Why do some people consider Health Care a right?
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$5 Answers
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
You asked, "Where and why (when) do we draw the line?"
WHICH HUMAN HAS ANY MORE RIGHT OVER ANY OTHER HUMAN, TO "DRAW" A --HEALTHCARE LINE-- WHEREVER THEY FEEL?
Dude, haven't you heard of natural selection (meaning selected by nature)? In other words... people should die naturally when it is their "time" to go, not when someone WHEN IT COMES TO SICK PEOPLE, IN NEED OF CARE, ALL AT THE SAME TIME? WHO WOULD GET CARE FIRST? WOULD IT BE THE AFRICAN CITIZEN, THE GERMAN JEW, OR THE ASIAN/IRISH MIX? I'D "LOVE" TO KNOW - WHERE YOU WOULD DRAW THE LINE?
If I were in "charge" of choosing which members of society I would draw a line AROUND the people who DO NOT BELIEVE IN EQUAL RIGHTS...
Peace to you,
Tiffi
OPINION
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
I dont mean 'with what group of people do we draw the line?' I mean with what government funded 'rights' do we draw the line?
Would you support government funded food as a right? I mean people are hungry, some people get to eat better than others, isnt that un-fair? Wouldent it be better if everyone chipped in and we all got the same food to eat? Food is more important than insureance isn't it?
Those who would like to see a government solution believe that investments in health and preventative care may yield huge cost savings and single payer systems can (If managed properly) result in over all cost savings buy having and supplying bulk medical care.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Maby a single payer system could work if managed properly.
Has medicare been managed properly? How about medicaid or the stimulus, or cash for clunkers?
Question: If you make something free do more or less people use it?
Answer: More
Question: If more people use it for more stuff, are people in genral, more or less healthy?
Answer: maby SLIGHTLY healthier if they can recieve treatment.
Question: If more people are using the medical more often, how can costs come down?
Answer: They cannot.
If more people are using coverage more, often costs can come down. It sounds odd, but consider this:
A person never goes to the doctor when they feel fine fails to go to routine physical exams. The person starts to go when they start noticing vision imparement and frequent urination He she had Undiagnosed Diabetes. Treating the problem could be very expensive now.
If the same person went for an exam every year and was able to catch the problem on a blood test they could have avoided very expensive treatments.
This is the reason so many medical insurance companies will make sure to pay for a yearly exam even if normally they have a deductable.
Everyone already has access to medical care through their local emergency room, at least according to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and if you are in need you must be treated regardless of your ability to pay. In this case, the question of whether or not health care is a "right" is moot, as is the argument that there would be increased use of medical resources as a result of universal coverage.
Many chronically ill people who currently can't pay for medical care simply wait until they're sick enough to be seen in an ER. Instead of regular office visits and medication which might add up to a few thousand dollars a year while placing a minimum of stress on the health-care system, their care will consist of being seen in an ER with an overwhelming caseload and probably undergoing a number of tests, possibly followed by hospitalization to stabilize the patient's condition; and upon discharge the patient will be given prescriptions which will go unfilled. After a while, the patient's condition will deteriorate again, and the cycle will be repeated.
Providing ongoing care to these patients to prevent their conditions from flaring up doesn't increase the usage of medical resources, it simply shifts that usage from one set of resources to another, more cost-effective set. Indigent patients would continue to pay the same cost they do now, while their subsidizers (whether private patients, insurance companies, or the government) could pay less.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
I agree that people everywhere should have access to healthcare. Africa is a totally different situation, people are suffering and dieing on a massive scale. In the US, everyone has some level of acces to medical care through the ER (I am not saying this is a good solution).
The question becomes, if you have the ability to purchase healthcare insureance for yourself (but choose not to because you spend your money on other stuff), should you be covered by the government?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
I think that most people would agree medical care probably falls under Life.
The Declaration of Independence (USA)
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
You are getting into the political debate going on now, that's fine. But I was addressing the questioner's specific question, why is health care considered a right by some people. The details of how that right might be protected or provided is indeed an interesting question as well, but not what was asked.
You brought up the Constitution. There is no constitutional rite to health care. Do you think society considers other entitlement programs as 'rights'?
The constitution does state that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights. It is the role of government to protect those rights, not some how provide them. Do you believe in government funded happiness since the constitution says that our creator endowed us with the right to pursue happiness?
My point is that some people chhose not to have health coverage because they think they dont need it, other people choose to not have health coverage because they do not want sacrifice other things in their life to pay for it.
It is a personal choice, not a universal right.
Should we work to make it affordable? Yes.
Should a healthy 20 year pay the same amount as a diabetic, chain smoking 70 year old? No.
