Universal health care in a universe created by God

[Gary Childress]

So if universal health care is unsustainable according to the laws of economics; and the universe (by necessity) must be something created by a sentient being that we traditionally call "God"; if both of those statements are true, then does that mean that God created a universe where the rules of nature and the human social world dictate that universal healthcare is unsustainable?

Or (if there is a God) did God just create a systematic universe ad hoc and only realize later that he had created one in which all humans cannot possibly (according to the way the laws of economics work, which he designed) receive decent medical care?

[MikeNovack]

So if universal health care is unsustainable according to the laws of economics

Explain. Are you meaning "health care cannot be provided to all" OR "just a matter of who is paying for it"?

And please leave gods out of politics. Presumably we are past the days when people believed a god chose the king as assigned each a station in life. Or rather past the days when people would use that in public argument.

[Impenitent]

decent medical care only prolongs your separation from god

-Imp

[Walker]

Healthcare deductibles have tripled since Obamacare was passed and people finally got to know what is in it.

The concept of God does have its antithesis, due to binary reality processing that permits the recognition.

[Immanuel Can]

Gary's question isn't strong enough. He could make it much, much worse, if he thought about it for a second.

How many people in human history have had "universal health care"?

How many people in the world today have ANY health care, let alone "universal"?

I've been in rural places in the Developing World. Have you ever seen somebody who's had zero dentistry in his life? How about somebody for whom pain medication is just an idea, not anything they've ever experienced? How much "health care" do rural women really get when they give birth? What's it like for a man who farms, but with no antibiotics to resist infection?

Gary's question is far too tame. The situation is much, much more dire than his all-Western experience will let him imagine. It's as crazy as asking, "Why would God not make universal internet access available?" The answer is that almost NOBODY has had it...certainly down through history.

So what is the real question, here? In his zeal to justify a very modern, very recent and very limited social benefit, Gary seems to have missed it.

[Gary Childress]

How many people in the world today have ANY health care, let alone "universal"?

You don't want universal health care, so how are you going to fix that problem for those who don't have health care at all? How do you propose that everyone gets health care?

[Walker]

I think a more charitable assessment than "missing the boat" is that Devil’s advocacy does limit cognition of possibilities when it becomes a habit.

[Gary Childress]

So if universal health care is unsustainable according to the laws of economics

Explain. Are you meaning "health care cannot be provided to all" OR "just a matter of who is paying for it"?

And please leave gods out of politics. Presumably we are past the days when people believed a god chose the king as assigned each a station in life. Or rather past the days when people would use that in public argument.

According to IC, universal health care is unsustainable. According to him economics dictates that "someone has to pay for it" and IC doesn't think it's fair to tax the rich more to pay for it, because taxes are "theft" according to him. So I'm just curious how our resident God-worshiper proposes to get health care to people who don't currently have it. Pray harder for it to happen maybe?

[phyllo]

What if he just doesn't care that people get health care?

Or alternatively, what if health care is only for those who can pay for it completely or who get someone else to pay for them in terms of gifts or donations?

[Gary Childress]

What if he just doesn't care that people get health care?

I suspect that's pretty much the case.

[Immanuel Can]

I'm just curious how our resident God-worshiper proposes to get health care to people who don't currently have it.

Well, instead of asking the wrong question, why didn't you ask me directly?

Answer: because I already answered it, in our other conversation.

But I'll go over it briefly, here.

Health care is an unsolvable problem. If you opt for private, there is one set of bad outcomes. If you opt for universal, there's a different set of bad outcomes. There is, contrary to Progressive naivete, no way to provide health care to everybody for free and without bad consequences. That simply does not happen.

That's the sort of realism that ideologues simply don't have, but about which reality simply does not care and will not cut them a break. However, it's they who seem to think that government can solve the dilemma. Nobody sensible would ever think that, and history certainly does not support it.

So I now ask, how? How, dear advocate of universal health care, is it going to be supplied universally, fairly, sustainably and without crashing your economy? Or are you just whining, and leaving all the hard particulars to a nameless, non-existent kind of government you think knows what you don't?

Let's see your plan. Spin out those details.

[Immanuel Can]

What if he just doesn't care that people get health care?

I suspect that's pretty much the case.

If "caring" would get people universal health care, they'd already have it. But you're thinking you're morally superior for "caring" about things you don't even have a strategy for arranging or a means of providing. I think you're not as "caring" as you think you are.

[Gary Childress]

I'm just curious how our resident God-worshiper proposes to get health care to people who don't currently have it.

Well, instead of asking the wrong question, why didn't you ask me directly?

Answer: because I already answered it, in our other conversation.

But I'll go over it briefly, here.

Health care is an unsolvable problem. If you opt for private, there is one set of bad outcomes. If you opt for universal, there's a different set of bad outcomes. There is, contrary to Progressive naivete, no way to provide health care to everybody for free and without bad consequences. That simply does not happen.

That's the sort of realism that ideologues simply don't have, but about which reality simply does not care and will not cut them a break. However, it's they who seem to think that government can solve the dilemma. Nobody sensible would ever think that, and history certainly does not support it.

So I now ask, how? How, dear advocate of universal health care, is it going to be supplied universally, fairly, sustainably and without crashing your economy? Or are you just whining, and leaving all the hard particulars to a nameless, non-existent kind of government you think knows what you don't?

Let's see your plan. Spin out those details.

My plan was medicare for all. Did you not read my prior posts? But you whine that it can't work and that it's "socialism". So are you ready to confess that God is not benevolent yet? Or is creating a world where universal health care is economically impossible (according to you) a sign of "benevolence"? Or how do you propose to get healthcare to everyone? What is your alternative plan?

[Walker]

In the USA, the federal government pays for border jumpers in dire straits ... trauma, childbirth, that sort of thing. States may be more generous.

Those citizens who pay high deductibles use the available healthcare the old-fashioned way.
The old-fashioned way is when absolutely necessary.
Dire Straits. The deductible is too big.

In the meantime, insurance companies enjoy their salad days.

Innate fairness calls foul.

[Gary Childress]

Apparently, all those illegals do is suck up our public resources and give nothing in return. It's their fault.