By Michael Wood | Tim Sullivan’s letter in GwinnettForum (2/12/16) illustrates why it’s easy to be an extreme ideologue and it’s hard to be a centrist. He said “…most Americans do not want to become Europe, we do not want to continue the fall into a welfare state where the government provides our every need.” (Emphasis added.) He was directing his comments about Bernie Sanders’ proposals regarding a higher minimum wage, the government reducing people’s student debt, and a single-payer medical care regime, perhaps among other government welfare programs.
Wood
Let’s examine each proposal in turn; but first some comments about nuance. I believe our debate about government programs, particularly welfare programs, should be more nuanced. We don’t have to take an “all or nothing” approach to future socialistic programs. We already have several, socialistic federal and state/local programs that most (at least many) Americans value and want to remain in place. These programs include Social Security, Medicare, and minimum wage laws.
Does Mr. Sullivan propose ending these programs and laws to avoid falling into “a welfare state where the government provides our every need”? I don’t think so; but even if he does, how many politicians would be foolish enough to advance such proposals?
Minimum Wage: These laws have been in place for most or all of my 71 years. To me the question is at what level society wants to set minimum wages. I think a jump to $15 per hour is too high, even if it was phased in over a few years. The $15 per hour is about double the existing minimum wage in most areas of the country. I believe $10 per hour is reasonable. A family might reasonably make it on combined incomes of $40,000 per year; but, it’s less likely they could make it on today’s $30,000.
Reducing Student Debt: I don’t favor reducing existing student debt, as the individuals who incurred it did so at their own initiation, even if they did not understand the full implications of what they are doing. Perhaps the federal government could encourage creditors holding student debt to lengthen the payment period and even reduce the interest rate; but, I don’t think the government should require creditors to do so.
Single-payer Medical Care Regime: I don’t believe medical care is a so-called human right. However, I do believe societies benefit themselves by providing some government subsidies to those who cannot afford basic medical services or who would be bankrupted by the high cost of care for certain injuries and diseases.
The arguments for single-payer include that it is easier for people to use, less costly, and that society benefits from supporting the health of its members. It also eliminates transferring revenues to for-profit insurance companies who merely act as middle-men.
Certainly, there are arguments against single-payer, but let’s not make the argument based on the label of “socialized medicine.” Let’s make it on some reasonable analysis of the pros and cons of a single-payer regime.
It seems to me that extreme socialism and extreme capitalism do not benefit the people sufficiently to warrant their pursuit. However, some mix of capitalism and socialism should provide sufficient benefits to enough people to warrant seeking the optimum mix.
Follow Us