Is healthcare a "right?"

There is no such thing as a right to healthcare.

 

ummm..... I do.. You didn't bother to define what you meant by it. But, feel free to make a qualified explanation of how you think health care would become "better".

 

no idea what this has to do with single payer providing better care at a fraction of the cost of our system?

 

People don't want "choices" for health insurance. They want access to services. When they need treatment, they want treatment. I've never heard anyone say they wait with interest and excitement for the next opportunity to pore over different plans to compare copays, deductibles, exclusions, premiums, and limits, and then hope they didn't make any bad choices and get unpleasant surprises.

Rights fall into two categories: moral rights and legal rights. Access to healthcare is a moral right, and both of our two major parties concede this truth when they mention the availability of ER treatments for everyone without regard for anything. No one ever advocates barring some people from emergency treatment, and that is evidence of the recognition of medical care as a moral right.

 

what a strange strawman you built there.

we have numerous examples proving single payer is less expensive than our system.

directly refuted by every single first world country with single payer, that provides better care at a fraction of our cost.

 

https://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf

 

You’re complaining about the care you get and cost...i am just asking if you cosidered shopping?

 

Of course it isn't.

If healthcare is a right, then that means the government can force other people to take care of you.

 

Really? So you'd let me interpret your citation for you? Because I will....

 

Can you offer an example of this? What type of services - that someone really needs - is not covered by national healthcare in those countries?

 

What does the 'right to life' mean to you?

 

yes.

 

I could be fine with that as long as everyone with an income paid for healthcare. Maybe kind of like SS tax - X% for the first $XX amount of income.
But it should be wholly collected, regulated, and implemented on a local level. A large federal bureaucracy would just make the quality go down and cost go up. It would also localize the problem areas in the system. Just like with police or fire, the communities get what they are paying for - not a lot of room for waste. The individual's voice is a lot louder on a local level as well. The idea that any federal plan can be some great fix all is pure fiction. America is just to diverse for that.

 

It would need some fed funding but that could work

 

Don't look now, but IT DOES!

Access to healthcare is a moral right, and both of our two major parties concede this truth when they mention the availability of ER treatments for everyone without regard for anything. No one ever advocates barring some people from emergency treatment, and that is evidence of the recognition of medical care as a moral right.

 

Right. We have very diverse medical needs. Some nationalities never get cancer, some never get the flu. Some never have diabetes. Some never get heart attacks.

uh . . . . . . . . . . . . wait a minute ....

 

shopping doesn't change the care quality or cost. I'm not talking about a PCP. I'm talking about expensive medical care needed in an emergency.

 

there's nothing to interpret. The citation shows the metrics used in showing which systems/countries are better than the US.

 

Sure it does...not every doctor is the same and not every doctor charges the same rates

 

The ironic thing is that not one of these is written into the Constitution.

The last one is in the Constitution, but it took "activist judges" in the form of Gideon Vs Wainwright to establish insure it would be inforced.

 

it of course does not. you can't shop around when you have a heart attack, stroke or a thousand other scenarios. You are going to the nearest ER.

Which is why healthcare does not and can not operate in a free market. And why every other first world nation with single payer provides better care at a fraction of our cost.

 

Thanks for participating in the conversation.

 

But that’s only one part of total care and cost...the majority of the popular doesn’t need emergency care...in fact much is preventable with regular doctor visits. So why don’t you shop around and get a cheaper better doctor since you aren’t happy with yours and maybe you won’t have that heart attack. Preventive care is essrential. If places with single payer there is no optio no choices, long waits for routine care.

 

USA law is based on the Constitution and the Anglo Saxon common law which is where many of these rights come from. See 7th Amendment to the Constitution.

 

Is health a right? The answer is here:



Article 25 of the United Nations' 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services."
Right to health - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_health






Some argue that the USA is not bound by it as it has not been officially ratified by Congress. Well, Bush invoked the help of the UN when he got his war and every president in history has done the same. It follows logically that if the USA is to rely on the UN for its actions then we should be equally bound by that organization's rules.