Commodification of health is not a result of racial inequity
The pursuit of profit and the resulting commodification of social life have altered the way that we live and relate to one another. In the process, societal relations have changed and the spheres of social reproduction have expanded. This expansion has also embraced the goods that we consume.
Despite this, there is a crucial difference between a commodity and healthcare. Unlike most other commodities, individuals are willing to pay astronomical amounts of money to obtain more life (at the expense of themselves and the society as a whole), even when they have no health problems or need to spend the funds for any other reason.
In contrast, people who are unable to afford health care are left with less access. This leaves the disadvantaged in a position where they are more likely to develop chronic diseases, and to be ill for longer periods of time.
A major contributor to this is a reluctance of those in power to acknowledge and help the poor or disadvantaged. This is particularly true for those who are in positions of privilege and power, such as doctors and insurance companies.
As a result, those in power do not feel as morally obligated to address the lived experiences of those who are less fortunate. This lack of moral responsibility is reflected in a wide variety of policies that determine who receives medical services, or in a range of other decisions that have the potential to affect the quality of their lives. The most egregious of these decisions is the commodification of health.