I do my best to steer as clear from politics as possible in this space. But at the risk of crossing the line, I link to an editorial that uses an extended analogy involving Major League Baseball to talk about the health care debate. The upshot: health care reform that involves a public plan would be the equivalent of Major League Baseball itself forming a team that competes with the existing 30 teams:
The analog in baseball would be for Major League Baseball — the corporate entity that oversees the game — to field a team that competed with other MLB teams. And that this MLB-owned team could play by a different set of rules (didn’t need to support its expenses, could have losses subsidized by taxpayers, etc).
One can imagine that such a team could hire the best players, charge less for tickets and potentially win the most games while running huge deficits. Even if the MLB-owned team was forced to play by the same financial rules, it would nevertheless send a strong message to others that it doesn’t believe that the other MLB teams were playing to their potential, and that it could do better.
I’m kind of torn here, because while the flaming pinko inside of me would like to see some sort of public option, the idea that Bud Selig and Bob DuPuy could do better running a team than Hal Steinbrenner and Brian Cashman is rather laughable.
And folks: I won’t tell anyone how to comment, but I’d really like to not see this turned into a serious and ugly political thread. I’m much more interested in exploring the problems, appropriateness or general absurdity of the basic analogy in baseball terms than in bringing health care politics into this space. But as is always the case, it’s your thread.
Now, onto that proposal to allow Don Fehr to address our nation’s school children later today . . .