There are those who see health care — not guaranteed by the “free” market or the Constitution — as a human right.
Health is not an economic good but a moral and ethical right to “the pursuit of happiness,” not the pursuit of economic profit.
Thank God he has “take-home pay to fund private insurance,” because millions do not have any pay.
President John F. Kennedy said, “If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.”
PHILLIP SCHICK
Dear Fool,
Yes, there are those that see health care as a human right, just as there are those that think the sun orbits the earth. These people are charitably referred to as "misguided," but the unvarnished truth of the matter is that they are fools. And you, Sir, are a fool.
Allow me to elucidate. A "human right" as defined in our Constitution is something, a "freedom," if you will, that cannot be taken away from you. Through the years of liberal progressive redefinition, it has also come to mean "something that must be provided to you," typically by the government. This is in stark contrast to the intent of the visionaries that penned the Constitution, but that is a subject for a different day.
It is important to note that the government that provides millions of people with their "human rights" produces nothing, NOTHING on its own. It therefore has nothing of its own to give. So, where do the goodies come from? That's easy: they are taken, under threat of force and/or incarceration if necessary, from others.
Reflect on that, Phil: for the government to give you something, it first has to take it away from me. This is, of course, a direct violation of my human rights, but I suppose you don't really care about that. The sanctity of human rights, in your mind, is conditional on which side of the "rob Peter to pay
Nice work, if you can get it.
Let's just set that aside, though, and accept it as an uncomfortable fact of life that those that work must provide for those that don't. For the sake of argument, let us assume that 'health care' is, in fact, a human right and should therefore be provided to all. Well, that clearly can't work - 'all' is quite a few people, right? Someone has to pay, right?
Well, no. Because you also state that there should be no pursuit of economic profit in health care. It should just... happen.
Tell me how that would work, Phil. Do you envision of vast army of volunteers providing your health care services to you, Phil? How many people do you think would volunteer to clean your bed pan, Phil? Who would feed those people? Food and lodging, as it turns out, are seemingly human rights as well.
And let's assume (in the interest of reductio ad absurdum) that our existing system of highly trained health care professionals was replaced by people willing to go through the years of rigorous educational process required to provide medical care, just to end up working long, stressful hours in exchange for a subsistence life style. What kind of person would be attracted to that, Phil? Sure, some very small percentage would be altruists, but the vast majority would almost certainly be those without the requisite skills to perform well in the for-profit market where they would, you know, get paid. Is that who you want performing your open heart surgery? Someone not clever enough to stock shelves at Walmart?
Good luck with that, Phil, because believe me, you're going to need it.
President John F. Kennedy said, “If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.”
He spoke of a free society, Phil. That's you and me, acting as free people. This used to be known as "charity." It was something people actually did do voluntarily.
When government uses it immense powers of force to enslave those who provide for themselves into providing for others, we no longer have a free society.
But you're getting "free" health care, and that's just fine by you.
