Re: Remember the Housing "Bubble"?

In message <euuu1i$dc4$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Keith F. Lynch <kfl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
Nate Edel <archmage@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You think you should be taxed to give free medical care to someone
who earns more every minute, even when asleep, than you will earn
in a lifetime?

As long as *everyone* get the same access to medical care paid for
by taxes regardless of my income, yes.

Why should everyone get the same access to medical care? Different
people value different things. Giving everyone the best possible
medical care would bankrupt everyone. We'd all alternate between
living on the street eating out of hospital dumpsters, and being
hospitalized for malnutrition and hypothermia. Giving everyone some
lower standard of medical care would mean some people who were willing
and able to pay for better would be forbidden from doing so, even if
it meant their certain death.

As far as I know no actual system works like this. You are free to pay for private treatment, although the free at the point of use care is as good or better from purely medical point of view (the health insurance can pay for the "hotel services"). For any treatment you actually need the NHS will provide it. Vanity related cosmetic treatments and IVF attempts after about the third attempt are the main exceptions.

Actually when people claim demand for medical care is unlimited they are actually wrong, medical treatment itself is unpleasant enough to deter most people. You are very unlikely to want to consume chemotherapy unless you have cancer.


While I'd normally say "that's not how a tax-funded universal
service works," in the near-infinitely remote chance that I'm ever
Emperor, you (and the handful of other anarchists and libertarians I
know from RASSF) will be allowed to opt out.

The usual convention in these discussions is to describe how we think
things ought to be, not what we're personally capable of accomplishing.
For instance I can deplore tornados without having any ability to
prevent tornados.

Complete opt-outs don't really work in medical care as the patient may not be conscious, may not be able to communicate or may not rational, so it may be necessary to give the treatment before it becomes possible to even ask for consent. An example: My brother suffers from hydrocephalus and has a cranial shunt to drain the excess cerebrospinal fluid, this can become blocked. When it does he is severely disorientated and not really capable of making an informed decision until after surgery, at which point the question of consent is moot.

So I would not allow you to opt out of paying, as there is no practical way of allowing you to opt out of eligibility.
--
Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm
Livejournal http://brett-dunbar.livejournal.com/
Brett Paul Dunbar
To email me, use reply-to address
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT Breast Cancer Rant
    ... If you opt to pay for medication, you also have to go private with the rest of your treatment - there are moves to change this and allow people to continue with NHS treatment but pay drug costs, but there is an equally strong lobby against it as they don't want to start a system where some things are free and some things are charged and see it as the start of a slippery slope. ...
    (rec.crafts.textiles.quilting)
  • Re: OT Health care
    ... She said she'd need to pay for it in the United States. ... but there is much more to medical care than emergency treatment ... Medicaid is a safety net. ... it is RATIONED by price. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: OT: USA Political Question/UK Health care
    ... She has a 'carer' who comes in three times a week to help her have a bath, ... She does pay a contribution towards the carer - because it is assessed ... Part of the reason the Canadian health care had a problem was that too ... It means that anyone in this country making minimum wage can have treatment and lab test they need when they need it same as me. ...
    (rec.crafts.textiles.needlework)
  • Re: (off topic) Bushs blame game
    ... >>always return home for major medical treatment. ... >>going to the US for major medical treatment, not just Americans. ... Because elective medical care is not covered by most insurance (and ...
    (soc.culture.thai)
  • Re: OT: USA Political Question/UK Health care
    ... some assessment of need for treatment? ... If it's ever approved, it'll cost over $20,000 a year, however, many of the patients in the original trial were able to return to employment. ... The government would rather pay $15,000+ a year every year for the rest of your life for disability benefits and Medicaid than to pay $20,000 for one year, get you back to work/paying taxes, and then you can afford to pay for your own treatments. ...
    (rec.crafts.textiles.needlework)