RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's

RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Raiikun -> RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (5/28/2012 1:12:47 PM)
Justice is just too complicated of a topic with too many aspects to explain how it fits with my paradigm. In your example, in regards of the guy accused of a crime, the issue is not unfairly intruding on his rights, so that's not the same scenario as the one involving health care.

Musicmystery -> RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (5/28/2012 3:47:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Justice is just too complicated of a topic with too many aspects to explain how it fits with my paradigm. In your example, in regards of the guy accused of a crime, the issue is not unfairly intruding on his rights, so that's not the same scenario as the one involving health care. No it's not. Your "paradigm" is the Perfectionist fallacy. Under that rhetorical error, nothing is acceptable.

Raiikun -> RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (5/28/2012 3:51:20 PM)
No, that's not my paradigm at all. To explain it is a tangent that goes beyond the scope of this thread though and is a distraction.

Musicmystery -> RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (5/28/2012 3:51:39 PM)
It really is.

Raiikun -> RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (5/28/2012 3:54:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery It really is. Sorry, I know my own thoughts and beliefs better than you do, and you're just wrong here.

Real0ne -> RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (5/28/2012 5:04:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery In short, you don't feel we should have rights, at all. Not at all. I'm just operating under a different paradigm than you are. These are all services that are nice to have and should be available, but to call them "rights"... ...does someone who lives 500 miles from the nearest living person have the right to police protection, road construction, and those other services? And if so, would it be a violation of his rights if he can't get a crew to build a road 500 miles to his doorstep? Road construction to his door is not a right. Justice, to use the example you also dislike, is a right. If he's accused of a crime, he has rights laid out legally. Without justice, law is meaningless, as is a Constitution. nope the police NOR THE GOVERNMENT PROTECT you that is purely bullshit. If they did you could sue them when you were robbed for failure to protect you. Try that sometime! Thats right, you have the privilege to something supplied by the gub regardless if you use it or not or even if it is applicable to you, BUT YOU WILL PAY TAXES as if you did use it. BECAUSE THEY SAID SO! The colonists did however make perfetly clear that the common law, NOT THE STATUTIZED SHIT THE GUB CALLS COMMON LAW, was their protection. The same with this health care crap. It is not a right by any stretch of the imagination as can be seen by the excellent definition posted on the previous page. However they are privileges and immunities granted UNDER the constitution. Rights are OVER and EXTRACONSTITUTIONAL.

Real0ne -> RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (5/28/2012 5:12:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery What if, for pennies on the dollar, good access to preventive health care cut incidences of cancer by 90%? all you need is a loaded gun for preventative health care. I posted data proving the gub is all for preventative health which is unfortunate since they should be for preventative illness or disease. It is a nice way to get rid of all the malpractice suits though since you will need to sue the gub when they fuck up. I am sure they will have their disclaimer stating that if you die in their care and its their fault too fucking bad. Now that is a right, but not a privilege granted by the gub [8\|]

vincentML -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 5:13:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Maybe we should consider it a moral right that trumps a lack of Constitutional right. Sort of like the humane right to food, clothing, and shelter. Might also throw in the right to safety and the right to get an education. Under the guise of a right, if someone has the humane right to shelter, food and clothing I'd suppose anyone needing such is free to exercise their right and to crash at your place, eat your food and help themselves to your wardrobe. But if, instead, you'd point them in the direction of the nearest shelter then it would be apparent that they'd be accessing the privilege the shelter offers in its charity. Charity is something one does for whatever reason, but it is not owed anyone due to any claim of right they might make. Charity is more akin to a gift, and a gift is not something anyone has a right to. How could it be a gift if you have a right to it? Did I say a Legal rights? I did not. I referred to moral rights and humane rights. The basic foundations upon which community is assembled. Along with those rights come a duty for the community to provide for those in need. The shelter does not offer a privilege; it fulfills a community obligation. Each individual has a moral and humane right to healthcare; and the community has an obligation to find the best way to provide it. I notice you left untouched my inclusion of safety and education, which the community does provide. The red herring you drew across the path of this discussion is ludicrous.

Real0ne -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 5:25:03 PM)
where would you go to adjudicate that?

