Board 8 > is there a right to health care?

(+) Yeah! (+)

and if there is, what does it encompass?
can you really have a right that requires the service of others? where does that leave medical professionals?
forget for a moment how feasible an implementation of a system that covers this right would be. in a moral/philosophical sense, do people have a right to health care?
---

No, but they have a right to nerd care.
---

Who determines the rights? I'd say no but I'm also not completely opposed to a universal healthcare system to some extent.
---

i saw the post but dont worry mystery person your secret is safe with me
---

MysticBrohan posted...

can you really have a right that requires the service of others?

Tons of rights require this on some level or another though, health care isn't exactly an exception.
---

in an ethical society? yes.
---

Kenri posted...

MysticBrohan posted...

can you really have a right that requires the service of others?

Tons of rights require this on some level or another though, health care isn't exactly an exception.

like what?
---

In the USA, it's law that a hospital cannot refuse to treat your critical condition just because they think you can't pay. I approve of this law. Given that addressing problems in the emergency room is inefficient, encouraging people to seek treatment sooner (by, in part, making other methods affordable) makes sense.

Do medical personnel, pharmaceutical manufacturers, and so on deserve compensation for unpaid/discounted time spent helping people that can't afford their normal prices? Certainly. I see public health as a common good which the government has an obligation to promote, and I think the government should use tax revenues to compensate those professionals.
---

MysticBrohan posted...

Kenri posted...

MysticBrohan posted...

can you really have a right that requires the service of others?

Tons of rights require this on some level or another though, health care isn't exactly an exception.

like what?

Right to an attorney and to a jury of your peers, for instance. In a less direct sense, any rights to non-discrimination ultimately end up forcing others to serve you.

Though you may not agree those are rights in, like, the philosophical sense.
---

No
---

Yes, but only to a reasonable level. You don't have a right to receive the best care possible, but you do have a right to receive a minimum threshold of care.
---

Yes.

To paraphrase a great man, we all have to work a little so that we can ball a lot.
---

"Health care" consists of goods and services provided by other people. To claim you have a right to other people's labor is literally slavery.
---

I see Smartmuffin is the type to pick the Barbarians when he plays Civilization
---

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

So...yes.

SmartMuffin posted...

"Health care" consists of goods and services provided by other people. To claim you have a right to other people's labor is literally slavery.

I mean they choose the profession and get paid for it, so no.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Life,

That's kind of more a right to not be killed, rather than a right to health care.

Being healthy is tied to happiness, which you don't have a right to- instead you have a right to the pursuit thereof.
---

I mean they choose the profession and get paid for it, so no.

And how would you exercise your "right" to health care if everyone decided to choose not to treat you and/or you were unable to pay?
---

SmartMuffin posted...

"Health care" consists of goods and services provided by other people. To claim you have a right to other people's labor is literally slavery.

look at this fucking edgelord

do you know any libertarian/free market fanatic doctors, I need to know who specifically to avoid when I need healthcare
---

do you know any libertarian/free market fanatic doctors

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/Ron_Paul%2C_official_Congressional_photo_portrait%2C_2007.jpg
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Yes, but only to a reasonable level. You don't have a right to receive the best care possible, but you do have a right to receive a minimum threshold of care.

Yes

For all its issues I love the NHS and think it's the best thing about the UK. But it does have those issues. If you've got it you should be able to go private and get better care.
---

i was under the impression you could get better care in the uk if you could afford it
im pretty sure i read you can at least skip queues or something
---

MysticBrohan posted...

i was under the impression you could get better care in the uk if you could afford it
im pretty sure i read you can at least skip queues or something

yeah there is private health care
---

SmartMuffin posted...

"Health care" consists of goods and services provided by other people. To claim you have a right to other people's labor is literally slavery.

So then do you believe right to an attorney and jury should be done away with?
---

So then do you believe right to an attorney and jury should be done away with?

Yes. Jury duty is also slavery.

"The right to an attorney" depends on what part you look at - the right to have an attorney present is legitimate, but having them "publicly provided" is not.

If three people were on a desert island and A committed a crime against B, it would be immoral to force C to serve as an attorney on the case if they didn't want to. Therefore, it cannot be a right.
---

That said, yeah, that was probably the most embarrassing edgelord post I've seen in awhile

By that logic, literally every job is "slavery"
---

StealThisSheen posted...

That said, yeah, that was probably the most embarrassing edgelord post I've seen in awhile

By that logic, literally every job is "slavery"

is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow
---

@SmartMuffin
could you expand a bit on where a right to health care would leave the medical professionals obligated to assist any and everyone?
positive rights are tricky
---

StealThisSheen posted...

By that logic, literally every job is "slavery"

SmartMuffin dangerously close to stumbling onto communist theory
---

You shouldnt even have a right to police officers or the fire department, honestly. Why are they obligated to help you?

If youre poor and cant afford your fire department fee, your house should just burn down. It isnt our fault you werent careful about letting your house burst in flames and I shouldnt have to pay for it.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

You shouldnt even have a right to police officers or the fire department, honestly. Why are they obligated to help you?

If youre poor and cant afford your fire department fee, your house should just burn down. It isnt our fault you werent careful about letting your house burst in flames and I shouldnt have to pay for it.

you are literally describing smuffin's ideal society btw
---

MysticBrohan posted...

@SmartMuffin
could you expand a bit on where a right to health care would leave the medical professionals obligated to assist any and everyone?
positive rights are tricky

Let's say you and I are the only people in the room. I have some minor training in first aid. You get injured. Do you have the right to force me to treat your injuries if I don't feel like it?
---

SmartMuffin posted...

