• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is healthcare a right?

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
1,527
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
What is "healthcare," first of all?

Modern medicine becomes increasingly technological, and increasingly expensive. Does every human being have a right to the latest high tech medical interventions? No matter how expensive?

What is the limit, and is there any limit?

If we are going to have universal health care, it should be basic emergency interventions. That's all I want. Not everyone believes in mainstream modern medicine. We should NOT all be forced to pay for it. I would rather not pay high taxes so all Americans, no matter how irresponsible they are about their own health, can have expensive mainstream interventions.

If we ever get universal healthcare, I hope it will include health education.
 

apdst

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
129,228
Reaction score
29,967
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Yes. Everyone is free to seek medical attention. That doesn't, however, mean that it's free; paid for by the tax payers.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
1,527
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Yes. Everyone is free to seek medical attention. That doesn't, however, mean that it's free; paid for by the tax payers.
Did you read my post at all? Some of the taxpayers are responsible about their own health. We can't prevent all diseases, but we can prevent the most common ones. Should I pay higher taxes so millions of Americans can continue eating at McDonalds and smoking cigarettes?
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
62,169
Reaction score
35,788
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
That is one of the great political questions. If folks have a right to be provided with food, clothing, shelter, utility services and medical care then why does anyone have to work in order to pay for providing those "basic human needs" for themselves and their dependents?

Of course, in order for the state (i.e. government) to provide those things to everybody, then quite a few somebodies must work to provide them directly or to pay taxation to provide them indirectly. Yet if work is required only to add personal luxuries (all needs being furnished automagically by the state) then there would be no tax base large enough to tap to provide for those universal needs.
 
Last edited:

Slavister

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
5,144
Reaction score
2,641
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Does every human being have a right to the latest high tech medical interventions? No matter how expensive?

What is the limit, and is there any limit?

...

Not everyone believes in mainstream modern medicine.
You are right. It should be available only to those who get all their vaccines.
(Those that read your other threads will understand.)

If you were really interested, you'd know the answer - just see what rest of the world is doing.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
1,527
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
That is one of the great political questions. If folks have a right to be provided with food, clothing, shelter, utility service and medical care then why does anyone have to work in order to pay for providing those "basic human needs" for themselves and their dependents?

Of course, in order for the state (i.e. government) to provide those things to everybody, then quite a few somebodies must work to provide them directly or to pay taxation to provide them indirectly. Yet if work is required only to add personal luxuries (all needs being furnished automagically by the state) then there would be no tax base large enough to tap to provide for those universal needs.
Yeah.
 

Moot

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
37,448
Reaction score
13,278
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I guess it depends on how much human life is worth. So what is the going rate for a human being? According to insurance companies, people in their prime working years are worth more than the elderly or children.

Look at it this way...the more people that pay into the insurance pool...the cheaper the insurance becomes. So if the whole country participated in the health insurance pool then we could all afford our own health insurance.

So it's kinda like the difference of paying $6,000 a year for Medicare for All....or paying $24,000 a year for private insurance. I think I prefer the former to the latter.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
1,527
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
You are right. It should be available only to those who get all their vaccines.
(Those that read your other threads will understand.)

If you were really interested, you'd know the answer - just see what rest of the world is doing.
I doubt the Scandinavian countries have our rates of obesity and smoking.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
62,169
Reaction score
35,788
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I doubt the Scandinavian countries have our rates of obesity and smoking.
Why so?

“46 per cent of all deaths before the age of 70 in Norway can be explained by behavioural factors such as unhealthy diet, obesity, low physical activity and the use of alcohol, tobacco and drugs” says Professor Stein Emil Vollset, Director of the newly established Centre for Burden of Disease at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health.
Healthcare in Norway - Wikipedia
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
62,169
Reaction score
35,788
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I guess it depends on how much human life is worth. So what is the going rate for a human being? According to insurance companies, people in their prime working years are worth more than the elderly or children.

Look at it this way...the more people that pay into the insurance pool...the cheaper the insurance becomes. So if the whole country participated in the health insurance pool then we could all afford our own health insurance.

