Rights vs. Responsibility, a Health Care question

Status
Not open for further replies.

dclary

Unabashed Mercenary
Poetry Book Collaborator
Requiescat In Pace
Registered
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
13,050
Reaction score
3,524
Age
55
Website
www.trumpstump2016.com
Today, as I enjoyed my morning shower, I thought to myself, "I wonder how much this shower is going to cost me."

I did so, because I'm in a new house, in the mountains, where my water provider is considered a "small provider" and can charge jacked up rates by the public utilities commission to stay viable, and where I have to use propane to heat my water, and the propane company's rates are exorbitant.

As a result, the more times I shower, the higher my water and propane bill will be. It's my responsibility to stay clean, and it's my responsibility to ensure that I dedicate a portion of my paycheck to ensuring I can afford as much water and heat as it takes to stay clean.

That's how utilities (and, in fact, almost everything) in America works: the more of something you use, the more you'll pay for it. We are a usage-based nation, which is practical and makes sense. People who use very little pay very little. People who use a lot pay a lot more.



Today in America, there's a growing debate over whether a person's healthcare should be their personal responsibility, or if it should be a birthright of American citizenship. In our history, it's been a responsibility. Now a growing number of people believe otherwise, for varying reasons, but mostly because they don't feel lower incomed people should be required to be responsible for their own lives.

If the government socializes medicine, what comes next? Surely electricity is something every American needs, right? I can't even imagine living without it. But if healthcare should be run and meted out by the government, shouldn't electricity too?

And water. Water is a vital component to life itself. Everyone in America accepts the basic fact that we each have to pay for the amount of water we use. But shouldn't the ability to drink, and to clean, and to keep our lawns alive be a fundamental right of all Americans? Shouldn't the government take over all the water utilities?

When does it end? Government-supplying of automobiles, internet service, cell phones, satellite tv, tivo?

At what point, once we start declaring everything a person has to be responsible for a basic service that the government must provide, do we stop?

The power to choose is the ultimate freedom. Once the government takes total responsibility for our well-being... then aren't we just serfs again? Won't we have given away everything that was ever truly important, in the name of comfort, in the guise of safety?
 

James81

Great Scott Member
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
5,239
Reaction score
1,017
The power to choose is the ultimate freedom. Once the government takes total responsibility for our well-being... then aren't we just serfs again? Won't we have given away everything that was ever truly important, in the name of comfort, in the guise of safety?

There will still be the power to choose under a national healthcare plan. If you want to keep your private plan, you may do so. In fact, since the government will be providing cheap healthcare, it will keep your private insurance plan costs from skyrocketing like they are currently doing, so you'll get your private insurance for cheaper than you would have if the national healthcare plan hadn't been introduced.

Look at it this way...Social Security is a nationalized retirement plan (that most people your age defend to the death, I might add). Has the government introducing it's own retirement plan fucked up the private retirement options? No.
 

MattW

Company Man
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
6,326
Reaction score
855
There is no question that healthcare is outrageously expensive for many services, but instead of trying to repair the hodge-podge of regualtions, policies, laws, providers, and industries that separate patients from doctors, we are just going to put a blanket fix over it all by ignoring the problems of how it got where it is.
 

MattW

Company Man
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
6,326
Reaction score
855
Look at it this way...Social Security is a nationalized retirement plan
Your own example is possibly the worst you could have picked. SS is not a retirement plan intended to cover everyone, and after decades of misunderstanding, most people are starting to realize that now. We will have generations of people paying in with zero benefit - they have to cover their own retirement while funding others who don't.

And the mismanagement and raiding of funds won't be limited to SS once we have a mountain of taxpayer cash that is supposed to be reserved for Healthcare.
 

Gretad08

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
2,842
Reaction score
494
Location
A really cool place
There will still be the power to choose under a national healthcare plan. If you want to keep your private plan, you may do so. In fact, since the government will be providing cheap healthcare, it will keep your private insurance plan costs from skyrocketing like they are currently doing, so you'll get your private insurance for cheaper than you would have if the national healthcare plan hadn't been introduced.

