I found this on the Whole Foods Market health care forum. No independent verification yet, but looks authentic. She is no longer is involved in WFM so is only speaking for herself and not on behalf of the company.
http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/forums/index.php?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3a338a2432-3a3c-459f-9c58-00df096792c5Forum%3a624bcd7f-b978-4ad6-996c-450fba4971f9Discussion%3aecf670c1-5605-488f-9b0e-8d32add1632b&plckCategoryCurrentPage=0Entitled: “Whole Picture”
The prior document being that posted by John Mackey on the wall street journal online 8.10.09
Entitled: “The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare”
Dear John
You are aware of my views on many subjects, and as you know, by personal choice, I rarely speak publicly in regards to Whole Foods Market. But in this case, relative the consideration of a publically funded health care option, I feel wholeheartedly moved to offer this view.
I, being personally in the position as “Cofounder of Whole Foods Market”, would first like to offer publically that your views are your own and express one of many within WFM; and are not indicative of the whole view of Whole Foods Market itself ; nor, are the views you hold and choose to express , the sum of the origination, nor are they wholly the basis for the conductive generative mechanism of the relative success and stasis of the business of Whole Foods Market itself.
As friend and fellow in the public round, I offer this view. For the information of others; as personal background to this view, I would say that I am in support of the science of business and economics (personal and global ), and that I see no conflict with the accumulation of wealth, and the distribution of wealth. That being said, I also support the view of a publically funded universal health care option for all members of our society.
Regarding your/John’s leading statement which I have read from the op ed posted through WSJ online; a quote attributed to Margaret Thatcher and reads thus:
“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.”
“socialism
You seem to be waving a red flag of sorts in your choice of this quote, though I am not exactly sure what is meant by the word “socialism” here, At present we all live and prosper to varying degrees in a meshwork of public services, which we would not necessarily term socialistic, but which seem natural and beneficial. Mostly we go through our day without a thought to these underlying public services. We might as well classify Whole Foods Market as a socialistic organization since it benefits completely and directly from these publically funded services and regulatory agencies and could not function as it does presently nor enjoy the financial success it does, without these vast structures. Such as: federally funded highways, for the transportation of food and other products. Federally funded city streets, signal systems and parking for customers and employee access. Public transportation and airport. Water systems and sewage treatment plants. The electrical grid. Public safety services such as police and fire. Regulatory agencies and laws that monitor and insure standards of clean air and water and even organic foods. Our monetary supply and shared financial exchange system. Public education. (Whole Foods Market generally serves a more highly educated and creative demographic which tend to be located in large urban areas. This is not a value judgment, it is simply so. The original Whole Foods store opened in Austin, Texas home to the University of Texas – the largest publically funded school system in the state of Texas. You attended university there yourself. Austin is also the center of the state government of Texas) Whole Foods market as a scale of operation relies on the highly sophisticated and integrally developed densities of cities with their articulated hybrid meshwork of public and private energies and structures. So while we may not all agree as to the details of these public services and laws, and from time to time we may experience the failure of these structures, I imagine most of us are grateful to have them and understand them to be integrally necessary to the function of the private domain. So again, I am not sure what you are suggesting relative to socialism, though having lived my first 29 years in Texas; as you still do yourself; I understand, honor and respect the qualities of the rugged individualist of the “lone star state”. I would suggest though, that to take this to the extreme; to denigrate the public domain; seems at best poorly considered or insincere.
“Run out of” …money –
What are the limits to wealth? Perhaps choice of how we want to express our collective energies is key. Time and time again, despite difficulties and set backs, the American people have shown that innovation, excellence and productivity are the conditions for the generation of wealth.
“other people’s money” –
Again this seems short sighted when we consider the deeper implications of the origins and generation of wealth. Love it or leave it. If you live in America you benefit from the social and environmental structures here and one’s wealth is an interdependent product of that.
Re universal health care -
I personally value health. Not only my own, but other’s as well; as I experience other’s health as having a direct and specific connection with my own. And vice versa. There is an aspect of personal health and there is also an aspect of the health that moves through, in, and as society. as a publically held generative capacity. This includes the environment and other beings and elemental interactions herein. If we experience health as good, and we experience health as an interdependent social expression (as well as personal and environmental) why would we the people, not make a social and public declaration and assurance of this goodness for the benefit of all ?
I am in whole agreement with the health care opportunities offered by whole foods market to whole foods market team members. This is a wonderful and inspiring actuality and business model. A model that may be used for consideration by other businesses if they happen find such a consideration of value. WFM is certainly not the first to offer such, and hopefully not the last, but statistically these offerings are rare.
It is my deepest personal desire and wish to see these health and wellness benefits offered by WFM, extended as stable and noble ground, to all members of our society. And while some businesses may be able to offer such, and certainly should be allowed to continue to do so if they wish; not all businesses will or will be able to do so. As well as not all individuals or families may personally be able to afford health care on their own. So in my mind, a publically funded option is paramount to universal coverage. Thus, I would suggest a health care system that allows for both private competition and public option and personal choice therein.
We also understand and appreciate how good health is coincident with financial success. WFM is a living example of this process and its financial rewards. There are many other studies demonstrating the value of health relative to resistance and energy waste/savings in various systems. And how health engenders productivity, innovation and joy. We could even extend this inquiry of health care and financial rewards within discreet businesses systems onto our larger social and financial system as well, and map the benefits derived thereof. As we support and distribute health within the larger pool, the pool itself may even become healthier in time. This has great implications.
So how to fund this public option. We have seen that there is money available for such actions as the war in Iraq or the financial market “bailout”. Perhaps mostly it is a matter of choice. What do we want to do with our time and energies (collective and personal)?
For all the flaws of our Medicare system, this has served relatively well, and may deserve further consideration as to how to improve it and possibly to extend to all Americans, those benefits which are at present offered to the aged and members of congress.
There are many such considerations re funding, in great detail and in real time intelligence. I would recommend reading and considering with an open mind (which is necessarily free of ideological clinging), the source texts and facts on “Obamacare” (in addition to the debate and personal commentaries on it). I would also suggest Howard Dean’s book “Prescription for Real Healthcare Reform”.
It is easier than we might think.
Dear reader, I leave that decision to you.
best,
Renee Hardy
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