MysticBrohan posted...

@SmartMuffin
could you expand a bit on where a right to health care would leave the medical professionals obligated to assist any and everyone?
positive rights are tricky

Let's say you and I are the only people in the room. I have some minor training in first aid. You get injured. Do you have the right to force me to treat your injuries if I don't feel like it?

do you honestly think this hypothetical makes you and your position look good to anyone
---

SmartMuffin posted...

MysticBrohan posted...

@SmartMuffin
could you expand a bit on where a right to health care would leave the medical professionals obligated to assist any and everyone?
positive rights are tricky

Let's say you and I are the only people in the room. I have some minor training in first aid. You get injured. Do you have the right to force me to treat your injuries if I don't feel like it?

The thing is, you must KNOW this example is bullshit but here we are.
---

*eats popcorn ala Michael in Thriller*
---

SmartMuffin posted...

MysticBrohan posted...

@SmartMuffin
could you expand a bit on where a right to health care would leave the medical professionals obligated to assist any and everyone?
positive rights are tricky

Let's say you and I are the only people in the room. I have some minor training in first aid. You get injured. Do you have the right to force me to treat your injuries if I don't feel like it?

Great point. To elaborate, lets say you are tied to a railroad track and a train is barreling towards you. I am two feet away from a switch that flips the train to the next track.

Do you have the right to force me to push that switch if I dont feel like it? I think wed both agree thats slavery, and you would prefer it as a true American for me to let you die.
---

are you guys honestly trying to argue logic with smartmuffin?
---

Do you have the right to force me to push that switch if I dont feel like it?

No. Not unless you were the one who tied me up or ordered the train to come or something like that.
---

His ideals can't even coexist with each other

"Investing is the way to raising jobs and the economy! Oh, but jobs are slavery, though."
---

SmartMuffin posted...

MysticBrohan posted...

@SmartMuffin
could you expand a bit on where a right to health care would leave the medical professionals obligated to assist any and everyone?
positive rights are tricky

Let's say you and I are the only people in the room. I have some minor training in first aid. You get injured. Do you have the right to force me to treat your injuries if I don't feel like it?

No.

But your boss has a right to fire you if treating his injuries is part of your job and you don't do it. Brohan himself isn't forcing you to do anything.
---

Johnbobb posted...

are you guys honestly trying to argue logic with smartmuffin?

He's at least internally consistent (well he was before he went full alt-right). If you had to pick a self-identified conservative on this board to argue logic with, SmartMuffin's really not a bad choice.
---

StealThisSheen posted...

His ideals can't even coexist with each other

"Investing is the way to raising jobs and the economy! Oh, but jobs are slavery, though."

Smuffin has actually been perfectly consistent. Labor that you choose to undertake and that you see the profits of (or at least, agreed-upon compensation) is perfectly fine. Labor where you don't have 100% control over your participation (i.e. a unviersal healthcare system) is slavery.
---

Not_an_Owl posted...

Labor where you don't have 100% control over your participation (i.e. a unviersal healthcare system) is slavery.

But you don't have 100% control over your participation in any job if you wish to keep said job. People aren't born and stolen away to be forced into being doctors. >_>
---

StealThisSheen posted...

Not_an_Owl posted...

Labor where you don't have 100% control over your participation (i.e. a unviersal healthcare system) is slavery.

But you don't have 100% control over your participation in any job if you wish to keep said job. People aren't born and stolen away to be forced into being doctors. >_>

People are definitely born and forced into being doctors (or lawyers)
---

Oh, but jobs are slavery, though.

I never said jobs are slavery. I said that having a "right" to someone else's labor is slavery.
---

SmartMuffin posted...

Oh, but jobs are slavery, though.

I never said jobs are slavery. I said that having a "right" to someone else's labor is slavery.

So how does universal health care make somebody being a doctor slavery moreso than somebody being a server at a restaurant?

If you're equating universal health care and having an attorney provided to slavery, then you're equating jobs in general to slavery.
---

SmartMuffin posted...

or ordered the train to come or something like that.

Wait, that can't be right. In that case it would only be the train engineer who is at fault.
---

So how does universal health care make somebody being a doctor slavery

The point isn't that having universal health care instantly transforms doctors into slaves.

It's that, as a principle, it declares that you are totally willing to enslave doctors if necessary.

If I have a "right" to something, that means I can use force to obtain it and others are morally prevented from stopping me. A "right" to the goods and services of other people implies a right to rob, steal, and enslave. A doctor who chooses not to treat you is "violating your rights" and you are therefore justified to use force to defend your so-called-rights.
---

SmartMuffin posted...

Do you have the right to force me to push that switch if I dont feel like it?

No. Not unless you were the one who tied me up or ordered the train to come or something like that.

Wow, didn't take you for a facist cucklord.

Who cares if I ordered the train to come? I wasn't the one who tied him to the tracks. That was his own fault. I'm not obligated to push the switch regardless if I called the train or not.
---

SmartMuffin posted...

It's that, as a principle, it declares that you are totally willing to enslave doctors if necessary.

If I have a "right" to something, that means I can use force to obtain it and others are morally prevented from stopping me. A "right" to the goods and services of other people implies a right to rob, steal, and enslave. A doctor who chooses not to treat you is "violating your rights" and you are therefore justified to use force to defend your so-called-rights.

So if you get kicked out of a theater for talking through a movie, it's morally okay to use physical force to get back inside and talk more because you have the right to free speech?
---

So if you get kicked out of a theater for talking through a movie, it's morally okay to use physical force to get back inside and talk more because you have the right to free speech?

You don't have the right to free speech on my property. Nobody has ever tried to claim so.
---