So it's kinda like the difference of paying $6,000 a year for Medicare for All....or paying $24,000 a year for private insurance. I think I prefer the former to the latter.
Except paying that $6K/year ($500/month) is for each person - so a family of 4 would be paying $24K/year or ($2K/month) for that wondrous M4A deal.
 

Glitch

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
7,107
Reaction score
2,522
Location
Alaska (61.5°N, -149°W)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
What is "healthcare," first of all?

Modern medicine becomes increasingly technological, and increasingly expensive. Does every human being have a right to the latest high tech medical interventions? No matter how expensive?

What is the limit, and is there any limit?

If we are going to have universal health care, it should be basic emergency interventions. That's all I want. Not everyone believes in mainstream modern medicine. We should NOT all be forced to pay for it. I would rather not pay high taxes so all Americans, no matter how irresponsible they are about their own health, can have expensive mainstream interventions.

If we ever get universal healthcare, I hope it will include health education.
Nobody has the right to demand services from someone else. We call that "slavery," and it most certainly is not a right, although many Democrats still think it should be.

It is also unconstitutional for the federal government to create any kind of universal healthcare. That is a constitutional power only the States have.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
62,169
Reaction score
35,788
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Yes. Everyone is free to seek medical attention. That doesn't, however, mean that it's free; paid for by the tax payers.
That is like saying everyone is free to buy a very nice house to live in, all they need is enough household income to do so. ;)
 

Lisa

Salem ac Leporem
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
9,733
Reaction score
4,250
Location
NE Ohio,
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Nobody has the right to demand services from someone else. We call that "slavery," and it most certainly is not a right, although many Democrats still think it should be.

It is also unconstitutional for the federal government to create any kind of universal healthcare. That is a constitutional power only the States have.
Do we have a right to police and fire protection, as well as due process in courts?

The existance of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid says that you are wrong about the constitutional ability of the federal government to create a national healthcare system.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
1,527
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Nobody has the right to demand services from someone else. We call that "slavery," and it most certainly is not a right, although many Democrats still think it should be.

It is also unconstitutional for the federal government to create any kind of universal healthcare. That is a constitutional power only the States have.
Right. It should be done by the states. Like Romney did in MA.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
5,990
Reaction score
1,527
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Do we have a right to police and fire protection, as well as due process in courts?

The existance of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid says that you are wrong about the constitutional ability of the federal government to create a national healthcare system.
It is not constitutional. Most police and fire protection is at the state level. Healthcare should be also. States can do what they want. The constitution limits the federal government. And there is a reason for that!
 

Lisa

Salem ac Leporem
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
Messages
9,733
Reaction score
4,250
Location
NE Ohio,
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
It is not constitutional. Most police and fire protection is at the state level. Healthcare should be also. States can do what they want. The constitution limits the federal government. And there is a reason for that!
Where is the constitutional limit of the federal government that prohibits universal healthcare? The SCOTUS ruled on this with the ACA and said that there was not a prohibition, nor is there a ban of creating a tax to pay for it. National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

The federal government has more power than the states. We have a strong federal government with 50 states that are jurisdictions. Those 50 states are not independent of the federal government. This is the difference between the Articles of Confederation and the US Constitution.
 

Glitch

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
7,107
Reaction score
2,522
Location
Alaska (61.5°N, -149°W)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Do we have a right to police and fire protection, as well as due process in courts?

The existance of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid says that you are wrong about the constitutional ability of the federal government to create a national healthcare system.
No, we do not have the right to the goods and services of others. We do have the right to due process because it takes nothing from anyone. Just like you have the right to free speech because it doesn't require anyone else. If you require goods or services, then it cannot be a right. Again, that is the definition of theft and slavery - taking goods and services that do not belong to you, and demanding they be provided without cost. I realize that slavery is a position the left still fervently supports, but I think you will find that slavery is an out-dated concept in western culture for at least the last century and a half.

