It came to me while watching the last Indiana Jones movie. We are the victims of the baby boomer generation. Their youthful preoccupations (greasers, motorcycle gangs, old rock) their moral struggles( holocaust, civil rights, nuclear weapons) their attempts at over arching depth ( aliens) were perfectly encapsulated in that movie...which is why it sucked so hard. Our politics are a product of the over bearing weight of baby boomer demographics and we live in the after glow of their decisions. If you want to know why bush didn't get impeached look no further than why no one was punished personally for testing atom bombs on soldiers. Because of the rolling political compromises made in the last generation to this spike in population we have a somehow found ourselves with two American citizens. Those old enough to get access to cost controlled healthcare and those unfortunate enough to not be in that particular demographic. Of course it is not just healthcare, tax benefits are a whole other ball game but I think in the end if you want a reason why we don't have universal healthcare look to medicare. In the end the idea of this kind of preferential treatment begs so many questions. Why is it based on age that you get access? Is it because you earned it by getting old? Why am I fair game before I have even had a chance to build up any wealth?
It is easy to see how this is wrong.. what about access to heathcare.
According to recent analysis of the polls the drop in support of health care reform is from the left. I think everyone should realize that something is going to be passed and now is the time scream and shout or we should just wait on it. The problem is going to be after the midterms with , I can't believe I'm saying this, republican gains. I say this because other polls show large portions of the coalition that voted for Obama not hanging together. I think this is partly from the anti-war portion that didn't listen to Obama about Afghanistan during the election and then the center right who have been hammered on the media that they consume about the evils of Obama. This combination of disengagement and ideological retrenching will not help passing better legislation.
I think that something needs to be said about the political use of access to public programs. Thoughout our lives we have lived in the cultural jetwash of the boomer generation. The bands, movies, and books that we have been drenched in were mostly the products of the mythologizing of the boomer generation from WW2, the 60s to the present.This is because for the whole of our lives the boomers have been the largest single demographic both in votes and buying power.
The selective access to publicly paid for programs like Medicare allowed by politicians should be seen as a bribe to this powerful demographic. It is a pandering to the self interest of what is still the largest group of voters out there- the baby boomers. Now they want to allow an earlier buy in which seems to me to be an attempt to get more voters into a cost controlled system at my generations expense. How about if you are willing to pay , then you can buy in. It seems cynical that health problems should only happen if you are over some arbitrary age. It is even more preposterous to think that only old people need cost controls over thier healthcare.
I don't have a problem with paying taxes. I don't have a problem with healthcare reform. I do have a problem with dividing the electorate along demographic lines to form public policy. The youth in this country is consistently getting the shaft in this economy. There are less jobs starting, with higher qualifications demanded, necessitating larger student loans, which keep us from buying homes. For the most part we are becoming the caretakers of the last generation ( who hang onto their well paying jobs for longer and longer) and they apparently have cost controlled healthcare while they can invest their retirement into stock in the insurance companies the rest of us have to use unless we can prove we are so disabled or impoverished that we cannot work. Now they want to pass legislation mandating purchasing this healthcare and in the process win over the support of 55 to 65 yr olds by allowing them to buy into medicare. Even Medicaid could be understood in this prism if you remember that it would have covered the children of the baby boomers.
I often can't help thinking what a clever idea it was to divide the electorate in the first place with medicare. Imagine the support healthcare reform would have if the largest part of the American population wasn't being , in effect , bribed with preferential treatment. Universal healthcare , in my opinion, would be a fact. I think that the baby boomer dynamic and the cynical use of access to public programs is the reason why we don't have universal healthcare while other industrialized countries do.
There is ageism in this country and it is against us.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Respnse to my one commenter. Thanks Bill.
Churches seem to get the governments help in a variety of ways particularly when it come to their charity work. Now they specifically receive government funding for a variety of charity programs in substance abuse and homeless issues. Tax exemption is the most overarching example that I can think of. The power of the church to speak on social issues is tremendous. In someways I think that it has been muted because of what it receives from the government. Some of the most active people for the separation of church and state such as Rev. Isaac Backus as far back as 1773.
