Most of those who know me also know that I don’t like the government being involved in our health care, for too many reasons than I can go into now.  More than once I’ve asked, “Do you really want to trust your health to the same folks who are mangling public education?” 

Important note:  I support the public school system, much as I find fault with it.  There are many teachers among our family and friends.  Our own children attended the local schools for a number of years.  We pay school taxes, and have voted in favor of most requested tax increases, including last year’s. Everyone in the family has put countless hours into (public) school volunteer work.

Another important note:  I agree that our health care system is in a big mess, and big messes invite government interference whether we like it or not.  Personal experience of family and friends has shown me that public health care can work very well (France, Switzerland) and very badly (UK, Canada).  (I know there are readers of this blog who are happy with Canada’s health care, but I’m going by the experiences of those I know personally, which, alas, are negative.)  I don’t like the way in which our government is approaching health care reform, but that’s not the point here.

The point is consistency.

In the battle over health care, the faction I will loosely designate as “pro-government-social-program” (PSGP) wins for consistency:  The same people who are pushing national health insurance are ardent advocates of public education.  Viewing education as a fundamental, essential right of every child, they make it not only available but compulsory, and not only for the poor but for everyone, and expect everyone to participate.  They frequently oppose anything (private schools, home education, vouchers) that would allow students to opt out of monopoly government schooling.

Having concluded that the cost of a (possibly large) uneducated segment of the population is greater than the cost of providing “free” education to all, they are consistent in applying the same logic to health care.

I, on the other hand, am not consistent, and neither, it seems, are many with better conservative credentials than mine.  How can I support public education for all and not health care?  Why is it considered acceptable, even admirable, for everyone—including the rich—to take government assistance in the form of public education, but lower-class, even shameful to be on Medicaid, accept Food Stamps, or live in public housing?  What makes education so much more important than health care, food, or housing?

And maybe the PGSP’s are not as consistent as I thought, because I don’t see them pushing for compulsory soup-kitchen and housing project attendance.

Although … when our kids were in school, the school breakfast/lunch program, which served a useful purpose for poor children who otherwise would not eat, was pushed on everyone.  It wasn’t exactly mandatory, but the schools used plenty of promotions and advertisers’ tricks to get children to pressure their parents to send money for their lunches rather than pack them better food from home.  In the case of breakfast, they actually kept the other students trapped on the school bus until the breakfast-eaters were finished.  So who knows what's next in the minds of the PSGP's?

I don’t know where we’re going and what we’re in for with all this, and I don’t know how I’m going to rethink my attitude in regard to public education and/or health care.  But it certainly was a revelation to discover my own inconsistency.

Posted by sursumcorda on Wednesday, February 27, 2013 at 8:48 am | Edit
Permalink | Read 954 times
Category Education: [first] [previous] [next] [newest] Politics: [first] [previous] [next] [newest] RETHINK: [first] [previous] [newest] Random Musings: [first] [previous] [next] [newest]
Comments

As a fellow conservative, I applaud your consistent and continued efforts to examine your life and bring all parts of it into alignment. :)

That being said, I think the differenct between "free" edcuation and "free" healthcare is that the latter is easier abused. People who wish to opt out of public education may not put the effort you or I might into their education, but they have definite ideas and they exercise their rights as citizens to think for themselves. Our current government model is not designed for the wise, effective use of a public healthcare system. The overhaul required wouldn't kill us, but it hasn't been thought out. The feared result is what happened to Hawaii when they created a "free" healthcare system. People dropped out of normal healthcare programs so they could use the state-sponsored program, and bankrupted the state in I think about three years. If every homeschooler or private schooler went to public school, would it crash the system? No, but they would miss out on benefits that the parents consider important (class size, individual attention/needs, time with love ones, etc.). If nationalized health care is used by all, is it going to crash itself? Weeeee.., debt isn't going to get any better. I think it's an argument FOR serving Mammon, but there it is.



Posted by Brenda on Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 7:08 am

"....and big messes invite government interference whether we like it or not."

When I saw this line, it reminded me of the boy's bedrooms. Change the word "government" to "Mom's". They have to be a pretty big mess before I go in, but when I go in, watch out!

Sarah



Posted by dstb on Friday, March 01, 2013 at 4:33 pm

That was the laugh I needed today, Sarah!



Posted by SursumCorda on Friday, March 01, 2013 at 6:16 pm