Is healthcare a right or a responsibility?

[VonDerTann]

What? That’s not accurate, and is just USA-bashing. Heck, I think the USA has the best medical care system in the entire world.

Look part of the problem is we’re to post 100 and it’s unclear if, when people say healthcare is a “right,” they mean it should be “free.” The 2 are not synonymous but seem to be getting used interchangeably by many posters.

 

[jeannetherese]

I’m wondering if we might be conflating rights and entitlements here.
When I think of rights, my initial response is to think of them as pre-existing the state:
We hold these things to be self-evident…that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.
That among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That to secure these rights, governments were instituted…
The rights are God given, rather than man given and we bring government into existence to secure them.

 

[Freddy]

Emeraldlady:

Providing a safety net for the vulnerable is not ‘socialism’. It’s motivated by the common good based on the principle that all people are equal and valuable to the community.

What one person sees as a “safety net” for the vulnerable another person sees as an exploitation of the vulnerable by trapping them in a system of dependence. Trapped people are not free people even if they prefer the trap to freedom. It is hard to see people suffer but sometimes a little suffering is what is needed to grow.

‘Look, we’d love to help your child. We know the treatment is more than you can afford. But we feel we don’t want to exploit you and trap you in a system of dependence. It’s for your own good…’

‘So you can’t treat him? Gee, I can’t believe the sense of freedom I feel right now. I guess this suffering he’s going through is just what he needs to grow. Well, assuming he lives long enough’.

 

[Padres1969]

Von, we have far from the best medical care system in the world. Ours is the only system where getting what have become fairly routine treatments for what have become common diseases like cancer can destroy the patient’s life almost as much as the disease. And yes people are conflating right with free because they do go hand in hand. If you have to mortgage your family’s future to get treated for a disease or injury that’s unconscionable. And yet that’s what happens to hundreds of thousands of Americans every year because we have a system that treats disease and injury as a cost center. It’s absurd. We’re the only country that does so in the western world.

 

[jeannetherese]

And yes people are conflating right with free because they do go hand in hand. If you have to mortgage your family’s future to get treated for a disease or injury that’s unconscionable.

Could you expand on this argument, please?
People mortgage their future’s for cars, homes, college degrees, credit card spending sprees; why not for this?
How and why does paying off medical bills become unconscionable?

 

[Freddy]

Padres1969:

And yes people are conflating right with free because they do go hand in hand. If you have to mortgage your family’s future to get treated for a disease or injury that’s unconscionable.

Could you expand on this argument, please?
People mortgage their future’s for cars, homes, college degrees, credit card spending sprees; why not for this?
How and why does paying off medical bills become unconscionable?

Of course people go into debt. It’s virtually impossible to buy a house without a mortgage. Likewise you’d need a loan even for a relatively new car. Lucky are the people who can afford either by paying up front. And you need to pay an arm and a leg for a college degree. Now if you have any money left to go spending on a ‘spree’ then you are exceptionally well off.

But these are all choices we all make. Reasonable choices. A roof over our head for our family, some means of tra sport and a decent education for our children. Very many people are in debt just trying to attain those basics.

What isn’t a choice is your kid becoming seriously ill and you needing to go further into debt just for basic medical care. Maybe remortgage the house. Or sell the car. Or spend the money you’d saved for her education. Or blow whatever you might have saved for your retirement.

But maybe you don’t want your taxes to increase by a percentage point or two. Maybe you can’t afford that. Or maybe you’d have less to go on a credit card spending spree.

If you honestly can’t afford it then like other countries with health care you wouldn’t need to pay anything into it. If you can afford it but don’t want to…well, that’s your call I guess. Let the devil take the hindmost…

 

[jeannetherese]

Hi Freddie,
I think that the distinction you make between debt emanating from choices and debt emanating from some sort of accident or crisis is helpful.
Continuing on from there I am thinking about poverty, through no fault of one’s own.
I’m trying to sort through debt as bad as opposed to debt as obligation. While it can be hard to be in debt for and extended amount of time, I’m not sure that this needs to be looked at as a bad thing.
In a sense, poverty is sometimes presented as akin to a state of sinfulness. On the one hand, I have an obligation to help others. On the other, there are many ways to help and I must decide how best to contribute. I do not see poverty as demeaning, whether is stems from choices or from location of birth or health crisis. I do agree that we have an obligation to care. How to express that care becomes a question.

