|
|
|
|
|
|
by mikeash
3434 days ago
|
|
|
A lot of people consider health care to be a basic human right. Taxing people to provide health care is, from that perspective, not fundamentally different from taxing people to prosecute murder. I get that you probably don't think health care is a human right, but "not even on the same spectrum" is not a simple statement of fact. If your preferred outcome involves screwing these people and various others because you think overall it's a worthwhile tradeoff, then so be it, but I want to make sure we're clear on that consequence. |
|
|
Correct, I consider human rights to be more fundamental than a new product/service -- health care didn't even exist a century ago. It is expensive, scarce, and difficult to define, as it is constantly changing. The only thing that is guaranteed is that there will be a point where a patient cannot be given any more healthcare, because of the diminishing returns (measured in hours of added lifespan per dollar).
> If your preferred outcome involves screwing these people and various others because you think overall it's a worthwhile tradeoff, then so be it, but I want to make sure we're clear on that consequence.
Yes you've mentioned that point before and I addressed it. To recapitulate: there is definitely an interesting argument to be made for the tradeoffs involved, and I think it would be worthwhile if measured in terms of average lifespan. However, as I said, I am not as convinced as you are that people with pre-existing conditions are going to be "screwed" in a more free-market, insurance-free system. Their costs of treatment goes down, and by the nature of insurance, they would typically be paying more than the cost of their treatment anyway (over time) to the insurance company, so....