Check out all the colorful, easy-to-read content at ConnectTheDotsUSA.com
Arlen Grossman, here are a list of arguments for a supposed right to health care: 1: The founding documents of the United States provide support for a right to health care. The Declaration of Independence states that all men have “unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” which necessarily entails having the health care needed to preserve life and pursue happiness. The purpose of the US Constitution, as stated in the Preamble, is to “promote the general welfare” of the people. According to former Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), as part of efforts to “promote the general welfare,” health care “is a legitimate function of government.” 2: Instituting a right to health care could lower the cost of health care in the United States. According to a study from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, under a single-payer system, in which all citizens are guaranteed a right to health care, total public and private health care spending could be lowered by up to $1.8 trillion over the next 10 years due to lowered administrative and prescription drug costs. The American Medical Association reports that private health insurance plans spend 11.7% of premiums on administrative costs vs. 6.3% spent by public health programs. According to data by the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), Canada and the United Kingdom, two countries that provide universal health coverage, spend 47% and 42% of what the United States did per capita in 2017. South Korea, also with universal coverage, spent just 28%. 3: A right to health care could save lives. According to a study from Harvard researchers, “lack of health insurance is associated with as many as 44,789 deaths per year,” which translates into a 40% increased risk of death among the uninsured. Another study found that more than 13,000 deaths occur each year just in the 55-64 year old age group due to lack of health insurance coverage. 4: The right to health care is an internationally recognized human right. 5: A right to health care could make medical services affordable for everyone. 6: Providing all citizens the right to health care is good for economic productivity. When people have access to health care, they live healthier lives and miss work less, allowing them to contribute more to the economy. 7: A right to health care could improve public health.
Here is a list of arguments against a supposed right to health care: 1: The founding documents of the United States do not provide support for a right to health care. Nowhere in the Declaration of Independence does it say there is a right to health care. 2: A right to health care could lead to government rationing of medical services. 3: A right to health care could cause people to overuse health care resources. 4: People should pay for their own health care, not have it given to them by the government. Under a single-payer system, the right to health care is paid for through taxes, and people who work hard and pay those taxes are forced to subsidize health care for those who are not employed. In the United States, people already have a right to purchase health care, but they should never have a right to receive health care free of charge.
Health care is a service that should be paid for, not a right. Those on the Left view rights as commodities and commodities as rights. Here is a hypothetical 2 person scenario: Joe, a medical care provider treats Steve for Epilepsy, migraines, other neurological issues, with the compensation provided by Steve for the service. In your arguing for a single payer model, what would that mean if Joe does not get paid at all, either by Steve or by the government?
Here are links for you: 1: https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/health-care-reform-good-bad-ugly, 2: https://www.cato.org/research/health-savings-accounts, 3: https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/grass-is-not-always-greener-look-national-health-care-systems-around-world, 4: https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/talking-health-care-reform, 5: https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/right-health-care, 6: https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/wrong-health-care-0, 7: https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/blueprint-healthcare-freedom, 8: https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/is-there-right-health-care, 9: https://www.cato.org/blog/fear-freedom-health-care, 10: https://www.cato.org/blog/better-way-reform-health-care, 11: https://www.cato.org/blog/restore-free-markets-health-care, 12: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw
Thank you, Ragnar, for your abundant thoughts on the health care issue. Of course, I don’t see it the way you do. I feel that the wealthiest country in the world shouldn’t have citizens going without medical care or going bankrupt because of medical bills. No system is perfect and there will be problems, but there is no reason that the United States shouldn’t have universal health care like every other developed country in the world. It would be nice to live in a country where medical care is guaranteed by the government, and there is no reason to be stressed if you can’t afford it. I understand this not a libertarian position, but it is a humane one.
Arlen Grossman, I agree with people who say that the words health care and profit shouldn’t be used in the same sentence. According to some of what I read about the Canadian health care system, the wait times they have are for elective or voluntary surgeries. There is virtually no waiting time for surgeries that are medically necessary to maintain life according to how that system works from the standpoint of medical care. According to how the system works, you only have to wait to receive care if your situation is not life-threatening. There are some problems with private insurance companies, yes, like having some insurance companies saying that they will pay for one medical treatment or medication over another. Yes, the bureaucracy is also a problem. If we had a system that allows for both a public and private option, I would be fine with that. Barack Obama said that if we like our doctor or health care plan that we can keep them. If we had both a public and private option, that should make everyone happy. The same people saying “keep your laws out of my body” are demanding that the government take control of the entire healthcare industry. Any person who says that he or she wants the law to stay out of his or her body and yet advocates laws that govern our health care would be a hypocrite. The federal government per the 10th amendment has no business getting involved in healthcare. When Obamacare was enacted, Nancy Pelosi said that we had to pass the bill in order to know what was in it. Really? Just read the damn bill, make the information available to the public and then give people the opportunity to vote on it at the ballot box. Relying on logic that we have to pass a bill to know what is in it would be seen as license for government enacting multiple laws and passing many bills and/or laws without the consent of the people. If our medical care and the necessary medications were paid for with our tax dollars, I would say that we could ditch the insurance companies altogether.
Having the government in charge of medical care will cause some problems, sure, and is not perfect.. But it’s better than any other system. Every other developed country pays less and gets better care than we do. And nobody goes bankrupt or has to worry about the cost of getting sick. I’ll take socialized medicine over any other system, and so will every other advanced country. What we have now in our country is laughed at by other countries.
Arlen Grossman, I am in agreement with you that no person should be forced to go without medical care. The issue is how it is paid for and who is paying for it. If government paid for our medical care, however, we got the say-so as to which medical care providers we can see, I would not have any problem with that. Just let us decide which medical care providers we want to see and it does not matter what the method of payment is. For the record, my allegedly lengthy responses are not intended solely for you alone. Yes, I may be responding to you specifically, however, my comments are also meant for other people.
Arlen Grossman, If health care is a right, maybe advocates of this so-called right can explain how government will pay for it and not diminish the quality of service. A natural right is something we have by by virtue of being born. Assuming that health care was free, which it is not, it will mean that people will clog the system with every little problem that they have. Universal healthcare isn’t free. You just pay for it with higher taxes and higher prices for every day goods and services. Not to mention the healthcare itself sucks. And the government decides what treatment you can or can’t receive. These people who are enamored with the idea of government running the health care industry should go and see for themselves how it works in other countries. “Free healthcare” is not free if the government pays for it. That’s our tax dollars and guess who pays that? This is a small example of why government should stay out of our lives. Socialized medicine is for fools. If government operated the health care industry, what if someone gets lung cancer and the government says it won’t pay for the treatment? What if someone gets liver cancer and government says that it won’t pay for the treatment?
Let me ask you a question, Ragnar. Why are we considering “socialized medicine”, like they have in every other advanced nation? And of all those countries who do have socialized medicine, why are none of them clamoring to change to our system?
Arlen Grossman, here is a fix to this issue: Get government out of health care and health insurance. Let people make their own choices and see what the polls say. The inelastic nature of healthcare prices means the individual cannot negotiate lower prices. Margaret Thatcher described Socialism as a system where you run out of other people’s money. To put a slight spin on that using the same logic, the problem with free health care is that you would eventually run out of slaves to provide it for you. Government destroys all that its tentacles get into. The health care we had before the government stepped in and made healthcare required was actually pretty good. Of course that all changed. When the government steps in, things turn to crap. Stuff like this sound great at first, but it really does more harm than good. Healthcare is a privilege, not a right. Why is everything a right nowadays? Abolish all government healthcare. The same people saying “keep your laws out of my body” are demanding that the government take control of the entire healthcare industry. Is that not a double-standard by its very nature? If Government pays for your health care, government is gonna control your health care. The only real reason American healthcare is so ridiculously expensive is because a bunch of idiots believed a democrat who said, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your healthcare plan you can keep your healthcare plan. You’ll save thousands a year on your health insurance premiums.” With the fake and phony moral outrage being displayed by people on the Left related to the false and misguided delusion they have that we should have a right to health care, these people obviously feel like they are entitled to a lifetime of care provided by the government. Universal healthcare isn’t free. You just pay for it with higher taxes and higher prices for every day goods and services. Not to mention the healthcare itself sucks. And the government decides what treatment you can or can’t receive. If you ask one person if health care is a right and then they say yes, however, you follow up with the next question as to if you have the right to see the medical care provider of your choice and that person says no, a person who says that is contradicting him or herself in that context.