Of course I would listen to them. More importantly I wouldn't have a choice. Their ideas and thoughts would be in the public square. I would not brush it off as religious blather though I would consider it's source as I would from any other perspective. The point and issue to me seems to be that this whole debate is being carried out by politicians and economists. It doesn't seem natural.
I think that the idea of natural rights was an idea within the Enlightenment larger than privilege and was used as justification with a foundation in reason for the right to claim independence from the king of england. I believe that rights are defined in the constitution and some are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I don't think that was a "privilege". I would say that it has worked out pretty awesome considering we live in the richest , most technologically advanced society in the world and I think that has a lot to do with the power of the free market to allow people of all backrounds to meet and make decisions for the common good. However the freemarket has always been critiqued and controlled by the other social institutions including the clergy. I also think that one of the strengths of the us is the ability to change that was written into the constitution.
As far as the idea of there not being natural rights I think that many religions would say that there are rights and that they are bestowed by God.
I guess what I am trying to say is not that there is no moral leadership in churches and that the government needs to step into help. I am saying that the debate being conducted on healthcare is being done without the involvement of the churches. Why is that? I am tuned into the internet, the radio, and so an extend the tv. That seems to be our public square and I am not hearing the faithful speak. It seems to me that this indicates a retiring less active role for churches in society.
Of course I would listen to them. More importantly I wouldn't have a choice. Their ideas and thoughts would be in the public square. I would not brush it off as religious blather though I would consider it's source as I would from any other perspective. The point and issue to me seems to be that this whole debate is being carried out by politicians and economists. It doesn't seem natural.
I think that the idea of natural rights was an idea within the Enlightenment larger than privilege and was used as justification with a foundation in reason for the right to claim independence from the king of england. I believe that rights are defined in the constitution and some are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I don't think that was a "privilege". I would say that it has worked out pretty awesome considering we live in the richest , most technologically advanced society in the world and I think that has a lot to do with the power of the free market to allow people of all backrounds to meet and make decisions for the common good. However the freemarket has always been critiqued and controlled by the other social institutions including the clergy. I also think that one of the strengths of the us is the ability to change that was written into the constitution.
As far as the idea of there not being natural rights I think that many religions would say that there are rights and that they are bestowed by God.
I guess what I am trying to say is not that there is no moral leadership in churches and that the government needs to step into help. I am saying that the debate being conducted on healthcare is being done without the involvement of the churches. Why is that? I am tuned into the internet, the radio, and so an extend the tv. That seems to be our public square and I am not hearing the faithful speak. It seems to me that this indicates a retiring less active role for churches in society.
Lazarus had a preexisting condition
I have been noticing in the papers and on the news in the discussions of Healthcare reform that there seems to be a cost benefit analysis mostly involving politicians, economists, ideologically driven pundits. Insurance lobbyists have also been featured prominently either on talk shows or through advertising. What is striking about this is the complete absence and denial of the fact that the conversation about healthcare is an ethical argument that our society must face. Are we going to have to face it without the input of any theological perspective? How is it that the President is left to explain not just how but also why we need healthcare reform? Have the churches in the wake of the Bush Presidency abandoned ethical and moral leadership to the executive? Is it possible for Protestants, Jews and Catholics to support reform in the post modern era?
The limited scope of the debate in what is probably one of the most comprehensive ethical explorations of the nature of our society has been completely abandoned by our religious leaders. If there is anything more indicative of the complete political domination, lack of moral leadership and marginalization of our religious institutions in modern American life than the complete uninvolvement of any major religious leader in this debate. I have not seen any churches organized either in support based on religious teaching nor have I seen any theological argument against universal healthcare. Why should this be so?
Where does the Catholic Church stand in this debate? What does the Southern Baptist Leadership think of the ideas for universal healthcare? Do the Mormon elders support universal healthcare? Is there a reason why a Buddhist would not support universal healthcare? How much of society is it acceptable just to leave out of any healthcare system? On what basis is that decision to be made? Most importantly why are they not leading their respective flocks?
