No One Has a Right to Health Care

[beagle9]

I've enjoyed this, and the irony of it all is that I'm sick today, so maybe life will get better for us all, but I'm not complaining. Time for some meds and soup. Gotta be well for back to work on Monday.

 

[kaz]

Absolutely. whether you have it in your hands or not, it's to go to your objectives, not mine. I believe in private charities, they are far more effective. Why do you think Buffett and Gates buy an army of accountants to evade taxes? Why don't they give government money? They always advocate it

I would participate in a group plan in that so you could have a great rate on your healthcare in a skinny minute, because I would know that I would get the same in return. Just comes down to who is handling the account, and can it be trusted. We have work to do in this nation.

If it's a government system, that isn't going to happen. Have you been following the cost of Obamacare policies? They aren't going down...

. Obamacare was a ruse and an agenda riddled disaster.

Yet you think the government that created that fiasco can do it right if they get another shot at it? Based on what?

. You think government is controlled by the same clowns each election cycle ? No you don't, but when someone is elected, no one follows up when they don't do their job... Everybody just lets the donor class win, and we the people lose. Might hopefully be different this time, but who knows really..

Government should protecting all it's citizens, not just the moocher class you refer to as "we the people"

 

[beagle9]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

Government decides what our rights are? You have no idea what the US Constitution is

. There is a process...

 

[idb]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

With freedom of speech (or any freedom in this country) you don't have to tax other people to have it. With healthcare, you do.

It's not a right to vote money out of my pocket just because I may have it. That's not a right--that's theft. Theft is the act of taking a persons property against their will.

If the US collectively want to decide to extend certain rights to US citizens then they can can't they?
Isn't that what the constitution did?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

With freedom of speech (or any freedom in this country) you don't have to tax other people to have it. With healthcare, you do.

It's not a right to vote money out of my pocket just because I may have it. That's not a right--that's theft. Theft is the act of taking a persons property against their will.

. Like I said before, do you ride down a wagon trail when you leave your home or do you ride down streets with culverts, ditches, drainage, sidewalks, lamp post etc? Do you think a street is more important than human life ?

What I think is that there are things we tax people for that benefit most if not all of society. I'm against taxing people for things that "some" may not have for whatever reason.

This is an old argument on any forum. When we talk about providing people with things, some often bring up police, fire, schools, roads, bridges and so on. With the exception of schools, these are things that benefit most or all of society so all of society pays. This is not to mention that very few if anybody would object to these entities existing in their world.

 

[beagle9]

I would participate in a group plan in that so you could have a great rate on your healthcare in a skinny minute, because I would know that I would get the same in return. Just comes down to who is handling the account, and can it be trusted. We have work to do in this nation.

If it's a government system, that isn't going to happen. Have you been following the cost of Obamacare policies? They aren't going down...

. Obamacare was a ruse and an agenda riddled disaster.

Yet you think the government that created that fiasco can do it right if they get another shot at it? Based on what?

. You think government is controlled by the same clowns each election cycle ? No you don't, but when someone is elected, no one follows up when they don't do their job... Everybody just lets the donor class win, and we the people lose. Might hopefully be different this time, but who knows really..

Government should protecting all it's citizens, not just the moocher class you refer to as "we the people"

. Wow I can't believe that just came out of your mouth... You actually said that government should do something ? Now go and wash your mouth out with soap.

 

[idb]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

Government decides what our rights are? You have no idea what the US Constitution is

Funny, I didn't see 'government' mentioned in my statement.

 

[beagle9]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

With freedom of speech (or any freedom in this country) you don't have to tax other people to have it. With healthcare, you do.

It's not a right to vote money out of my pocket just because I may have it. That's not a right--that's theft. Theft is the act of taking a persons property against their will.

. Like I said before, do you ride down a wagon trail when you leave your home or do you ride down streets with culverts, ditches, drainage, sidewalks, lamp post etc? Do you think a street is more important than human life ?

What I think is that there are things we tax people for that benefit most if not all of society. I'm against taxing people for things that "some" may not have for whatever reason.