Arlen Grossman, the only real arguments for a single payer model that have any credibility would be where it is argued that medical care providers would not have to deal with insurance agencies not paying them for their services, as well as claiming that there are no out of network specialists. My only real concern stems from the possibility of discrimination as to what the government says it will pay for.
Arlen Grossman, if one argues that a right to health care comes from the government, by this very logic, government can decide which medical needs take priority and which do not. In one comment, another person linked a video where the guy making the presentation was discussing whether or not Paul Ryan believed that health care is a right or a privilege. A better answer that Paul Ryan could have given is where he could have said that the politicians who represent the people have no right to dictate which kind of medical care they can have. At the opening of the video, the guy said that Paul Ryan’s answer was wrong, however, his answer was honest. How is it wrong to say that health care is not a right from the government? By its very nature and definition, a right granted by government means that government can restrict or deny in absolute terms said right. I also find the guy who was laughing as he said it to not be credible. When one person says another person is wrong with what they say while laughing about it, then the person who is implying that the other person is wrong is not credible.
Arlen Grossman, people who say that health care is a right in absolute terms just want to use that claim as an excuse to justify abusing the services of medical professionals. If someone says that the pursuit of health care is a right, that is different. Using fake moral outrage as a tactic in debating whether or not someone has a “right” to healthcare is absurd.
We will never agree on this.
But in any event, Ragnar, I have a request. I do enjoy our debates , and the mental challenge involved is a good thing. But, respectfully, I am a very busy person and try not to spend excessive time on the internet. When I see seven or eight posts from you, I feel overwhelmed and obligated to answer them, but they do take up a lot of time. My request: No more than two posts a day, and hopefully not on the subjects we have gone over and over about. Okay?
Arlen Grossman, some of my comments are mainly intended for your other readers, not just you personally. My problem is that if we allow government to pay for every person to get medical care, even if there is no out of pocket cost to us, what if one person’s tax dollars are used to pay for someone to have an abortion when the person who is paying for it has no say?
We don’t get to pick and choose where our tax money goes. That is Congress’s job. If it were up to me the military budget would be cut in half.
Arlen Grossman, I agree with you.
Arlen Grossman, if you say that health care is an absolute right, how far does it go before the labor of a medical professional is abused? Do we have the right to beat down the door of a medical professional at his or her practice and demand treatment for any medical condition we may have?
Where are people beating down the door of medical professionals and demanding treatment? That’s news to be. Please, be realistic. We are merely talking about the government covering health care costs. That what is done in a civilized country.
Arlen Grossman, I did not mean that in a literal sense. Here is a video for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxtGepwXaes If we went with the single payer model, that may save more money for people over the long haul, keep them from accumulating expensive medical bills, which may lead them to bankruptcy. My only real problem is that if government says they will pay for someone to have heart surgery, however, they will not also pay for the medication for someone with a neurological disorder, Epilepsy is an example, what is to be done?
Obviously these are issues that must be dealt with, and priorities must be set. No system is perfect. But what we have now doesn’t work for millions of Americans. And I don’t find other countries clamoring to change to our health care system.
Arlen Grossman, fair points.
Arlen Grossman, here are some videos for you: 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlo3x0ba9gc, 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDtt5S6k-U, 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6Mj6CasPmc No person has an absolute right to another person’s services, particularly if the person providing the service is not adequately compensated. If we have a right to free health care, what is next? Free Iphones? Free computers? A free car? A free house? Where does it end?
That sounds complicated and a lot of trouble. I just deleted your post and if you want you can write a new one. By the way, are you and Jeffrey Liakos the same person?–Arlen
Arlen Grossman, if you are asking me, the answer is no. I know of the man you speak. However, there is no relationship between he and I. What was the reason for the last comment being deleted?
I deleted it because you wanted to change it and the whole process seemed to be a lot of work. You are certainly welcome to rewrite it.
As for Jeffrey, there are many similarities in style and substance between you too. But I promise to treat you like the individual you are.
Arlen Grossman, in one comment by the guy you speak of, he posted a video regarding health care being a right or not. The guy making the presentation is being dishonest with his analysis. He omitted the actual answer that Paul Ryan gave to the question of health care being a right or a privilege from the title. For the guy who made the presentation to selectively edit a comment as part of the title of a video automatically causes the guy making the presentation to not be credible.
Ragnar, you’ll have to refresh my memory about that video. What did Pakman say about Ryan’s view of health care as a right or a privilege?
Arlen Grossman, it is a convoluted thing to claim that one has an inherent right to the services of another person without compensating the person for provided service. Here is an example of a service provided: Someone owns and operates a coffee shop where he or she serves their customers daily by providing them with coffee to sip on while on the shop or if the person is on the go. If they say a cup of coffee is $10.00, however, the person tries to weasel their way out of paying for the coffee that they ordered, that is theft of the time, money and labor of the person who made the coffee.
The same concept applies in the medical industry. If you refuse to pay for the service provided, either upfront and out of pocket or pay with an insurance policy, that is theft of the service of a medical professional. How can any person display such deluded thinking as to wanting to call a good and service provided by medical care providers a right?
While we want to talk of morality (many people on the Left have a twisted concept of that,) how is it moral for someone to take advantage of the labor of medical professionals and not pay for it, however, it is immoral to say that health care is not a right granted by government? Can you give me a logical answer for this?
Under a national health care system, Ragnar, the medical professionals would be paid by the government. So I don’t understand your concern about doctors, etc. not being compensated.
Arlen Grossman, your points are valid. My concern is that the medical care provider would not be paid enough to maintain functionality of their practices.
A valid concern, Ragnar. I imagine medical care providers and the government would have to negotiate acceptable fees. We could look at how other countries, like Canada, do it.
Arlen Grossman, I have somewhat conflicted opinions on this issue. No person should be required to go broke when dealing with a medical problem. On the other hand, if you have people who claim to want freedom of choice, should they not be able to opt out of having the government paying the bill so they can do that for themselves?
You need everyone on board to make national health care work most efficiently, But like in Obamacare, a tax penalty could be charged for those who wish to go it alone. Just like with income taxes, we can’t have people opting out or we wouldn’t have a federal government.
Arlen Grossman, if you automatically declare that health care is a right, that would essentially give people license to abuse the services of medical professionals. We already have this issue when we have people who cross over the border illegally from Mexico and get to access our facilities without paying for the services.
Anything that is a right can be abused, but that doesn’t mean we throw it out. We have a right to law enforcement, and that can be abused. But that doesn’t mean we should give up that right. If people abuse the system, they should be investigated and if necessary, prosecuted. But let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water. I believe health care should be a right in a civilized, compassionate society, even if there will be abuse.
Arlen Grossman, since this is the case, here are 3 questions for you: Where would you rather see your tax dollars go-to pay for abortions for women who refuse to have sex without necessary protections in place or to pay for the care of combat veterans who return home from war zones? 2: What are your views regarding drug addictions being seen as more of a physical and/or mental health issue and less of a criminal issue? 3: When Paul Ryan said that health care is not a right from the government, is it not unreasonable to assume that the guy in the video that another person posted was deliberately twisting his words by omitting the actual answer from the title of the video in question?
Arlen Grossman, the biggest problem with a “right” to health care is where the line should be drawn. Why should one person who deals with Epilepsy pay $50, 000.00 for their medications, while a person who deals with high blood pressure pays $60, 000.00 for the medication that they need?
