3 ms·

This is absolutely spot on. Health care is not a right, neither is education, food, or access to the internet. These are all things that people at some point

This is absolutely spot on. Health care is not a right, neither is education, food, or access to the internet. These are all things that people at some point or another have claimed as "inalienable human rights". There is always a cost benefit analysis here. Should we perform this extremely expensive treatment to give somebody a few days in agonizing pain, or maybe save a few dozen other people with a simple, straightforward procedure? The painful part is realizing that no matter what, people with more resources (money or otherwise) will have better (and longer) lives on average then people without resources. There is no way to legislate that away. See Venezuela for an example of that.

erelde 10y ago
> Should we perform this extremely expensive treatment to give somebody a few days in agonizing pain, or maybe save a few dozen other people with a simple, straightforward procedure? Does the current system in the US evaluate that? We could also go back to feudalism, people accross history and the world have gained rights against the wealthy minority, and I think healthcare for everyone should be something US citizens fight for now. (It's a bit of a marxist reading of history, but in this case it works)
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  Did you read the article at all? Evaluating the cost/benefit analysis is completely toxic and forbidden completely. The NHS does that and denies it, and the last election they tried to call Obamacare "death boards". We are in fuedalism right now, we just don't recognize our lords as explicitly. And you can't "fight for healthcare for everybody". Healthcare is a scarce resource, and not everybody gets it. It's the nature of scare resources. If you have to provide healthcare to all, something else will get cut. Education? Food subsidies? Housing stipends? You pick your poison and don't think that we can just produce things out of thin air. And the two marxist societies in the world are suffering. (DPRK and Venezuela) They've only been able to make everyone equally miserable, except for those in the ruling party.

erelde 10y ago

> Should we perform this extremely expensive treatment to give somebody a few days in agonizing pain, or maybe save a few dozen other people with a simple, straightforward procedure? Does the current system in the US evaluate that? We could also go back to feudalism, people accross history and the world have gained rights against the wealthy minority, and I think healthcare for everyone should be something US citizens fight for now. (It's a bit of a marxist reading of history, but in this case it works)

jimmywanger 10y ago
Did you read the article at all? Evaluating the cost/benefit analysis is completely toxic and forbidden completely. The NHS does that and denies it, and the last election they tried to call Obamacare "death boards". We are in fuedalism right now, we just don't recognize our lords as explicitly. And you can't "fight for healthcare for everybody". Healthcare is a scarce resource, and not everybody gets it. It's the nature of scare resources. If you have to provide healthcare to all, something else will get cut. Education? Food subsidies? Housing stipends? You pick your poison and don't think that we can just produce things out of thin air. And the two marxist societies in the world are suffering. (DPRK and Venezuela) They've only been able to make everyone equally miserable, except for those in the ruling party.