US Healthcare Reform

Aug 19, 2009 08:24

Amid all the storm and drang about US Healthcare reform, I'm beginning to get the impression that there is an underlying assumption that the 'anti-reformers' have that needs to be investigated ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 18

(The comment has been removed)

The American Fallacy a_cubed August 19 2009, 08:10:39 UTC
This all goes back to the founding of the US. "We hold these truths to be self-evident (*):.... All Men Are Created Equal ( ... )

Reply


ajodasso August 19 2009, 08:41:41 UTC
That is that sick people deserve to be sick, that they are being punished for some moral failing. This could be because they don't eat right, smoke or drink, but I think the deeper unspoken assumption is that god is doing it to them.

I think, sir, that you have hit the nail on the head. They'd never admit to it, though. When asked if this is the case, I can imagine the indignant no-of-course-nots that they'd bark out. Case in point: a Conservative colleague and I were sort-of-arguing about the healthcare issue on Facebook. She said, I'm sick of the government trying to control my life; I think everyone should just take care of themselves. And I said, but some people can't take care of themselves; this is an issue of basic human rights. And she said...

But who can say what basic human rights are, really?

*blink*

Yeah. She doesn't seem to think the right not to be sick is a basic human right. Which feeds nicely into your supposition.

Reply

purplecthulhu August 19 2009, 09:59:43 UTC
Why thank you!

You could always try them on 'life liberty and the pursuit of happiness', all of which a rather difficult from a sick bed. And, not that I should be trying to have this argument by proxy, why doesn't she worry about private insurance companies 'trying to control her life'?

Reply

robert_jones August 19 2009, 15:45:51 UTC
How can the right not to be sick possibly be a basic human right? Even in the UK, people get sick all the time. Some people are sick for the whole duration of their lives, and there's nothing anyone can do for them. How are they supposed to enforce the alleged right?

Reply

ajodasso August 19 2009, 16:13:31 UTC
Okay, let me rephrase that. What I mean is, I believe that the right to treatment and alleviation should be basic human rights. No, not everyone can be cured. But does everyone have to suffer at full volume?

Reply


autopope August 19 2009, 10:15:39 UTC
After observing the denizens of the USA for a couple of decades, and visiting frequently, I have come to this conclusion:

There is, among that people, a small but significant minority (in double-digit percentage numbers) who hate the poor and want them to die.

The 'why' is irrelevant -- it probably differs from patient to patient: in some it's adherence to the prosperity gospel, in others it's racism, in that bunch over there it's insecurity leading to projection, and in this huge subset it's a combination of some or all of the above -- because the real problem is that this group is powerful enough (when backed with the lobbying dollars of the healthcare and incarceration industries) to take a huge shit in the collective pot and force the rest of the nation to drink deeply.

It's enough to make me sometimes wish genocide hadn't gone out of fashion (but then I pinch myself and remember that if any genociding was about to happen, these folks are the ones who'd be handing it out rather than taking it in the neck).

Reply


fjm August 19 2009, 10:26:21 UTC
try the video here

Reply

purplecthulhu August 19 2009, 22:40:28 UTC
Words fail me. Healthcare a nazi policy?

Reply


pfy August 19 2009, 11:05:02 UTC
My impression is that it all follows from the assumption that if someone is poor, it's always their own fault. The reasoning seems to be that if someone can't afford healthcare, well, they should have worked harder when they weren't sick. Five seconds of thought would reveal several ways that conclusion might not actually be true, but this doesn't seem to matter.

And to paraphrase an old quote from Usenet about censorship, some people in the US are so deeply opposed to the government controlling their lives that they insist on having unaccountable private entities doing it instead.

Reply

purplecthulhu August 19 2009, 13:19:54 UTC
Indeed - if you think the government is accountable you should try a company, especially one you don't own shares in.

Reply

thalinoviel August 19 2009, 13:38:14 UTC
"it all follows from the assumption that if someone is poor, it's always their own fault."

I definitely agree this seems to be a major part of the argument and underlies the concept that people shouldn't have free healthcare because "it encourages them to strive"

Edited to add: I don't agree with the assumption & concept myself, but I think this is what people opposed to free healthcare think. That and they don't want to pay more taxes.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up