Any person who believes that all rights are government originated is delusional. Regarding Paul Ryan’s answer that healthcare is not a government-granted right, it seems that he was actually saying that government had no jurisdiction to tell us what type of health care we can have.
One of the other people who commented made a reference to Epilepsy. If the government only paid for the medication that people who have Epilepsy were prescribed, however, the medical provider had more discretion as to what was prescribed, as well as the dosage, I see no issue with that. What are your thoughts?
I am of the opinion that health care should be a right, not a privilege. It seems that every other developed country feels the same way. I don’t like living in a country where an illness results in bankruptcy.
Arlen Grossman, if you declare health care as being a right, how far does it have to go before it leads to people abusing the services of medical professionals? Why should any person demand treatment from a medical care provider and not be expected to pay for the service? Can you explain this? Your opinion is merely an opinion. Now, if government only paid the medical expenses, however, each person had more choice in the medical care providers they could see, I have no problem with this. The biggest issue is the regulatory overdrive that takes place in the medical care industry.
I just want everybody to have access to health care, ragnarsbhut, without going broke or going without.There is always going to be abuse, just as there is now by insurance companies, doctors and patients. But these abuses, under the current system or with national health care, can be fixed, if we have the will and make the effort. Sure, we don’t want regulatory overdrive, but a certain amount of regulation is necessary.
Arlen Grossman, another person posted with a comment referencing Epilepsy and Epilepsy medication. If the government only paid for the medication, however, the primary care physician or the Neurologist had a greater say in the medication being prescribed, that would not be a problem in my opinion.
Arlen Grossman, the biggest problem with the issue of health care is the regulatory overdrive.
Arlen Grossman, if my tax dollars went to fund development of new medications for Epilepsy and a multitude of other conditions, some that can be fatal if untreated, I would have no issue paying more in taxes if I had more of a say as to what the government does with the money. The issue with Kyle Kulinski (the guy who presented the video I linked) is his lack of objective analysis in his presentation. Here is an example of an exchange I can think of that this guy would twist to serve his own purposes between 2 fictitious people: Joe (the patient): “I have the right to the labor of Steve (the Medical Doctor) and I don’t owe him a penny for it.” Steve (the Medical Doctor): “If you have a right to my labor without compensating me for it, that makes me a slave.” There is no right to the labor of another person. A person can provide it, however, that person cannot be forced to provide the service compulsorily. Just saying, “I have an absolute right to health care” is absurd. Kyle Kulinski clearly has had things handed to him that he has not worked for or he just wants to sit on his ass and demand things and using fake and phony moral outrage when he does not get things the way he wants. If you want something, work for it.
Social Contract Theory is the Left’s favorite “go-to” for Healthcare as a right. The problem is, you don’t have an inherit right to another person’s service. That’s slavery. The only way the government can operate is through coercion and force. The moment that government has to infringe rights to create new ones, it has lost its purpose and has violated the Social Contract created by the People to uphold and protect the Constitution. Healthcare is a “positive right”, meaning it has to exist by taking away the rights of others. Government is not our nanny, people should take care of themselves. If Healthcare is a right then someone somewhere is a slave. leftists are still making the same argument that slave owners made, who will provide the food if we don’t force them to do it. I wish progressives would just come clean and admit they are pro slavery at least their arguments would make sense from that perspective. but to argue that every person on the planet has an innate right to the services provided by others because “morality” ignores the fact that these things don’t just pop out of thin air there isn’t a treasure trove of medical care being guarded by an evil leprechaun and if he would just get of the way everyone would live forever. If you want cheaper medicine and health care make it easier to do it. fast track degrees flood the market with qualified people. We should have so many doctors that they spilling over into third world look for patients to help but progressives haven’t heard a regulation they don’t like or a tax that’s to high. even if people will die because of it. All while bitching that we need to help people, if you want to help people, go do it. If healthcare is a right, then someone somewhere is a slave. Leftists are still making the same argument that slave owners made, who will provide the food if we don’t force them to do it. I wish progressives would just come clean and admit they are pro-slavery. At least their arguments would make sense from that perspective. But to argue that every person on the planet has an innate right to the services provided by others because “morality” ignores the fact that these things don’t just pop out of thin air there isn’t a treasure trove of medical care being guarded by an evil leprechaun and if he would just get of the way everyone would live forever. If you want cheaper medicine and health care, make it easier to do it. Fast track degrees flood the market with qualified people. We should have so many doctors that they are spilling over into the third world looking for patients to help, but progressives haven’t heard of a regulation they don’t like or a tax that’s to high. Even if people will die because of it. All while bitching that we need to help people. If you want to help people, go do it. Healthcare is a commodity. It is a good and service. Free speech is a right since it doesn’t come at anyone else’s expense. Anything that costs money to produce, by definition cannot be a right. Healthcare is expensive as hell. Doctors go to school for years and have high salaries as a result. Someone has to pay for it. It’s not free. Therefore, it cannot be a right. The best we can do is allow competition to make it as affordable as possible. As it stands, there is very little competition in the healthcare and insurance industry. Health insurance should be for catastrophic and expensive care. It shouldn’t cover so much other crap that could otherwise be cash based. Therefore, insurance premiums could be very affordable, and since everything under a certain price would be cash based, prices would have to cater to consumers. This would cause a lot of healthcare goods and services to drastically drop in price. And for people who still couldn’t afford healthcare, we could figure something out. But for the majority of the country, we should have affordable private insurance. The guy presenting the video was slandering Ryan’s words here. He said, “Not from the government”. I think that the problem with the guy who is presenting this video is that he believe rights as a concept in and of itself comes from government. As if it’s something the government gives you, which already concedes too much. My personal belief is that medical care can be too expensive in some regards. What the guy in the video I linked wants is “free stuff” and is acting like it is his (and that of other people who thinks as he does) right to demand a good and service that he and other people who thinks as he does have no desire to pay for. Only the criminally insane (libtards) believe that someone else’s labor and property belongs to them rather that the owner of the property and the laborer. These people who say that there should be a right to health care neglect the fact that medical providers do not work for free. The guy who is presenting this video also comes across as a hypocrite. He says that health care should be a right, however, he hypocritically does not want to allow people to decide for themselves by what means they will pay for their medical treatments, that and by depriving these people of the opportunities to make choices regarding what insurance plans they want to purchase. At the end of the presentation, he calls Paul Ryan a liar, which is false, a weasel, which is false, saying that Paul Ryan is wrong in saying that health care is not a right from the government. Government-granted rights by definition means that they can also be taken away by said government. My choice of the words human right was meant to imply that it should be our right to decide what medical treatments we want to pursue, how we want to pay for those treatments.
Wow! Do me a favor, Jeffrey, and keep your comments a bit shorter. I like hearing your point of view, but I’m a busy guy and don’t have the time to read long essays, some parts of which are repeated.
As for the substance, you never did respond to my post asking whether your opinion applies to public safety, fire prevention, education, and mail delivery. Don’t we have the right to a fire fighter, for example? Are fire fighters slaves? Since we are the only developed country where people can go bankrupt for a medical problem, shouldn’t we do something about that? Is compassion a part of the libertarian point of view? I guess not.
Libertarian/conservative ideology seems to triumph over human needs. Americans can die from medical problems so why shouldn’t the people (government) help its citizens, just like they do for public safety and education. I’d rather have Americans (through their government) helping all its citizens than allowing a handful of billionaires to have more money than the bottom half of the American people. That’s obscene. Where is your compassion, Jeffrey?
