Why do YOU think Healthcare is a Right and not a Privilege?

[LedZeppelin]

It's a social good, the same as a healthy population.

But to the OP's question, health seems to be a precondition to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." At least it seems to me.

But that doesnt make it a right.

- - - Updated - - -

Because the constitution says life is a basic human right, healthcare ensures you get the care needed to stay alive, therefore healthcare is a right.

It doesnt say that lol

[May90]

I don't think it is either a right or a privilege. It is a service.

[Awsyme]

The VAST majority of people using health services are the elderly. Visit any hospital ward and its usual 60 and up. And you WILL get ill, infirm and need care. If anything paying into a communal health fund ensures that a huge chunk of the population aren't forced to look after their relatives as they age.

In a more general sense, providing health care for the community ensures as much of them as possible are able to work and be active, ensuring a chunk of essential jobs carries on being done.

[belfpala]

But that doesnt make it a right.

As a precondition to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, you must also believe those are not your right. I believe it is.

- - - Updated - - -

It doesnt say that lol

It does say this:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

It also says, "No person shall... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

And just in case you want it to specifically say healthcare is a right, it also says, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." That is, it doesn't have to say it directly.

[Deleted]

Because letting people die because they are poor isn't a very humane thing to do!? But i guess being humane isn't something in OP's vocabulary, doesn't surprise me.

[Adam Jensen]

If you misuse your body you should have to deal with the consequences unless you have purchased protection in the form of insurance.

Getting cancer isn't "abuse" of your body.

It's a right. Or it should be. No one should be going bankrupt over healthcare costs they can't control. You have people who need EpiPens or they die. They either shell out that $600 a year, or they die. You have people, like my cousin, who had brain cancer, who are in fear of remission and thus have to pay for constant screenings and check-ups . . . or they die if the cancer comes back and doesn't get caught in time.

No hospital will turn you away? Sure. But ER visits where the patient can't pay end up costing taxpayer more than what having a national healthcare plan would. A national healthcare plan would drive costs down by raising the number of healthy people in the system (which is what the ACA tried to do with the mandate.)

You'd spend less in taxes if we just took a system like what Canada or GB or . . . any other first world, and most of the second world, and a good chunk of the third world, already have for universal healthcare systems.

I mean, for fucks sake, if Haiti can afford it, I don't see why the US can't.

[Gestopft]

You know what college education and healthcare have in common. The prices skyrocketed after our government decided to help with subsidies or back loans.

What time periods are you specifically referring to?

[Adam Jensen]

From a country with universal healthcare... none of this seems to be true.

Why is healthcare so much more expensive in the USA compared to other countries? The quality isn't better at least. Isn't the argument usually that in privatized healthcare the costs would be lower? But then we get cases of having to pay $3000 for an ambulance in privatized healthcare vs ~$20 in socialized healthcare.

Privatized healthcare is cheap my ass.

That's why Shkreli was capable of price gouging life saving drugs right? Not just legally capable, but also in the sense that he knew he'd make a profit and was therefore motivated to do so.

[crewskater]

Anytime you give the government control of something, they have a right to dictate what is and isn't covered. So why don't we have universal healthcare but with certain stipulations. If you get ill from something out of your control then it's covered but if it's something relating to you smoking or being overweight, that should come out of your pocket. Also eliminating pre-existing conditions would help. Problem solved.

[AceofH]

Let me put it this way. I am all for universal healthcare. I am not a fan of the aca though.

If you're going to tax everyone for healthcare that's fine. If you're going to tell the poor they get free healthcare while the rich and middle class pay for it or are fined, that is just wrong.

[Adam Jensen]

So you should get things for free? Sorry, that isn't an argument.

It's not "free."

It's "available."

There's a difference. Everyone contributes to healthcare via taxes. Person gets sick and doesn't get billed for the care because the taxes paid for it. You end up paying less because you only pay some premium (again, in the form of a tax) instead of $20,000 for an MRI.

[Granyala]

B/c I live in Germany and consider our system clearly superior.

[AceofH]

Getting cancer isn't "abuse" of your body.

It's a right. Or it should be. No one should be going bankrupt over healthcare costs they can't control. You have people who need EpiPens or they die. They either shell out that $600 a year, or they die. You have people, like my cousin, who had brain cancer, who are in fear of remission and thus have to pay for constant screenings and check-ups . . . or they die if the cancer comes back and doesn't get caught in time.

No hospital will turn you away? Sure. But ER visits where the patient can't pay end up costing taxpayer more than what having a national healthcare plan would. A national healthcare plan would drive costs down by raising the number of healthy people in the system (which is what the ACA tried to do with the mandate.)

