 |
|
|
|
 |
kush paintings
Balance 005 Romantic
Registered: Jun 2004
Location:
|
|
|
Arbiter, I do agree with what your views in theory, but in reality you can't just say fuck off to all the idiots in a country and let them die off from their own stupidity. If the poor in the U.S. keep getting poorer (relatively speaking), than in the end it is going to hurt you and me, even though we were smart about our money and the choices we make. In the end, I would never want to see the U.S. go to an entirely public healthcare system, show me a government that effectively and efficently runs anything, let alone the U.S. government. I believe that the option of public and private healthcare would be great for our country, as you provide the poor with adequate healthcare, but allow for freedom and choice with the availability of private services.
___________________
Lost Souls
|
|
Jun-12-2005 01:40
|
|
|
 |
 |
Arbiter
Naked Power Organ

Registered: May 2002
Location:
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by kush paintings
Arbiter, I do agree with what your views in theory, but in reality you can't just say fuck off to all the idiots in a country and let them die off from their own stupidity. If the poor in the U.S. keep getting poorer (relatively speaking), than in the end it is going to hurt you and me, even though we were smart about our money and the choices we make. In the end, I would never want to see the U.S. go to an entirely public healthcare system, show me a government that effectively and efficently runs anything, let alone the U.S. government. I believe that the option of public and private healthcare would be great for our country, as you provide the poor with adequate healthcare, but allow for freedom and choice with the availability of private services. |
I'm not telling them to "fuck off," I'm telling them to take some personal responsibility and to deal with their own problems. In any case, they're going to die sooner or later, and I don't see what's particularly admirable about trying to extend their lives as long as possible. If they're afflicted with some condition that's going to kill them and they don't have the personal resources or ability to overcome it, then it's just their time as far as I'm concerned. It's better to die honorably than live as a parasite anyway, in my not-so-humble opinion.
The problem with a "choice" between public and private health care systems is twofold. First of all, it doesn't really offer any individual responsibility or individual freedom, since everybody is going to be paying for the public health care system with their tax dollars anyway. Secondly, it offers a false dichotomy: that the only two desirable options are public and private health care. I don't agree with this dichotomy at all, because I view health care (and all forms of insurance) as scams.
As far as I can see, "health care" is just another excuse for people not to take personal responsibility for their circumstances. If we want to build a stronger, more responsible society, then the last thing we should be doing is reducing people's incentive to be responsible by sheltering them from the natural penalties for irresponsibility.
|
|
Jun-12-2005 14:17
|
|
|
 |
 |
Arbiter
Naked Power Organ

Registered: May 2002
Location:
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by metalgearsolid
No thats not the attitude i am proud of. who would be? but it is NOT ALWAYS the fault of the patients. They come down with diseases that is in thier genes. That is not their fault or is it Arbiter? people are poor they might have work but that still isn't enough to pay all the bills especially when u r blue collar. But for u u believe u r right hey if ppl cant pay for health insurance they shouldn't be treated. You see arbiter it is a human right to have health insurance and if someone needs to be taken care off they should no matter what the cause is because it is whats right. |
Not paying other people's medical bills isn't some sort of "punishment." And so it's not a matter of whether their situation is their "fault" or not. It's a simple fact of life that sometimes good things are going to happen to you and sometimes bad things are going to happen to you. Enjoy the good things, overcome the bad things: that's what I call "living." When you can't overcome the bad anymore, you may die. That's the natural way of things. Tell me: what's so horrible about that?
You seem to be very confused about what "human rights" are and how they work. A right is not an entitlement. The right to life, for example, is not an entitlement to be provided with the means to live by society. If you need an organ donor, you can't force someone to give you a kidney because of your "right to life." Likewise, if you need health care, you can't force someone else to pay for it because of your "right to health care." This is because a "right to health care" is not an entitlement to be provided with the means to obtain health care by society. That is, quite simply, not how rights work. However, just out of curiosity, where exactly did you get the idea that "health care" is a "human right?" In particular, what is the philisophical basis for this "right?" I'm dying to know because as far as I can see there is no sound basis for such a right.
|
|
Jun-12-2005 14:36
|
|
|
 |
 |
Dervish
Your opinion matters.

Registered: Dec 2003
Location:
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
I'm not telling them to "fuck off," I'm telling them to take some personal responsibility and to deal with their own problems. In any case, they're going to die sooner or later, and I don't see what's particularly admirable about trying to extend their lives as long as possible. If they're afflicted with some condition that's going to kill them and they don't have the personal resources or ability to overcome it, then it's just their time as far as I'm concerned. It's better to die honorably than live as a parasite anyway, in my not-so-humble opinion. |
Ok so what you are saying is this: If someone doesn't have the resources, then that’s just tough?
How does that apply to a child? Presumably they can't pay for it, and if their parents can't? Are they at fault(the child)? Yes the parent is responsible for them but if they can't provide then I don't think the child should be penalised for that.
Even in the animal kingdom a group will look after less able members in some cases, hopefully we’ve managed to progress from that.
In your model of if you can’t pay just die what happens to orphans? Because their parents were weak they will be or something, so it’s natural selection?
| quote: | | As far as I can see, "health care" is just another excuse for people not to take personal responsibility for their circumstances. If we want to build a stronger, more responsible society, then the last thing we should be doing is reducing people's incentive to be responsible by sheltering them from the natural penalties for irresponsibility. |
I agree that these days people are far to vocal about their rights and tend to decouple that from their responsibilities (in other words shirk them).
However it looks like you are possibly hinting at a bit of physical natural selection (the physically strong survive and so on) which for an extreme case against that we could look to Steven Hawking.
As I say extreme but he is physically weak, but mentally strong. Surely our society has progressed beyond the harder you can hit someone the better you are (which physical natural selection infers).
Maybe I’ve just misread you and you weren’t inferring physical natural selection?
___________________
If you can read this, I'm seriously fucking bored.
|
|
Jun-12-2005 15:44
|
|
|
 |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:38.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|