Look at it this way...Social Security is a nationalized retirement plan (that most people your age defend to the death, I might add). Has the government introducing it's own retirement plan fucked up the private retirement options? No.


Aren't we all required to pay into social security?

If I keep my own personal healthcare plan will I still be required to pay into the government sponsored plan? Of course I will.

The money has to come from someone. Doctors and hospitals still have to be paid even and since you can't take money from people that don't have it, it will have to come from those that draw a regular paycheck.
 

James81

Great Scott Member
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
5,239
Reaction score
1,017
Your own example is possibly the worst you could have picked. SS is not a retirement plan intended to cover everyone, and after decades of misunderstanding, most people are starting to realize that now. We will have generations of people paying in with zero benefit - they have to cover their own retirement while funding others who don't.

The national healthcare plan is not intended to cover everyone either. Only those who decide to pay for the premium.

Aren't we all required to pay into social security?

If I keep my own personal healthcare plan will I still be required to pay into the government sponsored plan? Of course I will.

The money has to come from someone. Doctors and hospitals still have to be paid even and since you can't take money from people that don't have it, it will have to come from those that draw a regular paycheck.

No, you won't be required to purchase the government sponsored plan. The money will come from those who want to pay the premium.
 

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,833
Location
Limbo
The question is a complex one.

Reality is, the majority of the populace cannot afford healthcare given any serious event. Healthcare is the #1 reason people declare bankruptcy.

I think it is an oversimplification to say, "Hey, its your responsibility"

Why? Well here is one reason: Tax dollars subsidize the healthcare industry, therefore tax payers should be entitled to the use of an industry their dollars help subsidize.

But I think that MattW has the right of it. The real impetus should be placed on fixing the system and making it cheaper instead of just dipping into the trough and grabbing feed for everybody.

Personally, I take a broader view on this healthcare issue and see it more than just a problem at the individual level. This issue is one of the 'negative' factors that puts our entire economy at risk.

Whenever someone declares bankruptcy, it puts an undo strain on the entire economy. Healthcare is the #1 reason people declare bankruptcy. Seems to me that on this basis alone, we should view this as a National problem and not just a "hey Mr. Individual, you are not responisble with your money" problem.

Mel...
 

dclary

Unabashed Mercenary
Poetry Book Collaborator
Requiescat In Pace
Registered
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
13,050
Reaction score
3,524
Age
55
Website
www.trumpstump2016.com
Look at it this way...Social Security is a nationalized retirement plan (that most people your age defend to the death, I might add). Has the government introducing it's own retirement plan fucked up the private retirement options? No.

Um, yeah. It has. Big time. And *most* people my age support privatized retirement. I'm a gen-X'er, not a boomer.

I have $200 a paycheck taken out and thrown into social security, the world's largest ponzi scheme. The money I'm putting into social security is paying for the people who bought into the scheme a generation before me. The next generation will have to pay for mine... but what happens when the cost of supporting the system becomes too high for the new generation? They'll eventually cut it, and all of us who paid into the scheme will be fucked, and all that money I gave will be gone.

1/3 of Obama's 2010 budget is dedicated to Social Security. A THIRD of the federal budget. How much more, how better served by our nation in things they *need* to provide (because we cannot) would we have been able to have as a nation if we weren't pouring money into a hole Americans should have been digging for themselves?
 

Gretad08

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
2,842
Reaction score
494
Location
A really cool place
The national healthcare plan is not intended to cover everyone either. Only those who decide to pay for the premium.



No, you won't be required to purchase the government sponsored plan. The money will come from those who want to pay the premium.


I swear, I'm not being snarky, but can you show me a link that explains this?

I've heard a lot of ideas tossed about from politicians, but never a concrete plan.
 

James81

Great Scott Member
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
5,239
Reaction score
1,017
You honestly believe that, don't you?

Wow.

I can only believe what they pitch to us. And I can only support things based on what is pitched to us.

