Is healthcare a right?

Balzac89

Balzac89

Undercover Mod
Private industry has to be regulated by the government. It has been proven a billion times that when private industry runs rampant they will do anything to make a quick buck even if it meant like treating you like dog shit and also producing unsafe products.

The goverment could easily handle public health care. Have you seen the projections for social security? The government was doing a damn good job with it until the congressman in the is country ran up our debt. Then Bush senior and Clinton borrowed huge amounts of money from the SS fund to pay off parts of the debt. Social security should remain solvent until 2045 if being run like it is now and beyond at 76 percent payments to 2084. That speaks for the waste of money for private corporations for CEO's and presidents of companies that get paid million for nothing.

If we turned the fund to private businesses the money would run out in like 2025. We have some time to figure this out.
 
CaRNiFReeK

CaRNiFReeK

Well-Known Member
0xo0 said:
That's assuming all things are fair and no one is cheating. I would love it if it were like that. But it's not really a free market. If it really were that simple, wouldn't it all be that simple?
Click to expand...
It is NOT fair! There is NOTHING fair about it! I am not saying we live in a free market, and anyone who thinks we do is effing dumb! We live in a mixed market. That is why we have government intervention when the free market fails. What I have described to you is EXACTLY the way things work in the market that we actually live in. It does not even care if people cheat. It doesn't care if people lie. 2+2 is always going to equal 4-- even if you say it really equals 5.



0xo0 said:
One could look at the health care our veterans get, it sure seems to be working really well. The operating costs are actually quite low too
Click to expand...
Now that is a laugh and a half. As a retired veteran with CHAMPA insurance, (which is a completely different set of regulation, than private insurance, btw) and private insurance, (employer subsidized or not) and you get sick and need medical attention. Your health coverage comes out of your private insurance BEFORE it comes out of CHAMPA. The way VA keeps its costs low is by making your private insurance pay FIRST around 80% of the costs AFTER you pay your deductible, BEFORE it kicks in on the remaining 20%. (which it almost NEVER completely covers) Of course it has low operating costs! It only has to pay 20% of the bill! If you don't have a private insurance as a veteran, the health care is deplorable.
 
BudMcLovin

BudMcLovin

Active Member
CaRNiFReeK said:
It is NOT fair! There is NOTHING fair about it! I am not saying we live in a free market, and anyone who thinks we do is effing dumb! We live in a mixed market. That is why we have government intervention when the free market fails. What I have described to you is EXACTLY the way things work in the market that we actually live in. It does not even care if people cheat. It doesn't care if people lie. 2+2 is always going to equal 4-- even if you say it really equals 5.
Click to expand...
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:bongsmilie
 
CaRNiFReeK

CaRNiFReeK

Well-Known Member
Balzac89 said:
Private industry has to be regulated by the government. It has been proven a billion times that when private industry runs rampant they will do anything to make a quick buck even if it meant like treating you like dog shit and also producing unsafe products.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But let's not confuse regulation with market intervention. They are 2 different things. Regulations control externalities-costs or benefits of a market activity borne by a third party. Like dumping your manufacturing waste in a river, or controlling emissions. Intervention is when the government disrupts the market by telling you what you have to buy or sell OR what you cannot buy or sell OR how much you can buy or sell.

As for doing anything to make a quick buck, that is nonsense. We are all buyers and we are all sellers. We sell our labor to our employer to earn the buying power for goods and services we want. It is the goal of every producer to maximize profits. It is the goal of every consumer to get the best price. There is a push and a pull. If a worker was not willing and able to sell his labor for a given price, then he shouldn't sell it at that price. If a buyer is not willing and able to buy a good or service at a given price, then he should not buy it at that price. It is in this way that the market seeks and finds it's equilibrium.

When you buy a good or service, you are looking for the best price. No bitching or whining if you buy it and can't afford it. When an employer employs workers, he is also looking for the best price. When Wal Mart puts Mom and Pop out of business it is not Wal Mart's fault. IT IS THE CONSUMERS FAULT!!! If you care more about Mom and Pop, then buy from them at a higher price. If you are interested in the best price, you go to Wal Mart and Mom and Pop go under. Fair? No. Real world? Yes. And no amount of saying it ain't is gonna change it. I said it 3 posts ago. It is a law that is stronger than gravity.
 
CaRNiFReeK

CaRNiFReeK

Well-Known Member
blazin256 said:
if more than half of america wasn't so fat, would we even be discussing this right now?
Click to expand...
That is exactly what I mean when I say that the supply curve has to be pushed to the right! People get healthier, and health care gets cheaper. When that happens, it becomes cheaper to write insurance policies! When insurance companies can produce cheaper policies, more people can afford to buy them, and equilibrium finds more insured people in that market! Someone gets it! Probably why TV shows like "The Doctors" and "Dr. OZ" came out right about the same time Obamacare passed.

