• Sex voucher

    From the New Yorker:

    @afrakt

    Share
    Comments closed
     
    • I take this cartoon as a criticism of the Paul Ryan/Republican plan to “voucherize” Medicare. Although its intent is clear,  the cartoon misfires. Presumably the woman (wife?) represents the federal government and the man (husband?) a Medicare beneficiary. So the woman declines to satisfy the man’s amorous advance directly but instead provides a voucher to subsidize his pursuit of gratification in the private market. The cartoon is saying that voucherizing Medicare is like a wife sending her husband to a prostitute. Or, assuming the cartoonist favors Medicare as currently implemented, the cartoon implies  the woman should never deny but always satisfy the man’s advances. The cartoon’s message is muddled with messy and probably unintended implications.

      • Except that sex is a luxury (arguably) and health care is not, at least when needed.

        If sex cured cancer, and the man had cancer, he would probably prefer guaranteed treatment from his wife then say the voucher-paid prostitute on the free market. No?

      • I think you may be over-analyzing this.