Nietzsche, in his parable of the death of God, described churches as sepulchers for God. I feel that he was saying that god no longer motivated the religious to live and create their parts in the drama of society. This inability to move on the stage of life in a powerful way at a time where misinformation and money seem to be guiding this important discussion about the values and ethics is disheartening. Perhaps it is time to ask them? Essentially we have become a country of listeners and sycophants. Does Obama, an avowed christian have to grapple with these questions with no input essentially acting as just another part of the infotainment industry? Is Rush Limbaugh's disinformation unchallengeable? God apparently moved Billy Graham to call for the death of Chavez in Venezuela, he moved the parish of the kidnapped captain to pray for him, he felt that Terri Shiavo should not be removed from care yet I am supposed to believe that God has no opinion on whether children and the sick and poor deserve healthcare?
So I have some questions and thoughts that I would like to fire away. If anyone could find an answer to these questions or simply ask their pastor, priest or rabbi why they are silent on this issue when now is the time that it is being decided I would appreciate it.
For Priests and pastors in the Christian denominations.
Did Jesus ask for money when he healed the sick? Did he ask if the lepers were gainfully employed? If he stormed into the temple and chased out the money lenders how do you think he would feel about profit based healthcare? If a Christian can believe in miracles why is the idea that we “can’t “have universal healthcare accepted as orthodoxy. Why isn’t their faith insisting on participation in this discussion?
It seems to me that the preexisting condition that we all have is that we are human beings and we will get sick, we will die, and the struggle of the believer and non believer is to find the right way to live and to endeavor to create a just society. What we are lacking is moral leadership on this crucial issue and we need it soon
The limited scope of the debate in what is probably one of the most comprehensive ethical explorations of the nature of our society has been completely abandoned by our religious leaders. If there is anything more indicative of the complete political domination, lack of moral leadership and marginalization of our religious institutions in modern American life than the complete uninvolvement of any major religious leader in this debate. I have not seen any churches organized either in support based on religious teaching nor have I seen any theological argument against universal healthcare. Why should this be so?
Where does the Catholic Church stand in this debate? What does the Southern Baptist Leadership think of the ideas for universal healthcare? Do the Mormon elders support universal healthcare? Is there a reason why a Buddhist would not support universal healthcare? How much of society is it acceptable just to leave out of any healthcare system? On what basis is that decision to be made? Most importantly why are they not leading their respective flocks?
Nietzsche, in his parable of the death of God, described churches as sepulchers for God. I feel that he was saying that god no longer motivated the religious to live and create their parts in the drama of society. This inability to move on the stage of life in a powerful way at a time where misinformation and money seem to be guiding this important discussion about the values and ethics is disheartening. Perhaps it is time to ask them? Essentially we have become a country of listeners and sycophants. Does Obama, an avowed christian have to grapple with these questions with no input essentially acting as just another part of the infotainment industry? Is Rush Limbaugh's disinformation unchallengeable? God apparently moved Billy Graham to call for the death of Chavez in Venezuela, he moved the parish of the kidnapped captain to pray for him, he felt that Terri Shiavo should not be removed from care yet I am supposed to believe that God has no opinion on whether children and the sick and poor deserve healthcare?
So I have some questions and thoughts that I would like to fire away. If anyone could find an answer to these questions or simply ask their pastor, priest or rabbi why they are silent on this issue when now is the time that it is being decided I would appreciate it.
For Priests and pastors in the Christian denominations.
Did Jesus ask for money when he healed the sick? Did he ask if the lepers were gainfully employed? If he stormed into the temple and chased out the money lenders how do you think he would feel about profit based healthcare? If a Christian can believe in miracles why is the idea that we “can’t “have universal healthcare accepted as orthodoxy. Why isn’t their faith insisting on participation in this discussion?
It seems to me that the preexisting condition that we all have is that we are human beings and we will get sick, we will die, and the struggle of the believer and non believer is to find the right way to live and to endeavor to create a just society. What we are lacking is moral leadership on this crucial issue and we need it soon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)