when i say cars are a 1 time expenditure, i stated that the cost the purchase a car is a set price. say $15,000. now yes there is maintenances on a car, but there are incremental costs. this still does not apply to health care. in health care we cant simply buy a policy for $15,000 and then pay small maintenances on our body. it also is a dumb argument because if your car breaks down you can simply purchase another one and throw the old one away. can you do this with your body? think of it this way. when you pay health care premium, in order to receive that care that coincides with that premium, you have to continue to pay that premium indefinitely. (as in forever!) but if you have a car, the purchase price is a 1 time cost, with low day to day costs. but you still dont see that a car is a luxury item.
No I don't. The definintion of luxury item is something that is a none necessity. Well that simple isn't true for most people where cars are concerned. For all practical intents you have to have one. And even though this is the case I dont' expect government owes me a car. It is simply a cost of life, just like your health is. Your body is a machine just like a car is a machine. That the purchase of a car is a one time cost isn't even true. Most people don't pay for their cars all at once. They finance them on a monthly basis over years, just like pay a monthly premium to own an insurance policy.
Look common obviously we both want the same thing. We just disagree on how to get there. But if you want to solve this problem it's going to require some out of the box thinking. You can not expect things to change by continuing to do things the way you did before, you know, the way that isn't working now. The reason health care is so expensive is BECAUSE there is so much government involved in it already. The reason health care is so expensive is because we have become so accustomed to an insurance model that allowed people to take less interest in how there money is spent. That is what you have to see. That the more directly your health impacts you financially the more likely you are to make good decisins where your health is concerned. The more directly you can control where your health care money goes the more likely the costs of goods and service will go down. Except the liberal way is exactly the opposite. Give the money to someone else, let them handle the logisitics. It shouldn't be any wonder why health care costs are so high. The consumer has no power. They have no choice in what they want to pay in premiums or what those premiums cover, they have limited ability or incentive to shop for the best price. Unlike other private businesses, hospitals and doctor's aren't beholden to the customer so they have no incentive to improve efficiency and cut cost.
so with this statement how can you compare cars to health insurance? in order to drive you are required by the state to pass a license test and carry insurance. wow, did i just say that the state "requires" you to carry insurance? sounds like a mandate to me, and this is for your so called "necessity".
I have stated several times now why the two are analogous. Maybe you need to start obectively asking yourself these questions. Why does the state have the right to require you to purchase insurance. If you want to solve problems common, you have to willing to challenge some of your premises.
aha! this we where you are missing the point. the reason that that one person could afford $500 and the other only afford $150, is not simply a matter of choice, its a matter of finances. since one person makes more than another he can simply afford better quality things. same way as everyone can not afford the same house or same car. it comes down to affordability. my argument removes scenarios like this from ever happening. if everyone pays the same price for the same services, no one loses. everyone wins.
The problem is the things you are ignoring. You thought you had a gotcha by telling me it's an affordability issue. Then by the end of the paragraph you're telling we will cover everyone and everyone will pay the same thing. I asked you before, how are these people who could not pay for insurance before, miraculously going to be able pay now? There are always going to be people that can't afford insurance, that's what medicare and medicade should be for. To help those that truly can not help themselves. But there is no good reason, and plenty of bad ones, to lump everyone into this group for the sake of the few.
and i didnt ignore your causality argument, i stated that it is morally wrong to deny someone potentially life saving treatment because of the all mighty dollar. hence you put a value on human life. i never said that treatment or procedure should be free, you assumed that was my position because i said health care was a right. we tell all children they have a right to an education, but that education is paid for through taxes. its not technically free.
Personally yes there are certain life cliches shall we say that I challenge. One of them being that every human life is equal. The fact is they are not. Certain people are more valuable to society than others. That's a cold hard fact. However, I do not believe that value is necessarily related to the amount of money someone has.