Universal healthcare should clearly be a human right

Dude just throw more money at the problem that is sure to fix it!

t. conservatard
You won't keep the people from being healthy with your lies forever, faggot.

Are you even from Canada? There are no differences with the conservatives and liberals.

Daily reminder

Attached: health_care_is_not_a_right.jpg (1104x1104, 344K)

Slavery is immoral and forcing medical professionals to take care of you is exactly that.

Attached: 1563077701310.jpg (194x260, 11K)

Attached: 1463648030907.jpg (600x360, 85K)

Attached: 1437335053333.gif (250x189, 391K)

Positive rights can not exist.
Do you have a right to have food?

Nobody forced them to become medical professionals. Not to mention people in the medical industry make a shitload of money.

Attached: cb5ovqs9asi31.jpg (1125x526, 81K)

Someone doesn't understand his own argument

Attached: 1459625294414.jpg (1224x737, 204K)

Everyone has a right to food as well.

Just because we can't fulfill that right now, doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

>Everyone has a right to food as well.
So I can legally enter a store and take what I want without paying? Or even your home and take food from your fridge?

>Just because we can't fulfill that right now, doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
That's the worst argument I've ever heard! We can enslave people again, but is that a good idea? NO

Attached: 1531100566182.jpg (502x720, 47K)

swell actually. universal healthcare should be cheaper than the private option and if the government wants to pay four hundred dollars for a pill like a buncha cucks that sell health insurance, they should fuck off and not even bother.

>expecting someone in a service industry that is bound under oath to try to save your life to serve you is slavery.

Daily reminder to google thomas paine faggot

Hi Kurt.

>Make a shitload of money

Oh?? From where? Taxes??? Where does that come from??????

Attached: 1555695120782.jpg (563x651, 226K)

Fortunately, I'm not so much of a loser that I can happily agree my taxes would be well-spent keeping people from dying from preventable causes.

Lies. Universal healthcare is more expensive, delivers inferior outcomes, and essentially enslaves healthcare professionals. Plus it would put hundreds of thousands of people out of jobs when the insurance industry is eliminated.

Attached: 1449958273900.jpg (480x359, 34K)

Can I go to your place of work (assuming you have a job) and force you to give me a service or product for free?

Attached: 1457666734037.png (443x750, 195K)

Daily reminder that you have no """right""" to another person's wealth or labor.

Attached: 1459626654586.jpg (474x455, 39K)

How so?

They make their money both from tax-payer programs, like Medicare, and from patients paying their medical bills.

Imagine being such a pathetic cuck to a shitty system that you even pretend to worry about the jobs of the people in the insurance indstry.

The insurance inductry has fucked the entire countries healthcare, lobbied the goverment to make sure it never changes, and even brainwashed you stupid cunts into thinking that it's a good system.

My. Fucking. Sides.

Says someone who thinks guns are a right.

>More expensive
>Not supporting 100k+ useless people
Which is it user?

>enslaves healthcare professionals
Yeah... all of the countries with a public option all also have their surgeries performed by inmate surgeons at a correctional facility.

By forcing someone to do something, it's enslaving them. Doesn't matter if you pay them, it's FORCED LABOR

Attached: 1463645047385.jpg (417x417, 39K)

Sure there are a few fatcats, and the field could stand to be tidied up a bit, but there are hundreds of thousands of people with jobs; regular joes like you or me.

Attached: 1446754585849.jpg (640x640, 70K)

I have a union job with healthcare, that shit still costs enough that you question going in when you don't feel right.

It is a human right. You can get whatever kind of care you can afford. However, things that are actually the manifestation of rights, like guns, you morons seem to think that it isn't one.

>has good healthcare
>still whines about it
Yup, a union member.

Attached: 1456119882925.jpg (720x699, 141K)

Do you consider oil tycoons slaves?
What about farmers?
The military?
Teachers?
Fire and Police?

Where exactly is the line between "Slave" and "State Subsidy"
Because if the state needs it, and is willing to pay... I don't see your logic here.

Attached: 1553475195112.jpg (614x642, 60K)

>Spends all day whining about people whining

Learn some economics

Attached: 1443138329753.png (1436x1580, 702K)

Unions should honestly be abolished. They destroy businesses and rip off the workers.

But they're not being forced. They choose to go into the medical industry, and they choose to go to work every morning. Nothing's stopping them from just quitting if they're unhappy.

Nice try, Rockefeller.

Do you know what food stamps are? Literally everyone in any slightly developed country has them in order to provide a free/subsidized method of preventing mass starvation from the US minimum wage.

I don't believe in one state healthcare system that manages all, as that would inevitably result in a decline in efficiency. What I do believe in is the state breaking up the monopolies that run healthcare in US states and a basic subsidized healthcare system that helps to provide a basic program for the impoverished in order to make treating the poor a positive thing that doesn't result in letting them bleed out being the more humane option

what does socialism even have to do with economics? How did you even get onto that topic?

We are talking about government subsidy.

I thought you said healthcare was a right? If it's a right then I can force them to serve me

Attached: 1459626710125.jpg (960x640, 155K)

>paying their medical bills

but thats dumb!!!!1! why not just give that same money to the government to pay the exact same bills?? thats a much better idea???

Attached: 1544810467613.jpg (259x293, 53K)

Name one good things unions have done.

Oh, so since the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution, you can force Colt to hand over some sweet, sweet rifles, right?

>what does socialism even have to do with economics?
... it's a school of economic thought? Marx was an economist?

Gave you this weekend to bang your dickbeaters on a keyboard.

You're welcome.

