This thought has been floating around my head for the longest of time. There is a serious frustration and dissatisfaction in me with how people are perceived in the context of the system of our world today. Is system and structure for the people? Or people for the so-called glorious and thriving economy? Is it all about wealth?
I think the climax of how this entry finally came about was in response to the Scientific Symposium I attended yesterday where a certain renowned scientist said, as part of his talk on Making Science Work, “How to make drugs that work to prevent old people like me [him] from draining the economy?” His word just re-ignited all that I was thinking about, all my dissatisfactions and frustrations.
If we look back into history, systems, structures, medicine, science, economy and basically everything that is external to life, they were made or brought into existence for people. Just like Sabbath for the people and not people for the Sabbath. All these existed for the benefit and pleasure of man and found its meaning in the context of man. Unfortunately, if we look at the way the world is today, everyone is driven or another word, slaved by all these external things that have got no real meaning. What are economy and wealth outside the context of man? What are systems and structures apart from the people? They are meaningless. But why? Why are people stuck in them? Slaved by them and is found suffocating just to keep up to all these meaninglessness? Aren’t these things meant for the people? What happened?
The current worldview puts economy and wealth above people. It is very sad to say this but it is happening. Take medical science for example. The question I always ask is “If medicine is ultimately to help and cure people of their suffering, why is it priced so high and only available to those who can afford it?” Is wealth and economy all there is to life? Do we only want to help the person if he is able to contribute to the wealth of a certain nation or drug company by buying the overpriced anti-cancer drug that only cost 0.0005% in production, and only gives a 5% efficiency?
People are paying the money. And to those who cannot afford such a high price, too bad, there is no hope for them. Is this how medical science started? Is profit and wealth primarily the reason why scientists set out to find cures to diseases? I don’t think so. It really frustrates me to see similar things happening everywhere. Just look around.
Are all these things for the people, or people for all these things?
hmmm. tricky one there. you see... without the economy, there would be no progress as well in the first place. for your example with medicine, if there isn't the funding for research, there would be no medicine. so in a way, i guess in a way, progress relies on the economy, and the economy relies on people (input). but at the same time, people rely on the economy then (back to your medicine example) to repay back what they've put in, to make it 'balance'.
so i suppose there's some sort of a truce going on here? either that or i'm too tired at this point in time to know what on earth i'm actually talking about.
Posted by: agung at September 10, 2006 10:22 PMSpot on Mel: the free market economy only knows how to solve certain problems.As Dave has pointed out, the market will provide the goods and services where there is an anticipated return on investment.
Unfortunately, for those of us who believe that the health of people is more than just a commodity, the market doesn't quite deliver. Economists call this a market failure and prescribe that this is where government steps in.
In a democracy, when the people vote for greater funding for fundamental research and greater subsidies for (effective and efficient) medical care, the government must step up and deliver.
So one way to stem the tide is to let your vote count! With your seemingly insignificant ballot card, ensure that your leaders hold on to the right priorities, and always puts peoples, families and communities first.
Posted by: Kenneth at September 15, 2006 4:24 PM