Yachtie -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 5:33:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Do you think/believe that people that can't afford insurance, or get quality "free care" from whatever is available for them these days, should just die? Many of us know for a FACT, that you often do not get anywhere near the same level of care for many medical conditions without good insurance. Without GOOD insurance in the United States: You almost always do NOT, get the same level of care, consideration, CHOICE of physicians, availability to see specialists, in-depth tests, labs, etc. medications, protocols, second opinions, treatment OPTIONS,or even availability of appointments, etc. Please be honest, I need to hear it. I do think this is how many people feel, but are too chicken shit to just admit it. Do you think/believe that people that can't afford insurance, or get quality "free care" from whatever is available for them these days, should just die? What I think is irrelevant to what is. Let me give you one fact. No matter if one is in the UK, EU, Australia, Canada, etc... Not everyone who needs shall receive. That is a fact due to limited resources, both in materials and costs. This exists whether in the free market or government controlled providing. Therefore I prefer the free market which has shown itself to be better at pricing and distribution than any governmental body, in any respect. I don't want to get off track but I think it should be noted that governmental intrusions into the market always skew it. Oversight for fraud, corruption etc are not skewing intrusions. Fraud, corruption, etc. are skews. Many of us know for a FACT, that you often do not get anywhere near the same level of care for many medical conditions without good insurance. Insurance is one of those things that when done right and for the proper purpose is a good thing. Unfortunately, when government gets involved beyond oversight and intrudes in the insurance market there exists a skew. For instance this skew is seen in states where i.e. one is both required to have car insurance and is also denied the ability to shop for the best coverage at the best price (cross state lines, even go foreign); states limiting competition denies the market finding lower prices. Where there is greater competition lower prices will be found. The medical industry is highly skewed these days due to many and various factors, not the least of which is government. It's the high cost stuff that's really at stake. Would you prefer private insurance where you have the choice of insurance, meaning the right to contract for your insurance needs with whatever insurance company you choose, or would you prefer government bureaucrats telling you what insurance you shall receive and what you shall pay? The insurance industry is broken like everything else is. Government is not the answer.

vincentML -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 5:39:01 PM)
quote: The critical difference between insurance companies having protocols on end of life care, and the government making the determinations is competition, and choice, Vincent. Most people don't get to sit down at retirement, and decide which government they are going to go with. Well actually, Rich, there is quite a lot of choice for Medicare recipients and federal employees. The PPACA would set up competitive markets in addition, if the States would permit. You are not seriously suggesting that individuals or their employers choose insurance providers based upon the fine print in their end of life protocols? I have not heard any insurance company advertising more lenient protocols to attract business. The simple fact seems to be that some end of life treatments only prolong the agony and indignity of dying hooked up to tubes and machines in "souless" hospitals. The decision for hospice comes from Medicare protocol, not from private insurors.

Yachtie -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 5:57:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Maybe we should consider it a moral right that trumps a lack of Constitutional right. Sort of like the humane right to food, clothing, and shelter. Might also throw in the right to safety and the right to get an education. Under the guise of a right, if someone has the humane right to shelter, food and clothing I'd suppose anyone needing such is free to exercise their right and to crash at your place, eat your food and help themselves to your wardrobe. But if, instead, you'd point them in the direction of the nearest shelter then it would be apparent that they'd be accessing the privilege the shelter offers in its charity. Charity is something one does for whatever reason, but it is not owed anyone due to any claim of right they might make. Charity is more akin to a gift, and a gift is not something anyone has a right to. How could it be a gift if you have a right to it? Did I say a Legal rights? I did not. I referred to moral rights and humane rights. The basic foundations upon which community is assembled. Along with those rights come a duty for the community to provide for those in need. The shelter does not offer a privilege; it fulfills a community obligation. Each individual has a moral and humane right to healthcare; and the community has an obligation to find the best way to provide it. I notice you left untouched my inclusion of safety and education, which the community does provide. The red herring you drew across the path of this discussion is ludicrous. I left out safety and edu as the goalposts are expanding a bit far to make the point. First, you say the community has an obligation. Should we live in the same community, by what authority do you say that obligation extends to me in any moral or humane way? On what basis do you say that? Moral? Suppose I'm not a moral man? Humane? Suppose I'm anything but humane. Now whether I would contribute or not is not the point. What is the point is that you say the community obligation extends to me. Really? Make me! Or you could pass a law and make it a legal duty. You might regard a legal duty as moral or even humane, but it's the legal duty forcing compliance else why would you need it? If your individual having a moral and humane right to healthcare wants it from me, come pick my pocket. That's the only way you'll get it. Now, unless your granted license by government whereby such pickpocketing is made legal, you'd be a thief. Isn't that what being a thief is, one who assumes a right to your [........] and helps themselves without your permission?

Marini -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 7:31:58 PM)
Yachtie, thank you for responding! quote: Do you think/believe that people that can't afford insurance, or get quality "free care" from whatever is available for them these days, should just die? What I think is irrelevant to what is. Let me give you one fact. No matter if one is in the UK, EU, Australia, Canada, etc... Not everyone who needs shall receive. That is a fact due to limited resources, both in materials and costs. This exists whether in the free market or government controlled providing. The healthcare issue has so many variables, that I might concede that every level of care probably can't be offered to everyone, BUT there are certain levels of care that should be. Therefore I prefer the free market which has shown itself to be better at pricing and distribution than any governmental body, in any respect. I don't want to get off track but I think it should be noted that governmental intrusions into the market always skew it. Oversight for fraud, corruption etc are not skewing intrusions. Fraud, corruption, etc. are skews. Government OR corporations/private industry? Most people would rather deal with the government. Many of us know for a FACT, that you often do not get anywhere near the same level of care for many medical conditions without good insurance. That is the problem, we are talking about. Insurance is one of those things that when done right and for the proper purpose is a good thing. Unfortunately, when government gets involved beyond oversight and intrudes in the insurance market there exists a skew. For instance this skew is seen in states where i.e. one is both required to have car insurance and is also denied the ability to shop for the best coverage at the best price (cross state lines, even go foreign); states limiting competition denies the market finding lower prices. Where there is greater competition lower prices will be found. The medical industry is highly skewed these days due to many and various factors, not the least of which is government. It's the high cost stuff that's really at stake. That could be true. Would you prefer private insurance where you have the choice of insurance, meaning the right to contract for your insurance needs with whatever insurance company you choose, or would you prefer government bureaucrats telling you what insurance you shall receive and what you shall pay? The insurance industry is broken like everything else is. Government is not the answer. What is the answer?