>Do you know what food stamps are? Literally everyone in any slightly developed country has them in order to provide a free/subsidized method of preventing mass starvation from the US minimum wage.
They're theft from the successful and given to the unproductive parasites.

>I don't believe in one state healthcare system that manages all, as that would inevitably result in a decline in efficiency. What I do believe in is the state breaking up the monopolies that run healthcare in US states and a basic subsidized healthcare system that helps to provide a basic program for the impoverished in order to make treating the poor a positive thing that doesn't result in letting them bleed out being the more humane option
Who cares? It's the individual's problem, no one else's. If you want to donate your money to a poor, go for it. Don't force others to give charity.

Attached: 1464502317106.png (790x418, 538K)

I have the right to own a weapon, not for one to be provided. That's the difference. You're forcing others to give you healthcare, a service.

Attached: 1448863916695.jpg (960x819, 142K)

Guns are a right. But that means you have the right to buy one, and the government can't them away. It doesn't mean you have the right to force someone else to buy one for you.

That's not exactly what you mean when you say healthcare is a right, is it? Thanks for demonstrating to the crowd what a false equivalence looks like.

Attached: ingy.jpg (500x281, 52K)

>thinks unions provided weekends
Um... that's thanks to progressive businesses. Look up Henry Ford, most of the wonderful things we enjoy today regarding labor are thanks to him and those like him. (40 hour week, weekends, end to child labor, etc.)

Attached: 1527457334539.jpg (460x418, 49K)

That's not how that works. Society considers something a right when it's so easy to produce and/or so readily available that it there's no good excuse not to allow access of it to everyone. For example, water is a human right, but you still have to pay the city to use tap water. You're guaranteed access to it, but you are still expected to pay for it.

Attached: 1437441890770.gif (480x360, 787K)

I don't get it. They murder people, but then imagine that they're Care Bears?

Now, where they are entrenched, they make it nearly impossible to start a new business on a tight budget because they force you to use union labor at vastly exorbitant rates.

Answer the question.
Where is the line? I need to know if I'm a slave because I get paid by the government.

You either don't understand what you're attempting to criticize, or you're pretending not to so I get upset. Either way, I don't think carrying on this dialogue will be productive.

Attached: 1567583157016.jpg (555x640, 47K)

not accurate and clearly underage pls leave.

I think there is joy in doing it at gun point.

Who's the INCEL in the pic?

again.

completely inaccurate.

guys. it takes 10 seconds of research to find out what universal healthcare actually means.

i’m not saying quality will improve,
i’m not saying it will cost *nothing*,

but good god. my father is a doctor. he’s disgusted at insurance companies.

WHY DONT PEOPLE HATE THE AWFUL MBA’S DESTROYING AMERICA’S HEALTHCARE INFRASTRUCTURE?

Because we’d rather hate the brown people who’ve been screwed by it a lot longer and are starting to make a few decent points about the inadequacies..

>That's not how that works. Society considers something a right when it's so easy to produce and/or so readily available that it there's no good excuse not to allow access of it to everyone.
Real talk here. Have you ever studied philosophy and rights? Because you got it wrong.

>For example, water is a human right, but you still have to pay the city to use tap water. You're guaranteed access to it, but you are still expected to pay for it.
Excactly my point! You have a right to access healthcare, NOT to have it paid for for you.

Attached: 1496433217677.jpg (600x908, 73K)

>defends socialism
>calls others people childish
kek

Attached: 1513372505495.gif (500x276, 226K)

Essentially. Ever met a commie IRL? They think they're fighting for the rights of the common people and that they're the good guys, but really they are bloodthirsty and want to kill those better off than them.

Simple, will you get arrested for not paying taxes? Yup, you're a slave, like everyone else.

Are you stupid, or were you dropped as a baby?

You argue healthcare can't be a right because it means doctors would be slaves.

Of course, guns are a right, because firearms manufacturers get paid for their services.

Where the fuck do doctors work for free? That's right, in your logical fallacy land. Healthcare workers get paid whether healthcare is treated as a right or not. But in one version, the people doing the paying pool their resources and don't get fucked.

You fail at this logic thing.

Shouldn't we be trying to figure out why shit's so expensive before we just give the government a blank check to pay for it?

"Rights are absolute"

"Guns are a right"

I'd love to know how you think a commercial product is an absolute right that will always exist.

>but good god. my father is a doctor. he’s disgusted at insurance companies.
Suuuuure buddy. My dad's an astronaut! And he's in favor of universal space flights!

>WHY DONT PEOPLE HATE THE AWFUL MBA’S DESTROYING AMERICA’S HEALTHCARE INFRASTRUCTURE?
Definitely a commie, thinks anyone with an understanding of business and economics is a bad guy. Get yourself a real education kid.

Attached: 1450076262630.jpg (455x426, 37K)

But that doesn't help millionaires steal money from poor people. Have you truly thought this through, user?

do you pay taxes or support public funding of roads, infrastructure, police, etc or should that all be privatized

Why do you blame the MBAs? Healthcare is heavily regulated. The actual costs are disguised because nobody actually pays for anything directly, distorted by price fixing, and consumers are traditionally stuck with whatever plan their employer offers so they can't shop around. That's bureaucracy and regulations, not the free market at play.

Nice racism, BTW.

if it were, then all nations should share the burden. it would have be like the UN deciding where hospitals should be and how much each nation should contribute. that would mean that everyone, everywhere, is paying into taking care of australian aborigines and subsaharan africans.

>Where the fuck do doctors work for free? That's right, in your logical fallacy land. Healthcare workers get paid whether healthcare is treated as a right or not. But in one version, the people doing the paying pool their resources and don't get fucked.
It means no doctor can work privately. They're enslaved in that they cannot work on their own, they have to work for the government, and thus have to provide services, or else.