Arlen Grossman, I would prefer that my tax dollars go to pay for fire fighters and police than subsidizing illegal aliens who cross over the border from Mexico who deposit their children here, which seems to grant them automatic citizenship. In my last comment, I said that when I meant to put than. It is inherently immoral to commit an act of theft. The reason for my last comment being as long as it was is due to the fact that I want for other people who read this post to actually think through what they will write in a comment in order to avoid making themselves look stupid in the process. My response was to you specifically, however, for any other person who comments, this response was largely intended for them. Here is something to illustrate my point: A guy goes into a doctor’s office with a medical problem, claiming that he has the right to the service of said doctor, however, refusing to pay for it in the process. What gives someone an automatic right to the service of another person if the person who is soliciting the service refuses to compensate the person providing said service? To use a hypothetical example, here is one that I can think of: I own and operate a coffee shop, which needs money to remain functional. Unless I had a cap on how many cups can be served, say 2, with cup number 3 being free of charge, why should the customers not pay for the service I provide them by giving them 2 cups of coffee at a set price, while excluding the last cup from any set fee? Why should they get a pass for not paying for the 2 cups of coffee that had been provided? The fact that something is really important doesn’t make it a right. That’s not what “rights” are. Free healthcare is forced labor. Who do you think is taking care of the patient? The doctor. How would he get paid, keep up with tools, assistance, how will he get the drugs needed for people. That stuff is not cheap, yet people want free healthcare. Free healthcare is forced labor. Part of the issue is that almost 43 million people in the US have medical bills they have not paid. The Affordable Care Act was supposed to help fix this, but it was a disaster that made insurance significantly more expensive than it was before, and healthcare costs didn’t go down either despite more being insured. Furthermore, the billing system for hospitals is broken. You can get a bill for lab work from the hospital, the 3rd party lab, and find out that your insurance actually covered it anyway. Also, the price on each of those is not necessarily going to be the same. Besides that, following the constant changes from CMS to know what you can bill for, how much, how to code it, etc. is insane. Bills are kicked back all the time for errors. Those bills may get lost or never be corrected. I’m not convinced letting the government run the whole show is the answer. The solution should include both government programs and the private sector. Pointing at Medicare and saying it works does not paint the whole picture. If it was so great, why are there Medicare supplements? I don’t think the answer is one thing we can point to and say “That’s it!” To further complicate the issue is the fact that both sides of congress hate each other so much, it is not possible at this time to have them sit down and form a reasonable solution without it being so over complicated and full of pork that it will be yet another disaster. And this is an issue we need both sides for. I don’t think having one side draft the solution their way and pushing it though will pay off for all Americans. If Kyle Kulinski (the guy making the video I posted) had provided a more objective analysis, he might have had some semblance of credibility. The point of “free” healthcare is the same as all other “free” handouts: Votes for the democrats. If the only thing that government did was pay for the consultation with a medical specialist (with our tax dollars,) however, we were able to choose at will which medical specialists we can see, then I will say that I might not have an issue with government paying for our health care. From a tax standpoint, if I was in a 30% tax bracket, however, there was no set regulation as to how much medication I could get for any condition I have, I would have no problem with that. Back to my Epilepsy reference (something I do have,) if I could get the medication I need with no out of pocket cost due to my tax dollars covering that, I could care less how high my taxes are. Like I said in another post, if my tax dollars were spent responsibly, I could care less how high my taxes are. Now, I get that responsibly spent might be subjective, however, to use my 30% tax bracket example, if any medication I needed to treat my Epilepsy came to me without restriction on how much I can get at any given time because I was in that bracket, I would have no real issue with this personally. One thing I do not like about government involvement in the health care industry is that government could take my tax dollars and use those for things that I object to. Funding Planned Parenthood with our tax dollars is another thing I do not condone.
Arlen Grossman, I am on your side in some regards. My issue with government getting into the equation is that government can discriminate at will as to what medications will be paid for and which will not be paid for. From the standpoint of my Epilepsy example, I have that condition myself. Were I to get the medication I need with no out of pocket cost because that is what my tax dollars paid for, I would not gripe about my taxes being too high in that context. In a sense, I am very much on your side. Do I want to give insurance companies all of the power to dictate what they will pay for from the standpoint of medical care? Not at all. Where we seem to differ is to whether or not we should let the government pay for it (with our tax dollars) or allowing the people to decide what insurance policies they want to purchase, so their insurance could cover the costs. Were I to be in a 30% tax bracket, 40%, maybe 50%, if there was no restriction on how much medication I could get, I would only have to be concerned with the prescription being renewed. So I agree with the guy’s premise that insurance companies should not have too much power. My only real issue with him is his lack of objectivity in his presentations.
Arlen Grossman, Social Contract Theory is the only argument that the left wing can make regarding a “right” to health care. The guy who presents the linked video clearly misrepresented Paul Ryan’s statement. A statement that health care is not a right or a privilege from the government is in no way claiming that it is not a right at all. Based on the title alone, the guy presenting the video is clearly being dishonest and not providing objective analysis. He selectively edited Paul Ryan’s answer to make Paul Ryan out to be a liar. I find it to be amusing when a Leftist political type speaks of social contract when they have no real clue as to what it means. “Not from the government” essentially means that government has no right to dictate where, how, when and under what circumstances you can get medical treatment. This is the point that Paul Ryan was making. I get the fact that those on the Left are incapable of understanding that no person has the right to the labor of another person, however, these people need to wake up and catch a clue.
Well, Jeffrey, sounds like you reject police officers, firemen, mail carriers, and teachers, too. Nobody has a right to their labor, either. And we shouldn’t have veterans seeking medical care from the VA.
Arlen Grossman, you are way off base. My problem with the guy who is presenting this video is that he clearly thinks that he (and all other Leftists) have the right to the labor of other people. From the standpoint of a human right to health care, I used the words human right to illustrate my belief that we should be free to make our own decisions regarding our health care. Social Contract Theory is the only real argument that those on the Left can make regarding a “right” to health care. Back to my example of Epilepsy medication, if I had to pay a higher tax rate in order to get the benefits lower out of pocket costs for the medication, I would not object to that. The only issue I have with the guy making the presentation is that there is no objective analysis on his part. When he says that Paul Ryan was honest, however completely wrong from the way of thinking of the guy making the presentation, he was almost laughing as he said it. Watch the video from the opening to the conclusion, then tell me that his analysis is not biased. “Is health care a right or a privilege?” “Not from the government.” Most of the people who say that medical care as a right should originate from the government neglect the fact that if government can give something as a right, government can take that away. “Not from the government” seems to me to be Paul Ryan’s way of saying that government should have no say so in where, how, when and under what circumstances we can get medical treatment. Now, to be fair, Medicare and Social Security are programs that the government runs. The big problem with the guy in the video is that he is making Paul Ryan sound like a hypocrite, where he says that Paul Ryan says that health care is not a right from the government and then coming out of left field where he claims that Paul Ryan is saying that it is a right. There was the part that I mentioned about the guy omitting from the title of his video the last part of Paul Ryan’s answer. It is all too clear to me that this guy is drinking the Kool-Aid. No person has the right to mooch off of another person, nor does one person have the right to demand services from another person without compensating them for it. You can’t force someone to provide a good and service to you. That is slavery by definition.
Arlen Grossman, the fact of the matter is that Doctors have bills that they need to pay. Yes I did use the words human right in reference to health care. To elaborate, here is what I meant: We have the human right to pursue treatment options for whatever we may have. That does not mean that we have the right to demand services without compensating medical professionals who provide them. I know that Leftists view rights as commodities and commodities as rights. However, they rely on twisted logic as the basis for their delusions. Getting a good and service without paying for it is theft. Health care is only a right until you run out of slaves to provide it for you. As of the video where the guy who makes his presentation of what Paul Ryan said, he clearly edited out part of Paul Ryan’s answer in the title in order to make Paul Ryan look bad in the eyes of some of his viewers. When he said that the way Paul Ryan answered the interviewer’s question was honest, completely wrong but honest, he was laughing as he said it. Laughing as you are saying something, unless you intend for something to be seen as humorous, discredits what you are saying, thus making your analysis not objective. Any person who says that health care is a right from the government clearly wants free stuff. People who say that government has no right to interfere in a doctor-patient relationship do not want their privacy to be violated, which government can do if you give the government that kind of power. What about the politicians who say that they want to deny us freedom of choice regarding our medical care and yet they want that very freedom for themselves. If government was only paying for medical care, paying for the medications that we need through our tax dollars not dictating which Doctors we can see, that is different. I know that Leftists want to reward laziness and keep people trapped in perpetual dependence upon the government. I also find it offensive how these people who claim that we should have a right to health care exempt themselves from the very system that they want to impose upon the rest of us. I wish these politicians could be indicted on charges of hypocrisy for their exempting themselves from a health care system that they want to impose upon the rest of us. Another thing I would like to see is this guy who makes the presentation go to a medical facility and demand treatment for any condition that he has. If he is told that he has to get in line, to pay for the appointment out of pocket or through an insurance policy, his tune would very likely change.
