Health Care is a right

Published

I would do a poll on this, but I do not know how to - or maybe you need to be a premium member.

At any rate, I would like to hear some discussion on whether you feel health care is a right or not.

I personally do.

Specializes in ER.

I dont think the constitution guaranteed women's suffrage, an end to slavery, workplace safety protections, oversight into how safe our food is, an end to child labor, social security, or the ability to vote by men who did not own land, but i dont think anyone here is open to restoring those institutions.

as hard as it is to believe, we can actually progress, sometimes at the cost of profit and power for the elites, as terrible as that sounds.

out of curiosity, though, are the people here that are against any public health care system also for privatizing things like the water supply? how about the military? if the government cant do anything right, should we then have for profit companies in charge of that? should the fda be sold off? what about the licensing of health care professionals, should the board of nursing be a corporation? it would seem that this would be the logical next step.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in LTC.
Then by all means get a constitutional amendment passed guaranteeing a government health care scheme.

Not necessary for Universal Health care. It's not unconstitutional.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Psych , Peds ,Nicu.

You're saying the young/healthy should be forced to pay for something that -might- happen down the road to prevent others from paying taxes to cover their misfortune. This is unsettling for several reasons.

You cant expect us to pay financially to cover every remote situation that might come up. The bottom line, private (and government) insurance is just a clone of the social security ponzi scheme. The young don't pay for their own insurance. They pay for the care of the elderly members in the insurance company. The actual amount insurance doles out for people in their 20's is just pennies in the bowl. So don't for a moment try to rationalize it as saying the young need to cover themselves so we don't have to subsidize them. It's entirely the opposite. You want the healthy to subsidize the sick.

In all insurance pools there is a mixture of low and high risk policy holders , that is how insurance works , it spreads risk between a large number of policy holders in order to pay the relatively few claims. For the most part we tend to throw good money after bad , to cover a risk we may incur . The jackpot /pay out only occurs if you suffer a loss .So are you saying all insurance is bad ? a ponzi scheme or it is only bad when you view the risk balance not in your favor ?.

NB the only reason the healthcare reforms may have a mandate is because the Insurance industry wants it ! simply because otherwise only the sick would take out insurance whilst the healthy wouldn't , in such a scheme no private insurance company would be able to exist .

Up Vote Up Vote ×

can be ammended to represent the wishes of the people.

True and since the MAJORITY of the population (latest polls) is against this thing being called "healthcare reform", it should not pass.

If you disagree with that statement then make this real easy...let them create the law then let the PEOPLE vote for it or not. If they say yes....pres signs....if they say NO, .....'nuf said.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
No where in the Consitution does it state that one is guaranteed a free public education either. But in every state in the country, there is free public education. If you desire, and can afford it, you are free to place your children in private schools, at your own expense.

But most of us cannot afford private schools, and we make do with our children attending free public schools. The point being, we have a choice afforded to us, to choose what works best for us. We should also have a choice of public or private health insurance, for ourselves, and our families. Where did you go to school, or your kids?

The Founding Fathers saw to it, and realized that, education was in the countries' best interest, for its children. It is the great equalizer. Older, retired, individuals, have not had children in the public schools for decades, yet they continue to pay taxes so YOUR CHILD HAS A FREE PUBLIC EDUCATION! Like it or not. Its there if you want/need, it. JMHO and my NY $0.02.

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN

Spokane, Washington

Hmmm... what a crock.

I OWN a house (and my husband owns another). I pay property taxes that pay for the school system here. He still pays property taxes in the state/county where his children live with their mother. I spend $500/child for school supplies for this PUBLIC "free" education, not to mention all those wonderful books we have to purchase for literary class. Free public education is NOT free. And like you pointed out... long after my children have graduated I will be paying for the "free" education of the children of folks who don't own houses.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
So are you saying all insurance is bad ? a ponzi scheme or it is only bad when you view the risk balance not in your favor ?.

Is all insurance bad? No. Don't be silly. Is it bad when it's not in my favor? Absolutely, in fact I'm pretty sure thats the word for word definition of bad.

NB the only reason the healthcare reforms may have a mandate is because the Insurance industry wants it ! simply because otherwise only the sick would take out insurance whilst the healthy wouldn't , in such a scheme no private insurance company would be able to exist .