Attached: 1481197286851.jpg (559x500, 23K)

not free. and not necessarily firearms. rather, the people have the right to own arms, whatever the common infantryman has at that time period.

What's that got to do with anything?

Privatized my dude.

Attached: 1557420661987.png (1416x1386, 1.92M)

Attached: 1437692767385.gif (300x186, 446K)

those are socialized institutions.

This whole thread.
Just add in a line about some how being a slave if the government pays for it.

Attached: 4fa9fnvejrg21.jpg (500x1406, 105K)

Your image is a piece of shit. It should have the word "to" and the end. Are you illiterate?

Different user, but it's the right to bear arms, it's not the right to bear this specific weapon from this specific time.

>Everything I don't like is Stalin

No, they're not. Learn what words mean.

Attached: 1569208275444.png (443x750, 178K)

>clearly
There are no rights that declare someone else give theirs to benefit others. You are wrong.

user, back at you. a government redistributing funds from its citizenry to fund public things is socialism.

Then let the govt take those guns back and enjoy a nice baseball bat. You're armed, your rights are not infringed upon.

By that you mean "protecting yourself and your property" is a right. Then yes.

So soldiers are slaves?

...

>conservatard
>user explains lib healthcare
fuck yourself brainlet.

Show me where it mentions being armed to the level of an infantryman.

Can't attack the idea, attack the grammar. Good job!

It ends up that way. Slippery slope my dude

In a way, yes. They leave, they go to prison.

there's the letter and the spirit. the letter is "the right of the people to own arms shall not be infringed"

the citizenry back then owned fucking canons. the spirit is "the populace should be armed enough to defend against threats individually or collectively"

Everyone has the right to contribute to society and work hard for what they deserve. Nothing is free, yet people think that they can do nothing all day and live off the backs of others.

No, it's not. Socialism is seizing the means of production, you're just talking about the welfare state, social welfare, or government programs.

You're also using deceptive arguments, because this isn't really about socialism, you're just suing that as a distraction by trying to trick people into agreeing that state-funded police are a good thing, then claiming that's socialism, and that therefore socialism is good, and since universal healthcare is also socialism it's also good. That whole chain of reasoning is false, because socialism has nothing to do with it, you're just using it to try to equate police and state run healthcare, and therefore bypassing any need to justify why healthcare should be paid for by the government.

Anyone forcing you to buy a gun? Are you paying for other people's guns?

Now ask yourself the same for universal healthcare and you'll understand.

Again, it's the right to bear arms. It's not the right to bear this one arm the government decided to let you bear.

That's communism. learn the difference, user.

how is it free when i already pay into medicare. If i pay i should get to use it.
are not fire fighters, cops, schools, roads and such services that we don't have a choice but to pay into. i would very much not like cops to keep a eye on me but they do because it's a good to the comunity.

Why do you think the 2nd amendment mentions the militia in the justification?

That's communism, retard

>They choose
How do you fail this hard? If it's a right, the gov't will force them to take care of people. What the fuck do you think will happen (is happening) when the red tape causes doctors to quit en masse? "B-b-but all these people have access to free health care,Why aren't they being taken care of?". You mongoloids can't even see past step 1.

Attached: 1498367257131.jpg (380x529, 39K)

>a few socialized things are good therefore all kinds of socialism are good
he didn't say that though. it's not either all or nothing. you have a very immature and black-white view of politics.

what do you do for money OP? i think that should be a human right, and you should be forced to do your job for free. fuck you

Fuck dude...

Attached: 1497572079576.png (288x288, 70K)

Attached: 1437335054444.gif (200x254, 1.37M)

No one is forcing me to buy or pay for guns.

I do however live in a country with a lower tax rate, higher quality of life on any index, and awesome public healthcare that I have used numerous times.

I'm being forced to pay for healthcare. Luckily since my employers don't need to provide it I have a higher wage. Fantastic stuff.

Useful infographic

Attached: 1459470337956.jpg (680x812, 193K)

No, that's not communism. Seizing the means of production is literally the definition of socialism.

ancap libtards: everything should be privatized and you should be allowed to start your own private police company

>socalisttards: the government should use taxes for literally everything and then it would be all fixed

me, an intellectual: maybe you should use some of both for different individual things

Attached: 1563682825174.png (828x834, 653K)

No, soldiers are not slaves. They are held to a higher standard. And they can leave, they just can't desert.

Let's look at another job that is purely governmental: are diplomats slaves?

I'll save some time: No, they are not. But only State Department diplomats may do official diplomacy. That doesn't make them slaves, it makes their jobs restricted.

Your definition of slave is purely to get an emotional reaction while avoiding the idea that NHS doctors in Britain are no more slaves than anyone else who works in a government job. Your idea is stupid, and lacks all credence as an actual argument.

No, it's not. You should learn the actual definition an ideology before you start promoting it.

dude with a saw appears to have a big nose.

That's the exact argument he was using. If you find it immature, you should be calling him immature, not the person who called him out on it.

That's just being retarded. People can't not get sick and having uninsured people fucks everyone else over (if you want to look at it from a selfish point of view)

Fuck I told myself to stop debating on Yea Forums. Ok so instead:

Kill yourself, jack off.

Attached: limitdumb.jpg (226x223, 6K)

we have petabytes of data at your fingertips through google and yet you're still too retarded to learn the meaning of a well-defined term. good job user. blanket socialization of all business is communism

quote where he said all socialism is good because police is socialized. i will wait.

That's communism or Marxism you dipshit. Those are the things that socialism leads to.

Attached: goodcitizen.jpg (960x960, 239K)

>are not fire fighters, cops, schools, roads and such services that we don't have a choice but to pay into.
Privatize my dude

Because all men must ready themselves for the next invasion of ring-kissing eurofags or otherwise. Every man is a militia in times of defense.

a good way to look at it is the second ammendment. it allows the populace to be armed...to a degree. you cannot have fully automatic weapons without jumping though hoops, or buy rpg-7s. it's not an all or nothing thing. these terms and policies are rarely either 0 or 100.

I think it should be free but we don't have enough doctors to help everybody. If I was on a waitlist for 2 years I would be stuck in a hospital for 2 years. We have to wait for robots to take doctors jobs then we can have free healthcare.

He equated healthcare to roads, and police here. Notice he didn't argument why healthcare should be treated the same way. He just followed that up by defending socialism, said they're all socialism, and therefore skipped having to actually defend state funded healthcare.

You should really learn to follow arguments by yourself.

a highly socialized system would only work if we kicked all the shitskins out

So why not return healthcare to the private sector and have the government force you to work? Cheaper meds and access for everybody. Problem solved! Everyone's "rights" are satisfied.

We'll miss you.

Wait, no we won't.

i dont see where he advocated or even mentioned helthcare once. peeople say "socalism man bad no socialized healthcare"

so a question is "what about these other socialized things we already have" thats not defending socialized healthcare, its questioning the argument

whiter than you Muhammad. math bump, string neanderthal mixture, and blue eyes.

Why not get the government involved to lower prices for healthcare across the board instead of letting insurances and hospitals abuse the market? Fuck giving it to everyone as it shouldn't be the people's burden that some can't do the basic to prevent a majority of health issues, aka control their fucking weight. A x-ray shouldn't cost 500 dollars when it reality it cost 20 to 40.

>to a degree
Where does it say that?
>you cannot have fully automatic weapons
the constitution doesn't care about that and says that you should.
>rpg-7s
That's not considered a firearm.

That's your problem, you Google something and assume that if someone as stupid as yourself said something, it must be true.

Socialism is defined as seizing the means of productions. This is the root definition of the word, the universally accepted part. Socialism still allows for private property, but all industry is owned by the state.

Communism is a step beyond that. There is no private property, and the state is abolished is favor or some kind of worker-based cooperative.

You should really read a book. Just one. These are the most rudimentary basics, so anything on the topic should clarify things.

You have no idea what you're talking about. See here

it's just what the supreme courts have decided. i agree user, repeal the NFA. i'm just talking about the way things are as-is.

Universal Healthcare does not, and should not, ask the government to own the means. It's a single payer system so all the hospitals and shit just get your info, bill the government, and then taxes roll it back around. The hospitals slash their account armies ( do you know how many fuckers we're paying right now to deal with a million different insurance plans? ). Americans get non-emergency health. Businesses can fire all the health related shites and move on, and they don't have to worry about firing some guy they don't need causing his kids to miss their shots. Yes, I'm sure you're tough and don't into caring, but a lot of us give a shit.

"a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

The next step is communism, where it is seized.

you can't just make things up and then say "google man bad and wrong". you're not going to make headway doing this

Follow the reply chain, for instance to this . His post was a clear attempt to support publically funded healthcare .

you fellas are confusing "socialism" as a full ideology and "socialism" as a descriptor of a system.

You have no idea what you're talking about. See here

I didn't make anything up, I gave you universally accepted definitions of socialism and communism. These are what the word means. You haven't provided a definition yourself, and your only cite is a general claim that something you might have Googled agreed with you.

that dude here. i wasn't, and was my first post.

Also, private health wouldn't go away. Companies are still gonna suck my dick to fingerbang their codebases. But all the homeless folks, and sick folks, and old folks and everyone will be able to get taken care of.
Who does it benefit not to do things this way?
The million insurance plans that are all taking their cut? lol.

Your definitions are shit and you are shit.

it's kind of like how when people say "free market" they don't really mean a free market. socialism as a full blanket system is different than using socialistic policies in specific places

You have no idea what you're talking about. See here

So your argument is that socialism isn't about seizing the means of production, it's about the owning the means of production, which somehow happens even though seizing the means belongs to a later stage?

Wow.

This. So much this

This fucking guy is full of shit.

Can't do that without a gun pussy?

Saying the word shit a lot is a very compelling argument.

Well if people got preventative treatment they’d get more work done and that means a higher NDP.

Nice to see you suck at reading comprehension through an entire post. How 'bout that free education.

Okay, fair enough. But seen in the context of the reply chain, my response was reasonable.

or maybe it has nothing to do with the means of production at all. if socialism in any sense is seizing the means of production than why do you call socialized healthcare "socalized"? is that actually not socialism then

Probably but I will still vote in my best interest so no ty

>Shouldn't we be trying to figure out why shit's so expensive before we just give the government a blank check to pay for it?
This is exactly what I said about Obama Care - "This isn't a health care bill. It's a health INSURANCE bill. It doesn't address the skyrocketing costs of health care at all! It just slightly adjusts how those costs get distributed.

Uh, how else would you protect yourself from an invading army or tyrannical government? The sword of the whiteknight?

Nothing that requires the service of another person can be your right. Only things you could do by yourself alone assuming nobody else fucked with you could be your right.

Except free markets are generally fairly free, encompassing most of the economy. You can't really say that about socialism.

Not being able to take part in an argument is a nice way to receive the word "shit" a lot.