This is an old argument on any forum. When we talk about providing people with things, some often bring up police, fire, schools, roads, bridges and so on. With the exception of schools, these are things that benefit most or all of society so all of society pays. This is not to mention that very few if anybody would object to these entities existing in their world.

. Sounds like a capitulation Ray...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

With freedom of speech (or any freedom in this country) you don't have to tax other people to have it. With healthcare, you do.

It's not a right to vote money out of my pocket just because I may have it. That's not a right--that's theft. Theft is the act of taking a persons property against their will.

If the US collectively want to decide to extend certain rights to US citizens then they can can't they?
Isn't that what the constitution did?

There is a difference between rights and entitlements. Entitlements are not a right. Entitlements are forced charity.

A right give you the freedom to pursue something--not pay for something you want. That being said, we all have the right to healthcare in this country. If you want healthcare, buy it.

 

[idb]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

With freedom of speech (or any freedom in this country) you don't have to tax other people to have it. With healthcare, you do.

It's not a right to vote money out of my pocket just because I may have it. That's not a right--that's theft. Theft is the act of taking a persons property against their will.

. Like I said before, do you ride down a wagon trail when you leave your home or do you ride down streets with culverts, ditches, drainage, sidewalks, lamp post etc? Do you think a street is more important than human life ?

What I think is that there are things we tax people for that benefit most if not all of society. I'm against taxing people for things that "some" may not have for whatever reason.

This is an old argument on any forum. When we talk about providing people with things, some often bring up police, fire, schools, roads, bridges and so on. With the exception of schools, these are things that benefit most or all of society so all of society pays. This is not to mention that very few if anybody would object to these entities existing in their world.

Schools don't "benefit most or all of society"?
Interesting perspective.

 

[dblack]

If the US collectively want to decide to extend certain rights to US citizens then they can can't they?
Isn't that what the constitution did?

It's the "collectively want to decide" bit that contains the poison. What you mean by that, is that the majority can force the minority to bend to its will via government. And, yes, that's how government works. But it's not inherently just, and we created the Constitution to contain it - to prevent the majority from abusing minorities willy nilly.

 

[kaz]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

Government decides what our rights are? You have no idea what the US Constitution is

. There is a process...

Not sure what that has to do with it. Do you know what the Bill of Rights actually is? They are protections from government, they are not government deciding what our rights are.

The idea of positive rights like the so called right to other people's money is an abomination to freedom

 

[idb]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

With freedom of speech (or any freedom in this country) you don't have to tax other people to have it. With healthcare, you do.

It's not a right to vote money out of my pocket just because I may have it. That's not a right--that's theft. Theft is the act of taking a persons property against their will.

If the US collectively want to decide to extend certain rights to US citizens then they can can't they?
Isn't that what the constitution did?

There is a difference between rights and entitlements. Entitlements are not a right. Entitlements are forced charity.

A right give you the freedom to pursue something--not pay for something you want. That being said, we all have the right to healthcare in this country. If you want healthcare, buy it.

Why couldn't the US decide to make an entitlement a right?
Why couldn't the country decide to enshrine free ice-creams for everyone on every second Sunday a right?

 

[kaz]

If it's a government system, that isn't going to happen. Have you been following the cost of Obamacare policies? They aren't going down...

. Obamacare was a ruse and an agenda riddled disaster.

Yet you think the government that created that fiasco can do it right if they get another shot at it? Based on what?

. You think government is controlled by the same clowns each election cycle ? No you don't, but when someone is elected, no one follows up when they don't do their job... Everybody just lets the donor class win, and we the people lose. Might hopefully be different this time, but who knows really..

Government should protecting all it's citizens, not just the moocher class you refer to as "we the people"

. Wow I can't believe that just came out of your mouth... You actually said that government should do something ? Now go and wash your mouth out with soap.

I'm a small government libertarian, not an anarchist. Where did you get the idea I oppose all government? What I oppose is government confiscation and redistribution of money. When government treats its citizens differently, it just pits them against each other

 

[idb]

If the US collectively want to decide to extend certain rights to US citizens then they can can't they?
Isn't that what the constitution did?

