Is Healthcare a Right?
- Thread starter Fun Size
- Start date
- Status
Please, you did that to yourself a couple pages back... "I grew up in a blue collar town, blah blah..."[/QUOTE]
Holy shit yeah, you're totally right. Giving people my background is TOTALLY equivalent to running down a person's job...
K
Kitty Sinatra
Jake, that reminds me. According to the Clash We have these 3 rights
1) The right not to be killed (murder is a crime unless it is done by a policeman or an aristocrat)
2) The right to food money (providing of course you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation and, if you cross your fingers, rehabilitation)
3) The right to free speech (as long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it)
Know these rights. These are your rights. All of them. Nothing about health care, there. And how can you dispute the Clash?
1) The right not to be killed (murder is a crime unless it is done by a policeman or an aristocrat)
2) The right to food money (providing of course you don't mind a little investigation, humiliation and, if you cross your fingers, rehabilitation)
3) The right to free speech (as long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it)
Know these rights. These are your rights. All of them. Nothing about health care, there. And how can you dispute the Clash?
C
Chazwozel
Bottom line is you can spout all your right wing bullshit to me all day long, for all I care. You're not the assholes that see what happens to people who are denied coverage and how hard it is for some people to afford medicine for their children. Why do I keep calling out on Gas's profession? It's not to berate him, it's to make it clear that he's VERY far removed from the reality of the situation. I bet a million bucks that if any of you free market asses would actually see how much people struggle with affording healthcare, or if you personally would experience a terminal disease, you'd be singing an entirely different tune.
But hey, don't listen to the guy with a Ph.D. who works in healthcare...
And yes, I am a firm believer of someone with an aliment going to the doctor and saying, "treat my condition please." And have that be fully covered by the government.
It's not your right to healthcare? Yeah, sing me that song when you've got leukemia with 6 months left.
But hey, don't listen to the guy with a Ph.D. who works in healthcare...
And yes, I am a firm believer of someone with an aliment going to the doctor and saying, "treat my condition please." And have that be fully covered by the government.
It's not your right to healthcare? Yeah, sing me that song when you've got leukemia with 6 months left.
I was waiting for you to throw out the ePeen. I have a degree in Economics. Which applies more in a 'affordability' discussion? Quick like a bunny.
And you're a molecular biologist, you douchenozzle; tangentially related to healthcare
And some people disagree.. Awoooooo...scary.
C
Chibibar
but sir... I don't think Obama's plan was government healthcare. It is AFFORDABLE health insurance for the masses (at least that is what I have been hearing and what I read so far cause it is a REALLY boring bill to read)
that is two different camp.
I am saying that affordable healthcare (insurance) means jack when people can't afford it. I know what it is like to be poor. I know it is hard to get any medical help when you have to choose between feeding your children vs insurance (my parents had to face that, but they learn their lesson and work REALLY hard to ensure my sister and I grew up well and healthy) well... healthy, I'm not sure I'm well (in terms of my mind heheh)
C
Chazwozel
I was waiting for you to throw out the ePeen. I have a degree in Economics. Which applies more in a 'affordability' discussion? Quick like a bunny.
And you're a molecular biologist, you douchenozzle; tangentially related to healthcare
And some people disagree.. Awoooooo...scary.[/QUOTE]
Those people like to subscribe to the best current American healthcare system. "Don't get sick."
Only as a corollary to "Don't be poor".
Of course, under the current system getting sick can make you poor.
And some people disagree.. Awoooooo...scary.[/QUOTE]Chazwozel said:
Those people like to subscribe to the best current American healthcare system. "Don't get sick."[/QUOTE]
No, because 'those people' understand that an equilibrium between the aggregate supply and demand of health care cannot be reached where the cost approaches anything that you would consider 'affordable'. We simply don't have the resources to do so. And with an aging population, demand only increases while supply stays the same putting upward pressure on prices.
And even if the government takes control of healthcare, there will still be people dying because of the rationing of these limited resources. Except now instead of the rationing being as a result of "who can pay the $$$" it will be "what will cost the gov't the most $$$".
C
Chazwozel
Common medical procedures and medicines aren't limited resources... Do you know how many doctors are cranked out every year? As for limited medical resources in terms of medicine? Hell, even my company is working with U.Penn in designing a cheap, cost effective vector and delivery system for gene therapy to use in the clinic. The problem with healthcare is in the insurance company premiums, not in the resources.
