Vanishing Health Care Reform

Angry because he left her, wife
delivers massive shock by
reversing wires on his power tools.

Have you been wondering what happened to the Health Care Bill? The possibility of a single-payer system was not even considered, the much touted public option has been dropped completely, Obama has been widely criticized for not being actively enough engaged in the debate, has not even come close to fulfilling his promises about health care reform, and we are about to get a bill that is little more than a gift to the Insurance companies. How did this happen? Whatever happened to all the glorious promises he made for universal, affordable, more efficient, and responsible health care, the reform that was going to vastly improve our dysfunctional health care system? Would you be surprised to learn that Obama received more than 20 million dollars from the health care industry in 2008 ($20,175,303 at last count). According to the Center for Responsive Politics, as reported today on Larisa Alexandrovna’s fine blog, “at-Largely,” that is precisely what happened. Do you think this might have anything to do with the vanishing health care reform? It seems our light-skinned President who doesn’t speak with a “Negro dialect,” speaks instead with a “forked tongue,” and like so many others in Washington D.C., has sold out to the “powers that be.” I can’t say that I am entirely surprised by this revelation, but I am surprised at the amount involved and the almost total victory they received for their investment. It’s just business as usual in our nation’s cesspool of capitalistic greed and treachery. It’s like someone once told me, “Don’t trust nobody, not even your own father.”

This seems to fit in nicely with Obama’s plan to tax so-called “Cadillac” health care plans rather than the wealthy. The Cadillac plans seem to be more of a “Chevy” plan and will negatively impact union workers who are outraged and threatening to withhold support for Democrats in 2010. Why does Obama want to stick it to the working and middle class instead of the filthy rich who already have more money than they can spend? Way to go, Barack!

I think I can understand greed up to a point. That is, I understand that if someone has nothing or next to nothing they may get a bit greedy when offered something. Or a child may be greedy for cookies or apple pie or something. And I suppose anyone who wants more in life than they have might be said to be at least a bit greedy. But what I do not understand is massive greed, greed on a scale that boggles my mind, nor do I understand why some people have it and others don’t. For example, many people deliberately pick careers or avocations that are obviously not going to result in their becoming unusually wealthy, teachers, University Professors, scientists, librarians, and many others, for example. They seem to be relatively satisfied with their lives and do not think of life merely as a pursuit to more and more wealth. But then there are those who already have more money than they could ever spend but who still pursue more and more and more. People like Donald Trump, Warren Buffet, Wall Street Executives, CEO’s, and even people like Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan. Having made their fortunes several times over they still never give up, still make more and more commercials, more and more deals, as if there is no way they could ever have enough. Whatever happened to the idea of making your fortune and retiring in comfort, as even Pirates used to do, or sailing Captains, or even pimps, gaffers, and drug dealers, and still others? I guess I can understand Tiger Woods, who continues his pursuit of records and probably just uses his winnings now for his foundation, but this is not true of many others who seem to want to make more just for the sake of making more. This seems to me to be greed, plain and simple. There ought to be a law that once you achieve a certain fortune you should have to retire and leave some for others. Or you should have to pay unusually high taxes, or donate huge sums to charity, or something. Making more and more money just for the sake of it I think is unconscionable and, I am pretty sure, is not a goal that exists in many societies. This kind of behavior seems to be peculiarly associated with free-market capitalism and results in a few having obscene wealth and the vast majority having very little (ring any bells?). Yes, I believe in democratic socialism, as practiced in much of Europe and Scandinavia. President Obama has brought about some welcome changes in his first year in office, but to accuse him of socialism is so far off the mark as to be absurd.

There is no calamity greater than lavish desires.
There is no greater guilt than discontentment.
And there is no greater disaster than greed.
Lao-tzu