Private insurance companies exist today, by screening for preexisting conditions. If the government is going to step in and force them to pay for everyone's medical coverage, then the only way that can happen is by also forcing the healthy to pay into the insurance system to cover the costs of the sick. And sure that seems like a perfectly altruistic notion now, just like social security did back when we had 46 workers paying into the system for every 1 retiree. But it never quite seems to work that way, does it?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in LTC.

If you disagree with that statement then make this real easy...let them create the law then let the PEOPLE vote for it or not. If they say yes....pres signs....if they say NO, .....'nuf said.

We already did. That's what happened last November, remember? And the people overwhelmingly voted for candidates that supported health care reform.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
No where in the Consitution does it state that one is guaranteed a free public education either. But in every state in the country, there is free public education. If you desire, and can afford it, you are free to place your children in private schools, at your own expense.

But most of us cannot afford private schools, and we make do with our children attending free public schools. The point being, we have a choice afforded to us, to choose what works best for us. We should also have a choice of public or private health insurance, for ourselves, and our families. Where did you go to school, or your kids?

The Founding Fathers saw to it, and realized that, education was in the countries' best interest, for its children. It is the great equalizer. Older, retired, individuals, have not had children in the public schools for decades, yet they continue to pay taxes so YOUR CHILD HAS A FREE PUBLIC EDUCATION! Like it or not. Its there if you want/need, it. JMHO and my NY $0.02.

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN

Spokane, Washington

Public education is not free. It is funded, poorly BTW, by taxpayers.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
We already did. That's what happened last November, remember? And the people overwhelmingly voted for candidates that supported health care reform.

Yeah we did. We voted for Senator Olympia Snowe ® Maine and she's doing a bang up job.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in He who hesitates is probably right....
We already did. That's what happened last November, remember? And the people overwhelmingly voted for candidates that supported health care reform.

Don't worry, the candidates will be leaving soon :D.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Public education is not free. It is funded, poorly BTW, by taxpayers.

I realize that public education is not FREE, but paid for by the taxpayer. However, renters, are not paying the property taxes that property owners pay. I am sure that part of their rent goes for the landlord's taxes, but they are not paying separately to enroll their children in the public schools. Anyone can enroll their children in the free public schools. That was my point. Anyone, on the other hand, many cannot afford private insurance or, due to pre-existing conditions, cannot even obtain insurance.

The government makes sure that all children have a free public education, regardless of parents' ability to pay. Even children who have disabilities, are afforded special education classes within the public school system. It use to be, that parents who had children who were disabled, had to pay to enroll their children in special schools for the disabled. Many of them could not afford special schools. They kept their children home, or turned them over to institutions.

Again, the government now provides ALL CHILDREN a free public education, regardless of disabilities. There is no reason that a public option could not be enacted for those who cannot afford private insurance, or do not have insurance through their jobs. That, by the way, is such a convoluted idea, I cannot believe anyone came up with that idea.

Again, that was the point of my letter. JMHO and my NY $0.02.

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN

Spokane, Washington

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I realize that public education is not FREE, but paid for by the taxpayer. However, renters, are not paying the property taxes that property owners pay. I am sure that part of their rent goes for the landlord's taxes, but they are not paying separately to enroll their children in the public schools. Anyone can enroll their children in the free public schools. That was my point. Anyone, on the other hand, many cannot afford private insurance or, due to pre-existing conditions, cannot even obtain insurance.

The government makes sure that all children have a free public education, regardless of parents' ability to pay. Even children who have disabilities, are afforded special education classes within the public school system. It use to be, that parents who had children who were disabled, had to pay to enroll their children in special schools for the disabled. Many of them could not afford special schools. They kept their children home, or turned them over to institutions.

Again, the government now provides ALL CHILDREN a free public education, regardless of disabilities. There is no reason that a public option could not be enacted for those who cannot afford private insurance, or do not have insurance through their jobs. That, by the way, is such a convoluted idea, I cannot believe anyone came up with that idea.

Again, that was the point of my letter. JMHO and my NY $0.02.

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN

Spokane, Washington

Define education. Many high school graduates can't balance a check book. And education isn't guaranteed for life. Maybe we shold give away health care for 12 years only.

And taxes are surely factored into someone's rent.

Why have so many states gone to gambling i.e. lotteries to fund education. Because the government can't afford it.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion