Is there a right to healthcare?

[Bassman]

Comparing peoples medical situations to household plumbing issues? Like a washing machine is as valuable as another human life?

Oh my.

It's pointless talking to someone as extreme as you on this issue.

It's no different. healthcare has never been a right. It has always been a service. And I want the BEST service I, not the government, can buy.

 

[aociswundumho]

So your argument is that healthcare does not pertain to the general welfare of the US? Perhaps you are having trouble coming up with any examples of health issues that pose a threat to American lives?

Food, housing, music, bicycles, swimming pools ... virtually everything pertains to the general welfare of the American people. Are you claiming that congress has totalitarian power over the people? Or is that just your own personal fantasy?

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

It's no different. healthcare has never been a right. It has always been a service. And I want the BEST service I, not the government, can buy.

It's rather akin to all those Communist supporters of the military who think that I should have to pay for their protection. We would obviously be better off just dissolving the military altogether and letting the people who want protection from national security threats pay for their own private security.*

*This was a sarcastic comment, meant to illustrate a point, and does not necessarily reflect my views

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Food, housing, music, bicycles, swimming pools ... virtually everything pertains to the general welfare of the American people. Are you claiming that congress has totalitarian power over the people? Or is that just your own personal fantasy?

In a sense, they do have totalitarian control, if they can get the required supermajority in both the House and the Senate, or Constitutional Convention from a supermajority of State Legislatures. Apart from that, they are limited by the Constitutional restrictions specifically imposed upon them. Such as anything that beings with the words "Congress shall make no law."

But if they want to create a food program (SNAP) or a housing program (Section 8) or a program to fund music (National Endowment for the Arts) they are well within the scope of the powers invested in them by the Constitution to do so.

 

[Surrealistik]

No.

Well hey, at least you're not a raging hypocrite like so many conservatives.

In the end though, what we spend tax dollars on as a society comes down to the battle of ideas that democracy permits and the winners thereof, for better or worse.

 

[skeptic llc]

So, according to the Constitutionally deficient brain dead Left, I am required to fork over 85% of my paycheck to fund some crackhead whore's methodone treatment.

$6,552 per year is 85% of your paycheck? Ouch, sorry dude. (https://www.drugabuse.gov/publicati...addiction/how-much-does-opioid-treatment-cost)

 

[aociswundumho]

In the end though, what we spend tax dollars on as a society comes down to the battle of ideas that democracy permits and the winners thereof, for better or worse.

Worse.

 

[Nickyjo]

You have the right to set up a website to express your opinions, you have the right to own a firearm, so of course you have a right to healthcare.

However there is no right to force other people to pay for your website, or to buy you a gun, or to pay for your healthcare. You have the right to buy healthcare from anyone you choose, but you don't have the right to force other people to pay your bills.

But isn't healthcare different? Am I not morally obligated to pay for other people's healthcare?

I'm morally obligated to pay for my kid's healthcare, and perhaps my wife's as well. I don't think I am morally obligated to pay for my siblings healthcare. I am quite certain that I have no moral obligation to pay for the healthcare of people I don't even know, because no one is morally obligated to provide charity. Even Bernie Sanders agrees with that:



There's no right to charity and there's no moral obligation to provide charity, and that means there's no right to free healthcare.

Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) says that everyone has the right to "social security," which I believe means health care in international parlance. The Declaration does not have any force of law, but is sort of aspirational, and forms the basis for some international treaties, which do have force of law when ratified.

The morality of providing for others' health care is irrelevant. In the US we are generally legally required to provide health care for the old, the poor, veterans, prisoners, and public employees. And, of course, it is not free, but paid for by taxes we elect representatives to levy.

 

[aociswundumho]

Apart from that, they are limited by the Constitutional restrictions specifically imposed upon them.

What are the constitutional restrictions regarding healthcare?

Such as anything that beings with the words "Congress shall make no law."

Do you believe that any and all federal laws which abridge the freedom of speech or of the press are unconstitutional?

 

[Surrealistik]

Worse.

View attachment 67298562

I mean the thing about democracy is that if you don't like it, and your ideas can't win, you're free to leave, unlike in many dictatorships.

 

[aociswundumho]

The morality of providing for others' health care is irrelevant.

So we shouldn't even think about whether government is acting morally or not? Need I point out where that leads?

My view is we should figure out what's right and wrong first, and then decide what the law should be based on that.

 

[Juks]

So, according to the Constitutionally deficient brain dead Left, I am required to fork over 85% of my paycheck to fund some crackhead whore's methodone treatment.

85%? How ineffective is your healthcare? All countries in Europe offers their citizens free healthcare. Right politicians as well as left. It is called civilisation...

 

[Juks]

I mean the thing about democracy is that if you don't like it, and your ideas can't win, you're free to leave, unlike in many dictatorships.

And free to talk about it..

 

[aociswundumho]

I mean the thing about democracy is that if you don't like it, and your ideas can't win, you're free to leave, unlike in many dictatorships.