A couple of points, Jeffrey. One, I think the video you refer to is this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaks8Bzv-j4. I agree with the host Kyle: Health care should be a right, not a privilege. He made a good case why. Clearly I disagree with Ryan. Two, you continue to use broad-brush stereotypes, e.g. “Leftists want to reward laziness….etc.” Those types of generalizations are lazy and ineffective. Third, as far as politicians being exempt from the health care system, it just isn’t so. Read this:https://www.factcheck.org/2013/05/congress-and-an-exemption-from-obamacare/
I don’t know what sources you use, but you might want to question them.
Finally, In my opinion, you rely too much on ideology, and not enough on people, especially those who need help the most. Have a nice day.
Arlen Grossman, I see no problem rendering aid and assistance to people who need it. The problem is that the guy presenting the video relies on utilizing arguments for a right to health care that are based on emotion, not logic and common sense. He also uses the term social contract to back up the notion that we have the right to the labor of other people. Giving legitimacy to the state (I know that those on the far Left and some on the far Right want that) ultimately leads to the state being enabled to unnecessarily abuse its power. You also never directly addressed my example of Epilepsy as a medical condition, which can be fatal if untreated. Now, if the government only paid for medication like that through our tax dollars, I see no real issue with that. However, Medical Doctors are responsible for prescribing them. If the Doctor prescribed them, however, our tax dollars went to pay for them, I have no issue with that.
I’m confused, Jeffrey. If you see no problem rending aid and assistance to people who need it, isn’t that government health care? Same thing with paying for medication for epilepsy? Sounds like you’re on my side.
Arlen Grossman, I am on your side in the sense that I do not want to give private insurance companies too much power. It seems to me that what Paul Ryan was really saying was that he did not want to give government the power to make decisions regarding our medical care that we should be free to make for ourselves. From my way of thinking, the guy who is making the presentation does have some valid points to make. Paul Ryan also has very valid points to make. To start with the guy making the point about private health insurance companies, I agree with him in the sense that private insurance companies can abuse their power and ripoff their customers by not paying for the medical care that their customers purchased the policy for. Regarding Paul Ryan’s point about whether or not health care should be a right granted by government or not, if a government can grant you a certain right, by that very logic, government can take it away. Regarding my reference to the matter of Epilepsy medication, if government paid for it (through our tax dollars,) however, there was no overall discrimination as to what medications they paid for, regardless of what medication the Doctor prescribed, I say no harm, no foul. All I can do is view the social contract argument that the guy presenting the video makes with a certain degree of disdain. One thing the guy making the presentation does as he is saying that Paul Ryan is wrong, however, he was being honest, is laughing as he said it. Not only does laughing as you say something like that make you look silly, it also makes you out not to be credible, definitely not objective, with the rest of your analysis. The guy also contradicted himself when he said that Paul Ryan was honest at the beginning of the video, then said that he is a liar at the end. Which one is it-is he being honest or is he a liar? You can’t have it both ways. Of course, with people on the Left, they want free stuff and are not willing to get their hands dirty. You said at one point that I sound like a libertarian to you. A lot of people try to paint all libertarians as having anarchistic mentalities. There is a difference between someone who says, “I just want to be free to live my life in peace as long as I do no harm to other people” and a person who says, “I want to abolish all rules and have a free for all society.” Related to my Epilepsy reference, the fact that medication is needed to manage it, if government (through our tax dollars) paid for it, however, it was left to the medical professional who prescribed it to decide the correct dosage, as well as the best medication, if I had to pay more in taxes and had to pay no out of pocket cost for the medication I was prescribed, I would not object to that. Here is an example of a tax bracket: 30%. If I I as a person who has Epilepsy made enough money that put me up to that level, which resulted in me getting the medication either free of charge because that was what my tax dollars paid for, or having very little out of pocket cost, I would be willing to pay that tax rate with no hesitation. What I don’t like about the right to health care argument is the fact that if government can grant that as a right, government can take it away. Look at what our representatives did to us. They forced Obamacare on us and exempted themselves.
Why do I get the impression, Jeffrey, you don’t even read what I write? Go back to my October 2 post, when I objected to your broad brushing of “all leftists.” And I provided a link that refutes your claim that Congress is exempt from Obamacare. Yet you go ahead and continue generalizing about the Left (They want free stuff and are afraid to get their hands dirty) and saying the false claim that Congress is exempt from Obamacare. Try to be more original. I know you can do better.
Arlen Grossman, you may be interested in things that are based in fact, however, from what I have heard and read, many Leftist political types don’t seem to be interested in facts unless these facts suit their narratives. In the video where the guy from Secular Talk speaks of a 0% tax rate and a 100% tax rate, he says that people should have a right to health care, that people should have a right to education. Both statements are merely opinions. People can choose to study things and learn about what they study. People can also opt to be ignorant and clueless about how the world works. From the standpoint of having a right to health care, people should only have this right insofar as they want to pursue of their own volition treatment options for whatever they have. Look at the politicians who claimed the right to exempt themselves from Barack Obama’s healthcare plan, all the while screwing us over in the process. A glaring hypocrisy is evident there. The guy presenting the video said that Paul Ryan was wrong when he said that health care was not a right or a privilege from the government, however, he was honest. As he was saying that, he was almost laughing in how he said what he said. That alone makes the guy presenting the video not credible or objective. Clearly, at least as I can tell, the guy presenting the video is delusional in his thinking. Leftists believe in government originated rights, not individual rights. Government also abuses its authority from time to time. Look at countries that have dictatorial regimes, for example. They are the worst. If you are familiar with the Star Trek franchise created by Gene Roddenberry, one species found in there would be what are called Borg. The Borg have a collectivist mindset, with no deviating from their routine allowed. Leftist political types are the same way. Relying on and using disingenuous fake moral outrage regarding the fact that government should provide us with health care as a debate tactic is absurd. any right granted by government means that government can take it away on a whim. As I correctly noted, the guy making the presentation omitted the part of Paul Ryan’s statement where Paul Ryan said, “Not from the government,” when asked about health care being a right or a privilege. Making equivalent the claim of health care not being a government originated right to mean that we do not have the right to pursue our own courses of treatment is absurd. One thing that Paul Ryan could have said, which would have destroyed the credibility of what this guy was saying is that government officials have no jurisdiction to come between a Doctor and a patient from a legal standpoint. When people get to the point where insurance coverage is non-existent across the board and that they will have to pay for medical care expenses out of pocket, the likelihood that these people will bitch about the “right” to health care will decrease or become non-existent.
