fallacious argument. They are provided with basic healthcare because they are imprisoned. With no way to acquire income and contract with others, this is something the judicial contract of our nation has agreed to.

They could be made to work for their health care, but they're not.

The govn't just passed a law a couple months ago about cobra insurance. It used to very expensive but now your only responsible for 33% of the total cost. As long as you don't have a gap in coverage totalling 6 months or greater you will be exempt from the pre-ex clause in an insurance policy. So that is one thing that will help.

It's not fallacious at all with respect to children, then, since they too lack a means of acquiring income and contracting with others.

I was just browsing the Wikipedia article on the Declaration on Human Rights, and it says that it is a "non-binding" agreement.

no. they are in the CUSTODY of the GOVERNMENT.

Odd to and they don't get the right to vote. I'm all for keeping that.

I'm not in the custody of the government. I'm a citizen and I get to vote.

My point is that they could be forced to work for their health care, and if they don't work, they take the chance of getting sick and being screwed. Just like it is on the outside.

So perhaps the right to health care is more important than the right to vote?

I think the right to health care is about this, ultimately: human dignity.

Human rights are about that. Dignity. If you cannot access something as basic as care for the health of you and your family, you are denied a fundamental necessity of human dignity.

The bottom line is that health care is not influenced by market forces like other businesses.

Look at it this way. If you are told you are about to die but you can be saved for $10 would you pay it? How about $100? How about $1000? How about $10000? How about $100000. There is no price that you won't agree to pay when it comes to a life and death situation. This is why we need the government to come in and regulate.

and the march to relieve parents of all responsibility is moving steadily forward, we see.

I think you're confused about the broad scope of the responsibility that comprises parenthood.

But you don't want the government to "force" people to be good parents either, so what's your solution?

I imagine it involves platitudes.

Maybe the government should force all poor parents to win the lottery so they can provide their child with healthcare.

Also, there are guidelines on how to be responsible parents. Failing at these can often mean child services. This is not something Obama put in place, it's not the new government taking over every single thing in your life, it's the right of a child to have parents that are fit to raise children.
I think it's the right of a child to have health care no matter how poor he/she is.

Maybe those parents should think twice about spawning if they aren't in a position to take care of children. I know I'd make a horrible father, which is why I wrap my rascal to make sure I don't procreate.

Health care is not a right. You have the negative right to live, in that I have no right to kill you, but I should be under no requirement to ensure you survive. If you get sick and die because of poor genes, living in a bad environment, or not taking care of yourself it's not my fault and I don't want to have to bear the burden of keeping you alive.

This is an appropriate attitude because birth control is always 100% effective and because the children resulting from unintended pregnancies deserve whatever suffering they get because their parents might have been irresponsible.

If one takes the time, one can conceptualize society in terms of a biological systems. For example, we can look at society as a collection of cells, bound together in thea common purpose of self perpetuation- as a species it is good for us to stick together. In this type of model, individuals are analogous to cells and in this type of model, people who think like you are cancer.

"Fuck everyone else, Ima get mine" is a piss poor way of being a member of society. In fact, it might reasonably be stated that one of the primary advantages of social existence is that there are many situations where we can all benefit from the assistance of other people more so than we benefit from going without that assistance.

But I'm sure you don't ever take advantage of something you didn't earn and have never benefited from the spending of your fellow citizen's tax dollars.

[QUOTE=filtherton;2692609]This is an appropriate attitude because birth control is always 100% effective and because the children resulting from unintended pregnancies deserve whatever suffering they get because their parents might have been irresponsible.


Agree or disagree, this is a huge problem in america. Too many people who have no business having kids are having multiple kids. I agree it isn't the kids fault that they were born to piece of shit parents, and they deserve coverage, but parents need to have concequences for having kids they can't support, not given more money for having as many kids as they can squeeze out. this is why welfare and medicaid are broken systems, they are too easy to take advantage of and easy to find the loopholes. Which is why I hope they can come up with a public option that will eliminate such loopholes. because the current system is broken

So the best thing for society is... apoptosis? :lol:

His vision is not the Libertarian vision.

---------- Post added at 10:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 AM ----------

I agree. I just don't think the federal government should do it. Why can't this be the work of the individual states and NGOs? Why does EVERY challenge the people of this country face have to be solved by Washington, D.C.?

Quite happy about it thank you. I've never had a problem with it (Though I can agree that waiting times for non critical treatments can sometimes be a bit long).

In Sweden we do have government healthcare paid for by taxes, but also private hospitals for those that feel like using those. Seems to be working pretty well. Always room for improvement of course, but all in all a very good system.

Oh, and I believe healthcare is a right. Refusing healthcare to someone just because they do not have the money to see a doctor or get a necessary operation is just fucked up on so many levels.

punish the shit out of them when they fail.

how is that any less "government running our lives" than a public option?