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

[Jinpachi]

Well you should have just come right out and said you were one of those -- "I am my own island" bullshitters. Would have saved me a whole lot of typing at someone who believes he doesn't benefit from other people's labor yet chastises others for doing so.

Of course you can benefit from someone else's labor. I never once said that. Don't put words into my mouth. I specifically said, numerous times, that you are not ENTITLED to it.

[Captain N]

Of course you can benefit from someone else's labor. I never once said that. Don't put words into my mouth. I specifically said, numerous times, that you are not ENTITLED to it.

Ah semantics. Got it.

[Jinpachi]

Ah semantics. Got it.

Whatever shuts you up

[Drakar]

Never really understood why this is such a problem for America. The rest of the developed world has universal health care. I don't understand why it is such a bad thing to help your fellow man.

I have a pretty good job, and I pay a fair bit in taxes. It doesn't bother me at all that this goes to help people that otherwise would not be able to afford it.

[psiko74]

no one is entitled to anything. if you want something, get off your ass and work for it.

[kail]

Le Snip!

You missed the point there. Rights is essentially a legal term. If the government allows a certain item or actions, then the citizens have that right. If the government denies those to specific groups or individuals, they don't have those rights. This goes with anything from speech to video games, and across the world different countries have different rights allocated to different people. There is nothing inalienable or "god given" about them. In this country, we do have the right to live. In some other parts of the world, some people probably don't have the right to live. Rights can also change as well, say prisoners and death row inmates.

To come back to healthcare, oddly enough we already have that right (to some degree). If anyone has a life threatening illness or undergone a severe accident, they will be treated regardless of income or insurance status. What's being argued in politics is the costs of our healthcare. Are we OK with the money we are being charged by hospitals and pharmacies? Are we OK with who gets the bill or how it gets funded? Those are the questions people are disagreeing with.

My comparison to the 2A was the fact that guns are not free yet is obviously considered a right. Healthcare is also a right we are given which is also not free.

- - - Updated - - -

Nothing stopping the doctors from quitting the hospitals. I'll say it again. You are NOT entitled to the fruits of my labor.

Sure they can quit from a hospital for w/e reason. But while they do work in a hospital, they can't deny medical attention to anyone in need of it.

[Deleted]

Well yea, that's the idea. We pay twice as much because its hard to negotiate for better prices when you have private insurance working along side you. Having a tier based system means prices don't generally go down easy. Private insurance has to be eliminated to fix this.

No, No it doesn't.
Again there are several insurance systems that works well, of the top of my head, Japan, Belgium, Switzerland, all have insurance systems.

[omeomorfismo]

no one is entitled to anything. if you want something, get off your ass and work for it.

then what is the point to create a society? i mean, they are supposed to be an aggregation for mutual aid, not an extension of the jungle law

[Teleros]

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.

Whilst I agree with you, the issue isn't taking personal responsibility - it's plain old economics. I'd go so far to say that nothing limited by scarce resources is, or can be, a right.

Traditional rights, like freedom of speech, assembly, association, and so on... they don't really cost anything. If Alice decides Hitler was awesome and says so, Bob, Chris and Dave don't have to pay anyone because she said that. She can bang on about how awesome the nutter was, but it neither costs anyone else anything, nor does it restrict their freedom of speech etc.

In contrast, healthcare costs money. Every £1 spent on healthcare is £1 not spent on something else. Furthermore, there is only so much money out there. If a government has £100bn to spend on healthcare & defence, but they both need £60bn, then something has to be rationed. Oh sure, you can kick the can down the road by borrowing, but you still pay - just later, as opposed to right now. Also, it means "no taxation without representation" is out the window, because government debt is paid for by taxation, and many of those paying will never have gotten a chance to vote on whether to accumulate the debt in the first place, owing to being under the voting age, or even unborn.