It's the "collectively want to decide" bit that contains the poison. What you mean by that, is that the majority can force the minority to bend to its will via government. And, yes, that's how government works. But it's not inherently just, and we created the Constitution to contain it - to prevent the majority from abusing minorities willy nilly.

So, you think that nothing should be enshrined as a right unless 100% of the population agrees with it.
That's a high hurdle.

 

[kaz]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

Government decides what our rights are? You have no idea what the US Constitution is

Funny, I didn't see 'government' mentioned in my statement.

"Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens"

You can go ahead and play five year old word games, but explain how that statement does not refer to "government"

 

[kaz]

If the US collectively want to decide to extend certain rights to US citizens then they can can't they?
Isn't that what the constitution did?

It's the "collectively want to decide" bit that contains the poison. What you mean by that, is that the majority can force the minority to bend to its will via government. And, yes, that's how government works. But it's not inherently just, and we created the Constitution to contain it - to prevent the majority from abusing minorities willy nilly.

So, you think that nothing should be enshrined as a right unless 100% of the population agrees with it.
That's a high hurdle.

Government should not be able to trod on the rights of some citizens for the benefit of others unless it's 100% agreed

 

[dblack]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

With freedom of speech (or any freedom in this country) you don't have to tax other people to have it. With healthcare, you do.

It's not a right to vote money out of my pocket just because I may have it. That's not a right--that's theft. Theft is the act of taking a persons property against their will.

If the US collectively want to decide to extend certain rights to US citizens then they can can't they?
Isn't that what the constitution did?

There is a difference between rights and entitlements. Entitlements are not a right. Entitlements are forced charity.

A right give you the freedom to pursue something--not pay for something you want. That being said, we all have the right to healthcare in this country. If you want healthcare, buy it.

Why couldn't the US decide to make an entitlement a right?

The same reason it couldn't decide to make it a fundamental law of physics. It's a question of definition. A right is an inalienable freedom, not a perk provided by government

Why couldn't the country decide to enshrine free ice-creams for everyone on every second Sunday a right?

Enshrine? What do you mean by that? We could certainly decide to give everyone free ice cream - until it ran out. But that still wouldn't make it a right.

That seems to be the core of the problem. You seem to think a "right" is just something government promises to do.

 

[beagle9]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

With freedom of speech (or any freedom in this country) you don't have to tax other people to have it. With healthcare, you do.

It's not a right to vote money out of my pocket just because I may have it. That's not a right--that's theft. Theft is the act of taking a persons property against their will.

If the US collectively want to decide to extend certain rights to US citizens then they can can't they?
Isn't that what the constitution did?

There is a difference between rights and entitlements. Entitlements are not a right. Entitlements are forced charity.

A right give you the freedom to pursue something--not pay for something you want. That being said, we all have the right to healthcare in this country. If you want healthcare, buy it.

. What is a right Ray ? It means something you can't be denide right ? So if a person's non-ability to pay the high cost of a procedure (I.e. bring in $300.00 dollars or you won't get served), then how is it a right Ray. I have seen horror where people have actually taken their family member back home, because they didn't have healthcare at the time, and didn't have the money to go it alone at the time. The friend was laid off from his job of 25 years, and his wife had never worked. His wife was the patient, and she was denide services based on their ability to pay cash at that moment. They also were denide government assistance at that time as well. Do you know how unbelievable that was to find out the woman couldn't be seen for her therapy after she had had a stroke? Disgusting is what it was, but as long as it's not seen from other folks utopias, then who cares right?

 

[idb]

Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens.
If they decide that healthcare is a right then yes, it's a right.
Some countries don't believe that even freedom of speech is a right.

Government decides what our rights are? You have no idea what the US Constitution is

Funny, I didn't see 'government' mentioned in my statement.

"Any sovereign country should be able to decide the rights for its own citizens"

You can go ahead and play five year old word games, but explain how that statement does not refer to "government"

I'll leave you to carry on with your paranoid 'government vs the people' line if you like.