Category | Op Ed

America’s health care problem? Solved!

Published on January 26, 2010 by James Swift

The same way such tracts as “The Communist Manifesto” and “Common Sense” ushered in entirely new ideologies which resulted in widespread implications on the general welfare of millions, I too have encountered such a watershed document, an ethical blueprint that will one day provide our vast nation with the resources capable of healing the concurrent medical hardships of the country. The name of this revolutionary, monumental treatise? “Logan’s Run”.

“Logan’s Run” by George Clayton Johnson and William F. Nolan is a cerebrally captivating, emotionally engaging look at a potential America in which the hassles of health care and social security concerns have all but been eradicated. These modern day trifles have been conquered in the futuristic utopia, not via sociopolitical chatter or radical economic reform, but via the implementation of physical policies that ensure that only the most able of representatives are allowed access to the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Without question, the implanting of a so-called “Lifeclock” in each and every American is the solution to our future’s health care concerns. As prophetically dictated by Nolan and Johnson in their landmark 1967 political tome, such alterations to the inert fabric of the American landscape is a necessity. Although at the forefront, involuntary microchip implantation may seem as if a violation of one’s human rights, let us not forget the numerical imprinting that is one’s Social Security Number. What is the difference between such a paper mandate and one that is of the electronic variety? Veritably, technological progression is vital for the country’s continuance, and such utilization and celebration of the sort should be wholeheartedly embraced instead of avoided.

To firmly assess the significance of health care in the nation, one must first examine who is entitled to such liberties. Of course, according to the established mandates of the United States Constitution, all American citizens are entitled to inalienable rights that constitute “being.” However, due to the unforeseen fiscal ramifications of such unbiased labeling, we now find ourselves in a massive financial chasm of which unclear reliance on abstruse nominalism has certainly played a role. To value health care, we must first delineate the elements of being that are worthy of the “privilege” of health care, and for that to become a reality, we must address that which is “unworthy” of protracted medicinal spending.

As established in the vaunted treatise of which I have based my political ideals, the value of life is only to be attributed to those whom contribute the most to the general welfare of the populace. According to most health care specialists, the “peak” period of one’s health occurs at approximately 29.5 years of age. I believe that it is significant that we allot and focalize on this demographic as having utmost primacy over other age demographics. Vis-à-vis Constitutional revision, I believe that we, as a collective whole, can reinterpret the definition of “American being” to entitle only those who are of a healthy age range to be worthy of supplied medicinal care. In regards to those who do not fit in such a demographic, I propose a compulsory excision from societal workings; fundamentally, to ensure the survival of American health care, we must ensure that the greater health of the nation is unperturbed and unaffected by those afflicted by the disease of “age.”

As callous a concept as it may seem to laud the notion of mandatory societal excision, I believe it is very much a vital one. When the nation was founded, most surely, the proud, noble craftsmen of this land had nary an idea that the nation would swell to such a podgy grotesqueness in both numbers and ailment. I envision the great leader George Washington walking down the pitiful hallways of our land’s nursing homes and the anger that must swell inside his red, white and blue corpuscles. America was founded as the nation of the young, the free and the bold; those are the fruits of a land of plenty, and due to overpopulation, the country has been picked and plundered to its most threadbare twigging.

As I am well aware, the notion of the compulsory euthanasia of all Americans over the age of 30 is a quite striking, startling one; however, the United States is a land that prides itself on pragmatism and logistical thought, and perhaps such an obvious, foregone outlet is the appropriate avenue to traverse for our country’s continuation. I muse, if the problem of health care is centric to those who require it, how could a solution be any more practical than what has been promulgated here today?