The existence of Social Security and MediCare/MedicAid only proves that unconstitutional laws still exist. Neither law has been reviewed by the Supreme Court, because if they were they would be both thrown out. Just like 11 of the 15 other New Deal programs the socialist fascist FDR had introduced in 1934, that were reviewed by the Supreme Court. The US Constitution is very clear on the matter. Unless specifically granted the power by the US Constitution the federal government is prohibited from exercising that power. All powers not prohibited by the US Constitution to the States or granted to the federal government by the US Constitution, belong to the States and/or the people.

Since social spending, healthcare, and education are not powers specifically granted to the federal government by the US Constitution, nor are those powers prohibited by the US Constitution to the States, then those powers belong exclusively to the States and/or the people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
--- Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
62,169
Reaction score
35,788
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Do we have a right to police and fire protection, as well as due process in courts?

The existance of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid says that you are wrong about the constitutional ability of the federal government to create a national healthcare system.
OK, but if the taxpayers can't even fund Medicare/Medicaid for some (18% of the population) without running a $1T/year deficit then how do you expect them to fund M4A?

BTW, it would take about a 40% increase in individual federal income tax revenue just to eliminate the current $1T/year federal deficit.
 

Glitch

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
7,107
Reaction score
2,522
Location
Alaska (61.5°N, -149°W)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Right. It should be done by the states. Like Romney did in MA.
Constitutionally speaking, that is the only place it can be done. At the State level.

There was a very good reason for this. Every State in the Union have laws that require a balanced budget. Whereas the federal government does not. Already more than 60% of the federal budget is being spent on social programs, and the two biggest culprits are Social Security (34%) and MediCare/MedicAid (23%). Both also exceed what we spend on Defense.
 

Moot

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
37,448
Reaction score
13,278
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Except paying that $6K/year ($500/month) is for each person - so a family of 4 would be paying $24K/year or ($2K/month) for that wondrous M4A deal.
I should've checked my figures before posting. How does this sound?....


Last year the typical working family paid an average of $5,277 in premiums to private health insurance companies. Under this option, a typical family of four earning $50,000, after taking the standard deduction, would pay a 4 percent income-based premium to fund Medicare for All – just $844 a year – saving that family over $4,400 a year. Because of the standard deduction, families of four making less than $29,000 a year would not pay this premium.
https://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/options-to-finance-medicare-for-all?inline=file
 

Glitch

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
7,107
Reaction score
2,522
Location
Alaska (61.5°N, -149°W)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Where is the constitutional limit of the federal government that prohibits universal healthcare? The SCOTUS ruled on this with the ACA and said that there was not a prohibition, nor is there a ban of creating a tax to pay for it. National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

The federal government has more power than the states. We have a strong federal government with 50 states that are jurisdictions. Those 50 states are not independent of the federal government. This is the difference between the Articles of Confederation and the US Constitution.
The Tenth Amendment limits the federal government to only those powers designated to them by the US Constitution. The Supreme Court held that the "penalty" under the Affordable Healthcare Act of 2010 was a "tax," and Congress has the constitutional authority under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the US Constitution to levy a tax. The Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of the law itself. If they had it would have been tossed as unconstitutional, and still may be. There is still a challenge by 28 States against constitutionality of the Affordable Healthcare Act still pending.
 

apdst

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
129,228
Reaction score
29,967
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
That is like saying everyone is free to buy a very nice house to live in, all they need is enough household income to do so. ;)
Everyone is free to own a gun, but they have to come up with the money to do so.

Everyone is free to go to college, they have to come up with the money to do so.

Everyone is free to start a business, they have to come up with the money to do so.
 

Glitch

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
7,107
Reaction score
2,522
Location
Alaska (61.5°N, -149°W)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Everyone is free to own a gun, but they have to come up with the money to do so.

Everyone is free to go to college, they have to come up with the money to do so.

Everyone is free to start a business, they have to come up with the money to do so.
If it costs them money, then it isn't free and therefore can't be a right. Furthermore, if it requires anyone else (e.g., teachers, doctors, etc.) then it cannot be an individual or inherent right. Natural rights are what you are born with, and nothing more. Nobody is born with a teacher or doctor, and there is no such thing as a "collective" right.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
62,169
Reaction score
35,788
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Top Bottom