On rights

[unixronin]

Keeping it short:  hugh_mannity on health care, starting with why health care is not a right.  (The capsule summary of which first point is that you do not have a right to anything that somebody else has to work to provide for you.)

This entry was originally posted at http://alaric.dreamwidth.org/11712.html. That post currently has comments.
You may comment there via OpenID even if you do not have a Dreamwidth account.

Comments

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

(On that last, the UN has just released a study showing that unpotable water supplies kill more people per year than all acts of violence combine - war included).

Can't say that particularly surprises me.

We as a society, however, have determined that certain infrastructure pays back more than it costs. Just as public schooling helps (no, I'm not claiming it guarantees) the overall public provide more productive citizens, so unuversal health care will help everyone.

And you won't catch me disagreeing with that.

Lest there be any misunderstanding, I firmly agree that the health care system in the US badly needs reform. The system as it now exists is horribly broken, to the extent that, de facto, those who do not have or cannot afford medical insurance subsidize those who have and can ... which is wrong beyond words. I agree that a well designed, not-for-profit, coordinated health care infrastructure has the capability to improve the overall standard and availability of care.

I believe, however, that the Federal government is the wrong body to do so, partly because of its massive inefficiencies of scale, partly because of its general bumbling incompetence, and partly because its decisions and policies are too heavily influenced by partisan politicking. This health care bill has some good aspects, but overall I believe it's a disaster, because it's a bad "solution" that will prevent a good solution. It's not just that it's a horse designed by a committee; one of the committee members agreed to vote to approve the horse only on the condition that it have pink ears, another member on the condition that she not be required to pay for any of its feed, a third on the condition that the tires¹ be designed and constructed in his district, and a fourth on the condition that the chairman of the committee agree to walk next door and kick the member's neighbor in the shins with steel-toed boots. And on top of all this, there's considerable doubt that the horse will actually solve the problem of crossing the river in the first place, because there's no clear evidence that the horse can swim.


It's not that I don't agree that the problem needs fixing. I'm just afraid that this will turn out to be a horribly bad fix, possibly worse than the original problem.


[1] "Wait a minute. Horses don't have tires!"
"Never mind that. We'll let your district build the wings."
"Oh ... that's all right, then."