Let's debunk one of liberals' belief — healthcare should be a fundamental right

you dont get to, we live in a democracy enough people have signed up to it already so if you dont like it it doesnt matter thats your problem nobody else's

 

of course you do that why you get food stamps if you cant buy it everyone has a right to food

 

see this is what I mean about americans throwing words around they dont actually understand, slavery and freedom should never have been mentioned in this paragraph, its just so deluded its not real. nobody wants to enslave you. and what do you mean you no longer have the right to maintain the health of your own body explain that how dont you, how does lots of people who dont have health insurance getting it affect your right to maintain your own health, the two are completely unrelated.

 

Treating health care like a public utility is NOT called wages. And I mentioned this as THE LEAST improvement.

 

Maybe. Maybe not. Congratulations on your wealth. I have a bit myself.

So if you are not a Taker why do you have the heart of a Taker? Is it guilt? What drives you to want to ask the government to take wealth from me in order to give it to others?

If you have the wealth you claim then why aren't you cutting out the middleman and giving the money directly to those you claim need it?

 

The fact that government first had to take money from me is irrelevant to the point.

 

Freedom versus slavery is central to this issue. If you can compel me to work two days every week for your benefit how is that anything other than slavery?
Getting something for nothing never works in the long run. Eventually you will run out of other peoples' money.

 

I see. I am compelled to be a party to this contract but cannot see it or change it? This is simple thuggery.

We will have to defeat those people who think as you do.

 

The idea that healthcare is a "right" debunks itself once you follow the argument to its logical conclusion. Doctors become slaves to the state and can be thrown in jail for refusing to provide me with my right to their services for free. If I have the "right" to the service of healthcare, then I have the right to any other service provided by the private sector. I have the right to a free haircut.

Of course, this logic would spell destruction of both the economy and our society. Which is the inevitable result of collectivist policies.

 

So by contibuting to a universal healthcare scheme and paying taxes I'm now a taker? Perish the thought!

Maybe I am a taker, as I take the rent from my investment property and re-invest it.

I don't need to redistribute my wealth to those who need healthcare because they already have universal healthcare. Silly idea.

 

You already have to work extra time to pay the part of your health insurance premium which provides for emergency treatment of the non-insured free-loaders.
Does this make you a slave? Then the way out is to let uninsured people die at the doors of emergency centers. Why does nobody propose this measure, I wonder?

 

Ah yes, so you want luxuries like armies and navies to be a special case.

You assume the US couldnt be prosperous while ruled by another country, and you assume it would be prosperous without healthcare provision.

None of these assumptions have any merit. As for Europe, Germany was ruled by the allies for nearly 50 years, the western half was extremely prosperous.

As was Hong Kong, as was Africa under the British. Japan under the USA. Indeed as was America under the British.

By the way, if there were no public sewerage and roads would the USA also be still as prosperous? But again, of course thats different isnt it?

Its a pity that you would define only healthcare as a luxury provision upon the public purse.

 

Right or no right.... healthcare should at least be more affordable.

 

You are compelled to do many things, the difference between you and slave is you have an equal influence on the making of these compulsions.

That you refuse to think beyond your unthinking anger is the reason your arguments have no sway. And you cannot defeat us, because we are you. But feel free to slap yourself on the face if it makes you feel better...

 

So you have the heart of a tyrant but not the lifestyle.

Awesome. You are an Aussie living in Laos. That also means you are irrelevant to the US condition. Have a nice day.

 

Of course we can defeat you. And we will.

 

Every day is a nice day and thanks for your kind words.

 

They already can - hospitals cannot deny medical treatment, and individuals cannot be forced by law to pay their debt.

Individuals in prison have entirely universal healthcare.

No you don't, you only have the right to health-care, not other services.

That's why only healthcare is a right, not other services. You're of course free to move to a more libertarian country like Saudi Arabia, where healthcare is not a right at all (if you're a woman at least) except if she has her husband's permission.

 

A bit of a misnomer, or misconception here.
If it only applies to inmates, then it's not 'universal'.

 

I love how these HC threads never talk about price integrity.

Wonder if anyone can offer another good or service that has ever increased at the rate HC costs have the past 2 decades?

 

Along with the increasing costs of private medical insurance.

 

You dont even know who you or we are. You cant even begin to know where to start.

 

Simple question. Why is it that America, which describes itself as the world's most prosperous and advanced nattion, is the only one in the civilised Western world which doesn't offer universal healthcare as a basic right?
Is everyone else wrong, and only America right? Somehow I doubt it.
Perhaps someone from the conservative right can answer this without resort to the 'personal responsibility' mantra, 'we saved your ass in WW2' or inane references to Communism.

 

Because we are somewhat paralyzed by the philosophical contradiction between the creed of the founders (individual rights to life LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness) and the creed of the "altruist/collectivist" (from each according to his ability, to each according to his need) and on this front, nothing wins out completely. It becomes a balancing act. We have a mixed economy in healthcare (a combination of freedom and controls) and it's an unstable mixture resulting in negative consequences. The statist part of the mixture is the problem and, at some point, if the creed of the collectivist DOES win out, we all lose in the end.

 

its only americans who equate not having healthcare with freedom and liberty. the only thing that frees you to do is die unnecessarily.