Arlen Grossman, I know that my 2 comments where I said that health care was not a right and my referencing if Paul Ryan said it was a human right seem to be contradictory. In the strictest sense, health care is not a right, but a commodity. We have a human right to pursue our own courses of treatment. So we have that right. What we do not have is the right to do is demand medical treatment and be unwilling to compensate medical professionals for it. I know that you (and many other Leftists) want something (free stuff) for nothing (being able to weasel your way out of paying the required price for the services being provided.) Just saying that people should have a right to health care is an opinion, not a fact. Social Contract Theory as the basis for the “right” to health care is an absurd argument to make. We do not have an inherent right to the services of other people. To claim that we do only makes the people providing said services slaves. I know that Leftist political types don’t give a damn about facts, however the fact is that nobody has the right to the labor of other people, period. As of the video I linked, the guy who presented this video, as well as many Leftist political types, use the Social Contract Theory as a basis for the right to health care, as well as playing on people’s emotions. This guy, as well as many Leftist political types, also rely on the utilization of guilt tripping and playing on people’s emotions to get their way. The only time you can get “free stuff” legitimately is if you buy one or two items, resulting in getting the last item free of charge. In the video, the guy making the presentation clearly edited out Paul Ryan’s comment that health care is not a right from the government. So, Leftists don’t give a shit about facts, at least unless they can make up their own facts. The guy who presented the video at the opening said that Paul Ryan was asked a pretty straightforward question about health care, that how Paul Ryan was completely wrong, however, he was honest in his answer. Paul Ryan said, “Not from the government,” when he was asked about health care being a right or a privilege. As the guy who says that Paul Ryan was wrong, he actually was laughing as he said that. Clearly this guy knows that what he is saying is bullshit. A right granted by government means that government can be taken away. Look at places where government runs medical care. The quality of service is a shit show. The only points that this guy made that have credibility are his referencing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He cited that under Medicare that 94% of those expenditures go to actual medical care. If you have a patient who has Epilepsy and the government refuses to pay for the medication through our tax dollars, the person in question is screwed because they may not be able to afford the out of pocket costs of the medication that they need.
This is an issue we’ve beaten into the ground, Jeffrey. I think government should provide health care for its citizens, you think otherwise. We’re not ever to agree on this. I do have a request, Jeffrey, please don’t use such such disrespectful blanket statements such as Leftists “don’t give a shit about facts.” As a “leftist” myself, I do care about facts. Our opinions may differ, but I do care about facts. I expect better of you, Jeffrey.
Arlen Grossman, here are some facts for you: 1: People who go to medical school have tuition costs, that for room and board when on campus, that for the books they need to study their chosen field. 2: Medical care is not cheap. When I say that government should not be overly involved, here is the gist of what I mean: If government decided selectively what medications it would pay for, then a lot of people would be screwed if the government (through our tax dollars) did not pay for the medications and/or medical care for these people. My claim that Leftists don’t give a shit about facts may sound extreme, however, outside of your blog, I have looked up other sources of information that have Left-leaning inclinations and am admittedly skeptical of the details that they provide. Outside of your blog, as well as some of the websites you suggested I look into, the only other person who I would say has any credibility with his presentations is David Pakman.
Thank you for trusting me,Jeffrey, but I disagree that Leftists don’t give a shit about facts. I think it is right-wing blogs who don’t care about facts. Case in point, President Trump disregards facts several times a day usually, and righties seldom, if ever, call him for it. And really, Jeffrey, you, who have nice things to say about Alex Jones, shouldn’t be lecturing others about facts!
Arlen Grossman, I know that I had used the words human right in the context of health care. To clarify as to what I mean, here is further explanation: I believe that we should have the right to decide what course of treatment we pursue for whatever medical conditions we may have. Hence my use of the words human right. Despite what the guy says in the video regarding government being able to pay for our medical care better than a private insurance company, where is the proof?
You keep referring to a video, Jeffrey. Which video is that? And whatever health care system you prefer, the question must be asked: “What if you can’t afford the medical treatment?” That’ s a reality for millions of Americans. And private insurance companies are not much good for that.
Arlen Grossman, the video I speak of is that which was titled Paul Ryan: Healthcare Isn’t A Right. Just saying that because something is not a right from the government translates to it not being a right at al has no basis in reality. When I had made reference to the concept of human rights regarding health care, my point was that we should be free to make our own choices, pay for our own medical care. Free health care exists in the minds of entitled Leftists.
Yet citizens in other developed countries have access to health care, even if they’re poor. In our system, if you can’t afford health insurance you’re screwed. Americans who can’t afford health insurance may be free, but they just might be dead. We’re the richest country in the world (although the money is mostly at the top), surely we can relieve that burden from our less fortunate citizens? Obviously, you don’t agree because, if I may say so, you believe ideology trumps human needs. That’s why we see it differently.
Arlen Grossman, back to my health care being a human right reference, I used the word human right in the sense that we should have the right to decide what health care we can pursue. To further illustrate, I will say this: We have a right to life. What we do not have is the right to demand treatment and be unwilling to compensate our medical professionals who see to helping us with these issues. A right granted by government means that government can take it away on a whim. So a right granted by government means we have it until we don’t have it. As to the video, the guy making the presentation says that government is factually and empirically better at paying for our medical care than private insurance companies. With Medicare and Medicaid, both being government-sponsored types of insurance, this is true at least from that standpoint. I looked up your link. The Washington Post, The New York Times-both are less credible than Infowars. I am not going to defend everything that Alex Jones or Infowars will say about things. Having said that, at least Alex Jones says enough to tip the scales in his favor. Police brutality and abuses of power, abuses of the civil liberties of U.S. citizens without legitimate grounds-Alex Jones is right about all of that.
If you think Alex Jones is more reliable than Alex Jones, you’ve lost me. Jones is insane. If the NY Times or Washington Post make a mistake, they will have a correction. If Alex Jones and Donald Trump make mistakes or lies–which they do constantly–they won’t admit it. It is clear to me why we differ so much politically. It is our news sources. You probably believe what Fox News, Limbaugh and Jones say, while I rely more on the newspapers you mention, as well as MSNBC and CNN. That is a wide gulf among news sources. And it tells us a lot about the sharp divisions politically in this country.
Of course I meant to say” those newspapers” instead of Alex Jones twice in. the first sentence.
Arlen Grossman, I find it to be absurd that those on the Left talk about social contract when they have no real understanding as to what it means. To say that people should get something like medical care without paying for it leads to abuses in the system.
A civilized country provides medical care, Jeffrey, so its citizens don’t suffer or go broke paying for it. Every other developed country fulfills that obligation. I guess it doesn’t bother you that Americans go bankrupt over medical bills, or are not able to afford treatment they need. That’s our difference, It bothers me.
Arlen Grossman, libertarians speak of negative rights. Those are rights that cannot be taken away. Leftists believe in positive rights. All people on the Left want would be handouts and free everything. Newsflash: “Free stuff” has to be paid for somehow. When I used the words human right, I was speaking to the fact that we should have the right to pursue our own courses for medical treatment. We already have government sponsored medical care (Medicare and Medicaid) and both programs are going broke.
Jeffrey, Medicare and Medicaid are a long way from going broke. And the American people are quite happy with these programs, and if there were a commitment to them in Congress they would be much better off.
Arlen Grossman, I cannot understand why people like the guy in the video I linked feel that they have the right to the labor of other people. Just asking if it is immoral to let people go bankrupt over accumulated medical bills is a tactic of manipulation. Saying that health care is too expensive in many regards is a valid point. My issue with the guy in the video who speaks of a right to health care is that he takes for granted the fact that we have better medical facilities than many other countries. My use of the words human right was meant to imply that we should have the right to pursue whatever medical treatment we need. The guy’s 2 examples about the questions as to if it is moral to allow people to go bankrupt over medical bills is easily debunked because we have health insurance plans that we pay for that foot the bills, as well as the question as to if it is moral to let people bleed out in the street are based on emotional appeal.
Arlen Grossman, I know that I used the words human right in the context of health care. To clarify, here is the gist of what I mean: We should have the right to decide what medical care we want to pursue for whatever ails us. My issue with the right to health care argument that those on the Left want a good and service that they don’t want to pay for. The fake and phony moral outrage from people who cannot accept the fact that we don’t have an inherent right to the services of other people is very revealing about their moocher mentalities. Free college, free medical care-these will have to be paid for somehow. We already have medical care which is sponsored by government (Medicare and Medicaid,) which satisfies the delusions about medical care being seen as a government-granted right. With the guy in the video who is making his presentation that I posted, he clearly has been indoctrinated into believing things that are not accurate.
