I dont know what is wrong with the debate (I am not from the US), but I have made the experience in discussions with americans, that the concept of a legal civil duty to rescue f.i. is seen as something rather exotic. I understand the US-legal-system doesnt know such a duty for every citizen. For germans its common practice (cause its taught in compulsory first aid courses for the drivers license). Also, propaganda in the US since the 50ies may have taken its toll on the public mind.
Well, in certain scenarios, I can see waiting in line problematic. Certain types of symptoms should be aloud to be bumped ahead of others despite your place in line. Or maybe have some sort of small care packages free in the waiting room besides water, hand sanitizers, and tissues.
This seems all very strange to me --the fact that this is even an argument people are having. Call me an idealist, call me a communist, call me whatever you think justifies or excuses your position, but as far as I am concerned, until every single human being on earth has free health care, we cannot call ourselves a civilised species. Period.
I hate to stick a spanner stright into the heart of a political hornits nest but I personally don't see the problem, for those who can afford it there will always be private health care. Is this a tax increase issue? Or do people just like to watch others suffer to feel better about themselves? Health - the ultimate status symbol.
Please help me out here. Where in the fourteenth amendment do you see the hands of corporations?
And it'd probably be a good idea to also define exactly what you mean by a corporation? Technically, even an individual can be a corporation; or do you mean companies that issue stock, or partnerships, or ... ?
Corporations need the state to maintain the superior edge upon the individual. They do not and never have operated successfully in a truly free market. Just read the 14th amendment and you begin to see their meddling hands.
Free market is the only way to superior product at least cost, it reduces a protected profit margin along with the corruption. That alone is incompatible with gov.
Canada cited as an example of how health care can be managed is due to lack of their transparency.
Not that prices could be brought down overnight either...
Now there I have no exact idea on the subject as what to do during the transition from current US ''tyranny/death'' to ''Ayn Rand''.
I only know that whatever you call the current US health-care system is far worse than some universal health-care. Or so I think. But that there's always much higher goals to aim for.
I guess it's easy to say that as long as it's not good enough, it's always the same crap.
I dont know what is wrong with the debate (I am not from the US), but I have made the experience in discussions with americans, that the concept of a legal civil duty to rescue f.i. is seen as something rather exotic. I understand the US-legal-system doesnt know such a duty for every citizen. For germans its common practice (cause its taught in compulsory first aid courses for the drivers license). Also, propaganda in the US since the 50ies may have taken its toll on the public mind.
13otany13ay 1 year ago
We ALREADY wait in line!
What a stupid argument.
DannyPhantomBeast 1 year ago
Well, in certain scenarios, I can see waiting in line problematic. Certain types of symptoms should be aloud to be bumped ahead of others despite your place in line. Or maybe have some sort of small care packages free in the waiting room besides water, hand sanitizers, and tissues.
Gettinghitonattheban 1 year ago
Any real solution has to begin with the destruction of the for profit corporate "health care" that the US currently has.
AntiSisyphus 2 years ago
This seems all very strange to me --the fact that this is even an argument people are having. Call me an idealist, call me a communist, call me whatever you think justifies or excuses your position, but as far as I am concerned, until every single human being on earth has free health care, we cannot call ourselves a civilised species. Period.
TWITfromURANUS 2 years ago
I hate to stick a spanner stright into the heart of a political hornits nest but I personally don't see the problem, for those who can afford it there will always be private health care. Is this a tax increase issue? Or do people just like to watch others suffer to feel better about themselves? Health - the ultimate status symbol.
amabodie 2 years ago
14th Amendment Section 1. has given protection for corporations as a "natural person".
northpal2 2 years ago
Please help me out here. Where in the fourteenth amendment do you see the hands of corporations?
And it'd probably be a good idea to also define exactly what you mean by a corporation? Technically, even an individual can be a corporation; or do you mean companies that issue stock, or partnerships, or ... ?
jagmarz 2 years ago
Corporations need the state to maintain the superior edge upon the individual. They do not and never have operated successfully in a truly free market. Just read the 14th amendment and you begin to see their meddling hands.
Free market is the only way to superior product at least cost, it reduces a protected profit margin along with the corruption. That alone is incompatible with gov.
Canada cited as an example of how health care can be managed is due to lack of their transparency.
northpal2 2 years ago
Not that prices could be brought down overnight either...
Now there I have no exact idea on the subject as what to do during the transition from current US ''tyranny/death'' to ''Ayn Rand''.
I only know that whatever you call the current US health-care system is far worse than some universal health-care. Or so I think. But that there's always much higher goals to aim for.
I guess it's easy to say that as long as it's not good enough, it's always the same crap.
handianus 2 years ago