Why capitalists don’t care about your health—but should.

We often take our running water for granted. For almost all of human history, the water didn’t come to you—you went to the water. Once we invented aqueducts, it took another several thousand years to figure out that clean water was almost as important as having water at all. We, as Americans, pride ourselves on living in the “greatest country in history” and expect our water to be consistently safe and clean, as is the case in every other developed country on Earth. And even if the water fails, don’t we have the best healthcare system in the world to help the afflicted? Of course, this isn’t the case in Flint, Michigan, and it hasn’t been the case for nearly seven years. 

Flint was one of the boomtowns of the auto industry. General Motors had a major factory upriver, and it employed a respectable chunk of the city’s working population. The city practically relied on the GM plant to employ its citizens. Flint saw incredible growth in the first half of the twentieth century, as people moved in from around the state. Demand for housing grew faster than supply, and the city struggled to keep up. During this period of expansion, however, GM and other industries along the Flint River were dumping their processed chemical wastes into its water. Why? One could argue that people knew less at the time about the dangers of chemical dumping (though it seems to be common sense). The bottom line was exactly that—the bottom line. It was cheaper and easier to simply dump the chemicals into the river, and little bureaucratic oversight allowed these companies to continue this practice for years, no matter the number of residents that may have been put in harms’ way.

Fast forward to 2011. GM and other industries had largely vacated Flint. The city was near bankruptcy, so Governor Rick Snyder declared it to be in a “local government financial emergency.” He appointed ‘emergency managers’ (EM), positions that all but overruled any elected city officials and, conveniently, reported to Governor Snyder himself. Half of all African-American citizens in Michigan were now living under the leadership of an EM whom they did not elect, compared to a measly 2 percent of white citizens. Snyder, a fiscal conservative, wanted to save money, meaning the emergency managers needed to cut costs. Thus, in 2014, Snyder’s EMs switched the water supply to a different source from Lake Huron to the polluted water in Flint River, which can corrode the old pipes beneath the city. It was supposed to be ‘temporary,’ but the effort was not made to ensure this. Flint River water continued flowing without intervention. Flint residents were now exposed to dangerous levels of lead and other pollutants and toxins. The poverty level in Flint was very high, so many were without employer healthcare; symptoms of lead poisoning went unchecked simply because people could not afford to get them checked. Their exposure continued for years.

It is now seven years later, and only in the past few months, the water in Flint has, reportedly, been labeled safe to drink. Residents are still understandably wary; their government lied to them and dragged their feet over water safety for more than half a decade. They and their children were forced to choose between expensive bottled water or poisonous city water. For many, their hands were forced to choose the latter. Again, poverty is endemic in Flint, with 39 percent of its citizens under the poverty line in 2020, so buying cleaner bottled water simply was not an option for some individuals. Nearly every decision that ended up hurting Flint residents was designed to cut costs in the name of being practical. Dumping pollutants, hiring emergency managers, and switching the water supply were all enacted in the name of saving money. Mona Hanna-Attisha, a pediatric physician at Flint Hospital, warned those in power, but they refused to listen because as Americans, we tend to think saving money is the right decision. We think in terms of dollars rather than lives. The irony is, for most of us, our lives are the ones being devalued. Had Michigan officials listened to the aforementioned harbingers, Flint residents wouldn’t have their current medical crisis. It is entirely the government’s fault, but they will never subsidize healthcare for Flint because it would cost money. When private businesses injure us, when the government refuses to seriously help, and when healthcare can’t be obtained through employment due to a lack thereof, as has been the case in Flint, a strong public healthcare option is the only solution.

Other-ism is the social belief in which there exists an out-group and an in-group, and the out-group poses an existential threat to the in-group. Politicians use other-ism all the time, because it is oh-so-effective. Donald Trump comes to mind, for his peddling of racist vitriol toward immigrants from the southern border who are ‘coming to steal jobs from honest, hard working Americans.’ Frequently, other-ism manifests in racism, sexism—and all the terrible isms that have accumulated in the mainstream throughout the years. It is used to divide the working class against itself. What the upper class doesn’t want us to realize is that the real in-group is them, and we, the working class, form the out-group. Because they control employment, they control the conditions in which we live and work. Divide the workers to prevent unification, then keep them poor anyway, and you’ve created the perfect conditions for the subjugation of the lower classes with little risk of a worker uprising. This division directly contributes toward susceptibility to political other-ism. As is natural human tendency, the blame for this poverty must be placed somewhere, so the Art of Scapegoating rears its ugly head. We’ve seen it so many times before in this country, and unfortunately, the blame almost always falls on minority communities. Those on the bottom of the economic ladder are left to hash it out among themselves, whether it is between race, culture, or any other number of derivations. Flint, for instance, is a community which has fallen victim to other-ism: as a primarily poor, highly unemployed, minority community, its voice carried little weight with the state government, hence it took seven years for its water to be safe to drink. Those in charge felt they could afford to ignore Flint, simply because they were the ‘others’. But, where does other-ism and worker division intersect with health? 