Arlen Grossman, here is the question Paul Ryan was asked: “Is health care a right or a privilege?” When Paul Ryan said, “Not from the government,” he was basically saying, however, not in so many words, that we should decide what medical care we want to pursue for ourselves, not having government mandate to us what medical care we receive. Social contract and the General Welfare clause in the U.S. Constitution being used as arguments for claiming that health care is a right are absurd arguments. If someone faces a terminal illness and the government decides not to pay for it, then government is giving the person in question the middle finger. So this guy’s claim that government is better at paying for our medical care than private health insurance companies is nonsense. The only valid points the guy presenting this video made are about the war in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq, the military industrial complex and the Wall Street bailouts. Every other point is reliant on appeal to emotion. The guy in the video talks about morality (when the Left has no morality) as an excuse to back up his baseless claims. He cites a 94% statistic about Medicare going to pay for actual medical care. Since Barack Obama sent Medicare into bankruptcy in order to pay for Obamacare, this negates the point that the guy in the video made. Social contract and general welfare as justifications for the right to health care are bullshit arguments to make. Anybody who says that health care is a right and yet wants to deny us by legal means the right to pursue whatever medical care we want is a hypocrite.
Jeffrey, you say ” not having government mandate to us what medical care we receive.” Government insurance will guarantee affordable access to health care, but nobody tells you if or how you use that health care.
And “Since Barack Obama sent Medicare into bankruptcy in order to pay for Obamacare,” is just plain false.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/11/14/paul-ryans-false-claim-that-because-of-obamacare-medicare-is-going-broke/?utm_term=.5ea8bfaa885b
And why would you assume government “wants to deny us by legal means the right to pursue whatever medical care we want” Nobody would stop you getting medical care any place you wanted.
Arlen Grossman, if government is demonstrably better at paying for my medical care than a private insurance company, then I can accept the premise of your argument. Now, if paying more in taxes resulted in a lower cost of a medication that I might need for the long term, mainly because that would be something my tax dollars would cover, I see no problem with that. You and I seem to agree that medical care can be too expensive. My only real issue is that I would like to have more say so as to what my tax dollars pay for. Here is an example of a medical condition that affects a lot of people: Epilepsy. Should there be no restriction on how much medication can be paid for on a monthly or yearly basis from our tax dollars for people who have this condition, how much medication can be supplied per patient, I see no problem with that. So, on principle, I don’t disagree that health care can be more affordable. What I object to is paying for medical care for people who cross over the border from Mexico illegally. Another thing I find objectionable is when my tax dollars subsidize organizations like Planned Parenthood. The only reason I object to the right to health care argument from those on the Left is that people who cross over the border from Mexico get it faster than the rest of us, all without paying for it.
Arlen Grossman, if government (through our tax dollars) kept the out of pocket costs for medical appointments low, I would concede that government would probably be better in that context. Now, if you have someone with a medical condition that is life-threatening if untreated that government refuses to pay for, that person is screwed. From the video I linked, I don’t necessarily disagree with the guy’s point that health care should have a greater degree of affordability. However, his claim that government is better at paying for our medical care than we are or that an insurance company is causes me to be skeptical.
Arlen Grossman, back to what Paul Ryan was saying, where he said health care is not a government granted right, Leftist political types only want “free” health care so they can mooch off of the labor of these medical professionals. They also speak of a right to that so they can justify the idea that they can relieve themselves of any guilt regarding their taking advantage of the labor of other people. Ever since the Progressive era, despite the positive sounding nature of progress, we have gone downhill. Leftist political types produce propaganda and want to have a collectivist mentality, with no room for different opinions. Here is an example of a medical condition which affects many people: Epilepsy. If anti-convulsant drug prices are paid for by the government, government could discriminate as to which medications patients who have Epilepsy can receive. How would you feel if you knew someone who has that condition and they could not get the medication they need because government raises the price of it? Back to the video, any person who says that we should have a right to health care (which we don’t) and advocates policies that price us out of plans that we want to purchase is a hypocrite. People on the right believe in being charitable with their own resources, while people on the Left believe in being charitable with the resources of other people.
You don’t give up, do you, Jeffrey? We’ve gone over and over on this issue and your viewpoint will never change. Nor mine. It comes down to a matter of values, and we have different values and see the world very differently. Let’s let this subject rest.
Arlen Grossman, if my extra tax dollars went to pay for the care of combat veterans, I would be willing to pay more in taxes. If my tax dollars went to fund research to develop medicines for a wide variety of medical conditions, I would be willing to pay more in taxes. Just let me make the decision as to where my extra tax dollars go. Can you not see the glaring hypocrisy behind the claim that we should have a right to health care and yet we are priced out of the plans that we want to buy? By allowing government to pay for our medical care, which we should not, we are making ourselves slaves to the system. “Everyone’s access to health care trumps libertarian ideology.” Those were your exact words. Just because something is accessible, that does not mean that you have an automatic right to it. Movie theaters are accessible, so we can go freely to see one movie or another. We do not have the right to insist that movie theaters be built, however. Here is an example of a right that we all have: To give our business to people who we want to. If I was a coffee shop manager and you were to come in for a cup of coffee, you would exercise your right to give me the business, as well as giving me the pleasure of providing the service to you. This is a voluntary exchange. We don’t have an inherent right to the services of other people. Here is an example of a right that the government should not have been given: The right to tax our income. Leftist political types whine and bitch about the wealthy not paying their fair share in taxes.
We will never agree on this one, Jeffrey. I believe any civilized, decent government would make sure EVERYONE has at least food, shelter, and health care (many other countries do it). In order to do that, taxes have to be collected, and more from those who have benefited from our system. You obviously feel otherwise. We both can agree that our tax dollars should be better used. But it would be chaotic if everyone picked and chose where they want the money to go. We let our elected representatives decide that. And yes, they will make the wrong decisions in our eyes, partly because we have different priorities, but also because the political system is so corrupted by money, i.e. the crony capitalist system we have now. There are no easy answers, Jeffrey. I wish there were.
Arlen Grossman, how can we not have some area of agreement regarding what I have said? Did you overlook my 2 statements at the beginning of my earlier comment? You are operating under a false premise. Another thing is that you are taking a lot of what I said out of context.
Sorry, Jeffrey, sometimes I don’t have a “reply” button on some posts, so I’ll answer here. Please give me specifics about what we could agree on, any false premises, and examples of what I’ve taken out of context. I’m not clear about what you are referring to.
Arlen Grossman, we seem to agree that health care has some aspects where it can be too expensive. I never said that I believe that people should be forced to go without health insurance. We already have government operated medical care (Medicare and Medicaid) that insures people who are elderly and people who are poor. The only argument for the right to health care that this guy in the video I linked provides is that which is based on emotion only. Why not let me decide where my tax dollars go? If my tax dollars go to fund initiatives that produce more effective treatments for neurological disorders, this is one area where I would not be overly concerned as to how my tax dollars are used or how high my tax rate is. That is one example. Should people have access to medical care? I would say so, however, I believe that people should be free to buy an insurance policy of their choosing or pay for their medical appointments out of pocket if they wish. Having access to health care and medical facilities is a good thing. The problem is that if government runs it, government can spend medical facilities into bankruptcy without repercussions. Would I object to higher taxes if my money was spent better? No. Would I feel like I was being ripped off if I said I wanted my tax dollars to go to fund medical treatments for people who are here legally (be they citizens by birth or if they immigrated here from other countries through proper channels?) Not at all.
Regarding your June 11 post, Jeffrey: We are essentially going over the same issues and will never change each other’s minds. Still, I will comment. I reject that using government services will make people dependent on the government. That may be true for a few, but I don’t think it applies to most people. Government service to me is a helpful thing that helps us run a civilized society. It can always be improved, but ill is better than having greedy capitalists bleeding citizens in order to maximize profits. You only end up with giants corporations, like insurance companies, trying to make money off ordinary citizens while giving the least possible services, as we have with our current health care model. Only the government stands in the way of greedy corporations ripping off ordinary people. That said, we must always make sure the government is not corrupt, just as we must do the same for big corporations.
