I wonder how you might explain to a medical doctor that his ability is required independent of his own need to use it on his own behalf? How is the need of the one person such that it can make demands on some other person to act even against their own circumstances? While it may be true that other OECD nations have cheaper health care, the fact remains that health care does not exist in a vacuum. We can always find a wonderful attribute or condition within, say, Cuba, but would you want to move your family there? How many time must Marx's "theory" be tested before we realize that it is based on a false premise: that somehow society can achieve "social justice" for all without a grotesque human cost. How far do the bodies need to pile up in mass graves before this nonsense of a "free lunch for all" is rejected? There are wider societal conditions and mechanisms that one needs to consider. What social reward system will exist to generate a motivation for persons to go through the rigors of training that being a Health Care provider demands in a monolithic non-profit health system for all eligible Americans? I ask the question honestly! But enough of that . My point is not against Universal health care per say, it is against the underlying set of assumptions. I am asking for a careful consideration of the premises that are being put forward: That governmental bureaucracies are even capable of achieving the goal of providing services in ways that are better than when free markets can provide. In my original posting on this thread I sought to point of that there is a computational way of considering the free vs. managed market system and so far I have not had much of a response to my point other than one post by Elliot. Human beings populate both the corporate systems and federal bureaucracies and so in both systems we should expect the same range of human tendencies. I would like to understand how efficiency works in both cases as a way to form a metric of comparison that is independent of political stripes. Onward! Stephen P. King From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Brent Meeker Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 3:25 PM To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Health Care as a Human Right - Is Universal Health Care a Human Right? snip First, your argument is logic chopping. There are differences among different needs. For example no one wants to need health care. Second, empirical observation trumps logic. Communism empirically failed, it didn't reach Marx's paradise. Was Marx's logic wrong? - probably not, he just didn't take account of enough in his premises. Universal health care succeeds. Every OECD nation, except the U.S., had some form of non-profit universal health care, their results are as good or better than the U.S. and they cost only half as much per capita. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.