Here is a great Reader's Digest article on health care fixes that explores ways that the government could regulate externalities without intervening in the marketplace, and telling us what we have to buy.

http://www.rd.com/living-healthy/18-ideas-to-reform-health-care-now/article101364.html
 
blazin256

blazin256

Well-Known Member
i think those shows have been out for a few years tho. but yea, it makes sense. health care is so much because we're so fat. and it takes that much to keep fat people "healthy". so the problem is clearly fat people, tax THEM. what am i saying. they make up the majority. no way would a fat tax ever pass.
 
CaRNiFReeK

CaRNiFReeK

Well-Known Member
I just started noticing those shows recently. I spend most of my time reading. We are already talking about taxing sweets. I recall seeing something about a tax on trans fats, too. When you put a fatty up in the air, you get the munchies, right? So wouldn't legalizing and taxing MJ be an inadvertent fat tax, too? You know that Little Debbie will produce more ding dongs and ho hos the day they legalize.
 
CaRNiFReeK

CaRNiFReeK

Well-Known Member
NoDrama said:
Sugar causes people to be fat, not fat.
Click to expand...
Lol, that's all you got? Any time you have a caloric intake that exceeds the amount of calories you burn, causes fat. Trans fats cause coronary artery disease which leads to a sedentary lifestyle- which leads to burning less calories than you take in. Which leads to fat. I can't tell if you are being contrary just for the fun of it, or if you actually believe that fat doesn't cause people to be fat.

I like your sig, btw.
 
ginjawarrior

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
CaRNiFReeK said:
I just started noticing those shows recently. I spend most of my time reading. We are already talking about taxing sweets. I recall seeing something about a tax on trans fats, too. When you put a fatty up in the air, you get the munchies, right? So wouldn't legalizing and taxing MJ be an inadvertent fat tax, too? You know that Little Debbie will produce more ding dongs and ho hos the day they legalize.
Click to expand...
i dunno i find munchies is something you grow out of when smoking when i get stoned alot i find i cant be bothered to go make myself some food much easier to just roll another one ;)
 
Dinosaur Bone

Dinosaur Bone

Active Member
blazin256 said:
i think those shows have been out for a few years tho. but yea, it makes sense. health care is so much because we're so fat. and it takes that much to keep fat people "healthy". so the problem is clearly fat people, tax THEM. what am i saying. they make up the majority. no way would a fat tax ever pass.
Click to expand...
The Democrats will assume that Republicans are the only ones who are fat, much the same way that Republicans assume that only lefty democrats are the only ones who smoke weed. If the Democrats dont figure out their party contains fat people too... the fat tax is coming.

What about CARBON tax's ??? How far will that go?? At what point do they put your fat ass on a scale to determine how much carbon you consist of??
 
0

0xo0

Member
See this is what I mean CaRNiFReeK, you're NOT understanding me. You're taking what I'm saying to mean something else entirely. Then some dude claps because you're saying exactly what he wants to hear. Lovely.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Balzac89 said:
Private industry has to be regulated by the government. It has been proven a billion times that when private industry runs rampant they will do anything to make a quick buck even if it meant like treating you like dog shit and also producing unsafe products.

The goverment could easily handle public health care. Have you seen the projections for social security? The government was doing a damn good job with it until the congressman in the is country ran up our debt. Then Bush senior and Clinton borrowed huge amounts of money from the SS fund to pay off parts of the debt. Social security should remain solvent until 2045 if being run like it is now and beyond at 76 percent payments to 2084. That speaks for the waste of money for private corporations for CEO's and presidents of companies that get paid million for nothing.

If we turned the fund to private businesses the money would run out in like 2025. We have some time to figure this out.
Click to expand...

If the government is regulating private industry, it is no longer private is it?
 
0

0xo0

Member
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder

Recommended reading. It's recognized as an actual disorder, it's not a sign of a healthy happy person. I'm NOT saying anybody participating in this thread is actually a narcissist or has narcissistic personality disorder, I'm only linking it in hopes that reading it might help someone anyone see where I'm coming from with the whole narcissism thing I was trying to get across. I feel this country is definitely overly narcissistic, to the point where it definitely harms us all. I include myself in that completely, I did grow up here and everything. I think it's weird that the whole democrat/republican thing somehow manages to split this country right in half, don't you?
 
0

0xo0

Member
And it's funny too, because to most people the whole thing is basically more like The Superbowl than anything else.
 
CaRNiFReeK

CaRNiFReeK

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
If the government is regulating private industry, it is no longer private is it?
Click to expand...

Um... YES! Regulation occurs when an industry practice creates an externality, the cost (or benefit) of which has to be borne by a third party. When an industrial plant dumps waste into a river and contaminates the drinking water of a community, the government passes a tax to get it cleaned up. Then it regulates that industry by outlawing industrial dumping, and puts guidelines on waste disposal. Regulation is the constitutional responsibility of the government to protect the US from all enemies both foreign and domestic.


Intervention is when the government enters a market that is failing, ie., healthcare, and forces the supplier to sell policies at a price lower than they can produce them. And/or tells consumers that they have to buy policies that they either don't want or can't afford.


0xo0 said:
See this is what I mean CaRNiFReeK, you're NOT understanding me. You're taking what I'm saying to mean something else entirely. Then some dude claps because you're saying exactly what he wants to hear. Lovely.
Click to expand...

