Is Universal Healthcare Detrimental to Your Health?

[lschs77]

Healthcare has become a most prominent issue in today’s world. Many people are demanding a universal healthcare system. However, I have several apprehensions about government-run healthcare.

Contrary to believe, insurance premiums and expense of healthcare is likely to increase. These cost increases, along with ineffective cost control, will lead to monetary instability in the healthcare system. Assuming that these costs could be effectively controlled, the insufficient supply of physicians would lead to the downfall of universal healthcare. Patients would have to wait longer to receive important consultations and procedures. Ultimately, I believe the average health of an American citizen would suffer due to universal healthcare. So, is universal healthcare really the answer considering it would be detrimental to the average health of an American citizen?

Moreover, I believe it is necessary to define healthcare as a right or a privilege. So, is it everyone’s right to have healthcare, or is it a privilege not available to everyone?

 

[Emma]

Of course it's a right.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Of course it's a right.

What part of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights was that in Emma darlin?

 

[Claudette]

My problem with it is that it will be run by the Govt. Oh yeah. They have such a great track record at running things. The cost is always way more than they anticipate and will we get better or worse care?? You can argue the nuts ant bolts of it but thats my big concern.

 

[Emma]

Of course it's a right.

What part of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights was that in Emma darlin?

9th Amendment.

 

[lschs77]

The 9th amendment gives no specific mention of the right to healthcare. The reason healthcare is not a right is because it is a service rendered by physicians to consumers (aka patients). One can't demand another to supply a service to them. If the government comes in and demands that that service be supplied to everyone, that is just a form of theft.

For example,
The government decides that everyone has the right to take a vacation out of the country. Therefore, the government tells all travel agencies that they must plan vacations for everyone, whether they are able to afford the cost of the trip or the cost of the agent. How is this fair to the travel agency? How is this fair to the taxpayers who are paying for these people's vacations.

lets put it into context,
Physicians (the travel agent) are people who render services to patients (the person looking to go on a vacation). Why should a physician agree to render services to a patient that can pay for those services? Why should a physician be responsible for paying out of his own pocket to care for these people? What gives the government the right to come in and say that a physician must care for these people that can't even pay their bill?

Now I'm not saying that anyone who can't pay for healthcare shouldn't be able to get it. We should make certain programs available to them to help them pay these bills (medicaid and medicare). However, we can't be demanding that healthcare is a right, and demanding that physicians care for these patients.

Just imagine if your boss said that you would have to render your services for free. I'm sure you wouldn't be on board for that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Of course it's a right.

1. The massive growth of government in the 20th and 21st centuries is to promote what the government defines as fair and just. Inherent in this is the question of the legitimate role of government in a free society. The Constitution tells what the Founders understood as most of the legitimate powers of the federal government, as listed in the enumerated powers in Article I, section 8. Congress is authorized to do 21 things.

a. Each and every outlay of taxpayer dollars should be viewed and compared to this list, as per bailing out banks, managing car companies, subsidizing farms, etc.

b. America has moved away from the constitutional principle of limited government that made us great and prosperous.

c. The other side of the coin from limited government is individual liberty: private property is the bulwark of freedom. Excessive taxation is, in effect, an attack on private property and free enterprise.

d. A tax represents a government claim on private property, a confiscation of private property that could otherwise be freely spent, or freely invested.

2. The primary justification for increasing the size and scale of government at the expense of liberty is that government alone can achieve what it perceives as good. But, in a free society, what moral right is there for forcibly taking the rightful property of one person and giving it to another person to whom it does not belong?

a. Charity is noble and good when it involves reaching into one’s own pocket.

b. In a free society, such relationships should be voluntary, in that both parties to the exchange feel good about it. A suitor pays to purchase a diamond ring for his adored.

c. Involuntary exchanges means that one party gains while the other loses. A criminal uses a gun to obtain a diamond ring.

Future Prospects for Economic Liberty
Walter Williams
August 2, 2009 lecture for Hillsdale College

 

[PoliticalChic]

Healthcare has become a most prominent issue in today’s world. Many people are demanding a universal healthcare system. However, I have several apprehensions about government-run healthcare.

