3 ms·

Basically, the article is a strawman fallacy. It paints national health care supporters as people who think, as you said, that health care as a human right woul

by ewzimm 10y ago

Basically, the article is a strawman fallacy. It paints national health care supporters as people who think, as you said, that health care as a human right would mean that everybody gets treated no matter how expensive. Nobody thinks that. The goal is to reduce the amount of people who are sick and dying as much as possible. We have data on that in the form of the performance of various systems and their impact on health. The US is still the world's economic superpower, but it's health care system is rated below Dominica and Costa Rica.

SilasX 10y ago
So was I just imagining all the people repeating the line that 'no one should die because they can't afford health care'? Or do you not see how that condition also exists in all the countries that do it right? >The US is still the world's economic superpower, but it's health care system is rated below Dominica and Costa Rica. What is this replying to? What did I say that contradicted this or suggested otherwise, or merited a re-run of "everything wrong with health care in the US" as if I disagreed? I was addressing a specific fallacy, not somehow claiming that everything the US is wine and roses.
- ewzimm 10y ago
  That low ranking is related to the first thing you're saying. It's what drives advocates of national health care, not the idea that nobody will die. When people are talking about deaths of people who can't afford health care, they're talking about people who don't have the resources to ever get care, the people who don't catch things in the early stages when they're easily treatable and find out too late that their condition has become terminal. The point of national health care isn't to eliminate all treatable deaths no matter how expensive, it's to improve care and accessibility so that it's in a place that aligns with the resources society could reasonably support. When we look at much poorer nations being able to provide much better care, we see that there's a problem that needs to be addressed. That's what people are talking about, not eliminating all deaths.
  - SilasX 10y ago
    Those are all great, subtle distinctions to make. They're also completely different arguments from, and not at all conveyed by "lol poor people die from lacking health care in the US but not Europe".

by ewzimm 10y ago

SilasX 10y ago

So was I just imagining all the people repeating the line that 'no one should die because they can't afford health care'? Or do you not see how that condition also exists in all the countries that do it right? >The US is still the world's economic superpower, but it's health care system is rated below Dominica and Costa Rica. What is this replying to? What did I say that contradicted this or suggested otherwise, or merited a re-run of "everything wrong with health care in the US" as if I disagreed? I was addressing a specific fallacy, not somehow claiming that everything the US is wine and roses.

ewzimm 10y ago
That low ranking is related to the first thing you're saying. It's what drives advocates of national health care, not the idea that nobody will die. When people are talking about deaths of people who can't afford health care, they're talking about people who don't have the resources to ever get care, the people who don't catch things in the early stages when they're easily treatable and find out too late that their condition has become terminal. The point of national health care isn't to eliminate all treatable deaths no matter how expensive, it's to improve care and accessibility so that it's in a place that aligns with the resources society could reasonably support. When we look at much poorer nations being able to provide much better care, we see that there's a problem that needs to be addressed. That's what people are talking about, not eliminating all deaths.
- SilasX 10y ago
  Those are all great, subtle distinctions to make. They're also completely different arguments from, and not at all conveyed by "lol poor people die from lacking health care in the US but not Europe".