How the future of American healthcare fails British scientists
An editor at Investor’s Business Daily has wrote an editorial bashing the plans for a government-run healthcare plan in the United States. Originally included in the article (which has since been edited) was the following paragraph:
People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn’t have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless.
Hawking, of course, is British, and has lived and worked in the UK for his entire life.
The paragraph has since been removed from the editorial, with the following note:
Editor’s Note: This version corrects the original editorial which implied that physicist Stephen Hawking, a professor at the University of Cambridge, did not live in the UK.
Luckily the folks at Dispatches from the Culture Wars found it, and cut-and-pasted the text for posterity.
The tenor of the article is unchanged following the editing. Despite realising that there is evidence to the contrary, it continues to argue that a person such as Stephen Hawking would not receive the health care he needs under a British-style system of healthcare. Removing the specific Hawking reference does not change the fact that the arguments being made are blatantly untrue, with Hawking as an excellent counter-example.
Listening to the health care argument in the United States is quite painful. The Republicans are clearly not fans, but refuse to come out and say why. They believe that government should be less involved in people’s day-to-day lives, not more. They believe that people selling and buying services are better off working out the logistics themselves, and that it will produce a better result than interference might.
In the midst of a recession brought about by unchecked free-market forces, however, they feel it is politically unwise to express such views in public. So instead, they fabricate other arguments — lies, if you will — in an effort to bring about results which are based on the above-mentioned beliefs.
Those opposed to health care reform in the United States should have their opinions respected, not mocked. In order to do that, they need to share their opinions so an open and honest debate can take place. Intellectually dishonest arguments which fly in the face of observable truth will continue to be met with disdain.
Related articles:
Honest debate from those politicians opposed to the health care system being proposed in the U.S.A. Is there such a thing as an honest politician? Especially in a political system where business interests have considerable influence over the politicians and their decisions, and where economic policies are enforced only by the market (environmental issues and unsafe products are an example).
@Alastair Venn
No, there’s no such thing as an honest politician, but politicians can make real (intellectually honest) arguments, even if their position on an issue is for sale.