Universal Healthcare for all

The happy Objectivist

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2020
909
274
56
Center
✟58,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I cannot dispute that nor do I want to, but it still is the case that in real life it is often just a matter of opinion as to who "started it."
No, it's a matter of facts that are discoverable and that is what courts are for, to discover the available facts and to act accordingly and impartially.

But government often doesn't do what it is supposed to do. That being the case, the man who retaliates against his neighbor would have to be considered the one retaliating, not the initiator of force, in this incident. So he wouldn't be at fault, according to Objectivism as you explained it here.
Yes, in the case where the government doesn't do the job we delegate to it, then it falls on each man to defend himself and his property, which he has an absolute right to do. One can not delegate a right that one does not have in the first place.

Who says "we delegate this power?" What if I say that I don't choose to delegate it? That should be my decision in the Objectivist thinking. Oh, that's right, the government will use force against me and no one is on hand who can prevent it!
The government would only have the right to use force against you if you started its use, just as you only have the right to use force in self-defense.
 
Upvote 0

The happy Objectivist

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2020
909
274
56
Center
✟58,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I'm afraid that that shows a misunderstanding of conservatism, but it's common. There are, incidentally, quite a few differences between conservatism and classical liberalism, but the size of government was the point that was mentioned, so that drew the response.
Are the Tea Party true conservatives?
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
No, it's a matter of facts that are discoverable and that is what courts are for, to discover the available facts and to act accordingly and impartially.
Oh, so now we add in the fickleness of the court system which already renders one decision only to have it overturned by a higher court and who knows what at a still higher court. Or else the courts refuse to hear the case at all.

You want this to be clear cut, but it never can be, not using this instigator and retaliator system that renders this supposedly tidy system of determining right and wrong no better than what we have at present.

Yes, in the case where the government doesn't do the job we delegate to it, then it falls on each man to defend himself and his property, which he has an absolute right to do.
Doesn't that mean that the Objectivist system of justice is negated?

The government would only have the right to use force against you if you started its use,
Which I have to say again, is a matter of opinion in most cases...and then if it is posited that the government shall decide who is correct about it, you've returned absolute power to the state.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Are the Tea Party true conservatives?
The Tea Party members strike me as being a collection of people who are generally conservative or conservative in the aggregate; but there's no blood test for membership and the participants are definitely a mixture.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
No, it's a matter of facts that are discoverable and that is what courts are for, to discover the available facts and to act accordingly and impartially.

Yes, in the case where the government doesn't do the job we delegate to it, then it falls on each man to defend himself and his property, which he has an absolute right to do. One can not delegate a right that one does not have in the first place.

The government would only have the right to use force against you if you started its use, just as you only have the right to use force in self-defense.
The history of human conflict is the history of claims that "They started it!"

But what counts as force, and who decides? does a pickpocket use force? a hacker? squatters? a con-man? Would you be justified in using force against them to regain your property? If you're planning or plotting to use force, can the government (or anyone else) pre-emptively use force against you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Albion
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
15,202
5,877
✟296,775.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Some current medications can be tens, of thousands per month, and with DNA research it may be possible to spend 100's of thousands for medication for one person. Are there any lines to draw on how much we will spend on healthcare and will we make it universal for every person in the world to spend all the resources possible we have on everyone? Even on Trump Supporters? Or Democrats? Or Muslims?

If you asked the world for a vote, I'm sure, there'll be a lot more people voting for socialized healthcare. There's a lot more poor people in the world who badly need quality healthcare.

It can be traumatic ordeal to lose a loved one because quality healthcare is unaffordable. I was one of those. Left us a huge debt and me in mental wreck. I even lost most of my clients because I can't do my job properly anymore from the ordeal. I have contemplated suicide a few times even. My grandfather did commit suicide as self-euthanasia due to cancer, they couldn't afford hospital either.

