Quote:
Originally Posted by Kosst Amojan
First time posting in this forum but you got me curious over this. How is healthcare a human right? Healthcare cost money and if the government is paying for it, that means they're taking it from forcefully from the people. So how can something be a right if it requires theft?
|
Not "a right" in the way that "civil unbiased treatment" is a right, but a right like education and roads are a right... once the state has enough money to support them, everyone is better off if everyone has access to them. Restricting them to the wealthy and elite serves only to maintain unnecessary divisions between "haves" and "have-nots," causing strife and jealousy and anguish.
Oh, and dead children. The core of this debate is "whose children are allowed to live to adulthood?"* That's why it gets so emotional. There's a subcategory of "who has to die at the age of 60?" but that's a considerably more rational part of the discussion.
Note that I said "everybody" is better off. I do not believe that national healthcare costs extra money. It would cost money to *implement* it, because it would involve a drastic change from our current system. However, once in place, it costs the nation as a whole considerably less than it does now--because healthier people are more productive, and healthcare providers who aren't trying to work for the highest profit possible won't order unnecessary tests for those insurance packages that can afford it, while ignoring tests for those who need them but can't afford them.
*Children: The US has an increasing populace that believes children are an expensive hobby, and those who can't afford to bear the full costs of that hobby--financial and emotional--shouldn't have them. There is an incredible callousness towards the children living in poverty or with a single parent, as if they had no inherent right to live, and therefore of course shouldn't be provided comfortable homes, good education, or healthcare.