|
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
This is one of those topics where you and I always disagree, and it ultimately comes down to(as Neo pointed out) who will pay for these things? At what point do you think you your "right to life" supercedes another person's rights? It's easy for you to demand that the government simply provide these things since they have a monopoly on the use of force, nevermind who actually has to pay for this stuff. You're walking on a very slippery slope.
I like Neo's comment on the "right to life" vs. the "right to medicine". Using your logic...if a person has a right to life but needs a kidney to survive, and I just happen to have 2 of them...does said person therefore hold some claim to my other kidney because he has the explicit "right to life" regardless of context or circumstance? Your logic would imply that he is virtually entitled to my other kidney and I have no choice in the matter. |
This is simply the classic liberal vs. conservative ideological debate. In my opinion the government is supposed to be our collective good. We don't hire private militias to protect ourselves, we have a military that is to collectively protect us. We have the government build our roadways throughout the country, educate children and fight fires. We are all supposed to be represented by and own government, it is where we are all supposed to come together as a nation, so it is the most logical entity to pay for such services if needed, especially since it already does in life or death situations. If someone is shot right in front of a hospital and they stumble in looking for help, the hospitial cannot refuse them and the government already pays the health costs if the victim cannot afford it.
While I know the conservatives wont agree with me on this any more than I agree with them in most instances, there is one very strange point about the current U.S. healthcare system that simply doesn't make any sense. If someone has a good paying job with an excellent healthcare plan, when they get sick, they pay little out of their own pocket for high quality treatment. How does it make sense that a poor person who cannot afford health insurance can only chose to pay the entire medical cost on their own for low quality care, which ends up being more expensive, or let their illness worsen by not receiving treatment? It's really the most regressive system possble and defies the logic of capitalism, where normally. for example,a rich person pays more money for a better car and a poor person pays less for a less quality automobile.
As far as in poor communities, African-American, white or any other ones, the key to changing these numbers is to at least provide healthcare and quality education to children so that they can get out of the cycle of poverty and/or violence. Since many factors exist, these on their own would not solve the problems, but it would provide determined kids the opportunity to reach their fullest potential, gain quality employment and be able to afford quality healthcare on their own to ensure their longevity. I don't have the numbers in front of me,but I beleve the lifespan of all wealthy people,regardless of ethnicity, is far greater.
___________________
Download My Spring '08 Mix Here
Thurs May 15: Influence @ Tini Martini w/ Kris B. vs. Nosmo, Rikler & Mike Palmeri
Thurs June 5: Under the Influence @ Tini Martini w/Mathias Matthew, Jack Kim & more TBA
|
