First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply Why do people have a problem with healthcare being a right?
17161 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 2/2/17

ninjitsuko wrote:


descloud wrote:

Since when does someone have a 'right' to another persons hard earn labor?

This is the damn problem right here. People don't want to work for their own things. They want to leech off others because it's far easier to tax those who are doing well and using it to pay for some lazy ass collecting welfare checks. No, this crap needs to end and people need to start taking responsibly for their own problems.


Like I said, it's not "another person's hard earned labor".
Healthcare is basically keeping people alive, no? So if someone has free healthcare and continue to stay healthy, they can work longer and continue to provide more to the federal government.

But, that's just a theory. If we lower a number of social programs, sort out proper healthcare, and a means of getting people back into the workforce ... I'm pretty sure it would work out in the long run.


Hmm okay let's outline the problems with 'free' healthcare specifically obamacare.

-Premiums skyrocketing
-Deductables increasing
-Higher waiting times in emergency rooms(how ironic)
-Shortage of primary doctors
-Increasing the debt problem

One way or another. The good it does is NOT outweighing the bad, not by a long shot. It's dragging down the country and needs to go.
453 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/2/17

octorockandroll wrote:


Tyrconnell wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Where i live it is a right and i always find it funny when people say it shouldn't or can't be a right.

I get its to do with the whole Capatalism > Socialism thing but why do you care if some other country has healthcare as a right?

I see people like the thread that was just closed going on how its not a right anywhere ...well it is and if you don't like it why just not goto countries where it is a right and not force others to go along with "Healthcare can't be a right"

Sorry just wanted to say this as i am SICK of seeing people say it.



In my case it's a question of Freedom, if healthcare is a right, then those who provide it cannot be free people. To declare healthcare a right requires that someone else , under penalty of law do something for you. You have no true right to claim any part of another person's life without their consent.


Are you living in a country with socialized healthcare? If so, then that is your consent.


Did everyone living in the U.S.S.R. consent with the gulags and the KGB? Never allow anyone to be against a Governmental Diktat do you?

11638 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 2/2/17

Tyrconnell wrote:

Did everyone living in the U.S.S.R. consent with the gulags and the KGB? Never allow anyone to be against a Governmental Diktat do you?



Are you on drugs? I'm not saying that to be mean, I legitimately want to know seeing as that's the only reasonable explanation I can think of for that kind of response aside from pure unabashed ignorance.

You are honest to god comparing a free country where you may come and go as you please to an authoritarian society that traps those living in it and forces them to work against their will in apalling conditions? What are you on?
mxdan 
11140 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 2/2/17

ninjitsuko wrote:

To paraphrase most arguments against it:

"I work and I don't want my money going to someone who doesn't."


Which is also an argument for lacking empathy.

I honestly think it is a wide range of things... But at the end of the day a lot of people just don't give a shit about their fellow American. But they having no problem boasting about how much they just love this country.

If anything I think America is a masterclass in why complete and total self interest can have some pretty poisonous ramifications when you're a monkey whose brain revolves around social aspects.

Who would of thought.

43154 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / Memphis, TN
Offline
Posted 2/2/17 , edited 2/3/17
Speaking from a purely personal perspective, I would suggest that people become less empathetic as they become more put-upon: to wit, resentment is cumulative. I work two jobs, averaging about 14-16 hours of work daily. Despite this, there are things which I am unable to provide for my family, at least immediately. Yet I've seen my tax money go from providing food and housing for those whom the government considers underprivileged, to providing those same people with cell phones--cell phones! Certainly every child should grow up free from the ravages of hunger and exposure, but why am I paying for other folks' cell phones? And now I get to pay for their expanded insurance coverage as well, while my own premiums skyrocket because of it. . .

Honestly, I work in order to provide for my family. Beyond that, I give to the church and to certain other charitable organizations. But the government is not a charitable organization, nor are my tax dollars a charitable donation. Mind you, I'm not trying to tick anyone off, I'm merely offering an honest answer to the original question. These folks have the same right to go out and work and provide for themselves and their families as do I--perhaps that is the right about which society should be asking. . .
29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 2/2/17 , edited 2/2/17

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


ninjitsuko wrote:

To paraphrase most arguments against it:

"I work and I don't want my money going to someone who doesn't."


to fix your wording! " I don't want my money going to people capable of working but don't because it easer to manipulate the system, People who can't work is another story. If you hurt your back you can still work, their are desk jobs. " and Pay your own health care. "


This attitude is why I'm glad I'm not American...
51656 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M
Offline
Posted 2/2/17

descloud wrote:

Since when does someone have a 'right' to another persons hard earn labor?