Attached: 1525719395521.jpg (680x620, 287K)

not effectively, and some people have families. would you leave the safety of your family up to a fistfight. the nigger breaking in is going to have a gun whether you do or not, he's not going to go "ok you're unarmed ill be fair and put my gun away"

Your definition contradicts your claim.

No, I actually presented an argument. You just decided to say shit a lot.

>national defense
>police protection
>fire protection
>ambulance care
>emergency care
Fuck rights.
We could save money as a nation if we pooled resources for medical care and covered everyone. It would cost half the average plan of today. You could use the other half to either buy private coverage, or spend it on whatever you like.
Do you have any reason but spite not to establish such a system?

Attached: kSPGesP.jpg (978x978, 67K)

in what sense? compared to what? it's free to a degree, but there are still loads of regulations on businesses and monopolie clauses, taxations, etc... not even to go to the extreme that a true free market would allow for selling heroin or child sex slave markets

Not any of those fags...
I remember how they kept comparing it to car insurance and how it's mandated. By that logic, I get to fuck up as many people as I want, as long as I pay the premiums, and they get to go to the doctor for free. Sadly it didn't work that way.

I didn't make any claim, I posted a definition.

And you don’t think that the cost of those 100’s of thousands of salaries is passed onto your systems operating expenses and consumers? Are you naive or stupid?

Socialism is when the government does stuff

>> Saying people don't own property or car's...
I had savings enough from part time to get a used car as well as put down a deposit for a apartment, as a student.
>> medicated to be happy?
Are you really the stupid? I only know of 1 person that takes any kind of medication for depression.
Other than that, its medicine for work related injuries.
>> Highest taxed country in the world.
Yes we have that, since its pays for EVERY commodity, from social/medical help, to city and road maintenance.

Something tells me you one of the REAL leeches in our country, and you are most likely unemployed, complaining over not getting enough welfare.
So please take a shower, and go down to the nearest Jobnet center and get a fucking job.

It's not socialism, I would have made that argument as well at some point.

>presented an argument
You lied about what socialism is.

They can have their private practices, but if anyone goes to a hospital or needs preventive care they’ll get it taken care of through the public health money pot rather than going into debt they can’t pay that just sits forever while doctors still did work without getting paid.

who pays the doctors that need to spend years of their lives and more learning how to keep you from your stupidity
discord gg /VgR9HJ

if you're the original user you said another guy was defending socialism becasue he advocated for socalized healthcare

>if we pooled resources for medical care
We already had that. The left didn't like it and placed us in the position we are now.

>It would cost half the average plan of today.
ACA premiums started skyrocketing almost immediately. I think you mean double the average plan, and then increasing from there.

based sicilians

Why is no one addressing this? If we had less people getting gravely ill due to a lack of preventive treatment then we’d have less burdens to society. Look at the European countries that do this. Germany, England, France, Sweden. Don’t you get it? It works for everyone except the pharmaceutical companies.

if we just take all the niggers and mexicans and push them over the border 100 percent of these problems would disappear. we'd even have one of the lowest murder rates. change my mind.

Except Obamacare already doubled out premiums and kicked more people off than signed on. You want more of that? Fuck you.

>You have a right to access healthcare, NOT to have it paid for for you.
If we agree, why were you misrepresenting what I was saying earlier?

its not working so well anymore after, ya know, the migrant stuff

>Rights are absolute, privileges are conditional.
Rights are set by people and can be revoked by people. Even the whole constitutional protections of the US can be revoked by law and nothing legally could be done to stop it.

Ooohhh yeah, you'll definitely do well against the army. Pathetic jerk off dream

Capitalism isn't anarchy, regulation is an essential part of capitalism, and required to ensure a level playing field and enforce contracts. This idea that regulation is the polar opposite of the free market has no basis in anything.

It’s still working and mass immigration is always a problem at first. The Irish really fucked our shit up.

Universal healthcare is in the national interest. We need fit young people so we can send them across the ocean to fight for oil and religion we no longer need.

Why does an invader have one in the first place. You've cucked yourselves with generations of shit laws

Why not tax the ultra rich 1% on everything they make and have health care funded for all?

Attached: twin-peaks-fire-walk-with-me-cannes.jpg (825x464, 36K)

Then why did you reply to my post with another definition, if you completely agreed with me?

>laughs in gook

when you say "free market" the implication is...its a free market. not "free except for this 900 page book of regulations of things you cant do and things you cant sell"

Attached: vietcong.jpg (329x500, 27K)

All of those countries you listed are drowning in their social programs. But I agree, preventative care would be nice. Right now I would go to the ER because it's packed with illegals (where I live), takes forever, and I get a 5 minute drive-by from an overworked doctor. I don't go at all anymore. I basically pay a large amount monthly in case of a disaster.

lmao doctors can desert too they can get a different fucking job but if lives are on the line they’re just as important as soldiers and should work for their country the same way soldiers do

>Fuck rights.
Yup, you're a lefty. Human rights never existed in the USSR, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Mao's China, etc.

No wonder so many millions were murdered under communism.

Attached: Commie Kill Count.gif (580x2450, 165K)

No, I came in in the middle. I've been using government funded healthcare, or something like that, not "socialized".

Have fun with your shovel and rake.

You then have hundreds of thousands of people both no longer contributing to the economy and they would need to be taken care of.

because they get them illegally from arms trafficers. look at the places with the highest rate of firearm murders. they all have strict gun control. chicago, detroit, etc. doesnt help because they dont go get them from stores anyway

Man, if only Venezuela knew they could defend themselves with rocks instead of turning in their arms to the government.

How old are you? Do you not have a basic education?

>...if we pooled resources for medical care and covered everyone.