Quality Universal Education is also critically needed while you're at it. You will have more pressing overpopulation problems with universal healthcare. Lack of quality education is strongly correlated to excessively high fertility rates.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
My leg got banged up pretty good in an accident a couple of months ago. Decided to have it looked at because it seemed the prudent thing to do. Got sent to the ER for an ultrasound for blood clots I didn't have and they did some x-rays. Got the bills which totaled over $4,000. But since I have low premium insurance through my employer and union. I only had to cover a $50 copay. I'd like to see it be that way or similar for everyone.
In Australia, I would see my local GP, they'd give me a referral to a radiology place and I'd get the ultrasound and x ray done there. The results would be back at my doctor within a day or so, I'd have another appointment and they'd give me the results. I wouldn't to pay anything.
 
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
15,202
5,877
✟296,775.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
In Australia, I would see my local GP, they'd give me a referral to a radiology place and I'd get the ultrasound and x ray done there. The results would be back at my doctor within a day or so, I'd have another appointment and they'd give me the results. I wouldn't to pay anything.

I went into debt just having my broken elbow fixed. Standard procedures, no complications, but costed an arm and leg.

I really hate this world for these things. I know some are having a great deal or even the deal of their lifetime but these are only few. Most people in the world are suffering. I wish the Lord would come soon or some 'nice' alien or AI invade our world to put a stop to all this madness.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I went into debt just having my broken elbow fixed. Standard procedures, no complications, but costed an arm and leg.

I really hate this world for these things. I know some are having a great deal or even the deal of their lifetime but these are only few. Most people in the world are suffering. I wish the Lord would come soon or some 'nice' alien or AI invade our world to put a stop to all this madness.
The worst thing about the American healthcare system is that it has convinced people that medicine really does cost that much. It doesn't. It's greedy companies charging a fortune for things that are very cheap to produce.
 
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
15,202
5,877
✟296,775.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
The worst thing about the American healthcare system is that it has convinced people that medicine really does cost that much. It doesn't. It's greedy companies charging a fortune for things that are very cheap to produce.

They hold our lives for ransom. Simply put, they have held a gun against our heads, demanding our money so they will spare our lives.

If America is a Christian country, they should realize that having the intelligence to make medicines, to cure illnesses is a gift of God. God's gift isn't supposed to be hard to acquire. It's supposed to be affordable to everyone. Isn't supposed to be exploited because there's a huge demand of it.

Jesus would call them thieves. There's a well defined limitation to set apart fair business from thievery in the Bible. It becomes thievery when you put atrocious prices on things that people's lives depend on (excluding luxury items).

Not sure how OZ does it for free. They're also using the same expensive medical hardware and pharmaceuticals that USA does and I can also imagine OZ doctors getting around on Porsches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kylie
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Not sure how OZ does it for free. They're also using the same expensive medical hardware and pharmaceuticals that USA does and I can also imagine OZ doctors getting around on Porsches.
That's the thing. It's NOT expensive. You in America only think it is because that's what you've been charged. Your healthcare system jacks the price way up. They charge you $20 for a bandaid or something. It's ridiculous. This stuff isn't that expensive. I had to go and get some antibiotics a little while ago, it cost me about $15 for 20 tablets, enough to last me for 10 days.

We've got a thing called "Bulk Billing." Here's a bit on how it works. Bulk billing for medical services
 
  • Informative
Reactions: timewerx
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,119
20,158
US
✟1,440,434.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
In Australia, I would see my local GP, they'd give me a referral to a radiology place and I'd get the ultrasound and x ray done there. The results would be back at my doctor within a day or so, I'd have another appointment and they'd give me the results. I wouldn't to pay anything.
Let me point out that the real discussion in the US is not about government-owned or government-supplied healthcare (which nobody with any real influence is seriously promoting), but rather government-insured health care. It's called "single-payer" healthcare in which the providers continue to be private agents but they are paid by the government rather than by a myriad of insurance companies. This is sometimes called "Medicare for All," Medicare being the current government payer for the healthcare of the elderly. I went on Medicare when I turned 65, and it's been pretty good. I also have a "Medicare Supplement" as part of my military retirement that covers medicine and anything Medicare doesn't cover.

Here is the seldom-discussed factor: The American insurance billing system is a billion-dollar industry. Companies that handle the incredibly complex and arcane system of medical insurance collect money every time they move a bill sideways multiple times between the provider and the insurance company (or companies) that pay the bill. Billions of dollars annually go nto the pockets of middlemen who do not a single thing to improve health care.