Arlen Grossman, the reason people choose to pursue medical degrees is because they seem to believe that it is their calling. My linking the video was deliberate. The guy says that government is better at paying for our health care than we are. Near the opening of the video, Paul Ryan was asked if health care is a right or a privilege. When Paul Ryan said, “Not from the government,” he was saying that we should not give government power over our lives to make decisions that we should be able to make on our own that govern our health. In one of the comments a person asked, “Why do you feel like you have a right to someone’s labor”? A following commenter said that the guy who presented the video was taking Paul Ryan’s comment out of context, pointing out that Paul Ryan was actually implying that government should not be able to tell us what kind of health care we can have. Making an automatic leap from saying that health care is not a right from the government is equivalent to saying that it is not a right at all is fundamentally dishonest. The guy in the video was oversimplifying what Paul Ryan said, making himself look like a dumb-shit. I also came across a comment where a person said that we do not have the right to another person’s labor or property, so in that context health care is not a right. Here are a few questions that I have for your consideration: 1: Why should our tax dollars subsidize drug addicts on welfare when they consciously choose to fuck their minds up with this shit? 2: If Paul Ryan had said that government had no right to dictate what medical treatment you can have, would this not destroy the credibility of the idiot who was presenting this video? Also, this guy uses appeal to emotion only to back up his claims, not balancing it with logic. 3: Why should we be forced to subsidize health care for people who cross over the border illegally from Mexico when they should get their shit in order instead of freeloading off of the United States, so as to get hospital visitations without paying for them?
As of the video that I linked, the guy who presents the video is clearly not credible. He only says that health care is a right so he and other people like him can feel good about taking advantage of the labor of other people without having to pay a penny for it. When Paul Ryan said that health care is not a right from the government, he was saying that government had no legitimate jurisdiction to impose a law that mandates one system upon a whole nation. So, health care is not a right. Health care is a commodity, a good and service. For the record, if government provides this for free, government can then take it away. These politicians who say that health care is a right want to price people out of the insurance plans that they want to purchase so as to guarantee that they will stay in perpetual dependence on the government, basically making the politicians who say that health care is a right out to be hypocrites.
We’ve gone back and forth on this many times, Jeffrey. In my opinion, if you truly cared about people you would not want them to go without health care, even if they lack money,
Everyone’s access to health care trumps libertarian ideology.
Arlen Grossman, if my money was not being used to fund abortion on demand, a policy that many Leftist political types condone, I would not give a damn about what other health care initiatives are undertaken that benefits us all. With that video I linked, near the end of it, the guy called Paul Ryan a liar, a weasel and said that what he was saying is wrong. The guy in the video is ignorant of the fact that someone will have to pay the medical bills, either through an insurance policy or out of pocket.
I looked at the video you are referring to, Jeffrey, and I have no problem with it. Sure, someone will have to pay the medical bills. Better it be the government (who can do it more efficiently) than insurance companies (who work to avoid paying for health care). Think about it, why are all the other developed countries not willing to imitate our health care system? Because it costs more, is less efficient, and doesn’t cover everyone.
Arlen Grossman, if my tax dollars went to fund initiatives like helping people who have degenerative neurological conditions, as well as other things, excluding paying for women to get abortions on demand because they refuse to have the necessary protections in place when having sex with male counterparts, I would not have an issue with that personally. Another issue is that if you give government too much power over our lives, as Paul Ryan correctly noted, we will always be kept in perpetual dependency upon the government. Why do you want to be kept in perpetual dependency? Also, health care is a commodity, not a right. So, basically, the guy in the video is the real liar, not Paul Ryan. Can you deny the fact that people who bitch about health care being a right and yet want to price people out of the insurance coverage that they want to buy are hypocrites by definition? Here is an example of a medical condition that affects a lot of people: Epilepsy, which needs treatment through anticonvulsant drugs. If government is put in charge of paying for these medications, there might be discrimination against people with one form of the condition over another, making one medication more expensive than the other.
In the Constitution there is a phrase “promote the general welfare.” I believe healthcare is a right in a civilized country. American citizens should not have to worry they will go bankrupt because they couldn’t afford their medical bills.
I suspect you and I will never agree about this.
Arlen Grossman, Margaret Thatcher described Socialism as a system where you run out of other people’s money. Socialism is only appealing to those who don’t want to pay for it.
I imagine you may have heard this: the difference between capitalism and socialism is that in socialism man exploits man. In capitalism, it’s the other way around.”
Arlen Grossman, that is something I had not heard.
Who said “free” healthcare?” I support universal (single-payer) government-sponsored health care.
Arlen Grossman, government does not pay for shit. The payments come from we the people, particularly by force of law.
My view is that in a civilized country, everyone should have a right to healthcare. My view is shared by every other developed nation.
Arlen Grossman, people who say that healthcare is not a right from the government are not saying that it is not a right at all. This is one thing that Leftist idiots (pardon the redundant statement) do not understand. Here is a video for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaks8Bzv-j4 The dumb-shit who is presenting the video clearly did not listen to what Paul Ryan was saying. He titled his video Paul Ryan: Healthcare Isn’t A Right. What he omitted was the latter part of Paul Ryan’s statement, where Paul Ryan said that it was not a government granted right. If he had said it was a human right, the guy who presented the video would have had no credibility with his distorted representation of Paul Ryan’s statement. Paul Ryan said healthcare is not a government granted right. If it was a government granted right, then government can give it or take it on a whim.
So if healthcare is a human right, who, if not the government, will ensure that right? How can somebody with limited means afford medical care in this country, where medical costs skyrocket every year?
Did you ever notice, Jeffrey, that while we argue about whether we could learn from other countries, those other countries have no interest in our healthcare system? The answer is obvious: who would want a system in which we spend more than anybody else and get the least positive results and the most uninsured citizens?
Arlen Grossman, let me pose a few questions for you: 1: If healthcare is a right, why should someone get medical care and not be required to pay for it? 2: Since saying that something is not a right from the government is not the same as saying that it is not a right at all, why do those Leftist idiots make the automatic leap of saying that if something is not a right from the government, that it is not a right period? 3: Since these people who go to medical school and have bills that they need money to pay the bills with, why should healthcare be free? Government is telling us what kind of healthcare we can have. We should have the free market and competition to help determine that.
Somehow it works in every other developed country. Not perfectly, of course, but more people are covered and don’t go bankrupt over medical bills. Medicare for all would save a lot of money that now goes to insurance companies (why do we need insurance companies for healthcare anyway?). By the way, people with enough money can always buy better medical care if they choose.
Arlen Grossman, free healthcare is an oxymoron. Unless you have a business model where you buy one item and get one item free, free stuff otherwise is not truly free.
Arlen Grossman, healthcare is not a right. It is a good and service.
Arlen Grossman, the “right” to healthcare is absurd. All Leftists want is free shit that they want other people to pay for.
Most people want government, Jeffrey. The just don’t like paying for it. It’s human nature.
Arlen Grossman, so there is no misunderstanding, I am not an anarchist. Quite the opposite, actually. What I would be for is a government that is strictly confined to limitations spelled out under the U.S. Constitution.
Sounds like you are a strict constructionist, which is not something I agree with. The Constitution was written over 200 years ago, and conditions have changed radically since then. The right to bear arms is a perfect example. Our founders could not have envisioned the kind of weapons we have now. If they could know, I believe they would have written exceptions into the Second Amendment.
Arlen Grossman, if our Founding Fathers knew of what was going on, from the Progressive era to the present, I can imagine that they would loudly speak out against all of it. Before the 16th Amendment (which was never properly ratified) was enacted, either no tax on income was present or it was temporary.
The problem is the the Leftist political types want goods and services that they don’t want to pay for themselves. Healthcare is not a right. It is a commodity. People who say that healthcare is not a right are saying that government does not have the right to tell you what kind of healthcare you can have.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to subscribe to The Big Picture Report and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 433 other followers
Sign me up!