If there is some ultra secret Illuminati plan that is lying to us that will get switched up, I can't control that. I can bitch about it if it happens, but until then I'll support or reject the plan as it's pitched.
 

dclary

Unabashed Mercenary
Poetry Book Collaborator
Requiescat In Pace
Registered
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
13,050
Reaction score
3,524
Age
55
Website
www.trumpstump2016.com
The question is a complex one.

Reality is, the majority of the populace cannot afford healthcare given any serious event. Healthcare is the #1 reason people declare bankruptcy.

I think it is an oversimplification to say, "Hey, its your responsibility"

Why? Well here is one reason: Tax dollars subsidize the healthcare industry, therefore tax payers should be entitled to the use of an industry their dollars help subsidize.

But I think that MattW has the right of it. The real impetus should be placed on fixing the system and making it cheaper instead of just dipping into the trough and grabbing feed for everybody.

Personally, I take a broader view on this healthcare issue and see it more than just a problem at the individual level. This issue is one of the 'negative' factors that puts our entire economy at risk.

Whenever someone declares bankruptcy, it puts an undo strain on the entire economy. Healthcare is the #1 reason people declare bankruptcy. Seems to me that on this basis alone, we should view this as a National problem and not just a "hey Mr. Individual, you are not responisble with your money" problem.

Mel...

I can appreciate that Mel. I just fear that this is the first, big, massive step toward a totalitarian socialist state. Am I wrong for thinking this? Is there a way to fix healthcare that does not involve requiring people to pay for the care of others?
 

dclary

Unabashed Mercenary
Poetry Book Collaborator
Requiescat In Pace
Registered
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
13,050
Reaction score
3,524
Age
55
Website
www.trumpstump2016.com
I can only believe what they pitch to us. And I can only support things based on what is pitched to us.

If there is some ultra secret Illuminati plan that is lying to us that will get switched up, I can't control that. I can bitch about it if it happens, but until then I'll support or reject the plan as it's pitched.

Dude.

I mean.

Dude.

Has there *ever* in the history of mankind been a time when what government promised *ever* equalled what it delivered?
 

Contemplative

AW Addict
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
515
Reaction score
132
The problem with healthcare is not only a class-based one, though that's certainly there.

Very steep health costs can come unexpectedly at any point in a person's life. The established American system has most people having periods of their life when they are desperately poor -- i.e., when going through college, or when temporarily unemployed. These people can only pay their own health costs by the charity of others -- and people shouldn't depend on charity for basic human needs.

People can also, though no fault or failed responsibility, accrue HUGE health costs that are essential to keep them alive, yet are beyond the ability of any one person. We, as a society, decide that everyone will take part in paying for those people's costs, because we know that there's a chance that tomorrow, we could be in the same situation.

Libertarians always talk about the government taking by force like it's some kind of bandit, to fund social programs -- but I say, there's no force in a voluntary collective. A nation is like a really large workers' collective in that people can choose to be members and embrace the laws, or choose to be members and try to reform the laws, or leave. Anybody that doesn't like paying taxes for Canada's socialized medical system is free to either leave Canada or vote a different party in. That's no more force than it's force for Microsoft to sue a worker who doesn't work, to get the revenue they paid to him back. Canada, like Microsoft, allows people to become members (citizens and employees, respectively) of its collective group provided they follow the rules, plain and simple.

There's no force in taxation. There's simply a collective saying, to live here you must make a choice and enter into a contract with us. If you want to live on the land in our borders, the land that by international law is ours, you must in turn accept the rates of taxation our laws set forth. Anybody that doesn't want to pay taxes can end the contract at any time they want, by leaving the nation. You can say that all nations have taxes -- but actually Somalia, for example, doesn't. You just have to provide your own everything, including self-defense -- fitting, for a country with no taxation.

You can complain that there's no nation that offers you exactly the citizenship contract you want -- but then again in a theoretical libertarian utopia, you could make exactly the same argument about the employment contracts you get offered. If you don't like any of them and voluntarily choose the least evil, is that really still force? At least with nations, unlike corporations, the terms of the contract are subject to the will of the majority.