There would have to be so much change to the way medical care works, not even including getting the funds, that it's almost impossible for the good to outway the bad.

>imagine living in a european city with great walkability and public transportation and never bothering to buy a car
>imagine housing costing less because if everyone is taxed at 80% the price of goods and properties will also adjust
>imagine your grandmother not having to try to scam drugs out of canada or mexico because she can't afford arthritis medicine but doesn't fall under one of the current public plans
>imagine not sitting in bed in the middle of the fucking night terrified that if you got fired tomorrow your kids won't be able to go to the doctor, and wondering how the hell you're going to cover the 10% anyway
This is where you say you hate everyone else anyway without considering that these policies will help you. Due to denial, you're basically expecting to live healthily and without accidents forever though, right?

Oof, that projection.

>ACA premiums started skyrocketing almost immediately. I think you mean double the average plan, and then increasing from there.
No the US pays about double what other similar nations do for health care. A switch from for profit private/public to single payer regulated public/private should drops costs by something between 25% to 50%.

If thats the case then everyone has access to it but some people do not have enough to buy it

>ultra rich 1%
Who is that? And how do you tax $0?

Protip: even if you were to seize 100% of the ultra wealthy people's income, you couldn't fund most of the federal budget.

Attached: 1485032069378.jpg (620x482, 43K)

I actually looked up a definition, you just spouted some erroneous jibberish.

Oy Vey cool it with the antisemitism there big guy

Different user, neither of you seems to actually understand the hohfeldian distinctions between rights and privileges so maybe just go brush up you self righteous dunning/krugers

You do realize how much bigger we are than them. It takes more resources, we can't even help vets at the VA

It's a shit hole over there, actually talk to someone from there. They're taxed to death, their governments are not going to be able to fund those things for much longer.

>an invader
IKR? Mexico has strict laws and only one gun store and it totally works there.

>If thats the case then everyone has access to it but some people do not have enough to buy it
If you can't afford a product or service, you don't get it. Easy, right?

Attached: 1459471412625.jpg (500x333, 21K)

That's an absurd argument. When someone says they're free or live in a free country, that doesn't mean they're free of natural laws like gravity, or even free to walk off without paying for something. Same with the free market. It's an adjective used to describe a human-designed social construct, not some absolute claim.

>pays about double
This is actually hard to track since it's pooled into the 60% taxes other nations pay. I would bet that the US pays slightly more due to them inventing most of the drugs, but almost average in the west.

I write software for large companies for a living.
Medical billing is a national shitshow.
The collection companies are a national shitshow.
Hospitals are already having to cover sick fucks that show up with colds and never pay, and it ends up getting billed out at a much larger cost to the various insurances as higher prices to cover expected nonpayments.
Some insurance gets better deals than others with different hospital chains.
A single payer system would simplify things for hospitals, and not really change their operation, especially if it was just a medicare for everyone type thing. They're already handling medicare today.
Private insurance would remain a thing, but handle immediacy and better accommodations. Private room. Week wait for non-life-threatening instead of waiting in line.
It could be done as easily as any other bank of regulations

Every discussion I've ever had with it was basically "I got hurt. Went to the hospital. I was fine afterwards."
Most of the financial problems I see people fight are people trying the gay "starve the beast" shit hoping to turn public programs into private toll booths.

that's just about the crux of my point user. its not really "free market" its "slightly freer than other markets".

You don’t see substantial issues arising from that? Bunch of fucking twits in this thread...

That user is right. We don't have a free market by far.

Socialized medicine is the REASON for the high costs. The solution isnt to increase socialized medicine.

Are you fucking stupid? What else would it be?

What's wrong with privatization? The free market is infinitely better than the government.
www.mises.org

Attached: 1481790928244.jpg (682x939, 86K)

The right owned both halves of congress and the presidency and didn't manage to do jack shit to fix healthcare. Who are you kidding that this is some democratic failure?

www.mises.org
Learn.

Attached: 1464150516538.png (594x594, 444K)

No, it's not double. It's closer to 50%. And switching to a single payer system wouldn't magically reduce costs. The US doesn't pay more because of some miraculous government efficiency compared to the inefficiencies of the free market (kek), it's because of specific priorities. That higher cost is because the US spends more on research and availability. If you want to reduce those costs, you'd have to cut back on research and increase wait times.

Everything is conditional. It just depends where you live.

What happens when the only constrion company for a town goes under. There goes all the roads and headlights

Your definition matched very closely what I said, and completely supported the point I was making.

*redlights

Universal healthcare would be cheaper and more inclusive.

Actually they’re not allowed to raise the prices of drugs in other countries the way they have here. Look at how insulin prices have gone up. It’s price fixing and our government won’t do shit about it

Quite a bit freer, actually. But the point your're missing is you're basing your entirely argument on the word "free". That's wrong, "free market", as in both words together, have a specific meaning. You're taking one of the composite words, building arguments based on that, and completely missing that the two words together have a specific meaning.

That's not the point the other user is making, tho.

Socialism has a specific meaning, user.

I am not in favor of centralizing control of healthcare. I am in favor of centralizing payment. Public servants holding the purse, private business interests handling the care.
Healthcare is inelastic enough to fall afoul of many free market protections, ( you cannot make an informed plan of where to have a head wound treated while you're in an ambulance )

Seriously. This is outrageous t1international.com/blog/2019/01/20/why-insulin-so-expensive/

Yet we just sit by and let it happen while the drug lobby tells us the increased prices are due to research.

Out of anyone else's taxes, right welfare monkey?

>That higher cost is because the US spends more on research and availability.
Drug companies want you to believe this, but they spend 10-15x what they spend on research on advertising.