Now, in addition to this, healthcare is something you can spend an awful, awful lot on. The traditional limits to freedom of speech were always very simple and easily defined, and had solid logical foundations - slander, libel, state secrets, and so on, but it was always formulated thusly: "You can say whatever you want, except X, Y, and Z."

Now you cannot do this with healthcare as a right. If I'm a billionaire, I can afford for daily MRI scans if I want. If I'm on the NHS though, that's unaffordable. And yet... healthcare is a right, and how dare you deny me my rights, you fascist! OMG you're like, literally Hitler, blah blah blah...

Also, because the taxpayer is paying for everyone's healthcare, that mean's your health is my concern, because I'm paying for it. So stop eating Big Macs and get out and exercise you fatty - no really, go and exercise, or we'll use state power to force you to do so, in order to keep the costs down for us sensible, healthy people. Now I use the example of being fat here, but there's no real difference between unhealthy eating and smoking, or drugs, or any number of things we already have laws about.

Would it be nice if everyone was in perfect health? You betcha. Would it be nice if everyone had access to all the healthcare they needed or wanted, without it being a financial burden? Hell yes. Should we care for our sick, our elderly, and all the rest? Of course! These are all fine sentiments... but they're just that: sentiments. At the end of the day, you have to actually pay for healthcare, and that, pretty much by definition, restricts and rations it. Thus, it cannot be a right, but a privilege, or a luxury, that we can buy thanks to the productivity and wealth of civilisation.

"If wishes were horses, beggars would ride."

[petej0]

how can it be a right? how can you force somebody else to take care of you? its a privilege that should be afforded to everybody by their government. why is that so hard?

They are not forced to take care of you, they would be paid to take care of you. There is a huge difference.

Now, in addition to this, healthcare is something you can spend an awful, awful lot on. The traditional limits to freedom of speech were always very simple and easily defined, and had solid logical foundations - slander, libel, state secrets, and so on, but it was always formulated thusly: "You can say whatever you want, except X, Y, and Z."

Now you cannot do this with healthcare as a right. If I'm a billionaire, I can afford for daily MRI scans if I want. If I'm on the NHS though, that's unaffordable. And yet... healthcare is a right, and how dare you deny me my rights, you fascist! OMG you're like, literally Hitler, blah blah blah...

Also, because the taxpayer is paying for everyone's healthcare, that mean's your health is my concern, because I'm paying for it. So stop eating Big Macs and get out and exercise you fatty - no really, go and exercise, or we'll use state power to force you to do so, in order to keep the costs down for us sensible, healthy people. Now I use the example of being fat here, but there's no real difference between unhealthy eating and smoking, or drugs, or any number of things we already have laws about.

Would it be nice if everyone was in perfect health? You betcha. Would it be nice if everyone had access to all the healthcare they needed or wanted, without it being a financial burden? Hell yes. Should we care for our sick, our elderly, and all the rest? Of course! These are all fine sentiments... but they're just that: sentiments. At the end of the day, you have to actually pay for healthcare, and that, pretty much by definition, restricts and rations it. Thus, it cannot be a right, but a privilege, or a luxury, that we can buy thanks to the productivity and wealth of civilisation.

"If wishes were horses, beggars would ride."

All valid concerns which is why we must do something to tackle the costs of healthcare first.

[Vash The Stampede]

No, No it doesn't.
Again there are several insurance systems that works well, of the top of my head, Japan, Belgium, Switzerland, all have insurance systems.

I don't understand what you're talking about. Japan has universal health care system. Belgium has private insurance and universal health care that coexist. The private insurance is more of a special health insurance plan. Switzerland is the only one who doesn't have any basic health service. They have private insurance that is heavily regulated. They certainly don't have pre-existing conditions as LAMal has them by the balls. On top of it, Switzerland sits in second place behind the United States on national income spent on health. So they're not a good example to fallow.

[Deleted]

I don't understand what you're talking about. Japan has universal health care system. Belgium has private insurance and universal health care that coexist. The private insurance is more of a special health insurance plan. Switzerland is the only one who doesn't have any basic health service. They have private insurance that is heavily regulated. They certainly don't have pre-existing conditions as LAMal has them by the balls. On top of it, Switzerland sits in second place behind the United States on national income spent on health. So they're not a good example to fallow.

My point was stop complaining about the insurers, the problem with costs are not due to them.
Your system is at fault, not your insurers.

[petej0]

My point was stop complaining about the insurers, the problem with costs are not due to them.
Your system is at fault, not your insurers.

You are correct, however the concept of Health Insurance is kinda stupid. The point of Insurance is to protect against financial loss and used to hedge against risks. Everyone will get sick, most will require some sort of end of life care that will consume most, if not all of the premiums they have paid in.

Home Insurance, car insurance these are the types of insurance people are comfortable with and are low cost because not everyone will make a claim against their policies.

So they can pay a low premium and get $50k in protection in the case of an accident. Or $800 a year to cover the cost to rebuild in the event your home is destroyed (by a covered event).

If you are a bad driver or have many claims in the past against your home policy you can be denied because you are too much of a risk. This is what health insurance companies tried to do. The ACA now made denying people for preexisting conditions illegal. This increased the cost of policies because they could no longer only accept healthy people. That would be equivalent to car insurance companies having to accept bad drivers.

[Vash The Stampede]

My point was stop complaining about the insurers, the problem with costs are not due to them.
Your system is at fault, not your insurers.

With the help of insurances they have an oligopoly system. Basically some Doctors feel they should get paid more for their business, and insurances want their customers, so some insurances pay Doctors more and some pay less. All Doctors want to get paid more, but those Doctors aren't well established. Once a Doctor has steady customers, they stop accepting new patients and negotiate harder with insurance. Insurance loves your premiums so some of them are willing to pay Doctors more to keep them.

The result is higher premiums. In countries like the UK you don't have this problem cause you negotiate with the government and you can't make deals with anyone else. This includes the price of drugs and the price of procedures. You want to do business here? Then we'll start a bid war, and whatever has the lowest price wins my business. Where as in USA, the bid goes up, and can go up cause Doctors can give some insurances the middle finger. Their regular patients aren't about to switch Doctors, but are more likely to switch insurers. So insurances pay, and pass the cost to the consumer.

[Queen of Hamsters]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._of_healthcare

I'm sorry to say, but the US healthcare doesn't even reach the top 20 of cancer treatment for women.

If the US healthcare quality was so much better, there wouldn't be thousands of americans who fly over to a nearby hospital in my city to get better treatment for stuff like cancer etc.

When I had the chance to have a look, the inside of a private US hospital seemed less comfortable and luxurious than the inside of my local public hospital. I think all this stuff about "US have the best healthcare" is just propaganda akin to North-Korea claiming they're the best country. It's not what the numbers, statistics or my own personal experience seems to indicate.

And then having a system where you charge 10x to 300x more for the same treatment or drugs, without noticeably better quality, you have a big issue you should be looking at. The US healthcare system to me seems to be in an urgent need for a massive reform.

Amen, laying down some inconvenient truths!

[Teleros]

All valid concerns which is why we must do something to tackle the costs of healthcare first.

Interestingly, some walk-in hospitals in the USA are offering their services for much, much less than they do for people with insurance. The whole healthcare market is a giant clusterf--- just about wherever you go in the world though, and I'm not really aware of any modern free market systems out there.

I mean, take the USA pre-Obamacare. No intra-state / cross-border insurance, meaning less competition. Lawsuits every time you blink. Heavy government involvement due to Medicare & Medicaid... you can't really call the result of all this a free market.

Well... not for human healthcare. Pets seem to manage pretty well without constant government meddling:

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.c...are-for-humans

I think it obvious that we humans tend to have a greater interest in human health than in that of our pets, so you can't exactly do a 1:1 comparison, but it is pretty impressive nonetheless.