Way I see it, the "taxation is theft" argument against social programs has always been a distortion pushed by people who refuse to acknowledge that a social contract is necessary and the majority of American voters aren't minarchists.
 

James81

Great Scott Member
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
5,239
Reaction score
1,017
Dude.

I mean.

Dude.

Has there *ever* in the history of mankind been a time when what government promised *ever* equalled what it delivered?

The way I see it, even if they are lying to us, I still think nationalizing healthcare is the better option than having the load of all healthcare being put on those of us who have insurance. yes, those of us who have insurance are not only footing our own healthcare, but also those who've filed bankruptcy on their healthcare plans as well.

Anything that drives the cost of healthcare DOWN and stops bankruptcy for medical reasons I am 100% on board with. I don't care if it's called the Hitler Plan.

But, the way the plan is pitched is a really good idea and would work really well if they implement it the way it is designed today.
 

James81

Great Scott Member
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
5,239
Reaction score
1,017
The way I see it, government healthcare plan should function just as a private healthcare plan.

There should be deductibles and copays and a monthly premium (that is cheap). That's all that needs done.

What that would do is essential quell the bankruptcies from the people who have no other choice because their medical bills are sky high and they weren't offered insurance.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
That's how utilities (and, in fact, almost everything) in America works: the more of something you use, the more you'll pay for it. We are a usage-based nation, which is practical and makes sense. People who use very little pay very little. People who use a lot pay a lot more.
Well you would think that, but here's an interesting glitch in California.

Cali is in a drought cycle, and there are legitimate concerns about there not being enough water to supply all the needs of the population. So, conservation is being pushed hard, as it should be. However, it turns out that in Norcal, at least, people have responded well, cutting their usage significantly. Unfortunately, since usage is down. that means the water district is receiving less revenue. They have a certain amount of fixed costs, like infrastructure maintainable, so they can't handle the drop in revenues. Their solution? Raise water rates.
Today in America, there's a growing debate over whether a person's healthcare should be their personal responsibility, or if it should be a birthright of American citizenship.. ' I

The power to choose is the ultimate freedom. Once the government takes total responsibility for our well-being... then aren't we just serfs again? Won't we have given away everything that was ever truly important, in the name of comfort, in the guise of safety?
I think your stretching here. The government is not proposing free health care -- they're proposing programs that would provide affordable insurance for those currently shut out of the health care system. They're not running health care; they're trying to move away from the profit driven insurance system we now have in place.

As far as health care being a right, are you saying that the wealthy deserve to live better and longer lives because they're smart enough or lucky enough to have acquired money? Should children be shut out of life saving health treatment, because their parents are poor?

You can use the "but where will it end argument" for absolutely anything, and show how any system, when taken to its logical extreme, becomes absurd.

The US currently has the most expensive heath care system in the world, but ranks well below many other countries in terms of life expectancy, infant mortality, and most other benchmarks of a healthy populace.
Although nearly 46 million Americans are uninsured, the United States spends more on health care than other industrialized nations, and those countries provide health insurance to all their citizens.

Plus, the expenses are rising, year after year. Our current system is unsustainable.
A recent study by Harvard University researchers found that the average out-of-pocket medical debt for those who filed for bankruptcy was $12,000. The study noted that 68 percent of those who filed for bankruptcy had health insurance. In addition, the study found that 50 percent of all bankruptcy filings were partly the result of medical expenses.

A solution that simply says, everyone needs to be responsible for their own situation and the government should play no part in it is, in fact, no solution at all.

http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml
 

MattW

Company Man
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
6,326
Reaction score
855
Contemplative said:
There's no force in taxation. There's simply a collective saying, to live here you must make a choice and enter into a contract with us. If you want to live on the land in our borders, the land that by international law is ours, you must in turn accept the rates of taxation our laws set forth. Anybody that doesn't want to pay taxes can end the contract at any time they want, by leaving the nation.
Taxation of the smaller, wealthier group to fund the demands of the larger, poorer group does amount to theft. The "contract" you spoke of is being distorted by mob tyranny based on their own selfish wants, and the brunt of the payment is on the shoulders of the minority.