Attached: gotcha.jpg (698x470, 48K)

Is it better to give everyone healthcare with a tax, or have everyone scramble for healthcare with 5-10% of their wages across the board?

The ACA was passed by a Democratic majority House, and a Democratic majority Senate, and signed by a Democratic president. Not a single Republican voted for it. The Democrats retained control of the Presidential veto and at least one house of Congress for 4 years (until 2014), preventing and substantive change by the Republicans. During this period, premiums skyrocketed.

And somehow it's the fault of the Republicans?

Yes, I didn't mention that, but the US also subsidizes drug costs for the rest of the world.

So those jobs are more important than the issues of ballooning healthcare costs and providing access to affordable preventative and emergency healthcare?

Not talking about drugs, I'm talking about medical research in general.

The market will provide! Someone else starts a company, or another company expands and takes the role

Until the last election cycle the Republicans owned the government. They could have advanced any plan they wanted and the democrats had no way to stop them.
They did nothing, because they have no better plan. The ACA is literally a Republican plan which they hate that Obama took from a Republican state and nationalized.

>I am not in favor of centralizing control of healthcare.
>I am in favor of centralizing payment.
So you don't want it centralized, but you want it centralized. Okay bro.

Medical research in general is done at university hospitals and funded by government grants already.

More important than your parasitic ass.

Not exactly. They make bank in India as well. Production and research costs vs what the big 3 actually make doesn’t add up.

Centralized systems fail because the allocation of resources in a human society is impossible to plan from on high. A medical payment system would have to work with any and all medical establishments as citizens used them, and those establishments would handle their own resource purchasing etc with the money charged against the national health system.
Just like they do today anyway.

What's that got to do with anything? We're talking about why healthcare in the US are higher, and it's because the US spends far more basic research and timeliness.

That’s not true. The fact of the matter is that for the big companies pharmaceuticals are a money making machine and they don’t even spend as much on research as they do on advertising. It’s price fixing. They raise prices in lock step.

Sure thing there bud, I’ll get right on it! Maybe try to consider a few counter factuals and hypotheticals yourself.

Oh wait you probably don’t have to since you don’t digest the raw data of the world yourself and instead outsource it to another. What harm could that possibly do? It’s okay, they probably don’t cherry pick or shoehorn or create straw men.

So even though the Democrats "owned" the government (to use your term) when the ACA passed, not a single Republican voted for it, and the Republicans had no way to make the slightest change to the bill for at least 4 years, during which premiums went through the roof, the ACA is the Republicans' fault?

kek

Jesus Christ, you deliberately obtuse fuck. Beyond your strict and semantically restricted definition, what would you call those then?

what did you mean by timeliness? I'm assuming that's an autocorrect error for the moment.
That research is done on the public dime already, excepting drug research, which is the far lesser side of drug costs, the lion's share of which is simply those annoying commercials asking you to ask your doctor about some new cock pill every evening.
Research and development are not the drivers of our higher prices. Nor is expediency. The only reason our lines are shorter for what we pay is that fewer people can afford to be in them, since most of our payments are eaten by middle men along the way.

I'm not the one being deliberately obtuse, you just have no idea what the word means.

Price fixing by big pharma is not responsible for 4% of the country's economy.

you tell me what the army is gonna do? bomb their own infrastructure?

ACA passed in 2010. 4 years later, repubs own congress to the point that dickface mitch prevents obama from event filling a supreme court vacancy.
trumps in as of 2017. it's been almost three years. you guys had complete power over the entire government in that time.
does it not strike you as odd that they didn't fix all the ills they claim the democrats caused?
The ACA worked, and the republicans knew if they trashed it they would take a public hit. So they blustered loudly and did nothing.
There was no better plan, only furious nothing.
Am I clear now?

That’s a pathetic reply to a legitimate question. Ad hominem assumptions prove nothing.

Fuck off niggers and spics shouldn't have insurance. They should just die

Being deliberately hateful serves no rational position.

>you guys
Fuck you, your miserable partisan piece of shit. If you choose to associate with one of the parties of evil, don't assume I'm disgusting piece of human filth like you.

And yes, it's very clear. You're blaming the Repbulicans for the failure of the ACA, even though they had nothing do with it.

I haven't claimed the ACA failed at all. Some states implemented it better than others, surely, but it raised coverage rates and ensured that people with health issues couldn't be left helpless.
If you think republicans could do better, I am asking why didn't they in the opportunity they had?

Doctors need Ferraris and multiple vacation homes though.

Yeah? And who's going to pay for it? You? Wise up kid. The rest of the world free-loads off the US health care system. If the US adopted socialized medicine we'd all be fucked because there goes 90% of the innovation.

Its the truth. They are wastes of life and deserve to die

Is the USA that poor? Healthcare is free, minimum wage is higher, taxes are lower and tips are not a thing in most of Europe. There's no need to shout "COMMUNISM BAD" when it's not even a communist practice we're talking about.

Being mad at everything isn't healthy, user.

>Nobody forced them to become medical professionals. Not to mention people in the medical industry make a shitload of money.
Go ahead, say the rest: and therefore I get to make them my slaves.

I claimed it failed, and said why, in the first post you replied to. You never addressed that.

And why would you assume I think the Republicans can or even should do better? That's completely out of fucking nowhere, I never made any such claim, or even hinted in that direction. Hell, I didn't even mention them, not even once, except to point out they had absolutely nothing to do with the ACA when you started claiming the ACA was their fault.

Okay, your definition of socialism is correct.

How do you characterize the allocation and disbursement of public funds to public infrastructure projects and institutions?