C
Chibibar
While you may be right, not every cities have that luxury. My friends who are nurses are working a ton of overtime due to understaff. Doctors are putting in tons of hours in hospitals (at least here in Dallas)
but if we are going to debate, at least we have to be on the same topic. Are we debating of having affording health insurance (that is what I was talking about and Obama's position) vs Government provide healthcare (that is a mix in this thread)
C
Chazwozel
While you may be right, not every cities have that luxury. My friends who are nurses are working a ton of overtime due to understaff. Doctors are putting in tons of hours in hospitals (at least here in Dallas)
but if we are going to debate, at least we have to be on the same topic. Are we debating of having affording health insurance (that is what I was talking about and Obama's position) vs Government provide healthcare (that is a mix in this thread)[/QUOTE]
Nurses are always in demand.
And the topic is: Is Healthcare a right?
I still say yes. Under a structured society, every citizen of that society deserves adequate benefits for being a productive member of that society.
Come to Canada (Where the government follows your advice and offers 'free' healthcare) and talk to me about 'limited medical resources'. There's a reason that the best medical development happens in the US and that's because of the money to be made doing it. Your example is a counterpoint to your argument.
C
Chazwozel
Come to Canada (Where the government follows your advice and offers 'free' healthcare) and talk to me about 'limited medical resources'. There's a reason that the best medical development happens in the US and that's because of the money to be made doing it. Your example is a counterpoint to your argument.[/QUOTE]
The best medical development happens in America because we have universities and medical colleges out the ass compared to other countries.
Wrong.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_uni_top_100_percap-universities-top-100-per-capita
# 1 Australia: 0.597 per capita
# 2 Switzerland: 0.534 per capita
# 3 Singapore: 0.452 per capita
# 4 Hong Kong: 0.435 per capita
# 5 Belgium: 0.289 per capita
# 6 New Zealand: 0.248 per capita
= 7 Austria: 0.244 per capita
= 7 Netherlands: 0.244 per capita
# 9 United Kingdom: 0.215 per capita
# 10 Finland: 0.191 per capita
# 11 Denmark: 0.184 per capita
# 12 Israel: 0.159 per capita
# 13 United States: 0.105 per capita
# 14 Canada: 0.091 per capita
# 15 France: 0.082 per capita
C
Chazwozel
Wrong.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_uni_top_100_percap-universities-top-100-per-capita
# 1 Australia: 0.597 per capita
# 2 Switzerland: 0.534 per capita
# 3 Singapore: 0.452 per capita
# 4 Hong Kong: 0.435 per capita
# 5 Belgium: 0.289 per capita
# 6 New Zealand: 0.248 per capita
= 7 Austria: 0.244 per capita
= 7 Netherlands: 0.244 per capita
# 9 United Kingdom: 0.215 per capita
# 10 Finland: 0.191 per capita
# 11 Denmark: 0.184 per capita
# 12 Israel: 0.159 per capita
# 13 United States: 0.105 per capita
# 14 Canada: 0.091 per capita
# 15 France: 0.082 per capita[/QUOTE]
Fine, because we have the best universities per capita...
C
Chibibar
Ok. Productive members.... what about the homeless? In Dallas we have two types. one is that people are out on their luck and need to find way to get BACK into working society (Party A. they are trying to get back on their feet) and there are people who just going to take advantage of the system (party B).
The hard part? trying to figure out who is who and who should give care.
If it is a right, the both parties deserve care while one party (Party A) will eventually become a productive member and have ROI while the other Party (Party B)
Do you think party B deserves healthcare?
Yes, and where does the money to fund those universities come from?Fine, because we have the best universities per capita...
C
Chazwozel
Yes, and where does the money to fund those universities come from?[/QUOTE]Fine, because we have the best universities per capita...
Stocks for most privatized ones. Government for others. Tuition and alumni donations factor in a bit.
Common medical procedures and medicines aren't limited resources... Do you know how many doctors are cranked out every year? As for limited medical resources in terms of medicine? Hell, even my company is working with U.Penn in designing a cheap, cost effective vector and delivery system for gene therapy to use in the clinic. The problem with healthcare is in the insurance company premiums, not in the resources.[/QUOTE]
I've only taken basic econ, which you also should have to get a PhD and that should have taught you that there is no such thing as an unlimited resource.
From an economics standpoint, he is making a good point. Most of this could be alleviated, though by regulating insurance companies so they can't charge whatever the market will bear seeing as healthcare isn't like CDs or apples, you can't live without emergent treatment.
C
Chibibar
That is a good question. It all comes down to personal agenda and political issues. A lot of research are done in university because they don't need to "produce" profit. Some company might be able to afford to do some research but the ultimate goal is "is this product gonna make it big" mentality.
