Subject:
|
Re: Rights to free goods? (was Re: What happened?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 3 Jul 1999 04:53:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1004 times
|
| |
|
|
John DiRienzo wrote:
Although I think this is somewhat of a dead horse issue and I'm wayyyy
to tired to be writing this...John addressed me personally, so I thought
I should respond...
>
> Thomas Main wrote in message <3779144D.DC72D75@appstate.edu>...
> > Larry Pieniazek wrote:
<snip>
> >
> > I was hoping not to engage Larry in this debate because I believe my
> > viewpoints are valid even though I might not be able to defend them as
> > aptly as Larry can defend his. I am not a good debater and Larry, as I
> > think we all know, is a masterdebater.
>
> Ah, just what the doctor ordered - good, teenage humor. When you can't
> argue, just hit 'em below the belt. Thomas, I don't know you very well,
> but I have now read a couple posts of yours, which, to me, are very
> debatable. Please do not take my defense of my beliefs as an insult to your
> person.
Just trying to diffuse a tense situation with humor...Larry seemed to
enjoy it...sorry if you thought it was juvenile.
>
> > > Thomas Main wrote:
> > >
> > > > Unfortunately, many people are not in a position to pay the outrageous
> > > > premiums insurance companies require.
> > >
> > > A fruitful line of inquiry might be into what causes premiums to be
> > > "outrageous". Check into things like barriers to entry, subsidised
> > > competition, and regulations, and report back.
> >
> >
> > I can't begin to understand insurance companies and how they operate and
> > how they're regulated. I will continue to look into these subjects.
>
> Good plan. When prices for a good are out of whack, check the government
> first - therein usually lies the cause.
I know there is a lot of government waste...I work in a university
library and see misappropriations of funds. This is a problem in
govenment that warrants concern and investigation. What can be done
about it? I don't know. Sometimes agencies and departments are
legitimately underfunded and sometimes I see spending just to spend
what's left in the budget so the same or more can be asked for next
budget cycle...this doesn't make a lot of common sense. I don't approve
of overspending...the government is not efficient in this regard.
>
> > > > And even if people do want to
> > > > pay, insurance companies get to pick and choose who they'll insure
> > > > (often denying insurance to those who need it most). Insurance
> > > > companies and hospitals are profit-motivated businesses. They are not
> > > > here to serve the people.
> > >
> > > A business that does not serve its customers will soon perish for want
> > > of customers.
> >
> > Not if its the only game in town. And if you mention competition - why
> > wouldn't the government be a worthy competitor.
>
> You are joking??
I'm just suggesting that a private insurer might not be able to charge
as much if the government had a health care plan in place that charged
less...
>
> > > A business that is forced to serve all who come regardless
> > > of ability to pay will soon perish for want of revenue.
> >
> > Each can pay according to his or her ability. All will be treated
> > according to their need.
>
> Where did you get that? Lenin? Or maybe Stalin? Although, I fear it is
> too late, you should check your premise before carrying on with this
> argument. I should stop now...
I regret making that statement now because it seems to have upset so
many people...as far as I know Karl Marx made that statement after
seeing the devastating effects of the industrial revolution on the
working poor of his time by unregulated, uncompassionate capitalists.
He was trying to imagine a society that would alleviate some of that
suffering. I realize that communists took that idea and made it a part
of their bloody revolution...I am not a communist and don't agree with
the communist party line...I don't even think Marx should be taken
seriously outside of the context of his historical epoch. I do think
socialized medicine can work - so sue me. I don't suggest it as a
replacement for private healthcare; just as a way for the uninsured to
get life-saving treatment. I don't think it should be totally free
either. I'm sure there is even some private-government partnership that
could be worked out here...
>
> > > > Government, on the other hand, is here to
> > > > serve the people.
> > >
> > > No, the proper role of government is to secure the rights of people, not
> > > serve them with free goods. You seem to have these two points completely
> > > reversed.
> >
> > Quality of life may be becoming a right in our advanced society.
> > Healthcare is a service that costs money and is treated like a commodity
> > in our society. But in the end it's about helping people achieve a
> > better quality of life and that can't be measured as a good. Our
> > government has secured the right of people to have freedom, healthcare
> > is a way in which government can secure the right of people to be free
> > from disease.
>
> So we are acquiring more unalienable rights because we are more advanced?
> This goes with your previous logic I suppose. Not with mine. The more
> unregulating our country goes through, the more advances we seem to make.
