Termyn8or
Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
|
"Ok, so you favor legislation saying that the government shall pay all reasonable medical expenses. How is that not a right? "
That distinction can be hard to explain. Quite simply, most will say that the Constitution gives us certain specific rights. That is not true. The Constitution states that our rights are ours by virtue of creation, and by extension, all the document does is to attempt to enumerate those rights. It's in the first few paragraphs for those who hadn't noticed. In fact it is that which allows for interpretation.
Despite the fact that they are getting to the point where interpretation has gotten so "good" that because the rain falls you got hungry. Take it to the nth degree and it is simple. Raining causes floods, floods can cause famine. Therefore rain is a bad thing. But rain is a good thing because there are too many people. So now it seems that there are too many people because there was not enough rain.
Of course that's gibberish, but it is the way people think apparently. So dispensing with normal stupidity, is health care a right ?
No. Now in crafting the government in the beginning, they sought to allow for changes due to new advancements. Looking at it mathematically there is so much "rights" to go around and as people be fruitful and multiply, those rights are diluted. When there were a couple hundred thousand people in this country, rights were hot, right on the spot. But now we live in tiny boxes within inches of one another. A hundred years ago I could take and blow off a bomb on my property, nice bigun. I had that right because it wouldn't hurt or even bother anyone else. Try it now. I mean I would keep the explosive 1,000 feet from the house, I'm not stupid. However my property is about 132 feet deep. How many times does 1,000 guzinta 132 ? Naught.
So my rights end where another's begin. This is a different concept. Right now the sheeple are crying "They got it over in _______ why can't we have it too ? ". So they are going to consider it right because people in the civilised countries do. Me want, monkey see monkey do. That really is the mentality. Health care never was and never could be a right becuse if it were, they would draft doctors for conscripted service. How else would they do it ? They have a compelling duty to provide this. Well they drafted our young for wars because they have a duty to defense, which isn't really defense but that is not the point. You are cordially invited by your government to die.
That's enslavement, and I thought we had that behind us. Now if you or I have to pay for some broad's fifth kid on welfare, I say it comes with a free tubal. You say what you want. But whether we pay or the pennies fall from heaven to pay for this, who is to perform the service ? And what if she wants the kid but not the tubal ? Do her rights end inside her fucking uterus now ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath
Reading the different versions, there is a form of conscriptable service implied at the very least. Earlier versions especially referred to medicine as an art. However this is not US law.
Consider this : First of all, We do not see the Constitution as the provider of these inalieanable rights, it is merely a description of those rights and direction to the officers of this country to enforce those rights. It attempts to enumerate those rights to give effect to Law. Not to create nor bestow those rights in any way. They were already there, they just need to be recognized and enforced.
Now the other side of the argument, at it's best would be that the government, even not in it's aim for nannyship, is responsible for the security of the country. Now let's have a look at that. I see two dead Men. One came back from Iraq without a back. He has a front with a small hole but no back. It appears he is dead. The other has a million tubes in him, he is emaciated and was obviously sick. Like the other specimen, he is not breathing and his heart is not beating. They are both defined as d-e-a-d .
Is one more dead than the other ? Only in that way can national health care be justified under our Constitution. If you read the thing, that's the gist of it. If, as a nation, not the power pullers or the media, the lawyers or the landbarons, but the people, the whole of the People agree that healthcare is deserved, needed importantly enough for the sake of the union, a compelling interest like armies and all that, then certain things follow.
First of all, when you get to single payer in a country like this, salaries will be limited. There will be no private practice, not that there is now so so much for that anyway. But then all doctors work for the government. Of course this will pay well, perhaps congress will set their pay at $90,000. But say some bright doctor pioneers the quintuple bypass. (I fucking know it is about impossible) His bright future will be to make $90,100.
Money is a double edged sword. In some cases it impels greatness, in others it hampers it. To do this, to actually conscript doctors is to take control. This is to remove the market from the equation. Now I can't say that this would necessarily be a bad thing. Without pay of any kind, what would you be ? I would be a teacher, basic electronics, mechanics/simple physics, maybe some rudimentary math, things like that. Pay ? Who cares under a different system ? My needs are met. In such a case I would not decide on a profession based on it's earning potential, so how would I make that decision ?
I might not like such a world, but who am I to deny the rest of humanity their utopia ? And think of all the people who could do something else, if they don't worry about the almighty buck. The best and brightest could teach if they felt able. Those without such ambitions could do something else. Get the idea, you do not need money at all. You are REQUIRED to do something useful, but what is up to you. Anything at all. You show aptitude, the further education is there for the taking. Take it, or leave it. Equality ? Nobody said anything about equality, you flip burgers you don't get as much as a heart surgeon. Too bad. What, make it ten grand per year of college ? That doesn't work either.
In fact none of it works as long as we are how we are. The competitive spirit may bring out the worst in us, but it also brings out the best in us. None of us wants this if we give it some thought. This would be true socialism. This would require that the whole world act as one big family. Fat chance.
Fact is, we got what we got. I'll work the system and get what I want no matter what. Millions do it. One day I might pay again. But I will do that when it is in my best interest to do so. Now if we all got fucking honest and recognized and admitted it, we would get along alot better. But most have this facade, and thus what an old friend used to call people "
Face.
T^T
|
RE: Sen. Rand Paul: Right To Health Care Like Believing... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread