ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Medicare-for-All!

Cherry_On_Top

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2039

Report this Feb. 11 2010, 5:52 pm

Quote (DS9TREK @ Feb. 11 2010, 5:48 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 4:06 pm)
What if I contract an incurable disease and I strongly believe that a cure will someday be found as a well as a method to regenerate a frozen body. Do I than have a right to demand from society that they pay for my cryogenic freezing and maintenance fees? If health care is my right and this form of healthcare has the potential, no matter how remote, to prolong my life; is society obligated to give it to me?

No you can't demand it. Just as I don't have the right to demand cosmetic surgery from the NHS. It only provides recognised treatments for recognised illnesses.

Cryogenic freezing doesn't even come with a guarantee you can be revived. Hey, I just remembered: a guy in Britain wanted to freeze himself while he was still alive cos he had an incurable illness. It went to court and the judge ruled it illegal cos not only does the freezing process actually damage you but there's no evidence you can be revived. He said that made freezing a living person assisted suicide.

from what I understand we have no way of "freezing" anyone without killing them.  

and that whole scenario would just be a whole can of worms  :laugh:

DS9TREK

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14322

Report this Feb. 11 2010, 6:00 pm

Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 6:06 pm)
Quote (Cherry_On_Top @ Feb. 10 2010, 3:51 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 12:45 pm)
Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 10 2010, 2:35 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 10:06 am)
What if I contract an incurable disease and I strongly believe that a cure will someday be found as a well as a method to regenerate a frozen body. Do I than have a right to demand from society that they pay for my cryogenic freezing and maintenance fees? If health care is my right and this form of healthcare has the potential, no matter how remote, to prolong my life; is society obligated to give it to me?

Of course not.

But if tried and true methods of saving a persons life are available and work well, people shouldn't be denied this if the 'law' says life saving care can't be denied, and if you have health insurance... afterall, that's what it's for.

I have people tell me now that under law life saving care den't be denied... so why is it we have stories of cancer patients being denied chemo treatments and such?? Insurance denies the claim, so the chemo provider refuse to treat the patient. He dies.

If life saving care can't be denied under law, why aren't the people that let the cancer patient die in prison?

What does "tried and true" have to do with a right to healthcare?

Cryogenics, no matter how infantile the technology, is a form of healthcare that does have the potential to save someone's life, even if that potential is very very remote at the moment. If I have a right to healthcare how does society infringe up one my right by deigning me this form of healthcare?

You said "people shouldn't be denied this if the 'law' says life saving care can't be denied,"

Cryogenics can very well be life saving care; it should not be denied according to your premise. Yet you seem to think it should be denied. ?

That's why Healthcare can?t be a "right" like freedom of speech is a "right"; it is just logistically impossible. The every system you would have to put in place to "Guarantee" this right would also have to simultaneously "infringe" the very same right.

The single payer system that would "Guarantee" everyone their right to healthcare would have to make choices as to who gets what healthcare; what healthcare doesn't fit the "tried and true" ?test; and what healthcare is to expensive; and after determining those things would have to than deign some people healthcare on grounds that it is too costly and/or is not "tired and true".

Healthcare can?t possibly be a right; in a system with finite resources calling Healthcare a right is a paradox because in so guarantying the right you would have to infringe upon it.

Of course that is not to say that providing Healthcare for all is not the right and human thing to do. It every may well be and it may be what we all should strive to do. But it is no "right".

no country that has socialized medicine will fund experimental medical treatments. ?Untill someone is resurected that is all it will be.

That fine.

But if in these same counties they believe healthcare is a "right" than they are infringe on that right every time they decide not to fund experimental medical treatments.

How do I than take them seriously if on one hand they create this ?right? and then infringe upon it.

It isn't a right. It's an entitlement like a state pension.

DS9TREK

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14322

Report this Feb. 11 2010, 6:01 pm

Quote (Somerled_ex_Siistertrek @ Feb. 10 2010, 6:52 pm)
Affordable health care on a needs basis is a universial human right. You have nothing to fear from universial tax funded health care being introduced.

