• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is Healthcare a human right?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Is Healthcare a human right?

  • Yes, but people should pay for it themselves.

  • Yes, and we need a single payer system.

  • No, fuck the poor.

  • No, but everyone should still have good healthcare.

Results are only viewable after voting.
DCal430 said:
It is at least in the hundreds of thousands.
Click to expand...

You're talking out of your ass. Only 5 people died due to inadequate health care in FY 2009-2010. All 5 people are the subjects of detailed case studies and numerous reports, all of which you can find on the United States Department of Health and Human Services website.
 
ProfJohn said:
How do you respond to the people who will claim that fat people are fat because they are sick or addicted etc etc.

Plus making fat people and smokers pay more will mean that the people who need healthcare the most will skip out on that healthcare until it becomes too late etc etc etc.
Click to expand...

Then they'll die. The system would be set up to essentially force people to be healthy.
 
I think that if a nation has no healthcare, then no, it's not a right.
But having health care and not having access to it because you don't have the money is just not right.
Here if you don't have the money to pay for your mandatory minimum healthcare (that will get you what you need), you can ask social assistance for help. It means you have no money though. You can't cheap out on healthcare to buy the new tv like in other countries.
 
DCal430 said:
Is Healthcare a human right?

Personally I feel it is. There is something seriously wrong when we have women and children dropping dead because they cannot afford to see a decent doctor. Especially now that we have record unemployment, the number of people without adequate healthcare in the U.S is staggering.

Remember there people in this country who are just to sick to work, to sick to get insurance. Here they are expected to lay down and die, and to me that is one of the the greatest tragedies in the country. :'(

The current reform bill is so weak very little will change I fear. We need real progress and real change. Too many children go sick and die because their parents cannot take them to a doctor. :'(
Click to expand...

Come on get with the program.

Poor women and men if they do manage to vote always vote Democrat.

So this is the Republican plan in action working flawlessly to erode the Democrat base so they can take over permanently and make the U.S. a playground for the rich only. They really don't want to be limited to Monaco, it's a very small area.
 
I put health care in the same general good category as education. We all benefit when everyone has access to a good education and medical system.
 
A civilized society has the obligation to allow its citizens to live with dignity. This includes health care at a maintenance level.

There are many reasons to keep health care out of congress, the main reason being their aptitude to mismanage money.

There are also reasons to put health care under the responsibility of congress.
  1. Congress can remove the layer of middle management that unnecessarily drives up costs.
  2. Wasteful insurance can be removed.
  3. If congress is responsible for paying to maintain our health, they will naturally create laws that will decrease medical costs. Such laws will affect our lifestyle choices and the food the FDA is willing to declare safe for consumption. Companies will no longer be allowed to put harmful chemicals in the food; such as preservatives and food colorings. Genetically modified foods will be better tested and regulated. Organic labels will be better regulated.


Some aspects of society are better regulated with capitalistic thought and other aspects are better regulated with social consideration. Health care at a maintenance level is a social aspect. Health care at a higher level is a capitalistic aspect.

Once these basic concepts are better understood, discussion and regulation can be provided in an intelligent manner.

There are many ways to corrupt the potential of a social health care program and this is what scares most people today. Unfortunately, I do not think this society or our congress is capable of creating a social program to fulfill the potential I can see. The people of this country are too shortsighted and corrupted by capitalistic thought, insurance, and their distaste for anything labeled "social".
 
dmcowen674 said:
Come on get with the program.

Poor women and men if they do manage to vote always vote Democrat..
Click to expand...

You're full of it. I know plenty of poorer people who vote republican. I'm not sure where the middle class mark technically starts, but since I only barely made 20k last year I probably qualify, and I usually don't vote democrat either.
 
Let's have a quick look at some of the OP's points-

DCal430 said:
Really the system is fucked up with perhaps millions dying needlessly each year.
Click to expand...

DCal430 said:
It is at least in the hundreds of thousands.
Click to expand...

Note how we bring out the plight of millions. Wait, maybe that's hundreds of thousands? Hey how about 42?

This creates doubt as to the knowledge and veracity of the OP.

DCal430 said:
Have some compassion, that person who needs ten million dollars a year to live could have easily been you, and you would be begging for society to pay for your treatment.
Click to expand...

Note the unrealistic expectation that society should provide unlimited support. There's not enough wealth in all the world to provide seemingly infinite care. It's impossible.

This too goes against the OP.

DCal430 said:
When we remove all of the middle men from the healthcare industry, such as private insurance. The cost of healthcare will drop 10 fold.
Click to expand...

This is perhaps the most awesome one of all, so far at least. It's already been established that millions, er hundreds of, er a whole bunch of people die and now 90% of money spent goes to "middlemen" a number that isn't even near right. So 5 fold? 2 fold? A buck-two-fiddy?