>Luckily since my employers don't need to provide it I have a higher wage

LOL people actually think this way. No, both you and your employers are taxed heavily to pay for it, and its probably shitty as well

Don't get me wrong the US system is terrible too, but it has some advantages, just that cost isn't one of them.

Publicly funded works fine.

Care to actually respond to the question now?

Where exactly is the information coming from that is informing your opinion?

Who says I'm mad at everything? Or even niggers. They just need to die.

So you have no problem with publicly funded projects or institutions? You simply believe that healthcare shouldn’t be added to the list?

I assume you mean this?
>ACA premiums started skyrocketing almost immediately. I think you mean double the average plan, and then increasing from there.
This graph, from Kaiser Family Foundation, who claim non-partisanship ( I don't really know them, but it was a high result when I looked for data concerning the 2010 ACA vs health costs ), this graph doesn't really show anything amiss in the amount paid that year, save the employer percent dropped and the employee percent raised. So the individual would feel it more in their check, but the rates didn't increase anymore overall than any other year.
re: the republicans, I assumed your arguing against the democratic tendency towards public health meant you were in favor of the republicans. They had an opportunity to replace or simple reject the ACA, and never took it. I see that as a strong conformation that they lack a better plan, and was hoping to sway your opinion by referencing the acts of those I assumed you supported.
I see no reason we could not institute proper health care to this nation of ours.

Attached: kaiser-graph.png (3000x2250, 449K)

Calm folks don't usually call for the deaths of others. It's reserved for fundies, terrorists and buttmad angry fuckers.

Think about what you just said. Do you really think most people have a problem with taxes paying for police? I mean yes, there are a few ancap types who might talk about privatizing it, but it's a really tiny minority that has never had any political power of any kind.

It's really, really bizarre that this has become the standard argument.

That is wrong, calm people can call for the deaths of others especially when they deserve it like niggers :)

Everyone here is arguing without any idea of the problems involved.

Government involvement is the reason the prices are high to begin with.

Know why a pill costs $1000 to buy but $10 to make? Well it costs roughly $1b to get it approved through the fda. So should we loosen the controls on drugs and allow potentially unsafe drugs to be given to people, children and animals without being tested first?

And what happens if we give that pill to someone but 10 years later we learn everyone that took it is getting liver cancer and now wants to sue? How will the business pay for the settlement if they are charging $15 for a $10 pill they still have to get approved by the fda… then theres the packaging, advertising, etc. And that process has to be repeated for EVERY SINGLE USE CASE OF THIS PILL. Its easier for docs to prescribe off label than for drug companies to get their drug approved to "treat or cure" all the conditions it might help.

Don't even get me started on insurance companies and their billing practices.

Fun factiod: ~30% of healthcare spending is to get paid from insurance/medicare.

I'm just tired of anti-black bullshit. I can't understand why people harp on and on this shit. Most folks that seem so upset by them are just mad at how they imagine them from TV and shit.
The south has its share of racists, but, like, half of fucking idaho seems to hate blacks even though they've got about 5 in the state, all of whom are assumed to be the all right few whereas the rest of blacks are scary gang banging drug rapists in their eyes.
It's fucking weird to hate something so completely that isn't real. Yeah, there are gangs in cities. Whites and bikers run drugs and shit too. You don't see people wanting to run trailer park lynchings and shit.
I think it's all like the xkcd comic. You see a dude like you be a violent prick, you assume its something wrong with the guy. You see a black guy be a violent prick, you skip assuming he's a violent prick, and just assume blacks are.
It's bad reasoning.

They spend more advertising the pill than they do pushing it through the FDA.

>Ooohhh yeah, you'll definitely do well against the army. Pathetic jerk off dream
Except that a small resisting force with little/loose organization and guerilla tactics has been a thorn in the side of every major US conflict since Vietnam. And is also how this country actually won our freedom from the brits.

Armies are great at blowing up other armies. Turns out theyre terrible at playing spot the solider among the civillians.

Also ive lived in the country around rednecks who hunt. A redneck in his woods is unbeatable by anything less than a carpet bomb. Get out of the city, youll learn how to survive yourself too.

Counter argument
www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2017/03/22/yes-it-was-the-affordable-care-act-that-increased-premiums/
>in the four years before the ACA, every age group and family type either experienced a premium decrease, or an increase of 9.2% or less. However, in the first four years of the ACA, every age group and household type experienced an increase of between 56.0% and 63.2%

>I assumed your arguing against the democratic tendency towards public health meant you were in favor of the republicans.
I never argued that, and your need to pull your head out of your partisan asshole and stop making that assumption. I'm expressing this fairly strongly because classifying people as a pre-defined enemy because they disagree with you on one point basically kills conversations. And otherwise, you seem fairly reasonable. That doesn't mean I agree with you, just that you're actually engaging in a conversation.

You didn’t answer the very simple question. I’ll just take that as a no, and an indication of your inability or unwillingness to engage in honest debate.

It’s not bizarre that it’s become the argument at all. Almost all the developed nations in the world have reviewed the evidence for and against and added it to their “publicly funded” lists.

Granted, there are times when the vast majority of people are wrong. I don’t think this is one of those times though.

You sound like a butthurt nigger. Try going outside, blacks are the worst. I grew up in a small town with zero niggers. I was pozzed like you, very anti-racist. Then I met niggers in the real world, hung around them and realized how shitty they really were. Like I said, go outside and you'll know how shit niggers are. There's a few decent ones, but that's like saying you can find a diamond in a pile of cow shit. Not worth your time, just dump the pile

Uh, because the "ultra rich" are too few to pay for it all lol. Remember 47% pay 0 income taxes...