You'd spend less in taxes if we just took a system like what Canada or GB or . . . any other first world, and most of the second world, and a good chunk of the third world, already have for universal healthcare systems.

I mean, for fucks sake, if Haiti can afford it, I don't see why the US can't.

The aca was and is flawed though. Either you tax everyone and everyone gets government funded healthcare or you don't. But you don't take a hybrid of the two where literally the only good thing is pre existing coverage

[AceofH]

So what you mean to say is you want to get rid of Medicaid?

No. What I'm saying is if the government is going to mandate everyone is required to pay into healthcare, they should at the very least make it like other countries instead of saying I have to pay for something from a third party and I'll get fined if I don't. Want to mandate health coverage? Fine. Then make sure the government turns it into a tax and the government pays for all medical from now on. Not this bastard hybrid.

[AceofH]

Lmao... So.. you want.. to get rid.. of Medicaid???

I'm assuming when you say "turn it into a tax" you somehow don't think brackets will exist anymore.

Tax bracket will still obviously exist. I'm just saying if you're going to mandate healthcare do it well and not just the failure that is aca

[telygroar]

Personally I think Healthcare is a privilege and not a right.

If you misuse your body you should have to deal with the consequences unless you have purchased protection in the form of insurance.

Also, in ANY civilized country, no hospital is going to turn you away if you have something life threatening that HAS to be taken care of even if you don't have insurance.

Forcing doctors to see patients under universal health care greatly diminishes a doctors will to continue practicing. It also reduces the will of any people who would be willing to undergo 10+ years of education to become a doctor because the limited ability to make good money in the profession.

Lol yeah, in france doctors are poor and unwilling to do their jobs ! So many people do not want to become one because of this §
And of course people would need to manage their body ! They need to stop have aggravated injury or accidents for fun while working or whatever just to have paid vacations like the sloth they are !!



Really ?

[NihilSustinet]

because im not a capitalist/sociopath.

[Not A Cat]

If I didn't have RomneyCare in Massachusetts I would be dead.

Type 1 Diabetes is incredibly expensive.

$70-$80 for test stripes every 10 days (if checking the generally recommended 5 times a day)

~$100 for 3 milliliters of humalog (insulin) which lasts about a week

You have to see an endocrinologist at least twice a year to get prescriptions which could be anywhere from $200-$300 if not more

While not required, it's generally recommended to see an optometrist, PCP, dentist, and a psychiatrist as there are many other complications that can arise from just having the disease. More doctors, more money, etc.

On top of all that, I wouldn't consider it an easy thing to live with, it's very stressful. So you're talking roughly $600 a month because when you were born your immune system decided your beta cells were too beta so they killed them off to assert their dominance. I barely scrape by as it is, tack on that every month and I'm as good as dead.

So fuck off, it's a right. I work and pay taxes just like everyone else. I take care of my body the best I can because the disease requires it. The least the government could do is make sure I can continue doing so via diabetic life juices.

[AceofH]

I'll stop making you guess...

Medicaid is a government program wherein poor people received medical care for free. This existed before the ACA. In fact, the ACA only expanded the definition of poor and introduced subsidies. Pointing the finger at the ACA for bankrolling healthcare for poor people is a finger pointed at Medicaid.

The mandate is for costs controls, which seems to be your actual beef.

No. My beef is that I am forced to participate, buying something from a third party and am fined if I am unable to afford said product. Not only am I fined though, I get no coverage while getting fined and yet others get coverage for free. What I am saying is to just tax EVERYONE, and have the government handle healthcare, like they do in Sweden. There is no need to force us to buy a third party product. If the government is going to mandate my participation and force me to pay for the product, they should at least supply said product at a decent cost and product for my income. The aca doesn't do this for me and many middle class citizens.

[AceofH]

There needs to be some standard by which this discussion can be held. You can do this with regard to social theory or legal discussion, but simply using it as a turn off phrase (clean water is a human right!) is just vacuous language.

With regards to a government identifying healthcare as a right, it makes no sense. This is hard for people to stomach because they see rights/privileges in the cavalier use (your clean water can be taken away!) wherein a government requires a legal basis by which to codify a right.

Calling healthcare a government right is baffling. It's untenable. We as a democratic society just decide on where and how our resources are used to deliver a service by society (a modern society should provide clean water) but by no means is there a grounds for criminal action should service be denied.

- - - Updated - - -



Dude. I just said your beef is with the mandate and you proceed to bitch about the mandate.

And I told you the mandate exists for cost control and you then go on to describe how a mandate needs to control costs...

Feel free to make a contribution, but I'm not going to spell out your posts for you.

But the mandate isn't doing it's job. I'm saying to completely bring health coverage under the government. No insurance companies.