3 ms·

I tried then, and I've tried in the years since, but I simply cannot understand where they're coming from. How anyone can support a healthcare system in this da

I tried then, and I've tried in the years since, but I simply cannot understand where they're coming from. How anyone can support a healthcare system in this day & age that can, and does, bankrupt or refuse to treat people.. I just can't understand it. I find it curious and odd that you can't understand another philosophy on the role of government and the individual.

hcayless 14y ago
I can't understand it. It seems to me to combine selfishness and short-sightedness in equal measure. "I'm all right, I have insurance" plus "I'll never be faced by a health crisis greater than my plans will handle." You might be right, and good for you if you are, but God help you if you aren't. I guess I understand the philosophical argument, from a purely logical perspective, that an individual must stand or fall on their own. But I don't get how people can seriously hold that opinion without living in a cabin in the woods, or in a bubble.
wybo 14y ago
This is not about the role of government and the individual. This is about healthcare, something fundamental that every human being needs. For which it cannot be predicted when one needs it, and where need can vary greatly through (in by far most cases) no fault of people themselves (an unpredictable unelastic good). Such matters - often literally of life and death - are not something that ever could be trumped by philosophies about 'roles'. Yes the market works well in most other spheres, yes economic freedoms are important, but no, economic freedoms (or justice) do not trump human life and death, where avoidable (in a civilized society). Economic freedom is just one of the many things people need for happyness. Health and healthcare are another, that is at least as important. And thus the value of economic freedom needs to be balanced out against healthcare. The government just is the mediator. Taxing one sphere of life (economic activity) to ensure justice and security in another that fares better if guided by other principles than profit extracted from individual patients. (individual GPs do profit in the UK system. They, for example, get a bonus if they can make a patient stop smoking, etc. ...speaking of preventative healthcare. They just have less incentive to exploit individual patients (by having them come back later with lung cancer for example) and then charge them to their limit)

hcayless 14y ago

I can't understand it. It seems to me to combine selfishness and short-sightedness in equal measure. "I'm all right, I have insurance" plus "I'll never be faced by a health crisis greater than my plans will handle." You might be right, and good for you if you are, but God help you if you aren't. I guess I understand the philosophical argument, from a purely logical perspective, that an individual must stand or fall on their own. But I don't get how people can seriously hold that opinion without living in a cabin in the woods, or in a bubble.

wybo 14y ago

This is not about the role of government and the individual. This is about healthcare, something fundamental that every human being needs. For which it cannot be predicted when one needs it, and where need can vary greatly through (in by far most cases) no fault of people themselves (an unpredictable unelastic good). Such matters - often literally of life and death - are not something that ever could be trumped by philosophies about 'roles'. Yes the market works well in most other spheres, yes economic freedoms are important, but no, economic freedoms (or justice) do not trump human life and death, where avoidable (in a civilized society). Economic freedom is just one of the many things people need for happyness. Health and healthcare are another, that is at least as important. And thus the value of economic freedom needs to be balanced out against healthcare. The government just is the mediator. Taxing one sphere of life (economic activity) to ensure justice and security in another that fares better if guided by other principles than profit extracted from individual patients. (individual GPs do profit in the UK system. They, for example, get a bonus if they can make a patient stop smoking, etc. ...speaking of preventative healthcare. They just have less incentive to exploit individual patients (by having them come back later with lung cancer for example) and then charge them to their limit)