The Case Against Universal Healthcare

[lovemeorhateme]

In the past I've always been an advocate for universal healthcare here on TOL as many of you know. Coming from a country which has universal healthcare, it baffles me that so many would be against such a system.

Instead of presenting the case here as to why I believe in universal healthcare, I thought it would make a more interesting thread to invite those of you who disagree with universal healthcare to present your case as to why you believe it is wrong.

What do you believe about the principle of healthcare which is free to all at point of need? Why do you have that belief? Do you believe that those who cannot afford it should be entitled to less healthcare than those who can? What do you believe is the correct Christian view on it?

 

[shagster01]

I'm against it completely. However, I'd budge a little if our taxes were only covering genetic diseases or no-fault problems.

But if you chose to smoke or eat big macs your whole life why do I have to pay for the related health problems?

 

[Arthur Brain]

I'm against it completely. However, I'd budge a little if our taxes were only covering genetic diseases or no-fault problems.

But if you chose to smoke or eat big macs your whole life why do I have to pay for the related health problems?

Do you live a life where you don't indulge in any sort of unhealthy diet or behaviour at all?

:think:

 

[shagster01]

Do you live a life where you don't indulge in any sort of unhealthy diet or behaviour at all?

:think:

Of course not. I do live a very healthy lifestyle, but I eat more sugar than I should. I'm enjoying a wheat beer right now, as a matter of fact.

But I don't think you should have to pay for any resulting health problems of my behavior either. That is the whole premise of not supporting universal health care.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Of course not. I do live a very healthy lifestyle, but I eat more sugar than I should. I'm enjoying a wheat beer right now, as a matter of fact.

But I don't think you should have to pay for any resulting health problems of my behavior either. That is the whole premise of not supporting universal health care.

So where do you draw the line then? Supposing it comes down to actual sugar intake that determines whether a person is deserving of health care? I'd sooner a society had provision for all instead of a 'morality test' for treatment...

 

[shagster01]

So where do you draw the line then? Supposing it comes down to actual sugar intake that determines whether a person is deserving of health care? I'd sooner a society had provision for all instead of a 'morality test' for treatment...

That is not what I'm saying at all.

I don't mind chipping in for a birth defect or something, but day to day health is your own responsibility.

If that's still too gray for you, then let's just get rid of it all.

 

[Arthur Brain]

That is not what I'm saying at all.

I don't mind chipping in for a birth defect or something, but day to day health is your own responsibility.

If that's still too gray for you, then let's just get rid of it all.

So, what of people who fall ill because they haven't ate enough recommended vegetables or fibre within any given month? Are you so morally superior that you can ordain just who should and shouldn't be "deserving" of medical treatment? You get stick here for apparently smoking pot. I don't care if you do or don't as regardless I'd support you having care either way if you were to become ill.

 

[quip]

I'm against it completely. However, I'd budge a little if our taxes were only covering genetic diseases or no-fault problems.

But if you chose to smoke or eat big macs your whole life why do I have to pay for the related health problems?

The same reason you pay taxes on roads and schools you'll never use.

 

[rocketman]

In the past I've always been an advocate for universal healthcare here on TOL as many of you know. Coming from a country which has universal healthcare, it baffles me that so many would be against such a system.

Instead of presenting the case here as to why I believe in universal healthcare, I thought it would make a more interesting thread to invite those of you who disagree with universal healthcare to present your case as to why you believe it is wrong.

What do you believe about the principle of healthcare which is free to all at point of need? Why do you have that belief? Do you believe that those who cannot afford it should be entitled to less healthcare than those who can? What do you believe is the correct Christian view on it?

I am against it LMOHM, for the simple fact that it intrudes on my liberty, let me explain. I pay a premium for the health care plan that I have for myself & family and it is such that I pay a very small co-pay for anything that we may need, no deductible, no questions asked just first class service. I had my appendix removed last year so, it was emergency room, hospital stay, surgery, drugs, etc. I paid $100 out of pocket, the rest was covered. Now, I do not feel I need to pay the government, ask the governments permission, or justify anything to receive the level of care I want, I will pay for it and I do not feel that I should have to pay more so some other person's family can have the same level of care I have, I have the liberty to choose what I want, for the price I am willing to pay. I know in a socialist country as yours that the state has set up a plan and you agree to pay higher taxes to support it but, by doing so you have resigned your liberty to the state in lieu of a service, no? Nothing is free and I feel no moral obligation to provide for anyones needs but, my own family...period. People have an obligation to provide for their own families as well but, that does not somehow magically become my responsibility. It may be a forgone conclusion that America will eventually set up a system such as your own in the UK but, it would have to be a better design than the Obamacare failure to get it done here that is for sure.

 

[Rusha]

What do you believe about the principle of healthcare which is free to all at point of need? Why do you have that belief? Do you believe that those who cannot afford it should be entitled to less healthcare than those who can?

I am PRO-universal healthcare regardless of the fact that some people do cause their own illnesses.

I would draw the line at most elective procedures, depending on the circumstances.

 

[patrick jane]

the government should offer free medical school education and training to every citizen, then we could all treat our own families. JK

 

[Arthur Brain]

I am against it LMOHM, for the simple fact that it intrudes on my liberty, let me explain. I pay a premium for the health care plan that I have for myself & family and it is such that I pay a very small co-pay for anything that we may need, no deductible, no questions asked just first class service. I had my appendix removed last year so, it was emergency room, hospital stay, surgery, drugs, etc. I paid $100 out of pocket, the rest was covered. Now, I do not feel I need to pay the government, ask the governments permission, or justify anything to receive the level of care I want, I will pay for it and I do not feel that I should have to pay more so some other person's family can have the same level of care I have, I have the liberty to choose what I want, for the price I am willing to pay. I know in a socialist country as yours that the state has set up a plan and you agree to pay higher taxes to support it but, by doing so you have resigned your liberty to the state in lieu of a service, no? Nothing is free and I feel no moral obligation to provide for anyones needs but, my own family...period. People have an obligation to provide for their own families as well but, that does not somehow magically become my responsibility. It may be a forgone conclusion that America will eventually set up a system such as your own in the UK but, it would have to be a better design than the Obamacare failure to get it done here that is for sure.

Er, the UK is not a "socialist" country RM.

 

[patrick jane]

Er, the UK is not a "socialist" country RM.

i noticed that . i think he was being sarcastic ? - atrol:

 

[Morpheus]

I am against it LMOHM, for the simple fact that it intrudes on my liberty, let me explain. I pay a premium for the health care plan that I have for myself & family and it is such that I pay a very small co-pay for anything that we may need, no deductible, no questions asked just first class service. I had my appendix removed last year so, it was emergency room, hospital stay, surgery, drugs, etc. I paid $100 out of pocket, the rest was covered. Now, I do not feel I need to pay the government, ask the governments permission, or justify anything to receive the level of care I want, I will pay for it and I do not feel that I should have to pay more so some other person's family can have the same level of care I have, I have the liberty to choose what I want, for the price I am willing to pay. I know in a socialist country as yours that the state has set up a plan and you agree to pay higher taxes to support it but, by doing so you have resigned your liberty to the state in lieu of a service, no? Nothing is free and I feel no moral obligation to provide for anyones needs but, my own family...period. People have an obligation to provide for their own families as well but, that does not somehow magically become my responsibility. It may be a forgone conclusion that America will eventually set up a system such as your own in the UK but, it would have to be a better design than the Obamacare failure to get it done here that is for sure.

You might just want to remove the Christian tag from your profile then.

Matthew 25:31-46
The Judgment
31 “But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; 33 and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; 36 naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 38 And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 39 When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’

41 “Then He will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; 43 I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’ 44 Then they themselves also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not [e]take care of You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

The "goats" will believe that they are "saved", but they have deluded themselves. By ignoring and rejecting the needs of others you are ignoring and rejecting Jesus. If you don't love others enough to care for their physical and emotional needs, then you don't truly love Christ. If that isn't "moral obligation" enough for you then what is?

James 2:14-20
14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can [n]that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, [o]be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is [p]dead, being by itself.

18 But someone [q]may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19 You believe that [r]God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?

 

[Morpheus]

i noticed that . i think he was being sarcastic ? - atrol:

Actually I believe that he thinks that any country that provides any services beyond defense is socialist. Come on; he thinks Christianity = self-interest. Grasping concepts is not one of his strengths.

 

[Tinark]

Of course not. I do live a very healthy lifestyle, but I eat more sugar than I should. I'm enjoying a wheat beer right now, as a matter of fact.

But I don't think you should have to pay for any resulting health problems of my behavior either. That is the whole premise of not supporting universal health care.