Contrary to believe, insurance premiums and expense of healthcare is likely to increase. These cost increases, along with ineffective cost control, will lead to monetary instability in the healthcare system. Assuming that these costs could be effectively controlled, the insufficient supply of physicians would lead to the downfall of universal healthcare. Patients would have to wait longer to receive important consultations and procedures. Ultimately, I believe the average health of an American citizen would suffer due to universal healthcare. So, is universal healthcare really the answer considering it would be detrimental to the average health of an American citizen?

Moreover, I believe it is necessary to define healthcare as a right or a privilege. So, is it everyone’s right to have healthcare, or is it a privilege not available to everyone?

The question that you are intending is, I believe, "is healthcare insurance a right or privilege..."

It is already decided that everyone in the United States -legal or otherwise- has healthcare.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course it's a right.

1. The massive growth of government in the 20th and 21st centuries is to promote what the government defines as fair and just. Inherent in this is the question of the legitimate role of government in a free society. The Constitution tells what the Founders understood as most of the legitimate powers of the federal government, as listed in the enumerated powers in Article I, section 8. Congress is authorized to do 21 things.

a. Each and every outlay of taxpayer dollars should be viewed and compared to this list, as per bailing out banks, managing car companies, subsidizing farms, etc.

b. America has moved away from the constitutional principle of limited government that made us great and prosperous.

c. The other side of the coin from limited government is individual liberty: private property is the bulwark of freedom. Excessive taxation is, in effect, an attack on private property and free enterprise.

d. A tax represents a government claim on private property, a confiscation of private property that could otherwise be freely spent, or freely invested.

2. The primary justification for increasing the size and scale of government at the expense of liberty is that government alone can achieve what it perceives as good. But, in a free society, what moral right is there for forcibly taking the rightful property of one person and giving it to another person to whom it does not belong?

a. Charity is noble and good when it involves reaching into one’s own pocket.

b. In a free society, such relationships should be voluntary, in that both parties to the exchange feel good about it. A suitor pays to purchase a diamond ring for his adored.

c. Involuntary exchanges means that one party gains while the other loses. A criminal uses a gun to obtain a diamond ring.

Future Prospects for Economic Liberty
Walter Williams
August 2, 2009 lecture for Hillsdale College

Your source is a screwball. I have known Dr. Williams for almost thirty years. Remember that one of his political heroes is John C. Calhoun, who never, ever would have allowed a person of color to be editorializing in public. Calhoun may have let Walter push a broom in the college hallways, though.

 

[Oddball]

Dr. Walter Williams...A "screwball".

And here I thought you couldn't undermine your intellectual credibility any more.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Dr. Walter Williams...A "screwball".

And here I thought you couldn't undermine your intellectual credibility any more.

Walter E. Williams, (born 1936 in Philadelphia) is the John M Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University. He is also a syndicated columnist and author known for his libertarian views.[1]

 

[JakeStarkey]

I know who Walter is. A pretty nice guy, but a rightwing political hack as well.

 

[Oddball]

And you're a complete idiot.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Dude, you have rarely if ever offered anything of substance in this message board. You can attack all you want, but you only fall on your face.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Of course it's a right.

Sure thing....it's a "right"........according to socialist/communist propaganda.....anyhow that's what all your leftie pals all tell you and i'm sure you believe everything they say....that socialist health care is the "best" in the world...and everybody should have it....why just look at our neighbor Cuba....the people there all get "free" health care....in fact your leftie pals even claim that Cuba is a model for the U.S.....

Cuba's Healthcare a model for the U.S. says CNN
American Thinker: Cuba's Healthcare a model for the U.S. says CNN

I bet you can hardly wait to experience your "right" to the wonders of socialist/communist health care....

 

[Oddball]

Dude, you have rarely if ever offered anything of substance in this message board. You can attack all you want, but you only fall on your face.

Fuck you I haven't.

However, I don't expect babbling shit-for-brains imbeciles like you to understand subtance, like that which comes from Dr. Williams, when it runs you over.

BTW, who did the attacking of the source first here, fuckroast?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You jumped me, and I kicked you in the face. Don't like it? Then back off.

 

[Oddball]

Fuck off.

You started the ad hom game and you can take it back, turd surfer.

 

[JakeStarkey]

What "ad hom"? That you don't know what you are talking about? That's not ad hom, Dude, I am referring to your lack of intellectual ability, not your paucity of character.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Gentleman.. Gentleman ... never mind I'll stay out of it.....