Going to a single-payer system with hospitals sending their bills directly to the government would put them all out of business overnight. Do you think they don't have lobbies in Congress?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kylie
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Let me point out that the real discussion in the US is not about government-owned or government-supplied healthcare (which nobody with any real influence is seriously promoting), but rather government-insured health care. It's called "single-payer" healthcare in which the providers continue to be private agents but they are paid by the government rather than by a myriad of insurance companies. This is sometimes called "Medicare for All," Medicare being the current government payer for the healthcare of the elderly. I went on Medicare when I turned 65, and it's been pretty good. I also have a "Medicare Supplement" as part of my military retirement that covers medicine and anything Medicare doesn't cover.

Here is the seldom-discussed factor: The American insurance billing system is a billion-dollar industry. Companies that handle the incredibly complex and arcane system of medical insurance collect money every time they move a bill sideways multiple times between the provider and the insurance company (or companies) that pay the bill. Billions of dollars annually go nto the pockets of middlemen who do not a single thing to improve health care.

Going to a single-payer system with hospitals sending their bills directly to the government would put them all out of business overnight. Do you think they don't have lobbies in Congress?
I agree, that's a huge problem. They are operating it for their own greed.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,119
20,158
US
✟1,440,434.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's the thing. It's NOT expensive. You in America only think it is because that's what you've been charged. Your healthcare system jacks the price way up. They charge you $20 for a bandaid or something. It's ridiculous. This stuff isn't that expensive. I had to go and get some antibiotics a little while ago, it cost me about $15 for 20 tablets, enough to last me for 10 days.

We've got a thing called "Bulk Billing." Here's a bit on how it works. Bulk billing for medical services

Back in 2001, my mother had an auto accident that required brain surgery. For certain reasons, they were unable to replace a section of her scull, so they had fitted her with a leather protective helmet that looked very much like the old-school leather helmets that American football players once wore. I noted that the helmet was stamped "Made in South Korea." I also noted that the hospital billed $2,000 dollars for that helmet.

Now, I've been in South Korea, and I've bought leather goods in South Korea, and I knew there was no way that helmet cost $2,000, not even including shipping. We were in Oklahoma city, so I took some photos of the helmet to a local custom bridle and saddle maker and asked them how much would it cost to have such a helmet made. They told me: $500.

Okay, so the hospital was charging $2,000 for a helmet from South Korea that did not possibly cost more than $50 and could have been made locally for $500.

A few years ago, a Chicago televisioin station did a "secret shopper" type survey of metro area hospitals, shopping around for a simple appendectomy. The prices ranged from $1500 to $25,000 for hospital services, and the differences in service certainly weren't that great.

In the US we get "not a bills" from the insurance companies, in which the insurer tells you what the provider charged and what they paid. It's not unusual for the insurance company to have paid no more than 10% of the charge, which may or may not have the provider billing you for the remainder. Here is a secret: Insurance companies have further deals in the system by which people with higher-priced policies are less likely to be billed for the remaining amounts.

A year ago, I had a prostate procedure done. Medicare and the military paid exactly 10% of the bill. Now, the urologist specializes in this procedure...it's the only thing he does. And it's an old-man's procedure, so all of his patients are on Medicare like me. That means he never receives more than 10% of what he bills, and of course, he knows that.

I figure he's able to deduct some of that from his taxes as business losses, but I also figure his real cost is nowhere near what he bills. But the amount he does get is enough to afford him a plush lifestyle.

Why is this game necessary? Why can't he charge and get a demonstrably fair price--the 10% he actually gets?

The fact is, hospitals pull their charges out of there behinds. They're out of control, and there is no way other than a single-payer system to put them under control, because it's impossible for the average person to intelligently shop around for medical care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kylie
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Back in 2001, my mother had an auto accident that required brain surgery. For certain reasons, they were unable to replace a section of her scull, so they had fitted her with a leather protective helmet that looked very much like the old-school leather helmets that American football players once wore. I noted that the helmet was stamped "Made in South Korea." I also noted that the hospital billed $2,000 dollars for that helmet.

