Beeb Salzer: Calling national health care socialistic is wrong

I’m the beneficiary of what some call socialism. You see, I’m retired and I get a check each month from the government. Maybe the program that sends the checks should be called Socialism Security since so many people are afraid of government programs, even if they too are beneficiaries. More than that, the government helps take care of my doctor bills with another program, Medicare. Of course, I have been paying into these programs all my working life so it’s not as if I don’t deserve my Socialism Security and Medicare. And I get a socialist pension through Cal PERS, not one that is overly generous but it is certainly adequate. OK, so the real definition of socialism has nothing to do with these programs but the word is still bandied about by demagogues who want to frighten people. (They also incorrectly throw around the terms Nazi and racist.) No, to call national health care socialistic is wrong.

My education in public schools was paid for by the government, as was that of my wife and children. My childless aunt and uncle never thought that they should be relieved of the obligation of paying school taxes even though they received no direct benefit. They understood society’s need for an educated populous.

Here in San Diego I frequent magnificent parks that are supported by the government. Those who spend their outdoor time at yacht clubs and never use the parks pay taxes that allow the rest of us to recharge our bodies and minds in nature. The general society even pays for my dog to have a place to run at various dog parks. Every morning my dog takes me for a walk around Fiesta Island and that exercise is good for both of us.

Previous by Beeb Salzer: New city hall should be a symboll of values

My wife and I were awakened the other night by a loud speaker from a helicopter, “Come out with your hands up.” No, the police were not after us. But somewhere in the area, a government agency was doing its job of protecting us. I’m happy that if I really do need a police officer or a fire fighter, they will be healthy because the city allots them substantial funds to pay for health insurance. I only wish that the city money providing their health insurance was not diluted by private health plans’ bloated administrative costs and obscene executive salaries.

I’m eternally grateful to those in the armed forces who protect us all. Unfortunately, too many of them require extensive medical help. The seriousness of their needs may sometimes produce glitches in the system but we all understand that the government realizes its obligation to those who serve. Imagine the horror if the wounded depended on private insurance that looked for loop holes to deny them treatment.

I am old enough to have seen the sea change that has brought us to this time when citizens resent public funding that doesn’t directly benefit them. I remember John Kennedy telling us we should ask what we can do for our country and then having that idea do a complete reversal when Ronald Reagan told us that government was the problem. Selflessness became selfishness. Concern for the public good became personal greed. It seems that our country has lost sight of the guiding principles of almost every religion: charity, compassion, dealing honestly with others, and telling the truth. And how did empathy turn into a dirty word?

It’s not that we have lost these virtues, but as our country has grown mere diverse, we tend to reserve their application to those of our own group. Too often there is a reluctance to be charitable or show compassion to those of a different religion, race, or social level. How often do we hear, ” I don’t want my taxes to go to those people?” And now we have a government headed by one of “those people.”

There are many many things our government does well but only the anomalous problems turn up in the news. Fear mongering politicians and media commentators jump on the few faults they see and their diatribes have caused civil discourse to turn nasty. Not only have public meetings turned into shouting matches but men totting guns show up in public places. Resentment, fear, and complete certainty of one’s cause have even prompted a few murders — think of the killing of doctors by pro-life advocates. We have come frighteningly close to those in other countries who, because they are certain of their causes, explode themselves in public places to make a statement.

I have the luxury of criticizing those who oppose government social programs such as health insurance because as the recipient of several government initiatives, and well satisfied and grateful for what I receive, I see no danger in extending government benefits to those who are in need. Yes, I can empathize with people who have no health insurance or who have lost their jobs. I would be happy to see others have the security I have, or what congressmen have, or police and firemen have. Given the choice between preserving insurance and drug company profits or having a healthy and secure citizenry, I’ll opt for the latter every time. For me, it’s both a practical and moral choice, call it socialism or whatever you want.

Beeb Salzer is a painter and designer and an SDSU professor emeritus.

Tags: Health, health care bill, national health care, SDNN, socialism

This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 8th, 2009 at 2:40 pm and is filed under Columns, Health . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.