But they do have to fear government running it.

dandandat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3117

Report this Feb. 11 2010, 6:16 pm

Quote (DS9TREK @ Feb. 11 2010, 9:00 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 6:06 pm)
Quote (Cherry_On_Top @ Feb. 10 2010, 3:51 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 12:45 pm)
Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 10 2010, 2:35 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 10:06 am)
What if I contract an incurable disease and I strongly believe that a cure will someday be found as a well as a method to regenerate a frozen body. Do I than have a right to demand from society that they pay for my cryogenic freezing and maintenance fees? If health care is my right and this form of healthcare has the potential, no matter how remote, to prolong my life; is society obligated to give it to me?

Of course not.

But if tried and true methods of saving a persons life are available and work well, people shouldn't be denied this if the 'law' says life saving care can't be denied, and if you have health insurance... afterall, that's what it's for.

I have people tell me now that under law life saving care den't be denied... so why is it we have stories of cancer patients being denied chemo treatments and such?? Insurance denies the claim, so the chemo provider refuse to treat the patient. He dies.

If life saving care can't be denied under law, why aren't the people that let the cancer patient die in prison?

What does "tried and true" have to do with a right to healthcare?

Cryogenics, no matter how infantile the technology, is a form of healthcare that does have the potential to save someone's life, even if that potential is very very remote at the moment. If I have a right to healthcare how does society infringe up one my right by deigning me this form of healthcare?

You said "people shouldn't be denied this if the 'law' says life saving care can't be denied,"

Cryogenics can very well be life saving care; it should not be denied according to your premise. Yet you seem to think it should be denied. ?

That's why Healthcare can?t be a "right" like freedom of speech is a "right"; it is just logistically impossible. The every system you would have to put in place to "Guarantee" this right would also have to simultaneously "infringe" the very same right.

The single payer system that would "Guarantee" everyone their right to healthcare would have to make choices as to who gets what healthcare; what healthcare doesn't fit the "tried and true" ?test; and what healthcare is to expensive; and after determining those things would have to than deign some people healthcare on grounds that it is too costly and/or is not "tired and true".

Healthcare can?t possibly be a right; in a system with finite resources calling Healthcare a right is a paradox because in so guarantying the right you would have to infringe upon it.

Of course that is not to say that providing Healthcare for all is not the right and human thing to do. It every may well be and it may be what we all should strive to do. But it is no "right".

no country that has socialized medicine will fund experimental medical treatments. ?Untill someone is resurected that is all it will be.

That fine.

But if in these same counties they believe healthcare is a "right" than they are infringe on that right every time they decide not to fund experimental medical treatments.

How do I than take them seriously if on one hand they create this ?right? and then infringe upon it.

It isn't a right. It's an entitlement like a state pension.

That I can understand.

The Line of discussion started with someone calling Healthcare a right.

Cherry_On_Top

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2039

Report this Feb. 11 2010, 7:09 pm

Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 11 2010, 6:16 pm)
Quote (DS9TREK @ Feb. 11 2010, 9:00 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 6:06 pm)
Quote (Cherry_On_Top @ Feb. 10 2010, 3:51 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 12:45 pm)
Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 10 2010, 2:35 pm)
Quote (dandandat @ Feb. 10 2010, 10:06 am)
What if I contract an incurable disease and I strongly believe that a cure will someday be found as a well as a method to regenerate a frozen body. Do I than have a right to demand from society that they pay for my cryogenic freezing and maintenance fees? If health care is my right and this form of healthcare has the potential, no matter how remote, to prolong my life; is society obligated to give it to me?

Of course not.

But if tried and true methods of saving a persons life are available and work well, people shouldn't be denied this if the 'law' says life saving care can't be denied, and if you have health insurance... afterall, that's what it's for.

I have people tell me now that under law life saving care den't be denied... so why is it we have stories of cancer patients being denied chemo treatments and such?? Insurance denies the claim, so the chemo provider refuse to treat the patient. He dies.

If life saving care can't be denied under law, why aren't the people that let the cancer patient die in prison?

What does "tried and true" have to do with a right to healthcare?

Cryogenics, no matter how infantile the technology, is a form of healthcare that does have the potential to save someone's life, even if that potential is very very remote at the moment. If I have a right to healthcare how does society infringe up one my right by deigning me this form of healthcare?

You said "people shouldn't be denied this if the 'law' says life saving care can't be denied,"

Cryogenics can very well be life saving care; it should not be denied according to your premise. Yet you seem to think it should be denied. ?