This is the damn problem right here. People don't want to work for their own things. They want to leech off others because it's far easier to tax those who are doing well and using it to pay for some lazy ass collecting welfare checks. No, this crap needs to end and people need to start taking responsibly for their own problems.


Yes, like the Red States leaching off the Blue states.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/
Hey I guess by your logic that means that the Blue states should get to decide exactly how the federal government spends it's tax revenue, and those silly welfare states (Red States) should get ZERO input.
39100 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / M / Charlotte NC
Offline
Posted 2/2/17
It has to do with understanding that people will not work unless they are forced to and that giving people things they have not worked for is philosophically wrong. Governments should not give people things - anything the government gives you was taken from someone else and that is stealing. But yes other countries do not have to agree with me. I have no problem with other countries doing what ever. I care only about what my country does - other countries can kill themselves all they like - arguably better for mine if they do.
86866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
45 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 2/2/17 , edited 2/2/17

ninjitsuko wrote:


dougeprofile wrote:
It is really easy to "care" with someone else's money! You have a right to purchase healthcare ...but you don't have a right to force me to pay for it.


As I've said numerous times on this thread thus far:
With our current form of government, it is not your money.

You wouldn't be paying for anything, not with your own money. You'd be taxed all the same and money would be given to both federal and state governments. Unless you change how the government is structured altogether (moving us away from a democratic republic), you're not paying for squat even if there were a universal healthcare system that was governed by the US government.


Sounds like you suppors the government taking my money so that it becoes government money ...this i wll prevent as much as possible, because this is a republic. I don't mind paying taxes for what the government should be doing, like defense - health care is beyon the limits of what a government should do. The government is accountable to the people on how it spend their money.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:/

I argue that while not everyone needs a gun, that everyone here virtually needs a doctor. I suppose a compromise we can agree with is that healthcare should be provided to some extent to those who can't afford it?


Just like a person buys a gun when they determine one is needed, they can buy healthcare/insurance when they decide it is needed.I can see some case for a state providing assistance for the poorest among us but not the federal government; though even here if you really care for these people, start an organization to raise money to support them and spare the public purse; guaranteed, you would do a better job!
29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 2/2/17 , edited 2/2/17

zaldar wrote:

It has to do with understanding that people will not work unless they are forced to and that giving people things they have not worked for is philosophically wrong. Governments should not give people things - anything the government gives you was taken from someone else and that is stealing. But yes other countries do not have to agree with me. I have no problem with other countries doing what ever. I care only about what my country does - other countries can kill themselves all they like - arguably better for mine if they do.


"giving people things they have not worked for is philosophically wrong."

That is highly subjective even at a philosophical level i think its fine myself.

If a country requires you to pay taxes to benefit others that isn't stealing in my opinion you have the choice to leave if you don't agree with it.


dougeprofile wrote:


ninjitsuko wrote:


dougeprofile wrote:
It is really easy to "care" with someone else's money! You have a right to purchase healthcare ...but you don't have a right to force me to pay for it.


As I've said numerous times on this thread thus far:
With our current form of government, it is not your money.

You wouldn't be paying for anything, not with your own money. You'd be taxed all the same and money would be given to both federal and state governments. Unless you change how the government is structured altogether (moving us away from a democratic republic), you're not paying for squat even if there were a universal healthcare system that was governed by the US government.


Sounds like you suppors the government taking my money so that it becoes government money ...this i wll prevent as much as possible, because this is a republic. I don't mind paying taxes for what the government should be doing, like defense - health care is beyon the limits of what a government should do. The government is accountable to the people on how it spend their money.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:/

I argue that while not everyone needs a gun, that everyone here virtually needs a doctor. I suppose a compromise we can agree with is that healthcare should be provided to some extent to those who can't afford it?


Just like a person buys a gun when they determine one is needed, they can buy healthcare/insurance when they decide it is needed.I can see some case for a state providing assistance for the poorest among us but not the federal government; though even here if you really care for these people, start an organization to raise money to support them and spare the public purse; guaranteed, you would do a better job!



Healthcare being beyond the limits is highly subjective.
86866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
45 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 2/2/17 , edited 2/2/17
I prefer voting out those scoundrels, and voting in those who won't tax me to give to others ...of by and for the people. Healthcare being beyond the limits is not subjective ...the constitution does not give that power to the federal government, thus it remains with the states and the people.
29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 2/2/17

Tyrconnell wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

Where i live it is a right and i always find it funny when people say it shouldn't or can't be a right.

I get its to do with the whole Capatalism > Socialism thing but why do you care if some other country has healthcare as a right?

