Jack Welch: Wonders If Keeping People Alive For Another Six Months Is Worth The Cost
I could have told you Jack Welch’s view on public healthcare before he said it.
His response is quite telling about how capitalists, who no doubt have health coverage, see this debate.
Both Scarborough and Welch talk about the tough choices, but what tough choices would they be willing to make? Welch seems to think the tough choices have to do strictly with issues related to profit.
Joe, we have to have debates about real things. About malpractice, and the cost that that puts into the system. Malpractice insurance…Liability issues.
Malpractice, malpractice insurance, liability issues, yet no discussion about how many people are going to die while people like Joe and Jack concern themselves with the extra couple dollars that might come out of their paychecks if taxes are raised to help make sure all people are taken care of.
Nothing I have heard in this debate has been more callous than what Jack Welch said next.
How do we deal with things that really in the last six months of a life take more cost than anything else that we have?
Welch, later in the clip says “how much technology do we really need?” The argument Welch is making, I assume, is do we really need this much technology to keep people alive? It is Welch’s belief that when people live too long, they become a financial burden on the system.
No one is arguing that it is cheaper to let someone die rather than try and prolong their lives with new medical technology, but I highly doubt that would Mr. Welch’s view if it were a loved one of his that had the opportunity to live an extra six months.
Both Scarborough and Welch are correct when they say that there are tough decisions that need to be made, although I would say there is only one tough decision to be made. That tough decision is whether or not Obama and Congress are willing to risk the size of their donor pool and go against the health insurance lobbyists to do what’s right.
Doubtful.