I do understand what you are talking about. I really do. I think it sucks that our sick, injured, and diseased have to suffer and die because of a dollar. I think it is horrible. I wish that there were not mountains of data and hundreds of formulae proving that what you are talking about will not work. From an economics standpoint, there can be no emotion involved. I'm not pushing a personal, or a political concept here.


For the whole narcissistic personality disorder thing, I read your link. I don't really see where you are coming from as it pertains to the question, “Is health care a right?” Then again, I don't really like to pick apart brains as much as I like to pick apart economics issues. Psychology just has too many emotional attachments to be accurate 100% of the time, unlike economics, which is completely emotionally detached.


Politics is another matter. I like to think and talk politics. But my opinions change when I have to admit that I've been proven wrong or that my ideas were flawed. I find myself changing my mind, and other people think that I am wishy washy. That's politics.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
CaRNiFReeK said:
Um... YES! Regulation occurs when an industry practice creates an externality, the cost (or benefit) of which has to be borne by a third party. When an industrial plant dumps waste into a river and contaminates the drinking water of a community, the government passes a tax to get it cleaned up. Then it regulates that industry by outlawing industrial dumping, and puts guidelines on waste disposal. Regulation is the constitutional responsibility of the government to protect the US from all enemies both foreign and domestic.


Intervention is when the government enters a market that is failing, ie., healthcare, and forces the supplier to sell policies at a price lower than they can produce them. And/or tells consumers that they have to buy policies that they either don't want or can't afford.





I do understand what you are talking about. I really do. I think it sucks that our sick, injured, and diseased have to suffer and die because of a dollar. I think it is horrible. I wish that there were not mountains of data and hundreds of formulae proving that what you are talking about will not work. From an economics standpoint, there can be no emotion involved. I'm not pushing a personal, or a political concept here.


For the whole narcissistic personality disorder thing, I read your link. I don't really see where you are coming from as it pertains to the question, “Is health care a right?” Then again, I don't really like to pick apart brains as much as I like to pick apart economics issues. Psychology just has too many emotional attachments to be accurate 100% of the time, unlike economics, which is completely emotionally detached.


Politics is another matter. I like to think and talk politics. But my opinions change when I have to admit that I've been proven wrong or that my ideas were flawed. I find myself changing my mind, and other people think that I am wishy washy. That's politics.
Click to expand...
Thank you for responding.
When the government "regulates" isn't that at least the beginning of the private business ceasing to be private? You gave examples of how and why they regulate. I asked "if" they regulate and submit that if a business is regulated by government it no longer is private.
The government word smithing and redefining of what a "private business" is doesn't matter.

The only private businesses I can think of are black market businesses...can you think of others?
 
CaRNiFReeK

CaRNiFReeK

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Thank you for responding.
When the government "regulates" isn't that at least the beginning of the private business ceasing to be private? You gave examples of how and why they regulate. I asked "if" they regulate and submit that if a business is regulated by government it no longer is private.
The government word smithing and redefining of what a "private business" is doesn't matter.

The only private businesses I can think of are black market businesses...can you think of others?
Click to expand...
It is the responsibility of government to regulate business in order to protect the third party. If the government intervenes in a marketplace, that is when I think businesses become less private, and their status as such becomes a matter of semantics.

Black markets are still markets. The prohibition of drugs is a great example of the power of supply and demand. No amount of prohibition has eliminated the market for illegal drugs. There is still a supply and there is still a demand. The market doesn't care if it is legal or not. As long as there are suppliers and demanders, the market goes nowhere. Not under threat of fine, imprisonment, or death. What is interesting about the black market is that in the absence of regulation and intervention prices stay pretty much the same year after year. It finds and retains equilibrium. The supply curve, and the demand curve don't shift too much because they are not being acted on by many outside forces. The $400 zip I was buying 10 years ago is still the $400 dollar zip the market offers today. Even inflation doesn't really change it. Inflation is a man made phenomenon, and economics doesn't care about the innovations of man.

EDIT: In order to protect the third party, it is the responsibility of government to regulate businesses that fail to regulate themselves.
 
CaRNiFReeK

CaRNiFReeK

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The only private businesses I can think of are black market businesses...can you think of others?
Click to expand...
I think the only free market is the black market. All private businesses that are not operating in the black market are not free markets, they are mixed markets.

If you are a seller of pot, and you go out and buy a $50 tax stamp to affix to every ounce of your product, you take your product off the black market. What does that do to the supply and demand curve? you are no longer willing and able to sell it for $400 an ounce. You have to charge $450 to cover the cost of the stamp. But your customers are no longer willing and able to buy it, either. You are left with a couple of options: figure out a way to cut your lighting costs, produce your own fertilizer, etc., thereby shifting your supply curve to the right. OR you could kill off all of the other dealers in your area, or start targeting high school kids to shift your demand curve back to the left. It will find equilibrium one way or the other. It is the governments ability to manipulate the market that keep sick people uninsured, and other immoral eventualities in motion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top