Now, I've been in South Korea, and I've bought leather goods in South Korea, and I knew there was no way that helmet cost $2,000, not even including shipping. We were in Oklahoma city, so I took some photos of the helmet to a local custom bridle and saddle maker and asked them how much would it cost to have such a helmet made. They told me: $500.

Okay, so the hospital was charging $2,000 for a helmet from South Korea that did not possibly cost more than $50 and could have been made locally for $500.

A few years ago, a Chicago televisioin station did a "secret shopper" type survey of metro area hospitals, shopping around for a simple appendectomy. The prices ranged from $1500 to $25,000 for hospital services, and the differences in service certainly weren't that great.

In the US we get "not a bills" from the insurance companies, in which the insurer tells you what the provider charged and what they paid. It's not unusual for the insurance company to have paid no more than 10% of the charge, which may or may not have the provider billing you for the remainder. Here is a secret: Insurance companies have further deals in the system by which people with higher-priced policies are less likely to be billed for the remaining amounts.

A year ago, I had a prostate procedure done. Medicare and the military paid exactly 10% of the bill. Now, the urologist specializes in this procedure...it's the only thing he does. And it's an old-man's procedure, so all of his patients are on Medicare like me. That means he never receives more than 10% of what he bills, and of course, he knows that.

I figure he's able to deduct some of that from his taxes as business losses, but I also figure his real cost is nowhere near what he bills. But the amount he does get is enough to afford him a plush lifestyle.

Why is this game necessary? Why can't he charge and get a demonstrably fair price--the 10% he actually gets?

The fact is, hospitals pull their charges out of there behinds. They're out of control, and there is no way other than a single-payer system to put them under control, because it's impossible for the average person to intelligently shop around for medical care.
I heard some advice, which was provided for an American audience: Always ask for an itemized bill from your hospital.

And they charge for the most ridiculous things too. Such as this:

4-614c36747129d__700.jpg


There's more like this HERE.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
15,202
5,877
✟296,775.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
That's the thing. It's NOT expensive. You in America only think it is because that's what you've been charged. Your healthcare system jacks the price way up. They charge you $20 for a bandaid or something. It's ridiculous. This stuff isn't that expensive. I had to go and get some antibiotics a little while ago, it cost me about $15 for 20 tablets, enough to last me for 10 days.

We've got a thing called "Bulk Billing." Here's a bit on how it works. Bulk billing for medical services

They should be criminally charged for fraud, scam, misinformation, deception, blackmail, extortion, and also theft. Not only from the medical sector but also everyone in the government who profited from this scam.

And then reimburse to the people the amount they have stolen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kylie
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
They should be criminally charged for fraud, scam, misinformation, deception, blackmail, extortion, and also theft. Not only from the medical sector but also everyone in the government who profited from this scam.

And then reimburse to the people the amount they have stolen.
Yeah, it's nothing but sheer greed. "We can charge $100 for a bandage, $1000 for an aspirin! What are they going to do? Refuse treatment and die? Mwah ha ha!"
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
That's the thing. It's NOT expensive. You in America only think it is because that's what you've been charged. Your healthcare system jacks the price way up. They charge you $20 for a bandaid or something. It's ridiculous. This stuff isn't that expensive. I had to go and get some antibiotics a little while ago, it cost me about $15 for 20 tablets, enough to last me for 10 days.

We've got a thing called "Bulk Billing." Here's a bit on how it works. Bulk billing for medical services
I think it is better to say - it is always expensive but USA makes it Eyewateringly expensive!

In the UK our utterly dreadful NHS costs 180bn. But that ignores the 90bn Negligence claims in process (Which will be funded by taxpayer) and it cost 100bn for a single year for the effect of inflation on the pension scheme ( I hate to think what next years upgrade is!)
Add that up and it is well over 25% of total government revenues for a year.

In covid it did far less than its usual pitiful best.

Age is costing serious money. As is the fact in the UK staff are creaming the service ( many retiring early to return on contractor rates which are double! so taking 2.5 salaries), in the USA corportations are creaming it, and in both places negligence lawyers are creaming it even more.