 

[Freddy]

While it can be hard to be in debt for and extended amount of time, I’m not sure that this needs to be looked at as a bad thing.

So losing your retirement savings and your children’s education fund and possibly your home and not being able to afford what we would consider to be the basics for a reasonable standard of living because your kid gets sick doesn’t need to be looked at ‘as a bad thing’.

How then would you describe it?

 

[Peeps]

I would add: the idea of universal health care doesn’t mean it would be free. it means it would be something you paid for in your taxes.

This assumes that everyone is working at a job that pays them enough so that a percentage of their income can be relegated to taxes (income taxes).

Also, I think we need to look at the U.S. Constitution–there are certain services that ARE mandated by the Constitution that the government must provide (which they pay for with our taxes)–e.g., a system of roads, a standing militia for our protection (which includes police and fire for our protection), and of course, a President, Vice President, Senators, and Representatives, and a system of courts including the Supreme Court.

Health care is not one of the services mandated by the U.S. Constitution. It could be added in an amendment, but at the moment, it’s not there. So I think that it is currently not a RIGHT, but a RESPONSiBILITY–and that means that those of us who are faith-filled, especially Christians, have to take on that responsibility and obey our Lord and help those who are in need of healthcare.

I don’t think we should be too quick to want the secular government to take over our responsibility to provide healthcare to those in need, which is a way that we can serve the Lord and our fellow man. Once the government takes over, it will be more difficult for us to minister not only to the physical needs, but to the spiritual.

 

[VonDerTann]

I’m going to the wall: The US has by far the best healthcare system in the world.

–The world’s best medical schools are in the US. By contrast, many other nations’ “medical schools” turn out “doctors” who at best can serve as nurses or medical techs in the US. Would you rather be treated by a doctor who studied at Yale? Or some med school in the Caribbean; Krzgystan, or somewhere else?

–For that matter, where is the best medical research done? The USA.

–Where do the world’s rich go for care? The USA. If you’re some Saudi prince and need an operation, you come to the USA (or more likely fly the US doctor to you!).

–Would you rather trust drug makers & testers like Merck; Johnson & Johnson, etc. (particularly with US testing regulations), or some drug made in China?

–For that matter, many other nations’ drug supplies basically come from the US’ unused drug stocks.

Want the best? You’re going to pay for it.

Want to wait months for a doctor? Want rationed care? Move to Europe, with it’s cradle-to-grave taxation.

Invariably, complaints about the US system come from people who want everything for free. And the dodge of, “I’d pay more in taxes for X!” usually comes from people who would like it to be MY taxes, not theirs, that will go up.

Lastly, when you write that the US has “the only system where getting what have become fairly routine treatments for what have become common diseases like cancer can destroy the patient’s life almost as much as the disease,” I can only say: Prove it.

I say now what I said months ago on another thread: There’s a difference between health care and health care costs or insurance. Maybe we can debate the pros and cons of health insurance as it’s structured in the US, but US health care is second to none.

 

[Freddy]

Invariably, complaints about the US system come from people who want everything for free. And the dodge of, “I’d pay more in taxes for X!” usually comes from people who would like it to be MY taxes, not theirs, that will go up.

You don’t get to choose whether you pay taxes or not. If it’s mandated, you pay. Unless you are earning a wage that’s considered to be low enough to be exempted. In Australia that’s around US$12k. Seems quite reasonable to me. And I have zero objection to paying the 2% it costs me to keep the health system down here in a situation when anyone who needs care can get it. And I said this further upstream but I literally have never heard or read of anyone who objects to this.

So your tax would go up. As would everyone elses. But if you’d rather not pay it then keep voting for those who will leave that little extra in your wallet. You can spent it on something you consider to be more important.

 

[VonDerTann]

Well, up here in the US 44% of residents pay no income tax whatsoever. The top 1% of earners pay more income taxes than the bottom 90% combined. I’d postulate that the 44% have no trouble asking the 56% to pay more.

