Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs it Obnoxious to Support Health Care For the Poor?
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/06/it-obnoxious-support-health-care-poorIs it Obnoxious to Support Health Care For the Poor?
By Kevin Drum
| Tue Jun. 24, 2014 10:35 AM EDT
Here is Gary Silverman in the Financial Times:
What I like about Obamacare is that it shows some respect for those people as Hudson called them in Giant who are good enough to work the fields and mow the lawns, and build the roads and sew the clothes, and diaper the babies and wash the dishes, but somehow arent good enough to see a doctor from time to time to make sure there is nothing wrong inside.
Along with a passage from another author about Palestinians, this makes Tyler Cowen unaccountably angry:
I am not in this post seeking to adjudicate ACA or U.S. policy in the Middle East. The easy target is to go after these two authors, but I am interested in different game. The deeper point is that virtually all of us argue this way, albeit with more subtlety. A lot of the more innocuous-sounding arguments we use all the time come perilously close to committing the same fallacies as do these quite transparent and I would say quite obnoxious mistaken excerpts. One of the best paths for becoming a good reader of economics and politics blog posts (and other material) is to learn when you are encountering these kinds of arguments in disguised form.
I'm stumped. What's obnoxious about this? There are certainly technocratic arguments to be made for and against universal health care, as well as the particular implementation details of Obamacare. But the core reason most of us have for supporting Obamacare is exactly the one Silverman makes here: we think everyone, even the poor, should have access to decent health care. A great many conservatives prefer to simply turn their heads away from this human suffering, often because they prefer to keep their taxes low. A great many liberals prefer the opposite.
This isn't a secret, or a hidden agenda, or anything like that. It's always been the primary motivation for universal health care. More generally, our values are the motivation for a large share of human activity, especially including political activity. What's wrong with that?
Tyler Cowan:
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2014/06/why-you-should-not-confuse-sympathy-with-policy.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 451 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Is it Obnoxious to Support Health Care For the Poor? (Original Post)
babylonsister
Jun 2014
OP
Prophet 451
(9,796 posts)1. I have never known a country that hates it's poor like the USA n/t
Cerridwen
(13,251 posts)2. I'll take a guess.
He appears to be saying that you should never make an argument from sympathy, i.e. emotion, when discussing policy.
To which I would reply...well, I'll clean it up. It reminds me of a randian concept of "brutal objectivity" and has been used to justify the most heinous of actions.