On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, David Seedhouse wrote:

 _why_ are people against the redistribution of
> income wrong?  It isn't enough merely to say and feel that they are -
> you need to advance reasons.

IF you hold the improvement of health status as a value, and the major
impediment to that is inequitable distribution of income, then not
redistributing resources is wrong...of course, I, personally think it is
wrong on moral grounds too.

> On the contrary.  You make bold assertions only.  If you explained
> these more deeply you _would_ be more explicit.

Actually, I thought I was *mostly* reciting evidence about income
inequities and health status among other issues...as well as giving a few
views which have come out of 20 years of teaching, etc...

> Well, I think it is unproductive to focus on apparent weaknesses in a
> small piece describing a large body of work.  Obviously I am aware
> that there can be distinctions betweeen good and bad potentials and
> am at pains to explain this and argue for my preferences in my books.

I hardly meant to be unproductive...and responded to what you had put
forward. I'd be more than happy to read your books and see how you work
this out. Many of us at UT have had many discussions of these "good" and
"bad" issues, so perhaps your work will make it clearer for us.

> According to my way of thinking if you have good
> foundations then you have a good level of health.  I can and have
> defended this view.  If you think that this isn't what being healthy
> means then you ought to respond in the same way, offering your own
> account of what health is.

Well, that's a fair enough challenge, perhaps I'll be able to meet it
someday.

> I both write and act according to my
> understanding of health.  It has always been difficult and lonely to
> do this but I have persevered.  Unless we act out what we believe
> nothing will change.

Actually, I expect most of us are doing this..in our own small ways. But,
I imagine that everyone on this list has many stories of how "politics"
keeps them from doing all that they would like to do in HP, including
escaping the dominance of the medical model..

> > totalizing concept. But, I think that is perfectly understandable, if
> > regrettable, given that HP is, (at least for some of us!),
> > part of movement for social change..it will have its contradictions.
>
> So you will get contradictory social change - does that make sense
> to you?

This is the way that I understand social change...and yes, it makes sense
to me....thesis, antithesis and synthesis, etc.

> Try what we can, but you have to admit that the Right have the upper
> hand at the moment.

There is no doubt about that...

 They are more likely to be shifted when there
> are thoughtful alternatives to their hardnosed selfishness.

This is one belief about how social change happens; I am skeptical that
"they" are likely to listen to anyone, regardless of how
"thoughtful"...but, we'll
see...

> (It would be interesting to hear from people from a different
> political persuasion too - how would you answer this question?)

Yes, it would....

Rhonda