Also, “anyone who needs care can get it” is a relative term. I think it’s already available. As I indicated above, “charity care” is available (hospitals can’t turn away those truly in need). One poster, in trying to show how people face supposedly backbreaking debt from healthcare, linked to a story where a patient with little money got a bill for $837 – hardly “backbreaking” or something to cause generational debt.

Abuses will always happen, and again, we can talk about the merits of healthcare costs, but simply making all healthcare free seems the best way to cause government takeover of the healthcare system; and attendant problems like rationing (you eat more when food is free); long waits (the buffet line is longer when food is free); etc.

 

[Leek]

If charity care is already a thing then aren’t you paying for it anyway? Personally I think everyone with an income should pay in something above a certain level even if it’s a small amount because then everyone is contributing. Also sales taxes as an option. But how much does private insurance cost? I only have private coverage for dental, drugs and stuff like chiro etc… so I assume that would be a lot less? I’m glad my small company doesn’t have the burden of covering all my medical expenses.

 

[VonDerTann]

Not really - it’s just “free care” where the hospital/provider works for free.

I agree with you that all should pay something.

 

[Freddy]

Well, up here in the US 44% of residents pay no income tax whatsoever. The top 1% of earners pay more income taxes than the bottom 90% combined. I’d postulate that the 44% have no trouble asking the 56% to pay more.

Me neither. It’s those that pay no tax that are earning so little that they are the ones who need help with health care.

But as I say, if you’re keen not to pay anything towards it, then you’ll have a little extra to spend as you wish.

And if you haven’t got $837 then that’s a lot of money. What he have done? Couple of stitches? My son was in the states few years back and cracked his scapula. Three days in hospital and we got hit with a $30,000 bill. Luckily we could afford insurance. How does the guy who struggles to pay $800 cope with a bill like that?

 

[SugarMagnolia]

If I took this approach then abortion would be okay. Isn’t it a right the government grants to it’s citizens? Rather we have God-given rights that are enforced by the government(or at least should be)
God bless you! (Abortion is wrong btw)

I never said abortion wasn’t wrong. You’re a liar.

 

[SugarMagnolia]

I think you are making use of an overwhelming exception to prove the general rule, which doesn’t follow. I’d grant that someone won’t choose to walk into a moving vehicle because they know they’ll get a free leg amputation and hospital care afterwards, but it doesn’t follow that they won’t knowingly hurt themselves in lesser ways, knowing that they will be mostly covered. Most of the economic strain on the medical industry isn’t due to caring for quadriplegics, but for much less extreme cases.

No, Not one “overwhelming exception.” I could have written a dozen examples, two dozen examples, but I really didn’t feel like writing that much. There are an infinite number of ways people can hurt themselves. I don’t have infinite time to write them all.

 

[SugarMagnolia]

What one person sees as a “safety net” for the vulnerable another person sees as an exploitation of the vulnerable by trapping them in a system of dependence. Trapped people are not free people even if they prefer the trap to freedom. It is hard to see people suffer but sometimes a little suffering is what is needed to grow.

It’s not the “system” that makes elderly and disabled people dependent and vulnerable. It’s old age and illness that is the trap. Suffering old age and disability is not something people “prefer.” Every elderly person I know (which is most of the people I know) would rather be a healthy 30 year old working a full-time job.

 

[LouiseHine]

Healthcare is a right - everyone has the right to look after and protect their own life; here in the UK everyone is guaranteed access to the NHS, which we all pay for through taxes because it’s in everyone’s best interest that the nation’s people be as healthy as possible. Prevent is better than cure. Also, it’s the right thing to do - why wouldn’t we want to help people be healthy?

 

[SugarMagnolia]

What? That’s not accurate, and is just USA-bashing. Heck, I think the USA has the best medical care system in the entire world.

Look part of the problem is we’re to post 100 and it’s unclear if, when people say healthcare is a “right,” they mean it should be “free.” The 2 are not synonymous but seem to be getting used interchangeably by many posters.

Nothing is “free” if you’re a taxpayer. Taxpayers have prepaid.