John Mackey on health care reform
John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market, had a great column in the Wall Street Journal a couple days ago:
The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare
Mackey lists eight things government should do to reform health care that don't involve increasing government control, power, and spending (including a couple I've mentioned before).
The only one I might take issue with is his recommendation to "make costs transparent." I'm not sure what he means by that. It gives the impression of some kind of government regulatory agency imposing transparency as is done in some other sectors. That, of course, I would argue strongly against as government aggression. Of course, he may simply mean that government should halt particular actions it currently takes that actually prevent cost transparency, in which case I heartily support the idea.
Also (and this may just be an issue of imprecise wording), he mentions that the "right" to health care "has never existed in America." This is true, of course, but logically speaking, there can be no such thing as a "right" to a certain level of health care, regardless of your particular country. As I point out regularly, a right to a certain level of health care (or housing, or wage rate) would imply the necessity of Peter robbing Paul to pay for it, and that violates the fundamental right of all sentient beings--the right not to have force initiated against your person or property. And when that fundamental right is not recognized, we're no better than animals fighting over scarce resources under a regime of "might makes right."
At any rate, a generally outstanding piece by the wise Mr. Mackey.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
August 13th, 2009 - 18:33
There is so much retorhic from both sides of this thing it is getting a bit crazy. I wish both sides would relax and really look at what is out there. We either come up with something or we are all sunk
August 14th, 2009 - 17:49
Check my article at http://www.austinpost.org/ “You Are Killing Your Prescription: Why Shouting Won’t Help the Obamacare Debate”
August 15th, 2009 - 11:35
I read the editorial that John Mackey wrote in the Wall Street Journal.
A couple of points.
He suggests that our health care costs will come down if we take better care of ourselves. The tone suggests that if we get sick, it is our own fault and we deserve what we get.
However, Corporations spend a lot of money making, advertising and selling us things that make us unhealthy. Sure we can choose not to buy these products, but pressures of our daily lives give us little time. Advertising dollars are spent to persuade us to consume high sodium, fructose enriched, starchy foods that are easy and fast to prepare. Does the government support the corn crop just because so much of it goes into production of high fructose corn syrup and this supports corporations? Isn’t this a form of corporate welfare? Are we willing to stop the practice?
Mackey says that health care is not a right because it is not in the Constitution or in the Declaration of Independence. Well, society is much different today than it was in the 18th century. Health care was much different then. If our founding fathers were writing those documents today, they would be having this debate, just as they debated the bill of rights. Our human rights and rights as Americans are not limited to those named in these documents. They were only the ones that the framers could think of and agree on at the time to get the documents signed and released. The purpose of government as Abraham Lincoln believed is to do what individuals could not do for themselves, or not do well. Clearly, the cost of health care is out of reach for the majority of Americans. The Insurance companies are failing to provide a service that all Americans need. We can’t trust them because they are motivated by profit and not the public interest. Government must step in to protect the American people.
Mackey promotes high deductible insurance policies. Many of us work for very little money. Many of us don’t make enough to save a little with every paycheck and don’t have $2500 dollars in savings before insurance kicks in. Clearly, Mackey is out of touch with the way we live. He assumes that everyone is as affluent as he is.
August 16th, 2009 - 12:34
Pat,
I read your article (though I think you meant that comment for the previous blog post), and I partially agree. It’s often counterproductive to be loud and disruptive, but sometimes it can be an effective means to make your anger unequivocally clear. And when politicians are going around the country calling for ever greater coercion and aggression against individuals, I think people are quite justified in being pissed off and letting these parasitic creatures know that they are just a hair shy of having their government violence met with retaliatory private violence.
August 16th, 2009 - 12:59
Frank,
John Mackey is not suggesting it’s strictly our own fault if we get sick, but he is saying we have a LOT of control over our health. And it is most definitely NOT the fault of the companies that produce junk food–as you said, we all have a choice, and blaming our busy lives constitutes no excuse whatsoever (that’s indicative of someone with an external locus of control).
Now, your point about government subsidies of corn is well taken, and I honestly hadn’t even thought about that as it relates to health care costs. Yes, if the government is subsidizing corn, and if this subsidy has the effect of making high fructose corn syrup cheaper than it’s natural market price, then this is one of the many government actions that raise health care costs (and which I heartily condemn). Of course, regardless of its effect on health care costs, any government subsidy of ANYTHING is fundamentally wrong, uneconomical, and violent. You’ll find no defense of corporate welfare on my site.
Regarding any proposed “right” to health care, there can logically be no such thing. The only thing you can have a right to is to not have someone prevent you from acting freely within the boundaries comprised by the equal such right of others. That is, you have the right to not have someone physically aggress against your person or property–no more, no less. A right to a certain level of health care would imply a right to aggress against someone else, which cannot be a legitimate action in a civilized society composed of individuals with equal rights. Whether a group of politicians decides to initiate such aggression in order to provide people with health care has no relevance to the question of whether it’s a right–it’s not.
Regarding the insurance companies, they are not exactly failing to provide something people need. They are doing exactly what the market demands within the confines imposed upon them by government rules. And if we can’t trust those companies because they’re motivated by profit rather than the public interest, then we can’t trust you either if you’ve ever bought anything for yourself or consumed food or water, or done anything else that has benefited you because those examples of your being motivated by profit rather than public interest. Moreover, it’s a good thing that insurance companies, like anyone in the business of earning a living, are motivated by profit, because that causes them to compete to provide a better product at a lower price, thus benefiting their customers. The government needs to protect us from this?
August 31st, 2009 - 09:49
Darren,
I don’t think we can agree on the issue of whether we have a right to health care or not. My opinion is that we have many more rights as human beings than are mentioned in the Constitution. The Constitution does not grant rights, it simply acknowleges that we have them- and it is by no means exhaustive in that capacity.
But consider this- America is the only modern democracy that does not have a universal health care program. This means that American businesses are at a disadvantage when they compete against other countries that don’t have to offer health insurance as a benefit.
Concerning unhealthy eating habits and choice- Consider human nature. There are so many television, radio and print ads encouraging us to consume products that are not good for us that it is difficult to resist them. They make us believe that by their use we will be sexier, more popular, and happier. The corporations know that we can’t resist. Also, I was at the supermarket yesterday, and I started reading the ingredients on some of the labels. Fructose is in almost EVERYTHING. And the few products that I found that don’t have fructose cost much more. Consider the plight of the person shopping for a family on a budget. That person HAS to make compromises to make a paycheck cover everything.So it is not a fair criticism.
Concerning your statement about insurance companies doing exactly what the market demands, – The truth is that there just isn’t real competition among the insurance companies. And the ones that do exist in a market are too big for a nonprofit/coop to compete against. The private sector has failed to cover millions of Americans because they can’t afford what the insurance companies charge in premiums. If you lose your job it is extremely expensive to buy an individual insurance policy. All the while, the insurance companies are making huge profits and spending millions on lobbyists who are bribing our politicians to vote against health care insurance reform. Insurance companies refuse to cover applicants with preexisting conditions. These people can’t get insurance at any price. The current system has FAILED for these reasons.