That's why Healthcare can?t be a "right" like freedom of speech is a "right"; it is just logistically impossible. The every system you would have to put in place to "Guarantee" this right would also have to simultaneously "infringe" the very same right.

The single payer system that would "Guarantee" everyone their right to healthcare would have to make choices as to who gets what healthcare; what healthcare doesn't fit the "tried and true" ?test; and what healthcare is to expensive; and after determining those things would have to than deign some people healthcare on grounds that it is too costly and/or is not "tired and true".

Healthcare can?t possibly be a right; in a system with finite resources calling Healthcare a right is a paradox because in so guarantying the right you would have to infringe upon it.

Of course that is not to say that providing Healthcare for all is not the right and human thing to do. It every may well be and it may be what we all should strive to do. But it is no "right".

no country that has socialized medicine will fund experimental medical treatments. ?Untill someone is resurected that is all it will be.

That fine.

But if in these same counties they believe healthcare is a "right" than they are infringe on that right every time they decide not to fund experimental medical treatments.

How do I than take them seriously if on one hand they create this ?right? and then infringe upon it.

It isn't a right. It's an entitlement like a state pension.

That I can understand.

The Line of discussion started with someone calling Healthcare a right.

the United States already think it's a right. Otherwise hospitals wouldn't have to treat critically injured regardless of their ability to pay.

dandandat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3117

Report this Feb. 11 2010, 7:33 pm

Quote (Cherry_On_Top @ Feb. 11 2010, 10:09 pm)
the United States already think it's a right. Otherwise hospitals wouldn't have to treat critically injured regardless of their ability to pay.

It doesn¿t have to be a right for the citizens to think its a good idea to have critical care provided regardless of ability to pay.

There are laws that require a lot of things; they aren't all rights.

So just because critical care is provided doesn¿t mean people think its a right.

Bekky_

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 18

Report this Feb. 11 2010, 11:01 pm

The west should stop worrying about their own health care, no matter what system they have its better than everyone else. Maybe you should spend your time and money on helping the third world rather than trying to extend your over indulged lives lives a few more years while children are dieing around the world.

Bekky_

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 18

Report this Feb. 12 2010, 12:23 pm

Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:19 am)
Quote (Bekky_ @ Feb. 11 2010, 10:01 pm)
The west should stop worrying about their own health care, no matter what system they have its better than everyone else. Maybe you should spend your time and money on helping the third world rather than trying to extend your over indulged lives lives a few more years while children are dieing around the world.

Wow.

It's a difficult task to come across something more idiotic than you.

In this task I have failed.

If caring more about millions of suffering children in third world countries than I do about the west extending their over indulged life spans from 68 to 72 makes me an idiot; then I¿m proud to be an idiot.

Maybe you should start caring about others more than yourself.

Corwin88

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 312

Report this Feb. 12 2010, 12:28 pm

Quote (Bekky_ @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:23 pm)
Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:19 am)
Quote (Bekky_ @ Feb. 11 2010, 10:01 pm)
The west should stop worrying about their own health care, no matter what system they have its better than everyone else. Maybe you should spend your time and money on helping the third world rather than trying to extend your over indulged lives lives a few more years while children are dieing around the world.

Wow.

It's a difficult task to come across something more idiotic than you.

In this task I have failed.

If caring more about millions of suffering children in third world countries than I do about the west extending their over indulged life spans from 68 to 72 makes me an idiot; then I?m proud to be an idiot.

Maybe you should start caring about others more than yourself.

It's not a question about caring.

My family comes first. Then I worry about how I can help others.

When the government forces more money out of my pocket to 'care for' others, they are affecting my ability to care for my family.

Take more from me by force and I'll spend less helping others and more helping my family. Allow me to keep more and I tend to spend more helping others.

Bekky_

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 18

Report this Feb. 12 2010, 12:35 pm

Quote (Yanks @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:33 pm)
Quote (Bekky_ @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:23 pm)
Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:19 am)
Quote (Bekky_ @ Feb. 11 2010, 10:01 pm)
The west should stop worrying about their own health care, no matter what system they have its better than everyone else. Maybe you should spend your time and money on helping the third world rather than trying to extend your over indulged lives lives a few more years while children are dieing around the world.

Wow.

It's a difficult task to come across something more idiotic than you.

In this task I have failed.

If caring more about millions of suffering children in third world countries than I do about the west extending their over indulged life spans from 68 to 72 makes me an idiot; then I?m proud to be an idiot.

