Healthcare--a right or not?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by WAN, Feb 23, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. WAN

    WAN Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,428
    Likes Received:
    343
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Hello. I have read in one thread where people were debating whether access to healthcare is a right. Someone says it is, however the opposite side said that nobody should be forced to pay for someone else' healthcare costs.

    I believe that here in Canada, access to water is declared a basic human right. However I think (could be wrong) that we still have to pay for it ourselves.

    What are your thoughts? Is access to healthcare a universal human right? Further, should the government compel people to pay for other people's healthcare costs?
     
  2. gamewell45

    gamewell45 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    24,659
    Likes Received:
    3,507
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't pay for my water (I have a well) other then the electricity to run the pump but I pay taxes to support the schools locally even though I don't have children in school. So I think the government can compel people to pay for health costs for other people.
     
  3. usfan

    usfan Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2012
    Messages:
    6,878
    Likes Received:
    1,056
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Healthcare is a commodity, like food, clothing, shelter, entertainment, etc.

    There is no natural right for something that someone else has to work for. That is a contract between 2 parties. One provides the service, the other the pay. this complex interdependency among the social structure is what we call 'the economy'.

    The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is... legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay ... If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system. ~Frederic Bastiat
     
  4. Belch

    Belch Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2015
    Messages:
    16,275
    Likes Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What is your definition of "right"?
     
  5. Thehumankind

    Thehumankind Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,473
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    if not paying taxes becomes a crime,
    then healthcare is of course a right.
     
  6. Maximatic

    Maximatic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,076
    Likes Received:
    219
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Does any other person have to act in order for one person to have healthcare?

    Is production of healthcare a universal human obligation?

    Yes, and no, right?

    Okay, then no.
     
  7. Medieval Man

    Medieval Man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Messages:
    3,379
    Likes Received:
    1,665
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you compel someone to pay for your "right" it certainly shouldn't be a right.

    The doctor someone sees for a malady? Someone is paying for it, either the physician working for free or the taxpayer.

    On the other hand, a civil society should certainly provide assistance for its citizens who are in dire need. Not, it should noted, the illegal alien or the healthy adult who chooses not to provide for themselves, but the truly needy.

    It really isn't that complicated, but liberals/progressives/socialists wishing to build their voting base have made a mockery of "rights"...
     
  8. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,613
    Likes Received:
    2,041
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Isn't really the issue what level of care should people with no money get compared with what level of care people with copious amounts of cash can get?
     
  9. Maximatic

    Maximatic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,076
    Likes Received:
    219
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Why is it that, when you start talking about the obligation, you stop talking about the person? Instead of "the physician" or "the taxpayer", it becomes "civil society".

    If it really should be, why is everyone so squeamish about saying it how it is?
     
  10. Thehumankind

    Thehumankind Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,473
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    We have individual rights, but yet,
    we are incorporated into one as citizens of the USA thus what they call Americans.
    I believe a unified nation is far more stronger and being one entails responsibility for the group for any weaknesses within the group affects everyone.
     
  11. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    57,267
    Likes Received:
    36,477
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Multiplying rights, multiplies violence. We may use force to defend rights, to rectify rights violations, and to punish rights violators.

    The right to use force to defend rights may be derived immediately from the very idea of enforceable rights. If we have any enforceable rights at all, we have the right to use force or threats of force to defend them. That is what enforceable means. If we don't have any enforceable rights, then the whole idea of justice is empty. The right to use force to rectify rights violations and the right to use force to punish rights violators is well established.

    The right of restitution requires that one who violates the rights of others must compensate the victim of the rights violation for the harm caused by the injustice, and such compensation may be collected by force, if necessary.

    I'm not sure where a "right" to healthcare fits in here other than as a vehicle for virtue signaling.
     
  12. Belch

    Belch Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2015
    Messages:
    16,275
    Likes Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    wtf? We are incorporated into one as citizens of the USA?

    Sorry, but we're not communists. If you want to be a commie, then go off and be a commie with other like-minded people.

    Jeeez!!!!!

    and really, I think providing you guys with body bags should not be allowed. Just let the bodies stay where they are and turn it into some kinda place for real Americans so they can visit the graveyard occasionally to serve as a reminder of what you guys always always always end up as. Just a bunch of skeletons to serve as a reminder what communism always results in.
     
  13. Thehumankind

    Thehumankind Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,473
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    What is the meaning of USA?
    what is "U",
    the people should be united for we are the rulers as per Democracy,
    do you know what is democracy?
     
  14. Belch

    Belch Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2015
    Messages:
    16,275
    Likes Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    U means united states.

    Yes, I know what democracy is.

    The U of United States does not mean a democracy, but rather a republic.