Some regulations slow down industry and should be eliminated...some
government interference saves lives. Industry pollutes rivers and air
for example...and government regulators try to curb this. The
libertarian ideas (as I understand it) is to hold offenders responsible
for their actions (such as pollution). But this would involve huge
class-action lawsuits that would take years to resolve...al the while
the industry keeps polluting, has no authoirty setting limits for it,
etc. I just don't think that approach is time-effective or that it
would work as well as a government sponsored enforcement
>
> > > > The government has a responsibility to provide access
> > > > to health care and insurance when insurance companies and hospitals
> > > > won't. This does not mean that private insurance and medical treatment
> > > > will disappear, or even that it will diminish.
> > >
> > > But indeed it will. Whenever a paid good competes against a free good,
> > > the paid good is soon driven out of the market. Bad money drives out
> > > good.
> >
> > Has this happened in European countries where national health care is
> > available? Think of this scenario. Larry and I are both sick. Larry,
> > choosing to quickly remedy his malady goes to a private doctor whereas I
> > go to the public health department. Larry pays $80 for the doctors
> > visit and $20 for medicine. I pay $20 for the visit and $10 for the
> > medicine (thanks to a gov. prescription card). Larry chooses to go to
> > the private doctor because:
> >
> > * He trusts the doctor and has established a relationship there
> > * He is in and out of the office with his medicine in 1 hour
> >
> > I choose to go to the health dept. where I spend 3 hours waiting and see
> > a doctor who I may or may not know. Both of us are treated. Larry has
> > spent more money - but he *chose* to because of the service provided by
> > his private doctor. I have less money to spend, but I still received
> > adequate treatment. We both win. The government health care clinic and
> > the doctor wins too. Nobody's money is driving anywhere. There's a
> > balance :)
>
> I thought Larry's point was if there are two competing companies, where
> one offers a free service, the better company (the one which is not free)
> will go out of business. For example, people have a chance to get their
> health care for free, and many many people choose this. Then the other
> company has to raise prices because it has lost customers. Then more people
> must choose the free service, and again the company that charges raises its
> prices. Until it is wiped out. Beyond that, why should I pay for your (or
> anyone's) health care? Because they voted for a guy who said I should? I
> don't like that, honestly.
I don't think people will flock to the free service. For one thing, I
think government health care shouldn't be free - but scaled to personal
income; only the destitute would get free emergency care. I think in
European countries, those that can afford private health care prefer it
over national health care plans because the quality of service is better
privately. But I still think government health care has a place - to
catch those who are uninsured privately.
> > > > Normally, you get what
> > > > you pay for - and that will keep private doctors and hospitals and
> > > > insurance companies swimming in money. But for those that need a
> > > > minimum level of support - they should be able to look to their
> > > > government for subsidizing their health care needs.
> > >
> > > Once more, slowly. In the libertarian view of rights, there are no
> > > rights to free goods. In other words, you do not have the RIGHT to the
> > > fruits of someone else's labor unless that person chooses to grant it.
> > >
> > > When john doe speaks of the government having an obligation to help him
> > > (with goods such as medical care) what john doe actually is saying is
> > > john doe has the right to expect the government to take goods away from
> > > someone else to give those goods to john doe. That's basically just
> > > stealing using government thugs instead of your own hired muscle.
> > >
> > > Once more, slowly. There is no right to goods. Rights speak to
> > > behaviours only. Goods can only be purchased with other goods or labor.
> >
> > And the government could ask for service in exchange for the healthcare
> > it provides. Compulsory military or community service (in lieu of
> > further taxation) could be the ticket to "purchasing" these goods the
> > government lavishes on us. As for the right of the government to take
> > what doesn't belong to it - that's the price of admission for living in
> > a government regulated society. While I appreciate the philosophical
> > ideals of individuals rights and permissions, the government must
> > intrude in this way or it will disappear.
>
> I am sure the people who are sick and dying because they have inadequate
> insurance would be of great use to our over manned military. Your words are
> true, though, the government may lose a lot of itself if it does not find
> another place to squeeze out some cash. By taking over healthcare, they
> could remedy their deficits for a few more years, until that turned into an
> annual loss as well. As in note (2) from Larry.
I'm just saying that there is an exchange of service for healthcare. If
all 18-20 year old were conscripted into some sort of national service
(not necessarily military-oriented) that would be a way of generating
productivity that could pay for this system.
