Philosophy Now Forum

If the government determines that a certain level of healthcare should be available to everyone, there is only one proper way to accomplish it. The government must set up identical healthcare accounts for everybody, whether he be a billionaire or homeless. It needs to be a specific dollar amount invested in that person's name and funded annually by the government. People are able to charge health expenses of any kind to that account, including health insurance, doctor visits, presciptions and hospital care, all purchased by the individual in the free market.

What about the waste that comes with spending money on people who are not experiencing any health problems?

The Voice of Time wrote:What about the waste that comes with spending money on people who are not experiencing any health problems?

That's what insurance is.

The Voice of Time wrote:What about the waste that comes with spending money on people who are not experiencing any health problems?

Treating everybody equally is not waste according to the U.S. Constitution:
The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws."
Furthermore, each account only covers health-related issues, including preventive-health measures. Obviously, everybody will eventually have health-related issues, but if his account is properly managed, there will probably be enough money in it to fully or substantially cover both major and minor ones.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:That's what insurance is.

What? You're talking about insurance as the solution or somehow (and I can't quite see how) a problem of waste? Unless you're referring to luxurious insurances that excessively gives priority and resource allocations to people who do not need the specific degree of resource consumption, and therefore waste away human resources and hospital resources on treating some people excessively while others are left with nearly nothing.

bobevenson wrote:If the government determines that a certain level of healthcare should be available to everyone, there is only one proper way to accomplish it. The government must set up identical healthcare accounts for everybody, whether he be a billionaire or homeless. It needs to be a specific dollar amount invested in that person's name and funded annually by the government. People are able to charge health expenses of any kind to that account, including health insurance, doctor visits, presciptions and hospital care, all purchased by the individual in the free market.

And when your kid gets leukemia, you're broke anyhow. I'm not saying that the Swedish system with really high taxes and state funded medical care for everyone for everything is better or worse, I'm just saying that your system does not change much. Unless you take care of the high-cost-cases somehow.

bobevenson wrote:If the government determines that a certain level of healthcare should be available to everyone [...] It needs to be a specific dollar amount ...

Who wants the same health care to be available to those who are healthy and those who are sick? I want sick people to be able to go to the medics and get better. Healthy people don't need to do that.

mickthinks wrote:

bobevenson wrote:If the government determines that a certain level of healthcare should be available to everyone [...] It needs to be a specific dollar amount ...

Who wants the same health care to be available to those who are healthy and those who are sick? I want sick people to be able to go to the medics and get better. Healthy people don't need to do that.

What you are saying is that it's OK for the government to force people to pay money to somebody in need. If you did that yourself, you would be thrown in jail. In other words, you think it's OK for the government to do something that you, yourself, would be thrown in jail for. In other words, you want to be a co-conspirator in the crime, hiring the government to do your dirty work to keep your own hands clean. It's like hiring somebody to commit a robbery. You should be indicted, tried, convicted and put behind bars along with the actual perpetrator of the crime.

Bob, why do you call it a party when it's just you btw? That's like saying "i'm with a group" and then enter the night club alone. Why don't you just refer to it as your own ideas instead of some made up political party?

A political party is created by people and not be the mere idea of it.

The Voice of Time wrote:Bob, why do you call it a party when it's just you btw? That's like saying "i'm with a group" and then enter the night club alone. Why don't you just refer to it as your own ideas instead of some made up political party?

A political party is created by people and not be the mere idea of it.

Do you think Christianity was created by a group?

Yeah, it was. In fact it was created by lots of people over a large span of time. And it certainly wasn't Christianity when the earliest person working on the spiritual ideology started working, that was just some lonely dude who was likely also insane but smart enough to appear esoteric and not just out of his mind.

bobevenson wrote:

mickthinks wrote:I want sick people to be able to go to the medics and get better. Healthy people don't need to do that.

What you are saying is that it's OK for the government to force people to pay money to somebody in need.

Er ... no, bob, that's not what I said.

Why are you changing the subject? Don't you want to discussthe AEP's health policy anymore?

The Voice of Time wrote:Yeah, it was. In fact it was created by lots of people over a large span of time. And it certainly wasn't Christianity when the earliest person working on the spiritual ideology started working.

Tell that to Jesus, my friend.

mickthinks wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

mickthinks wrote:I want sick people to be able to go to the medics and get better. Healthy people don't need to do that.

What you are saying is that it's OK for the government to force people to pay money to somebody in need.

Er ... no, bob, that's not what I said.

Why are you changing the subject? Don't you want to discussthe AEP's health policy anymore?

What do you mean "changing the subject"? That's what this subject is all about, the government forcing healthy people to pay the bills of sick people, criminal behavior for everybody except the government.

bobevenson wrote: What do you mean "changing the subject"? That's what this subject is all about, the government forcing healthy people to pay the bills of sick people, criminal behavior for everybody except the government.

This is because the government isn't a natural person. It is an artificial person. Such entities are judged differently in law.