This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2017, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
"Tool" can be chosen as the label for a fool. Choosing the right "tool" can be the key to being efficient, as anyone who's been around the block knows.
So why do we act like tools, and often fail to apply this knowledge in the political arena? The fact that a proposed solution involves the government does not mean that it is inherently bad nor is a free-market solution inherently good.
Both the government and the free market are tools. Neither is appropriate for all jobs, and frequently both are needed to do the job properly. So why can't we just access which tool or combination of tools is the best for the task without pre-judging that one tool is inherently inferior or superior?
We reject the consensus of every other major developed nation that universal health care is a moral and economic imperative because of the government-is-bad label, which we put on their health care systems. Yet they all achieve better results for much less money.
Their common attributes are universal care, a basic plan provided on a nonprofit basis, and a unified system (not multiple systems, i.e., private, Medicare, Medicaid). Switzerland's system is a great model. See Wikipedia.
Karl Johnson
Millcreek