Real0ne -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 8:15:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Most people would rather deal with the government. What is the answer? wait till they get their hands in your pockets and expand their programs and lets see what you say then. Like most every other program that will be abused, like SS did they ever pay back the money they STOLE from it for their banking debacle? FUCK NO! Will they ever? FUCK NO what makes anyone think this will be any different? Do tell!

Real0ne -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 8:18:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie First, you say the community has an obligation. under the original organic law brought over by the colonists during the time of the constitution the only "obligation" was to assist in the protection of life and property of your neighbor from attack within or without. Nothing more. I would say they slightly expanded gubafia powers since then.

Real0ne -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 9:06:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini What is the answer? fix the economy so people can afford to pay. here is a treat for those who feel people should be robbed by institutionalized taxation instead; The seminal case establishing the general rule that police have no duty under federal law to protect citizens is DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services. [6] Frequently these cases are based on an alleged "special relationship" between the injured party and the police. In DeShaney the injured party was a boy who was beaten and permanently injured by his father. He claimed a special relationship existed because local officials knew he was being abused, indeed they had "specifically proclaimed by word and deed [their] intention to protect him against that danger," [7] but failed to remove him from his father's custody. The Court in DeShaney held that no duty arose because of a "special relationship," concluding that Constitutional duties of care and protection only exist as to certain individuals, such as incarcerated prisoners, involuntarily committed mental patients and others restrained against their will and therefore unable to protect themselves. "The affirmative duty to protect arises not from the State's knowledge of the individual's predicament or from its expressions of intent to help him, but from the limitation which it has imposed on his freedom to act on his own behalf." [8] About a year later, the United States Court of Appeals interpreted DeShaney in the California case of Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department. [9] Ms. Balistreri, beaten and harassed by her estranged husband, alleged a "special relationship" existed between her and the Pacifica Police Department, to wit, they were duty-bound to protect her because there was a restraining order against her husband. The Court of Appeals, however, concluded that DeShaney limited the circumstances that would give rise to a "special relationship" to instances of custody. Because no such custody existed in Balistreri, the Pacifica Police had no duty to protect her, so when they failed to do so and she was injured they were not liable. A citizen injured because the police failed to protect her can only sue the State or local government in federal court if one of their officials violated a federal statutory or Constitutional right, and can only win such a suit if a "special relationship" can be shown to have existed, which DeShaney and its progeny make it very difficult to do. and of course the same goes for gubafia et al. notince the slick way they got around any liability. all this shit is a play on peoples emotions and covers the real problem and that is the mutha fuckas trashed the economy hunting for better markets.

TheHeretic -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/28/2012 9:26:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML You are not seriously suggesting that individuals or their employers choose insurance providers based upon the fine print in their end of life protocols? I have not heard any insurance company advertising more lenient protocols to attract business. The simple fact seems to be that some end of life treatments only prolong the agony and indignity of dying hooked up to tubes and machines in "souless" hospitals. The decision for hospice comes from Medicare protocol, not from private insurors. Let me try to clear what seems to be confusion, Vincent. I have said that something is going to become a bigger deal as we move forward, and you are demanding to see it right now. Look to the baby boomers themselves. Are they a generation to move quietly through the turning points of life? Their teen angst became the 60's, their party years became the sexual revolution. Should we really expect them to die without it being a big deal?

Yachtie -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/29/2012 6:07:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini What is the answer? Good question. I must defer to the answer lying within one's own ideology. One's ideology forms a basis for choice. Choice has consequences, both intended and unintended. One must live with the results. The question to me is whether one can parse out just what those consequences might be. My answer is simple. I trust myself and the free markets as to me over some government bureaucrat administrator. Life is not fair but bring it on no matter. I'll give it my best shot. Tell me something Marini, who has your best interests in hand? You or the government? Do you really believe that your political representatives (law makers) actually care more about you than you? Some would say they must, as they watch our every move, read our mail, listen to our conversations, grope us at airports to keep us safe [;)], give our money to their friends [8\|], imprison someone for a joint and let white collar criminals go free, make backroom deals in the dead of night, and on it goes. Do you really want government involved in your healthcare?

Musicmystery -> RE: Memorial Day /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's/con's (5/29/2012 6:10:19 AM)
quote: Do you really want government involved in your healthcare? It will be imperative. Just as it is for roads and electricity, for example. A mishmash of private insurers is how we got here.

thompsonx -> RE: Memorial Day Question /Is health care a Privilege or a Right? pro's and con's (5/29/2012 6:27:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun No, that's not my paradigm at all. To explain it is a tangent that goes beyond the scope of this thread though and is a distraction. Is that a euphemism for being unable to defend your position?

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875