    These are not difficult questions, dude.
     
  15. Maximatic

    Maximatic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,076
    Likes Received:
    219
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Regardless of what "Democracy" declares, "we" are not "the rulers" by any stretch of the imagination. In reality, some people, few people, rule others. In democracy, special interest groups rally the masses into factions and contend for the opportunity to forcibly impose their will on everyone else.

    You're trying to get a right, something good, morally correct, but all you've added that the individual doesn't have is power. How are you not trying to argue that might makes right?
     
  16. navigator2

    navigator2 Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2016
    Messages:
    13,960
    Likes Received:
    9,410
    Trophy Points:
    113
    NO. Other people's money is never the right answer.
     
  17. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    23,187
    Likes Received:
    6,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Is a "natural right" different from a legal right? Some say rights are free, and if it must be paid for, especially by someone else, it's not a right.

    I say consider the Constitution:

    The right to a prompt, fair trial by jury

    The right to vote in elections for public officials

    Section 8
    "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

    This right is the basis of copyright and patent laws. But you have to pay money to secure such rights.


    Section 9
    "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

    According to this Constitutional provision, jailed people may require their jailer to justify their imprisonment to a court. President Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of this right during the Civil War met with strong opposition. This is not free.


    Article III
    Section 2
    "The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed."

    In accordance with this, anyone accused of a crime has a right to a trial by jury, except in the case of impeachments. This right was further defined and strengthened by the 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th amendments.


    Amendment VI
    "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed"


    All of these are right provided by the Constitution and yet they all cost money to secure. So the claim that rights are free is not valid.
     
  18. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    23,187
    Likes Received:
    6,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Very sorry but you chose to live in society. In societies people provide for the whole and that means providing for others and each other. It's the social contract. Some people who object move to the Alaskan wilderness to live alone and not depend on anyone and not have to help anyone. And yet when they get there they find that cooperation and helping each other is the key to survival.
     
  19. Thehumankind

    Thehumankind Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,473
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Yup, voting is done by the people as well,
    we choose someone for us.
     
  20. navigator2

    navigator2 Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2016
    Messages:
    13,960
    Likes Received:
    9,410
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I chose to live in a society? With my best Willy Wonka expression, oh really? Tell us more. :roflol:
     
  21. Thehumankind

    Thehumankind Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Messages:
    4,473
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I guess the exact word is that we are represented as a whole,
    and my contention is the power of unity should be far more stronger than the power of one,
    calling for unity of course and I think how is it to run a country more efficiently through democratic or even a republic process,
    because they the people in the government really work for us and that's a fact.

    If the government would undermine the will of the people, I think that's not democratic/republic at all but authoritarian, am I right?
    There's no perfect provision that will satisfy each and everyone and never will be for if addressed it creates so much conflict and chaos considering 300M souls to consider, but we do have that so called majority rules and lawmakers who would debate the pros and cons and whatever comes out it's either we have to avail or adjust, it's the reality.
     
  22. Maximatic

    Maximatic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,076
    Likes Received:
    219
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    In asking whether the law should be used for something, we necessarily appeal to some standard distinct from and beyond systems of governance. So we can't even talk about these things without assuming at least a methodological natural law,.. unless we want to be dishonest with ourselves.

    A good rule of thumb for a natural right is that it shouldn't, itself, require any justification. One of us getting what we need to sustain ourselves without taking it from anyone else requires no justification, so we can have rights to life and property. Taking something from someone else, or hurting(or threatening) someone else, requires justification. So anything involving those things can't be a right.
     
  23. Maximatic

    Maximatic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,076
    Likes Received:
    219
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I know, right?
     
  24. Medieval Man

    Medieval Man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Messages:
    3,379
    Likes Received:
    1,665
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Because leftists will often use the nonsensical argument that we already have a system of socialism in place with roads, firefighters etc.

    A 'civil society' can be purely capitalistic yet still provide services for those who truly need them, as well as display a cooperative economic model.

    An individual, and this includes taxpayers, should never have their time/property/labor taken from them in order to provide a "right" for someone else. Yet individuals, by utilizing a republican form of government, can willingly provide for those who can't provide for themselves as well as embark on civil projects for the betterment of society.

    This is how it's supposed to work, anyway. But statists in both the Democratic and Republican parties have bastardized our republican form of government in an attempt to build their voting bases. And here lately, it's been especially prevalent in the Democratic Party, which has swung so far left as to be unrecognizable to the party of the past...
     
  25. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,550
    Likes Received:
    34,472
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A human right is whatever government power dictates. A natural right exists without government.

    Many human rights require the violation of natural rights to implement. Government forcing others to pay for something is a power you cannot use as an individual or you would go to jail.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page