In my view medics are the greediest people on the planet. They create no wealth themselves, so cream ever more from the struggling part of the economy that generates all the jobs and wealth. It is a job for life.

YOu can argue whether "bezos is greedy" but the bottom line is nobody has to shop at amazon, for years it ran at a massive loss, and it has indeed made the cost of selling goods very low compared to the high street. You get a shop in the busiest mall on earth, for zero rent. only commission It succeeds because of the no risk deal. Its where all the people are. With medics you get a choice of greedy people.

My sympathy is actually with big pharma, not least because I helped start a biotech company.
Pharma are the real miracle workers.

Medics are forced to keep to a script, and the pharmaceuticals are already proven by the time they use them.

The scientists are cleverer but get none of the perks, they do a far harder job. Most will lose the job at least twice because drugs fail, and companies fail. People misunderstand profits. Most drugs fail Most drug companies go bust. It costs $500m to launch a successful drug, all out of profit,
yet people speak of big pharma profiteering. They need the profit to do more trials! Most of that money goes into trials. It costs eg 200m for a full phase 3. You guessed it. A lot of that money goes back to medics for allowing their patients to be involved with trials. The Pharma takes all the risk. THe medics take much of the reward.


One major impact would be if FDA reduced the severity of trials. (which relies on patients of all race, age , and condition)- for small requirement drugs it becomes prohibitive. Also if patents were lengthened. It takes 7 years to develop a drug, after which only a very short window is left before generics step in. So nobody wants to invest any more.

Society needs to think this through. The real reason there are no new antibiotics, is that at the expected price pharma has to sell them, they are uneconomic for pharma.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

comana

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Jan 19, 2005
6,917
3,473
Colorado
✟899,280.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Let me point out that the real discussion in the US is not about government-owned or government-supplied healthcare (which nobody with any real influence is seriously promoting), but rather government-insured health care. It's called "single-payer" healthcare in which the providers continue to be private agents but they are paid by the government rather than by a myriad of insurance companies. This is sometimes called "Medicare for All," Medicare being the current government payer for the healthcare of the elderly. I went on Medicare when I turned 65, and it's been pretty good. I also have a "Medicare Supplement" as part of my military retirement that covers medicine and anything Medicare doesn't cover.

Here is the seldom-discussed factor: The American insurance billing system is a billion-dollar industry. Companies that handle the incredibly complex and arcane system of medical insurance collect money every time they move a bill sideways multiple times between the provider and the insurance company (or companies) that pay the bill. Billions of dollars annually go nto the pockets of middlemen who do not a single thing to improve health care.

Going to a single-payer system with hospitals sending their bills directly to the government would put them all out of business overnight. Do you think they don't have lobbies in Congress?
I am a medical biller for a billing company. I’d be happy to see the industry gone tomorrow. I don’t believe the cost is driven by medical billing as much as the insurance industry. I can’t think of a billing company big enough to get lobbying influence but I guarantee the insurance companies do.

Hiring in house or contracting out medical billing is a requirement for any practice , hospital, healthcare group, BECAUSE the insurance industry has made healthcare so incredibly complicated.

However, Medicare in the US is very simple and if expanded, would reduce costs overall. Convince the insurance industry to stand down on their lobbying interests to keep control and maintain their huge profits? Unlikely in my lifetime.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,119
20,158
US
✟1,440,434.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am a medical biller for a billing company. I’d be happy to see the industry gone tomorrow. I don’t believe the cost is driven by medical billing as much as the insurance industry. I can’t think of a billing company big enough to get lobbying influence but I guarantee the insurance companies do.

Hiring in house or contracting out medical billing is a requirement for any practice , hospital, healthcare group, BECAUSE the insurance industry has made healthcare so incredibly complicated.

However, Medicare in the US is very simple and if expanded, would reduce costs overall. Convince the insurance industry to stand down on their lobbying interests to keep control and maintain their huge profits? Unlikely in my lifetime.

It was only in the 70s that medical insurance companies were permitted by the government to be for-profit industries. Before that, they had to be non-profit companies. We could roll back to that, too.
 
Upvote 0