Caroline Pellegrin Chapter Five, Question Six

This chapter has made me both irrationally and rationally upset. When Wheelan states at the end of the chapter that "Economists study what we do with it [information], and, sometimes more important, what we do without it," I became increasily hopeless at the prospect of achieving any sort of upward mobility in the realm of human equality. I feel as if we are confined by the disadvantages of knowing information and not having information. For example, if an insurance company could predict that an  individual would have lung cancer in ten years than they would refuse to give him or her care, but since the insurance agency does not necessarily have access to this knowledge they are required to charge more people an increasing amount of money in order to gain profit. Perhaps I incredibly naive, my idealism never having been seasoned, but I believe that everyone, no matter age, financial situation, gender, or race should have to opportunity to receive excellent health care. Why has access to good health care become such a concocted plan for profit? I'm angered that something as basic as getting medication for brochitis or something as crucial as receiving a needed scan for cancer has become overidded by the desire for continuous profit and personal gain. I realize that my exasperation is irrational- everything is governed by the inescapable need for profit, everything can be commoditized. I shouldn't be upset by what's logical. But at what point should profit trumph meaning?