Eva-Fan wrote:The way I look at it is if there is profit in the equation you cannot call it health"care", cause they won't care unless there is profit to be made. Your personal problems were just considered business risks by the private sector and deemed potentially non-profitable. That's why if you take profit out then the only thing left to care about is health. Nothing good can come from profit and health related issues.
Economics isn't your strong suit is it? Just because something is for profit does not mean it is also bad for the end user. In theory, for profit is better since it encourages competition to provide the same services at lower prices. In fact, I've heard people argue that a lot of the US health care problem might be viewed as the competition and costs are hidden from the end user. Most people get health care through their work. That means competition is limited since people can only pick whatever their job provides and the costs are somewhat hidden for the end user since work generally picks up at least some of the tab. If the US system were more capitalistic and the end user had control over the choices and costs then that'd encourage competition which would eliminate some of those inefficiencies in the system that Obama says costs oh so much. I don't completely buy into that argument, but it is at least something worth thinking about.
Kionon wrote:Precisely. Healthcare is a right, not a luxury.
No, it is not a right. Look at all the other things Americans consider to be rights: free speech, free religion, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, right to own firearms, assembly, due process before the law, etc. One of the common things about all every right I just listed, and all the ones I didn't that you can look up in the Constitution on your own, is that they require nothing of other people. You can speak, but I'm not required to listen to provide you a forum. You can own a gun, but I'm not required to buy it for you. You can practice your religion, but I'm not required to endorse or pay for it. Etc. Now look at healthcare. The term, as we're using it here, requires others to do something for you. If healthcare is a right, that means you are within your rights to force another person to be your doctor. To force other people perform tests, surgeries, etc. To force people to develop and provide you medicine. To force other people to spend trillions paying for it all. If it is a right, it would be the only one in the US that flat out forces other people to do something, even if it's against their will. I fail to see how forcing other people to do what I want is a 'right'. That type of thinking is straight out of the royalty entitlement mentality that the US is founded in opposition to.
Healthcare also isn't a luxury. It's a need, the same as food, water, and housing are. Note that those three things are not considered rights either.
Also of note about your examples of education, roads, etc. None of them are rights. Try telling Harvard that education is your right so they can't deny you entrance just because you had a 1.5 GPA in High School. Explain to the police officer who pulled you over that you don't have a drivers license or insurance, but you have the right to roads so they can't stop you from driving 150 MPH in a school zone. Police and fire come a little closer to rights, but there have actually been lawsuits over that and the courts decision was that police are not obligated to respond to your call. All of your examples are entitlements that most Americans agree with and are willing to pay for, they are *NOT* rights. Health care may or may not be one of those entitlements that Americans are willing to pay for, but don't make the mistake of thinking it must be provided. Legally and ethically, you are not entitled to force other people to do what you want.
Someone doesn't know godix well at all.