Business are made to make a profit. Regardless of the business, if there is no profit, there is no business. Even non-profit, is still looking to make a profit, the difference is that all profit are reinvest into the business instead going into the pocket of investors.
Government funded universities can be a good thing BUT they are limited in what they can research. Mainly cause they don't want to step on anyone's toes and lose the government money.
Private funded university also have the same issue, but different donors have different personal views and thus allow more diversity BUT can be limited if the funds are limited.
P.S. even universities have to make some sort of profit in order to stay open, but it is mainly run via tuition base and thus their goal is to attract more students which could lead to more research.
C
Chazwozel
No.
I don't even know if regulation is the key, but competition. The fewer the number of firms in a market, the closer the final Nash equilibrium is to the monopoly outcome (high price above marginal cost, low output). (A Nash equilibrium in an economic market is where all firms in the market are choosing their best output strategy given what the other firms are doing.) The larger the number of firms, the closer the final Nash equilibrium is to the perfectly competitive outcome (lower price equal to marginal cost, higher output).
While I'm hesitant to use the word 'collusion' to describe the actions of insurance companies, whatever they're doing isn't working...
L
Le Quack
Yes, and where does the money to fund those universities come from?[/QUOTE]Fine, because we have the best universities per capita...
I do believe that the students that pay for the universities fund the universities.
Yes, and where does the money to fund those universities come from?[/QUOTE]Fine, because we have the best universities per capita...
I do believe that the loans that are taken out by students are what fund the universities.[/QUOTE]
Fix't
I would like to see what criteria you base that declaration on. Especially since you're comparing our humble nation to the world's only current superpower. A nation which is also about ten times the size of us, it might be worth pointing out.
I mean ... a cursory Google search turned up this page. Now, I'm the greatest philistine in here when it comes to medicine, and I couldn't tell you if these are some of the 'best' medical developments in the last few years, but I would put money on the fact that they're probably not insignificant.
The Swiss healthcare system is very interesting (my family moved there when I was in high school).
Healthcare insurance is mandatory for 99% of the population. Every Swiss healthcare company has to offer a basic, government-regulated, plan to anyone who asks for it, and they are not allowed to profit beyond a certain amount on the mandated plan.
However, they can charge whatever the market allows them to on supplementary/comprehensive insurance with only a few stipulations, the largest being that they are not allowed to charge higher premiums based on current state of health.
Policy prices and the costs of medical procedures are all publicly available. The poor get help from the government to pay for their insurance, but everyone else has the ability to pay higher deductibles in order to get lower premiums, and employers pay a very small percentage relative to individuals.
I'm pretty sure that American insurance companies would hate it due to the regulation and lower profit margins, and due to physician compensation laws there is a common complaint that the Swiss are occasionally forced to pay high deductibles for basic services, but if you want an example of a government-regulated system where consumers can shop around between almost 100 different companies, and companies can still make big bucks by charging supplementary premiums and fees for things like coverage, specialty care, and private (as in your own room in a private, non-urban, high-quality hospital), it's hard to beat Switzerland.
Healthcare insurance is mandatory for 99% of the population. Every Swiss healthcare company has to offer a basic, government-regulated, plan to anyone who asks for it, and they are not allowed to profit beyond a certain amount on the mandated plan.
However, they can charge whatever the market allows them to on supplementary/comprehensive insurance with only a few stipulations, the largest being that they are not allowed to charge higher premiums based on current state of health.
Policy prices and the costs of medical procedures are all publicly available. The poor get help from the government to pay for their insurance, but everyone else has the ability to pay higher deductibles in order to get lower premiums, and employers pay a very small percentage relative to individuals.
I'm pretty sure that American insurance companies would hate it due to the regulation and lower profit margins, and due to physician compensation laws there is a common complaint that the Swiss are occasionally forced to pay high deductibles for basic services, but if you want an example of a government-regulated system where consumers can shop around between almost 100 different companies, and companies can still make big bucks by charging supplementary premiums and fees for things like coverage, specialty care, and private (as in your own room in a private, non-urban, high-quality hospital), it's hard to beat Switzerland.
Those people like to subscribe to the best current American healthcare system. "Don't get sick."[/QUOTE]
No, because 'those people' understand that an equilibrium between the aggregate supply and demand of health care cannot be reached where the cost approaches anything that you would consider 'affordable'. We simply don't have the resources to do so. And with an aging population, demand only increases while supply stays the same putting upward pressure on prices.