Maybe 100 years ago, but today international borders are extremely controlled. You're not "free to leave" if there's nowhere for you to go. Even if you do manage to emigrate, you're still stuck in just another rotten democracy.

and your ideas can't win,

I don't want to impose my ideas on you, I want to be left alone. Apparently that's too much to ask.

 

[Juks]

Even if you do manage to emigrate, you're still stuck in just another rotten democracy.

Well, you don't have to choose a democracy.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

What are the constitutional restrictions regarding healthcare?

None come to mind.

Do you believe that any and all federal laws which abridge the freedom of speech or of the press are unconstitutional?

In a sense. Although of course the powers of the Supreme Court to evaluate cases like Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises are provided for by Article III, so the flexibility of interpretation is supplied by the Constitution itself.

 

[skeptic llc]

85%? How ineffective is your healthcare?

Well, in fairness, it is very very very ineffective. Mostly our healthcare consists of insurers fighting their "customers" and hospitals, the government, and one another to get out of paying medical bills. As a system for enriching insurance companies and their lawyers, though, it is really quite good.

 

[Surrealistik]

Maybe 100 years ago, but today international borders are extremely controlled. You're not "free to leave" if there's nowhere for you to go. Even if you do manage to emigrate, you're still stuck in just another rotten democracy.



I don't want to impose my ideas on you, I want to be left alone. Apparently that's too much to ask.

If you're looking for anarchocapitalism where you can do wherever you want, pretty much the only place you'll find it is Africa I'm afraid (or international waters; good luck).

If you're looking for an idealized libertarian state where everyone is in sync with your own views, that doesn't exist outside of your brainpan, and it never did.

There will never be an ideal country or nation for you, me, or anyone else, so you're left to pick the 'least bad' one should you lack the ability and/or resources to get society onside.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Maybe 100 years ago, but today international borders are extremely controlled. You're not "free to leave" if there's nowhere for you to go. Even if you do manage to emigrate, you're still stuck in just another rotten democracy.

Ah, the plight of the proletariat. "No one's forcing you to labour for the bourgeoisie. Captialism is all about voluntary exchange. If you don't like it, why not just go work for someone else?"

I don't want to impose my ideas on you, I want to be left alone. Apparently that's too much to ask.

So build yourself a boat and sail the ocean. Free as a bird. Just you and the open sea air. A self-sufficient island of a man.

 

[skeptic llc]

So build yourself a boat and sail the ocean. Free as a bird. Just you and the open sea air. A self-sufficient island of a man.

Sounds awesome. And I can't swim, which I think will make those who know me be even more supportive of your suggestion.

 

[Juks]

Ireland has lower tax burden than US, but still free healthcare. So , you are using your taxes for something else.

 

[aociswundumho]

None come to mind.

Really? Does the federal government have the legitimate power to inject drugs into your body against your will?

If no, where in the Constitution is fedgov restricted from doing that? Cite the actual text please.

 

[Ginger Ale]

Actually, it's far better than the eurotrash socialized medicine that you are so touting. Plus with government run medicine? Say goodbye to new research. and innovations. Say hello to long lines and mediocre at best "healthcare" oh, and I am quite sure the best doctors won't want to work for a pittance in GP. Specialists are where the real $$$ is at.

Which Eurotrash are you referring too? My son in law lives in Sweden and itś pretty fantastically. You are wrong on all points. Itś sad that you succumb to rhetoric.
They have dental and they have care for seniors that include in-home or nursing home care. An ambulance ride will cost you $30 bucks.
You can get private supplemental insurance if you feel like it, and about 15% of them have it. There are also a few private hospitals if you want it, but their system works, and rarely do you need it.

Doctors in Europe make a similar income, and I never hear anyone willing to give up a non-profit healthcare system for a for-profit system, I only hear Americans defending it.

There are problems with all systems, but ours is ridiculous and most people around the world feel sorry for Americans in regard to healthcare costs and services.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Really? Does the federal government have the legitimate power to inject drugs into your body against your will?

If no, where in the Constitution is fedgov restricted from doing that? Cite the actual text please.

Yes. The government has the Constitutional authority to inject drugs into someone against their will. In fact, they have done so with astonishing regularity concerning those suffering from mental illness. There is, however, a great deal of case law restricting the government's ability to do so based on the first, sixth, eighth, an fourteenth amendments, along with an inferred right to privacy through penumbras. You can look up the actual text for those yourself.

 

[Juks]

Yes. The government has the Constitutional authority to inject drugs into someone against their will. In fact, they have done so with astonishing regularity concerning those suffering from mental illness. There is, however, a great deal of case law restricting the government's ability to do so based on the first, sixth, eighth, an fourteenth amendments, along with an inferred right to privacy through penumbras. You can look up the actual text for those yourself.

With a schizophrenic sister I am sorry to say that this is the only way. Hopefully science will provide better care for the future schizophrenics, May it be just better drugs with less side effects.