Looking at all this in context either this is wins the most clueless healthcare topic of our time (and that's hard to beat) or hopefully the OP is a plant. I can't imagine a person willing to opine on something they have absolutely no clue about.









To answer the question, no it isn't a right. No one has the obligation to pay for something that another isn't willing to do.
 
How can the work product of one man be the right of another? Does that not sacrifice the rights of one man for another?

Sorry, but the work product of a man can never be the right of another, for that deprives one man of his rights and makes him a slave to the other man.

Healthcare for those who cannot afford it is a worthy charitable cause, but should not and cannot be a "right" as long as we wish to have true liberty.
 
matt0611 said:
No its not a right. You don't have the right to take something from someone else by force, sorry.
Click to expand...

Amused said:
How can the work product of one man be the right of another? Does that not sacrifice the rights of one man for another?

Sorry, but the work product of a man can never be the right of another, for that deprives one man of his rights and makes him a slave to the other man. ...
Click to expand...
That's a specious argument. For example, what about guns? After all, someone has to mine the metals, someone has to manufacture them, someone has to transport them. Are they all "slaves" because we have a right to bear arms? No, they aren't because they freely chose to work in their industries and they are compensated ... just like health care providers.

Or are you suggesting we don't really have a right to bear arms either? If so, you're selectively redefining the concept of "rights" to match your preconceived positions.
 
Human rights, IMO, extend beyond any political or geographical border. Are you asking in regards to universal human rights, or just here in the US or whichever country you are posting from?
 
Bowfinger said:
That's a specious argument. For example, what about guns? After all, someone has to mine the metals, someone has to manufacture them, someone has to transport them. Are they all "slaves" because we have a right to bear arms? No, they aren't because they freely chose to work in their industries and they are compensated ... just like health care providers.

Or are you suggesting we don't really have a right to bear arms either? If so, you're selectively redefining the concept of "rights" to match your preconceived positions.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with Amused, but that analogy is a hallucination of epic proportions.
 
This is essentially down to the type of society you want to live in; A collaborative one where some care goes to all at the lowest level to help them a little when they need it, or a 'fuck you' system where only the lucky ones survive and those of a disadvantaged background drop dead or live a life of misery and pain.

Of course this will be attacked as "socialist", but I rather be social than a lonely douche who's the richest man in the graveyard.
 
DivideBYZero said:
I don't agree with Amused, but that analogy is a hallucination of epic proportions.
Click to expand...
IMO, no more so than the cheesy, emotional cry that universal health care is slavery. Noooooo, think of the children ... err ... slaves! 🙄

There are all sorts of rational arguments one might make against national health care. Slavery isn't one of them.
 
Bowfinger said:
That's a specious argument. For example, what about guns? After all, someone has to mine the metals, someone has to manufacture them, someone has to transport them. Are they all "slaves" because we have a right to bear arms? No, they aren't because they freely chose to work in their industries and they are compensated ... just like health care providers.

Or are you suggesting we don't really have a right to bear arms either? If so, you're selectively redefining the concept of "rights" to match your preconceived positions.
Click to expand...

LOL another fine example of liberal logic. A clue for you: in order to exercise your right to bear arms, one must first *purchase* his firearm......last I heard, the government doesn't give out "free" guns like you want to give out healthcare.

Silly liberals.
 
Corn said:
LOL another fine example of liberal logic. A clue for you: in order to exercise your right to bear arms, one must first *purchase* his firearm......last I heard, the government doesn't give out "free" guns like you want to give out healthcare.

Silly liberals.
Click to expand...

Yup, this. Lol. I'm sorry Bowfinger but that analogy was just completely off.
 
Last edited:
matt0611 said:
Yup, this. Lol. I'm sorry Bowfinger but that analogy was just completely off.
Click to expand...
Sorry, your position -- national health care is a form of slavery -- was off. I just showed how absurd it was using your same "logic." The reality is in both cases the people delivering the service do so willingly and are paid accordingly. There is no slavery, not by any rational, non-partisan standard anyway. Trying to divert attention from your fallacy by pointing at me doesn't cut it. Can you defend your premise or not?
 
Bowfinger said:
Sorry, your position -- national health care is a form of slavery -- was off. I just showed how absurd it was using your same "logic." The reality is in both cases the people delivering the service do so willingly and are paid accordingly. There is no slavery, not by any rational, non-partisan standard anyway. Trying to divert attention from your fallacy by pointing at me doesn't cut it. Can you defend your premise or not?
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to divert, I think you're just not understanding my position, hence your off analogy.

You have the right to arm yourself, however, that does not mean you have the right to a gun provided to you by the government AKA your fellow citizens.

In this same way, you have the liberty to purchase health care.

Now, you say you have the right to healthcare itself, which means it must be provided for you by your fellow citizens right?
Doctors, nurses, equipment, medicine must be paid for with something right?
So following your logic, this would mean that people have the right to other peoples production -> slavery.

That is why it cannot be a human right.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top