Try “Googling” health care and you would have unintentionally, not to mention figuratively, tackled, “with one stone”, two of the most circulated stories in America today: Google’s row with China and the Obama Administration’s newly signed health care legislation. Initially, I intended to write two separate blog articles on each topic but I realized that I do not have much to say about each topic and that my opinion on each was clear cut. Hence, I will attempt to tackle both issues “with one article”.
Google:
China is Google’s loss and not the other way around. Most people are aware of Google’s generous market share in China, but not many people know much about its major competitor and search engine giant, Baidu. Google’s decision to exit mainland China not only surrendered its current market share to Baidu but it was a futile action in the name of a faulted subjective moral reasoning. In my semester in Beijing last year, it was very difficult to find a Chinese individual or student who used the Google search engine. Almost all of the Chinese students that I came across with used Baidu’s search engine for research papers and etc, which is contrary to the claim by some that Google’s exit from China would hurt China’s students and professors the most. Objectivity must be applied to a culture before one can decide on the best course of moral action. Laws exist to suppress freedom and laws must vary across different cultures. Find me a truly free governed body and you will have provided me an example of lawlessness. Google’s exit was not based on the lack of Internet freedom in China, otherwise, it would have also exited from other countries it still operates in that demand censorship, including monarchies and theocratic states. Google is simply frustrated with its lack of defense against China’s growing hacking community.
Health care:
The issue is not whether universal health care (or the path towards it) belongs to a socialist agenda or is too expensive of a venture to be pursued, but rather the issue belongs to the old debate of States’ rights. I think universal health care is important for the future growth and prosperity of a nation, especially one as wealthy as America, but should States’ rights be ignored in the pursuit of this? No. Over 14 States are currently preparing to proceed with legal action against both the Federal Government and the Obama Administration. Its easy to make the argument that the bill is too expensive but economists have already argued the long term benefits, including an over a trillion dollar reduction in the U.S. deficit over the next 2 decades as well as the potential decrease in premiums due to a larger pool of the insured. So, back to the States’ rights issue. The health-care bill is unconstitutional, not to mention, a burden on States with already struggling budgets. In my state of Massachusetts, universal health care was already a reality before this current bill, and that’s the best way to solve the issue. Health insurance is not an interstate enterprise so it should remain a “State” issue. Health care reform should come in the form of tort reform and relieving health care professionals, such as physicians, from their malpractice insurance burdens. The federal government should tackle these first before complicating an already complex health care system.