And even if the government takes control of healthcare, there will still be people dying because of the rationing of these limited resources. Except now instead of the rationing being as a result of "who can pay the $$$" it will be "what will cost the gov't the most $$$".[/QUOTE]
You can argue that it's very complicated for it to work in the US, but not that it won't work. There's examples of public healthcare working well in other countries. (Also, I will repeat over and over that public healthcare does not mean that private healthcare won't exist!)
---------- Post added at 09:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 AM ----------
Also, I do believe healthcare is a right. I guess it's a social one, though.
This is exactly how healthcare over here works as well.
C
Chazwozel
Those people like to subscribe to the best current American healthcare system. "Don't get sick."[/QUOTE]
No, because 'those people' understand that an equilibrium between the aggregate supply and demand of health care cannot be reached where the cost approaches anything that you would consider 'affordable'. We simply don't have the resources to do so. And with an aging population, demand only increases while supply stays the same putting upward pressure on prices.
And even if the government takes control of healthcare, there will still be people dying because of the rationing of these limited resources. Except now instead of the rationing being as a result of "who can pay the $$$" it will be "what will cost the gov't the most $$$".[/QUOTE]
You can argue that it's very complicated for it to work in the US, but not that it won't work. There's examples of public healthcare working well in other countries. (Also, I will repeat over and over that public healthcare does not mean that private healthcare won't exist!)
---------- Post added at 09:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 AM ----------
Also, I do believe healthcare is a right. I guess it's a social one, though.[/QUOTE]
Dat dars commie talk, son!
Here's da future accordin to dat dar Obama:
GasBandit
Staff member
Anybody notice how it's Adammon making reasoned arguments, while Chaz makes fallacious assertion after assertion? I, too, was counting the posts until he broke out the Appeal to Authority fallacy for him holding a PhD in a tangentially related field, and nobody's saying poor people can't have health care except the lefties who use it as a straw man, probably pinching their nose and saying it in a singsong voice?
I can't stick around, but I just wanted to get this in... Medical care IS a limited resource. Anyone who's taken a look at the hours medical professionals put in can tell you that. The British NHS is spiralling into implosion, even according to its own creator, and the only reason Canada can afford single payer health without it also imploding is because a huge amount of what would be their national budget is covered by the mere existence of the US Military, and they're actually a very small country population wise, with a mere 33 million people, 90% of which are all crammed within 100 miles of the US border.
It's a little different a story when the country has 10 times that, and actually has to be self sufficient.
I can't stick around, but I just wanted to get this in... Medical care IS a limited resource. Anyone who's taken a look at the hours medical professionals put in can tell you that. The British NHS is spiralling into implosion, even according to its own creator, and the only reason Canada can afford single payer health without it also imploding is because a huge amount of what would be their national budget is covered by the mere existence of the US Military, and they're actually a very small country population wise, with a mere 33 million people, 90% of which are all crammed within 100 miles of the US border.
It's a little different a story when the country has 10 times that, and actually has to be self sufficient.
Spain.
I'll give you that our country is like 6 or 7 times smaller population wise, but actually healthcare is NOT run on an national level, so what does it matter?
Our economic system is fucked, but still our healthcare works damn well. Of course it's not single payer. You always have an option to go private even if the public one is payed from your taxes.
Anyway, I must admit all the discussion has convinced me that you need a tort reform before anything else. THEN reform the rest. Or at the same time at least...
I'll give you that our country is like 6 or 7 times smaller population wise, but actually healthcare is NOT run on an national level, so what does it matter?
Our economic system is fucked, but still our healthcare works damn well. Of course it's not single payer. You always have an option to go private even if the public one is payed from your taxes.
Anyway, I must admit all the discussion has convinced me that you need a tort reform before anything else. THEN reform the rest. Or at the same time at least...
J
JCM
Of course Canada having more people south is due to dependence in the US, not due to the fact that further North is fucking freezing.
Also, if like that Messiah guy said a while ago and I've been getting from the late conversation, part of the high cost of healthcare comes from people who get very expensive life or death care and don't pay for it, why not integrating that into a system paid by all through the state, since you are already paying for it somehow? Also that way they may get some cheaper preventive treatment and you all win?
---------- Post added at 03:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:02 PM ----------
Well fuck I just looked at the Canada map and JCM is right, that point of your argument is pretty weak. (I had already thought more or less what he said, but it became even more apparent with the map)
---------- Post added at 03:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:02 PM ----------
Well fuck I just looked at the Canada map and JCM is right, that point of your argument is pretty weak. (I had already thought more or less what he said, but it became even more apparent with the map)
- Status