Maybe you should start caring about others more than yourself.

We should have a prime directive with regard to third world countries.

Something like, we are not going to talk to you or giver you $$$$ until you invent electricity or something like that.

I only wished; if you had such a directive then maybe you wouldn¿t have raped these nations of their resources and hindered their development.

Bekky_

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 18

Report this Feb. 12 2010, 12:41 pm

Quote (Corwin88 @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:28 pm)
Quote (Bekky_ @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:23 pm)
Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 12 2010, 12:19 am)
Quote (Bekky_ @ Feb. 11 2010, 10:01 pm)
The west should stop worrying about their own health care, no matter what system they have its better than everyone else. Maybe you should spend your time and money on helping the third world rather than trying to extend your over indulged lives lives a few more years while children are dieing around the world.

Wow.

It's a difficult task to come across something more idiotic than you.

In this task I have failed.

If caring more about millions of suffering children in third world countries than I do about the west extending their over indulged life spans from 68 to 72 makes me an idiot; then I?m proud to be an idiot.

Maybe you should start caring about others more than yourself.

It's not a question about caring.

My family comes first. Then I worry about how I can help others.

When the government forces more money out of my pocket to 'care for' others, they are affecting my ability to care for my family.

Take more from me by force and I'll spend less helping others and more helping my family. Allow me to keep more and I tend to spend more helping others.

You should want to help, and not need to be forced too.

Who's family doesn¿t come first?

But doesn¿t it bother you that part of the reason your family is prosperous is because other people are suffering? It¿s time the west gives something significant back to these third world nations for all the plundering they have done over the years.

Yes I know the argument ¿2000 years ago the Romans enslaved my people and stole their rescores and you don¿t see me asking the Romans to give it back and pay damages do you?¿

But since when doe¿s two wrongs make a right? Just because the Roman¿s aren¿t around anymore to make good on the damage they may have caused doesn¿t mean the west shouldn¿t do the right thing now and make good on the damages that they have caused.

Cherry_On_Top

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2039

Report this Feb. 12 2010, 4:17 pm

I think it only covers people below a certain income.  If you get sick while changing jobs before your new insurance kicks in you are hooped.

Avenger_Class2009

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4035

Report this Feb. 12 2010, 4:19 pm

Quote (Cherry_On_Top @ Feb. 12 2010, 4:17 pm)
I think it only covers people below a certain income. ¿If you get sick while changing jobs before your new insurance kicks in you are hooped.

Been there did that
I hate rejection

PhantomCrunk007

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5088

Report this Feb. 12 2010, 5:18 pm

Quote (Corwin88 @ Feb. 09 2010, 7:15 pm)
Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 10 2010, 9:48 am)
Let's just let a bunch of folks die because they aren't wealthy.

That's always a winner. :D :sarcastic:

I'm far from wealthy and I'm not going to die.

Yet I pay my own way.

Imagine that.

Paying for a service on my own.

:laugh:

And thats what it boils down to. I pay so everyone else must too. Go ahead and dress it up like it's some moral stand you're taking, but you're just bitter someone might get something for less than what you worked so hard for. There is a world for that, it's called life. For some reason you think you deserve to be treated differently just because you think you work "harder" than others which is really relative because some people push a pencil and probably make x10 what you make, but for some reason you think they work harder than you.

Cherry_On_Top

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2039

Report this Feb. 12 2010, 5:22 pm

Quote (PhantomCrunk007 @ Feb. 12 2010, 5:18 pm)
Quote (Corwin88 @ Feb. 09 2010, 7:15 pm)
Quote (TheChronicOne @ Feb. 10 2010, 9:48 am)
Let's just let a bunch of folks die because they aren't wealthy.

That's always a winner. :D :sarcastic:

I'm far from wealthy and I'm not going to die.

Yet I pay my own way.

Imagine that.

Paying for a service on my own.

:laugh:

And thats what it boils down to. I pay so everyone else must too. Go ahead and dress it up like it's some moral stand you're taking, but you're just bitter someone might get something for less than what you worked so hard for. There is a world for that, it's called life. For some reason you think you deserve to be treated differently just because you think you work "harder" than others which is really relative because some people push a pencil and probably make x10 what you make, but for some reason you think they work harder than you.

I think the expression you are looking for is "let them eat cake"

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum