Comments on: On Health Care

By: AngloAm

AngloAm — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:55:48 +0000

Not heard much from Richard Aubrey since you asked him to substantiate his claim that everyone could have insurance if they wanted it.

By: The Angry Black Woman

The Angry Black Woman — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:09:05 +0000

Actually, JD, I’m not letting your response through because you can’t seem to make your case without random ad hominem attacks. Try again.

By: The Angry Black Woman

The Angry Black Woman — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:05:52 +0000

I’m not entirely sure you’re correct about every state having an insurer that can’t turn you down, but if you provide evidence of such, that will be helpful. That still doesn’t solve the problem of: what if I can’t afford this insurance? Will the coverage an individual needs in order to manage their chronic/life-threatening illness cost more than they can afford to pay? Not “Oh gosh, if I get this insurance I won’t be able to keep my polo pony!” It’s “If I pay this monthly premium I will not have enough left over to eat, or pay my rent, or pay my bills, or a combination thereof.” Perhaps you can afford the insurance you’re insisting everyone can have, but not everyone can, which has been the point all along.

Also, you act as if the rights we as citizens have now don’t take away money from other people. I explained this upthread, but I will try again: my taxes pay for several hundred things that I do not directly benefit from, as do yours. In having this health care system, the government is not going to take your money and then say “you can’t have this, only these people can.” Isn’t the whole point of this is that it’s universal?

If you’re going to complain about the government taking your money to solve other people’s problems, then I think you’re going to have to first dismantle the justice system, which uses government money to give lawyers to people who can’t afford them, and health care to convicted offenders (and food, and shelter… hey wait!). Let’s get rid of roads, while we’re at it. Why should I have to pay for other people’s need to get from one state to another? Not my problem!

Unless you’re ready to pay for every service and convenience that taxes pay for yourself, I suggest you rethink your position on health care. Because all of your objections just come off as selfish and self-serving, which is fine if that’s what you want to be. But you can’t be that way while also taking or using what millions of others paid for with their tax dollars.

By: LDR

LDR — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:35:46 +0000

“You don’t need to “qualify” for the insurer of last resort . . . You just apply. They are not allowed to turn you down.”

So, Richard, if it’s that easy, why are so many, many people complaining about their lack of healthcare?

By: Richard Aubrey

Richard Aubrey — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:25:58 +0000

Actually, Angry, I’m not saying anything of the sort.
I am saying that implying that there is no option but employer-sponsored coverage is incorrect.
You don’t need to “qualify” for the insurer of last resort;it’s not Medicaid. In some states, it’s Blue Cross. You just apply. They are not allowed to turn you down. In our state, BC has a selection of contracts with varying premiums.
Most individual plans have maximums of two million and up to five million.
Since the positive right–in your construction it’s health coverage–requires inevitably that the resources to do it be taken from others, it would be more direct to insist the government have the power to take money from other people to solve your problem. Which is, fundamentally, what you are demanding.

By: Magnetic Crow

Magnetic Crow — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:10:06 +0000

Huh, funny. Neither my husband nor I have employer-provided insurance, nor are we likely to ever be offered a job where we will, given our field of work. We’re making just barely enough to pay rent (even with a roommate), pay our bills, not starve, and sometimes pay our student loans (when we’re lucky).
Neither of us qualifies for state sponsored health insurance as it currently exists.
Plus I have a minor (thankfully not life-threatening, though it could lead to life-threatening things if untreated) preexisting condition that could potentially get me disqualified from private insurance, if I could afford it.

And what options did you say we had again?

(Other than going back to college and learning an entirely new set of job skills, accruing even more debt in the process and decimating our shared income (and furthermore being perpetually miserable in our new careers). Or purposefully decimating our income to the point where we qualify for state sponsored medical insurance).

By: The Angry Black Woman

The Angry Black Woman — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:51:48 +0000

for many people, there IS no other option. They can’t afford private insurance yet may not qualify for the last resort insurance or that last resort insurance may not cover their needs.

So what you’re saying here is that those who cannot afford private insurance just have to suck it up and suffer because they’re not poor enough to qualify for medicaid (which is run by the gov, correct?) and not rich enough to pay huge insurance costs? If that’s your position, fine, but if so: you’re a jerk. Thanks.

By: Richard Aubrey

Richard Aubrey — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:40:31 +0000

WRT rights.
There are negative rights and positive rights. Negative rights are, for example, in the Bill of Rights. They tell us what the government may not do to us.
Positive rights are different. Without exception, they require the government to do something for us (which is what makes them “positive”), which inevitably requires the government to take the resources to do so from somebody else.
So they are different from things like RKBA and free speech.

Also, individual insurance is available. If you have a problem affording it, that’s different from implying there is no solution other than employer-sponsored benefits.
Each state is required to have an insurer of last resort which will take individuals regardless of existing conditions.

By: msday

msday — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:13:57 +0000

“I think she’d be a lot less angry if she took responsibility for her own life. She needs to understand/realize that there is no “moral right” to any insurance. Just as there is no moral right to a mortgage or a car.”

So JD, there is no difference between letting your citizens die versus their owning a car or house? You’re a very cold man and I bet you are one of those demanding types who come into hospitals, expecting to be treated royally because you have an insurance card. In the past, I disliked patients like you. The type who sit with your little magazines in the waiting room, turning up your nose, when a homeless person enters. The type who writes long letters to the hospital president just because a life saving procedure on the patient before you, caused your appointment to run late. grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

By: msday

msday — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:02:33 +0000

I think the worse part of this whole argument is using Canada, and Great Britain to refute the argument and concealing the countries in which it works. I live in Italy, am American, and a former healthcare professional. My husband is Italian, so I am on the national healthcare plan. One thing that I like is that there are no big “I’s” and little “i’s”. In other words, unlike in America, no one bows for important people and treat the least fortunate like dirt. I don’t walk away with ton’s of bills, or unnecessary revenue building exams, or follow ups and I have never had to wait. Italy has participated in a lot of ground breaking research alongside the United States and they have some very efficient doctors. The draw backs are pretty much the comfort level. If I go to the hospital, I may have to bring my own sheets, towels, cups and saucers. There are no shiny well decorated facilities with the latest modern art and people aren’t constantly smiling for fear of losing your business.
My only concern about the healthcare system is the further decimation of the middle class. Right now, although, it’s not necessarily right, radiology and other allied health procedures are revenue builders. Jobs in CT, Mammography, Ultrasound, and Cardiac ultrasound, for example pay on average around 23 dollars per hour for level I professionals. Many of them work on a per diem basis starting anywhere from 35 to 85 dollars per study. Allied health professionals, along with nurses make up the heart and soul of the medical community. If you cut the need for these procedures, through treatment algorithms, and pay cuts, more people are going end up unemployed and in need of retraining. Everyone is concerned about doctors, and are blind to the nurses and Techs making up the upper middle class.