I see people like the thread that was just closed going on how its not a right anywhere ...well it is and if you don't like it why just not goto countries where it is a right and not force others to go along with "Healthcare can't be a right"

Sorry just wanted to say this as i am SICK of seeing people say it.



In my case it's a question of Freedom, if healthcare is a right, then those who provide it cannot be free people. To declare healthcare a right requires that someone else , under penalty of law do something for you. You have no true right to claim any part of another person's life without their consent.



Which if you don't like you can move countries, too much freedom is a bad thing everyone needs to work for eachother to survive as a society.
29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 2/2/17

dougeprofile wrote:

I prefer voting out those scoundrels, and voting in those who won't tax me to give to others ...of by and for the people. Healthcare being beyond the limits is not subjective ...the constitution does not give that power to the federal government, thus it remains with the states and the people.


I feel the other way if my country voted out those people i would move countries
86866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
45 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 2/2/17 , edited 2/2/17
Not allowing others to use the force of government to take my money for their own "noble" intentions is how to survive as a society; giving to charity is far mor effective as well. Rather than moving, there is this thing called al election to get rid of the parasites.

Just don't come here, we have enough of those kinds of people ...don't let the door hit you on the way out!
184 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M
Offline
Posted 2/2/17 , edited 7/18/17

ninjitsuko wrote:


descloud wrote:

Since when does someone have a 'right' to another persons hard earn labor?

This is the damn problem right here. People don't want to work for their own things. They want to leech off others because it's far easier to tax those who are doing well and using it to pay for some lazy ass collecting welfare checks. No, this crap needs to end and people need to start taking responsibly for their own problems.


Like I said, it's not "another person's hard earned labor".

Healthcare is basically keeping people alive, no? So if someone has free healthcare and continue to stay healthy, they can work longer and continue to provide more to the federal government.


This type of misguided collectivist thinking terrifies me when I think of how deeply it has taken root in impressionable minds. It essentially asserts the belief (with the determination to wield the full force of government in order to ensure the "consent" of all individuals) that each person is not in full possession/ownership of themselves and/or labor and the fruits thereof, but that "the people" and "the greater good" are placed in the hierarchy above the individual (inverted hierarchy of freedom) where the collective whole lays claim to the fruits of the individual, and "universal human rights" (collectivist entitlements) supersede individual natural rights (freedom of expression, personal liberty, ownership of oneself and the fruits of one's labor).

Your statement highlighted in red, no matter how you spin it, generalizes that the individual exists solely to provide for the collective whole and has no right to claim one's own labor and the fruits thereof. That is the very antithesis of liberty and that which this nation was founded upon, and there was a significant reason as to why this nation was founded on individual liberty, with safeguards to ensure liberty was forever a part of this nation. Although, over the past century, these safeguards have been continuously encroached and trampled upon by those with your mindset until enough legislation has been passed to effectively dilute individual liberty within this nation to the point where it is now almost indistinguishable from collectivism.

Not everyone agrees with the concept of forced taxation of personal income. There are those of us who believe forced taxation of an individual's labor (a necessity of providing for one's existence) is a form of theft and slavery to the State (or the collective whole). There was a significant period of time in this nation's history when there was no income tax, and we prospered and flourished without it. People were looked after and taken care of, not by the State, but by each other (and this tradition continues today in some circles). Healthcare was affordable at that time thanks to zero regulations by government in the healthcare industry. Doctors became doctors not solely through medical school diplomas, but through apprenticeships where they learned their profession from professionals in the line of duty, and "graduated" from learning and moved on to open their own practice when they had learned all they could, therefore they had no initial staggering sum of debt of which they had to repay through passing along the astronomical cost to the patient for a simple check-up (a couple of eggs or a side of salted pork was common payment at that time in some instances). There was no such thing as "health insurance" to be milked and abused triggering massively inflated pricing, neither could it be forced upon the people by a corrupt government under the guise of "for the greater good" and forced "charity". I work neither for you or the State, but for myself in order that I might take care of those who immediately depend on me, and if I have that which I may spare for others, I do so voluntarily while strictly managing my resources in a manner so as I might be able to provide for all without reducing the provisions of those who immediately rely upon me. I am an individual residing within a nation built of individuals, with individual needs and individual desires and individual aspirations. I am not beholden to any individual other than myself to provide for their needs, desires, and/or aspirations. If I do so, it is of my own free will. That is my natural right as a human, and cannot be superseded by any other rights. That is called freedom.

And there is no such thing as implied consent--you either consent or you don't. Implied consent means nothing more than "you do what I say because you have no other choice and because I say so." There is no such thing as implied consent in a free society, only in a collectivist society controlled by a centralized power through force and intimidation.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.