This old Torygraph article is a bit of an eye-opener as well:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/p...egin-with.html

Now of course, we Brits have historically always been very active in civic life (charity work, volunteering, etc) compared to a lot of other nationalities, so what works in the UK may not work in China, but I'd say it's yet another sign that we don't have to put up with the ever-rising costs of healthcare, at least for some parts of the world.

[oxymoronic]

They are not forced to take care of you, they would be paid to take care of you. There is a huge difference.

wrong

while we both agree universal healthcare is nice and should be afforded to everybody we differ in reality. in the real world, people have to go to work, pay taxes so this can be provided. in your world, its magic and doctors magically get paid.

the force is on the taxpayer, but i dont mind, i think it should be FORCED.

- - - Updated - - -

Now of course, we Brits have historically always been very active in civic life (charity work, volunteering, etc) compared to a lot of other nationalities, so what works in the UK may not work in China,

huh, you learn something new everyday. somehow i feel who is number 1 in the world when it comes to charity.

- - - Updated - - -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._of_healthcare

I'm sorry to say, but the US healthcare doesn't even reach the top 20 of cancer treatment for women.

If the US healthcare quality was so much better, there wouldn't be thousands of americans who fly over to a nearby hospital in my city to get better treatment for stuff like cancer etc.

When I had the chance to have a look, the inside of a private US hospital seemed less comfortable and luxurious than the inside of my local public hospital. I think all this stuff about "US have the best healthcare" is just propaganda akin to North-Korea claiming they're the best country. It's not what the numbers, statistics or my own personal experience seems to indicate.

And then having a system where you charge 10x to 300x more for the same treatment or drugs, without noticeably better quality, you have a big issue you should be looking at. The US healthcare system to me seems to be in an urgent need for a massive reform.

this poor guy, doesnt know what the difference between best and averages is. so sad, to consider yourself enlightened and not even know simple math. also somehow thinks the simple charts somehow equates to the best care possible.

[oxymoronic]

Translation: "I'm very upset with finding out that socialized and universal healthcare in other western nations performs better than the ridiculously much more expensive privatized healthcare, so I'm just going to blurb out some nonsense, also I'm very smart."

translation: im right, im euro therefore i am right. and here is a bullshit graph to back it up lol.

this is just sad. how can a human be so dense? mortality rates = best care? lol what in the world. who pioneered those techniques you are using? i guess according to you we all should be more like cameroon.

[Mistame]

But that's tautological, your "rights" cannot be denied by a government that acknowledges those rights. If you live somewhere else they absolutely can.

Rights are an extension of person-hood and exist outside the purview of government. They cannot be granted by government; only protected or violated.

And how do we determine what those rights are? Generally, enough people vote on them. Or enough people demand that their government grant them those rights and if they don't, they fight for them and win because enough people believe in them, or they have the power or influence to enforce their will.

So like I said, a right is something that enough people agree that they want.

The fact that you're suggesting that people vote on rights is in fact evidence that those are not rights, but privileges. The primary difference between a right and privilege is that the former cannot be taken from you and the latter requires permission and can be revoked. Additionally, anything that inherently imposes on the rights of others is, by default, not a right.

As an example, citizens in a local town vote to increase taxes slightly to pay for trash service. While they're a citizen of that town and pay taxes, they've the "right" to use the trash service but that trash service is not a right, but a privilege. And at any given time, citizens can vote to revoke that privilege. Similarly, if you purchase a gallon of milk, you've the "right" to that milk and to use it how you see fit, but you don't have a right to milk.

Just like water, you've a "right" to any water you purchase or acquire of your own volition. You do not have a right to water at the expense of others. If you use the city water service and don't pay your bill, they stop serving you water. You need their permission to have access to the water and thus, by definition, that service is a privilege, not a right. As is anything that comes at the expense of others. Seems to me people are confusing the "right" to something you pay for to actual rights.

[MattEffect]

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.

Wouldn't that just force out money hungry doctors and make room for compassionate ones?