While the working class struggles among themselves, the upper class is able to pull strings and access higher levels of healthcare. In March 2020, I remember watching as NBA players and celebrities were able to get tested for COVID-19. My father noted that he had no idea where to even look for a test, much less the conditions that would require one. God forbid, had anyone in my family gotten the coronavirus, we would have had no idea what the next steps would be. When then-President Trump was infected, he was treated with an experimental antiviral cocktail. While the President of the United States is, of course, an important person, why are they afforded medical care that I would not be able to receive myself? Is the President not a public servant, and thus, shouldn’t they be treated as a member of the public? No. The President is in the in-group of politicians and the wealthy, and the rest of us have to work to ‘earn’ our care. Every American deserves the right to health. Life and death should not be a privilege for those who can afford it. It shouldn’t cost anything to live. But, again, giving the masses better, affordable, possibly even subsidized care would be pernicious to the profits of those companies who would provide it. Ideally, companies and consumers would benefit from an increased availability of medicines through universalization, but more often than not they choose to control the price and distribution as to maximize their gains. For example, in 2015 Martin Shkreli, the head of a pharmaceutical company, bought control of a life-saving HIV medication and raised its price overnight more than 5,000%—creating an incredible profit margin, but putting thousands of HIV patients at extreme risk. 

Corporations get around this moral dilemma of profit versus the right to health by technically providing healthcare to their employees, but doing so in an inconvenient way. HMOs and sponsored physicians restrict the care that an employee may need. If your insured doctor is a quack, well that’s tough for you, and if you need a procedure that’s not covered by your work, forget it. However, when there is a lack of employment opportunity, such as in Flint, even this healthcare is unattainable. Programs such as Medicare for All (M4A) would greatly reduce medical debt and increase personal choice of medical care, thus lowering cost and increasing accessibility. However, this would impact the profit margins of every insurance company and many private hospitals. The upper class will paint supporters of M4A as ‘the others,’ and it will drown alongside so many of its progressive policy cousins.

But only if we let it.

The fact remains that social health programs are incredibly successful at improving quality of life for many Americans. Much of the COVID-19 response is being coordinated through the public sector. For example, state Departments of Health are a main coordinator of vaccine distribution, ensuring that every American will get a chance to receive the vaccine at no cost. Vaccine priority was determined by susceptibility to infection and employment status, allowing everyone a chance to get vaccinated. This is in stark contrast to the COVID-19 tests, which were administered by private companies, were at first impossible to get if you didn’t have connections, and often had an associated out of pocket cost. The military is making a surprise domestic appearance in some states by assisting healthcare professionals at vaccination sites, streamlining and securing these vaccination programs for the general populace. President Joe Biden also signed the Defense Protection Act, requiring included companies to assist in the manufacturing of COVID-19 vaccines and related equipment, overriding the private sector for the public good. These are all socialist, or at least, left-wing policies that prize human life over the dollar, and they will go on to save thousands of lives in this country. 

This is not to say that the private sector does not act without the public good in mind, because many times the public good and profit can go hand in hand. However, the idea with industries such as healthcare, which determine life and death, is that profit shouldn’t even be a consideration. For instance, many Western COVID-19 manufacturers have patented their vaccine recipes, allowing them a monopoly over the technology and therefore total control over its price and availability. This has led to an extreme worldwide vaccine shortage, especially in India where case numbers are skyrocketing. This global crisis is easily scaled down to our nation itself, as we saw during the COVID-test shortage. If healthcare was nationalized, there would be no need to worry about its monetary lucrativity, and everyone could access the same level of care. 

Of course, if you’re not convinced that socialist health policy is the right decision for America, capitalists can find refuge in the fact that a healthier working population is a harder working population. Happier and healthier workers can devote more energy to their work and with less medical expenses. They are more likely to spend money on projects of their own—passion projects such as opening a restaurant or other small business. A healthy capitalist society needs constant innovation to avoid stagnation; with a wealthier and healthier workforce, who possess more personal capital and financial freedom, innovation is all but a guarantee. 

To my capitalist, working class friends, oppression of the workers is holding thousands back from chasing capitalist dreams of their own. Money saved by the working class is not hoarded—it’s spent. Money saved on medical bills will be put towards other expenses, perhaps even into capitalistic ventures, stimulating the economy. Communities can be strengthened through the relief of debt, and small businesses can grow. 

Unfortunately, the sentiments of those in charge of the Flint crisis is mirrored in communities around the country. It is only a matter of time before there is another Flint, before another local government decides that it must accommodate the needs of big business over the needs of its citizens. These actors will behave as they may, but there is one way to mitigate the effects: a strong, universal public option. Decoupling healthcare from employment, and fully funding it, will free millions of their debt. 

Those who need this relief the most may hold the key to the rebirth of the American community.  Liberating them can only lead to good things.