> > Now, I believe Libertarians think that once the government is no longer,
> > all we'll be left with is a bunch of self-regulating, responsible adults
> > who pass around colored paper, smile and respect each other's rights. I
> > think chaos will ensue.
>
> I am not sure what Libertarians think, but I think your belief is pretty
> far from accurate. Maybe we should both try to find out. Whether I have
> the same vision as the Libertarians or not, I know their moral code is very
> similar to my own. Again, I feel like you are hitting below the belt,
> making up a big crock and saying that is what Libertarians think. If
> deflation of the dollar and a second industrial revolution is chaos, then
> yes, that would ensue.
Again, I wasn't trying to "hit below the belt." It's true that I don't
know a lot about libertarianism (despite getting literature from them -
I think i signed some thing or other when I was in college - now they
think *gasp* I'm one of them :)
> > >
> > > > The government
> > > > supports libraries, museums, and artists for the intellectual health of
> > > > its citizenry.
> > >
> > > The reasons why the government do this are rather different than for
> > > "intellectual health" but no matter. Libertarians oppose this wealth
> > > transfer from taxpayers to politically correct artists just as they
> > > oppose other wealth transfers. Therefore using it as justification
> > > fails.
> >
> >
> > The government collects taxes and spends the money it gets for the
> > welfare of its people. Where would we be without this system? We need
> > libraries, art, healthcare, roads to build a society. America is a
> > great country in part because it is rich....its citizens are rich and
> > they have paid for a multitute of government projects that have
> > benefitted all. For instance, we have a fabulous highway infastructure
> > without which interstate commerce and the trasfer of good would be
> > impossible...now the same companies who benefit from the government's
> > munificence scoff at paying taxes. We all win with proper government
> > spending programs...and we have a voice to choose which programs our
> > government adopts.
>
> Then choose the right ones, thats all thats needed. I could be wrong,
> but you seem to have the impression that none of these roads would be here
> without our wonderful government to make them. I humbly disagree!
someone suggested that he would prefer to see private contractors bid
for road repair directly to the people the roads were for...i just don't
think this is feasible. What if my road needs repair - I have 20
neighbors who might all want different contractors to do it. Or what of
the government sees a need to pave for future economic growth of an area
when the people don't see the *current* need for new roads?
>
> > > > It should support basic universal health care for its
> > > > citizens also. After all, the people give their tax dollars, patriotism
> > > > - some even give their lives - for the government.
> > >
> > > Libertarians oppose the draft. If the government, as a recruitment
> > > enticement to get people to enlist, wishes to promise health care to
> > > veterans, that's fine.
> > >
> > > But to say "we're going to steal from jack so we can pay john doe
> > > because we might draft john doe some day" seems rather foolish to me.
> > > Similarly, to say "we're stealing from john now so we'll later steal
> > > from jack so we can give free goods to john"(2) seems rather foolish
> > > too. Why not let john save his pennies now and buy his own goods later?
> >
> > Because life is unpredictable and john may have invested badly, or not
> > realized the importance of preparing for the future until it was too
> > late, or the stock market crashed and because we live in a
> > compasssionate society we have a fail-safe.
>
> Again I wonder if you are for real! Do we really live in a compassionate
> society? Or does it make you personally feel better to believe that?
> Perhaps if this person wasn't trained (brainwashed as Larry put it) to
> believe that the world would take care of him, he would have planned
> better??
I'm saying there are circumstances beyond everyone's control. One
serious disease can bankrupt a family...cancer treatments that cost
$1000 each when you have to go 3x a week...
Make insurance more universal...people pay on a graduated scale...it
might be more managable
And, yes, I am for real. Like Larry, I believe people ar absically
good. I also believe that we live in a compassionate society...and
because of technology and better use of resources, we are able to be
more and more giving...
> > > 1 - For instance, expect Jasper or Richard to weigh in about how well
> > > the Euros do at transferring wealth to provide free goods... :-) Their
> > > bubble hasn't burst yet, but it will.
> > >
> > > 2 - boil down the social security trust fund and this is what you're
> > > left with, by the way.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
> > > - - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
> > >
> > > NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
> > > will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Main
> > main@appstate.edu
> > Webpage: http://members.xoom.com/brickenplate/index.html
--
Thomas Main
main@appstate.edu
Webpage: http://members.xoom.com/brickenplate/index.html
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
433 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
