On 3/15/2010 3:26 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:

Hi Brent,

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?


You give yourself away as a ideologue libertarian, not a seeker after understanding, by your choice of extreme examples. The other OECD nations are culturally, politically, and economically similar to the U.S.

How many sweatshops and monopolies and corporate run governments must we have before we realize that a laissez faire free for all does not make for a good society.

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 ...



Indeed, and considering wider societal conditions, beyond GDP, has motivated the development of meausres of "happiness" and "life satisfaction". At the top of the list are nations like Denmark, Costa Rica, and Switzerland. All with democratic governments, personal freedoms, and universal health care. And all nations I would move my family too (Costa Rica was Rush Limbaugh's choice).

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.


The very fact that you phrase the question as free vs managed market shows your bias. Markets can only exist where fraud and anti-competitive practices are suppressed - which takes management. And as the human population and consumption and pollution continue to grow exponentially either we will manage the problem or it will manage us.

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.


The read T. R. Reids "The Healing of America" and Shannon Brownlees's "Overtreated" and look up studies of life satisfaction online.

But I don't think this topic is appropriate to the everything-list. So if you want to reply I suggest you take it offline.

Brent

Onward!

Stephen P. King

*From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Brent Meeker
*Sent:* Monday, March 15, 2010 3:25 PM
*To:* everything-list@googlegroups.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.

--
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.

Reply via email to