If you end up being unlucky to the point where the alcohol in the wheat beer you are drinking triggers a cancer in your esophagus, and you are either unable to pay for the treatment and/or your insurance doesn't cover the treatment, should you just be left to die and suffer unless you are fortunate enough to have connections to obtain the charity of others (which may still not be enough for adequate treatment)?

 

[Tinark]

I am against it LMOHM, for the simple fact that it intrudes on my liberty, let me explain. I pay a premium for the health care plan that I have for myself & family and it is such that I pay a very small co-pay for anything that we may need, no deductible, no questions asked just first class service. I had my appendix removed last year so, it was emergency room, hospital stay, surgery, drugs, etc. I paid $100 out of pocket, the rest was covered. Now, I do not feel I need to pay the government, ask the governments permission, or justify anything to receive the level of care I want, I will pay for it and I do not feel that I should have to pay more so some other person's family can have the same level of care I have, I have the liberty to choose what I want, for the price I am willing to pay. I know in a socialist country as yours that the state has set up a plan and you agree to pay higher taxes to support it but, by doing so you have resigned your liberty to the state in lieu of a service, no? Nothing is free and I feel no moral obligation to provide for anyones needs but, my own family...period. People have an obligation to provide for their own families as well but, that does not somehow magically become my responsibility. It may be a forgone conclusion that America will eventually set up a system such as your own in the UK but, it would have to be a better design than the Obamacare failure to get it done here that is for sure.

"I'm a responsible person, I've got mine, me and my family are taken care of, screw everyone else"

 

[Tinark]

i noticed that . i think he was being sarcastic ? - atrol:

There is a rampant problem among the right to call everything they disagree with politically either Nazi, Socialism or Communism, and all of it is Left-Wing. It's like a reflex.

They have an inability to understand nuance and definitions of words. Their use of words leaves no room to understand the extreme differences between UK and Soviet Russia. It's all one and the same from their point of view. To those who do understand some of the core differences between the two, one can either :bang: or just :rotfl: at the ignorance on display.

 

[shagster01]

If you end up being unlucky to the point where the alcohol in the wheat beer you are drinking triggers a cancer in your esophagus, and you are either unable to pay for the treatment and/or your insurance doesn't cover the treatment, should you just be left to die and suffer unless you are fortunate enough to have connections to obtain the charity of others (which may still not be enough for adequate treatment)?

I see your MO is going to try to appeal to my heart by making it personal.

But yes, I do think that. It's been that way for thousands of years. I would gladly accept donations, and fight as hard as I could to overcome. But I don't think people should be legally obligated to pay for my problems.

I know you don't understand personal responsibility and luck of the draw, but they are real none the less.

 

[Morpheus]

I see your MO is going to try to appeal to my heart by making it personal.

But yes, I do think that. It's been that way for thousands of years. I would gladly accept donations, and fight as hard as I could to overcome. But I don't think people should be legally obligated to pay for my problems.

I know you don't understand personal responsibility and luck of the draw, but they are real none the less.

I understand personal responsibility and luck of the draw. I also realize that no matter how responsible people are luck of the draw trumps it at times. That is the whole purpose of universal healthcare. It's the whole purpose of Social Security, including disability and survivor benefits. It's the whole purpose of unemployment benefits. We are a society. As a society we recognize that when some suffer it affects us all. We can either work together to alleviate much of the suffering, or we all turn our backs on the suffering, allowing our elderly to starve, leaving our disabled to fend for themselves, and put our orphans into workhouses. But by ignoring those needs it makes our entire society as sick, callous and twisted as those individuals who can blithely watch others starve during their lobster dinner. That sickness will eventually kill the society. When everyone is forced to fight, scratch and claw to survive, nobody ever actually thrives. The goodness of life is destroyed in all the fighting.

The idea of "a rising tide lifts all boats" has been proven false. By trying to climb on each other to keep our heads above water most end up drowning. When we all work together to lift each other up, everyone survives. If one gets weak, those who are stronger hold them up until they recover. Then when you have your moment of weakness there will be others there to keep you afloat. That is what society is all about. Otherwise just do away with governments and law and let the mayhem begin.

[Edit] Part of personal responsibility is realizing how my success is due to the health of the society. Those of us who have succeeded have a greater personal debt to the society that facilitated our success. When we reach a particular level we shouldn't pull up the ladder. Instead we should finance an elevator to make it easier for others to join us. Hoarding is ultimately destructive, while sharing facilitates growth, which, in the long run, brings us greater personal return.