Saying they can afford it doesn't negate any of the inequalities. Social programs will keep popping up until there are no wealthy to demonize, and the trough dries up because no one wants to work for anything, yet they expect everything.

It will not stop with healthcare or retirement.
 
Last edited:

Devil Ledbetter

Come on you stranger, you legend,
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
9,767
Reaction score
3,936
Location
you martyr and shine.
Healthcare itself is ridiculously overpriced. Therein lies the real problem that our politicians are terrified to address.

Take a good look at a hospital bill and see what they charge for a band-aid or a single, regular strength ibuprofin tablet. We've gotten so used to the idea of healthcare costing so much that we've lost sight of the fact that we're not getting anything like our money's worth out of it.

Doctors used to have a little more money than the rest of us. Maybe they lived in the brick house on the nice end of our street. Maybe they had built in pool. Now where are they? Gated communities? Taking the family on European vacations, etc. The whole thing is a racket, and it all started with insurance paying our medical bills so we didn't have to feel the pain of them.

In hospitals, the majority of the "care" is carried out by nurses - who are paid far less than doctors - and aids, who are paid far less than nurses. Yet they still charge us as though the highest paid, most wonderfully educated doctor is doing all of the care. The entire system is screwed up, and national healthcare coverage isn't going to fix it.
 

MattW

Company Man
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
6,326
Reaction score
855
The entire system is screwed up, and national healthcare coverage isn't going to fix it.
But it plays well during election cycles, and that matters more than the health of voters.
 

KCathy

Writer when I grow up
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 27, 2007
Messages
471
Reaction score
110
Location
Oregon Coast
Website
www.catherinebusinelle.com
Healthcare itself is ridiculously overpriced. Therein lies the real problem that our politicians are terrified to address.

When I lived in Ecuador, I ended up in the emergency room four times due to a breathing problem and ended up paying less than $100 total for it.

Back in the US, when my husband (who works 60 to 80 hours a week, by the way, and is no lazy mooch trying to steal from the rich) ended up in the ER here, and then having his gall bladder removed, we ended up with a $3,000 bill. That's what our already too-broke-to-afford-health-insurance-that-didn't-cover-JACK family makes in six weeks.

Now we're paying 10% of our monthly income to barely cover interest on that debt, money, by the way, that we can't use for insurance. Or diapers and food. Only to be looked down on by people who work 40 hours a week and assume that we must have done something to deserve to be poor. After all, they work hard and have money.

I know we have better quality health care in the US than in Ecuador, BELIEVE me. But I don't buy that it has to cost 50 TIMES as much. Sorry.

I've voted Republican all my life and believe STRONGLY in personal responsibility, but it gets hard to accept that I'm just not working hard enough when health insurance that covers any procedure under $1,000 (like visits to the doctor when we're sick or medicine for my children) would cost literally a THIRD of our income.

It's kind of hard to listen to someone complain about having to pay taxes that are still a significantly smaller portion of their income than mine are when last week I literally couldn't afford to buy my kids cough syrup when they couldn't sleep for coughing. It's so easy to rant about being forced to pay for others' care when you don't have to limit your restaurant trips, much less decide you can't afford to take your coughing child to the doctor.

I went to college. I waited six years after marriage to have kids so my husband and I would be able to provide for them without needing help. He got a fantastic job that would enable us to have kids and lost it through no fault of his own after it was a little late to put them back. We aren't lazy. We didn't make horrible choices. We just can't afford life-saving medical care because our medical system is messed up.

Saying medical care isn't affordable is the biggest understatement I've ever heard. When my grocery budget is $200 a month ($150 on a tight month), how on earth do I squeeze in taking three sick kids to the doctor at $50 a child and another $10 each for medicine? Just not eat? Is that enough responsibility to teach me my lesson and get me to try harder?

Don't you dare talk to me about taking responsibility. What the hell more do you think I'm supposed to do?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.