Poll of the Day > What's your view on healthcare?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I think healthcare is definitely is a right, and I don't mind paying more taxes in order to have a healthcare system that can treat people when they need it.

I just can't understand how can some people see healthcare as a commodity.

we spend 600 billion on the military every year
we can't afford to give people free stuff

The problem is that even if you pay for healthcare not every hospital will accept that brand of healthcare. Universal healthcare would be nice so it would be less of a hassle to find a doctor near you that accepts your insurance company.
---

Great if you can afford it.

tiago92 posted...

Do you think healthcare should be a right?

No, rights are protections from government. By default, it cannot be a "right." Instead, government-sponsored healthcare -- like any other program providing a "free" service to an individual -- is an entitlement.

Whether or not you feel that everybody should be entitled to taxpayer-funded healthcare -- and there are certainly arguments you could make for or against it -- it doesn't become a "right"

RoboXgp89 posted...

we spend 600 billion on the military every year
we can't afford to give people free stuff

False and somewhat silly conflation. Not to mention that an entirely free healthcare system would cost more than that. So we could cut *all* military funding -- leaving all citizens at risk -- and still only be about halfway there.

https://nypost.com/2016/01/31/bernie-and-the-high-cost-of-free-health-care/
---

Anisoptera posted...

The problem is that even if you pay for healthcare not every hospital will accept that brand of healthcare. Universal healthcare would be nice so it would be less of a hassle to find a doctor near you that accepts your insurance company.

Yep
---

with the healthcare that people have in canada people will literally die before they see a doctor, which is why canadians come here if they have something serious

we need to ban things like sugar, ciggerettes, and high proof alcohol first before taking on anymore people
oh yeah and manufacture cars that don't go too fast
what else... guns, holy crap the amount of blood that gets wasted because people don't lock up loaded fire arms

It should not be a for-profit industry.
---

I'm all for it as long as I don't have to pay more taxes for it. If they can find a way to budget it in without taking more of my money, then I would be fine with it in practicality.

However, I don't like the idea that I'm paying for people's habits. I've said it a million times before, but if I have to subsidize someone's poor life choices, then I'm not happy. I think that leads us down a path where people have less accountability for their own actions. That's why I prefer to pay for healthcare for people as a charitable contribution rather than as a law.
---

A right is something that if there was no government involvement you would have anyways (Free Speech, Guns, Legal Representation, etc.), in that sense no it is not. If it should be provided by the government or not is a different debate. I feel it is fine, but not at the federal level (maybe not even at the state level). Requiring that employers pay for an employees health care (or that the local government does in the case of small businesses/self employed) makes a lot more sense to me since most health issues usually are related to your career choice anyways.
---

What y'all don't understand is America has the largest medical tax burden on Earth for their current coverage...

Something ain't right
---

Healthcare is not a right. Rights are inherently 'God given' or 'natural'. Meaning that the only way to lose those rights is by government infringement. Health care is a service, subject to the laws of economics. Just because everyone needs something doesn't make it immune to scarcity; quite the contrary, actually.

Should we receive universal health care in exchange for the taxes we pay? That's a more legitimate debate. Asking people whether they believe a commodity is a natural right and then accusing them of callousness or greed is not an honest debate.
---

No, because universal health care gives me way more services then I'll ever need in my life. I'd rather pay out of pocket for cheaper, more specific care as I need it. Why give up more in taxes when we could just cut out having umbrella policies to lower the rate of most services.

Well, in an ideal world, yes, I think it should be a right because it sounds nice on paper, but I don't think it should be in reality due to reasons in the last paragraph.

If we did it like japan it would be fine
5 dollars walk in see a doc walk out, heavily subsidized by the gov't
but everyone there is skinny, there's no guns and no one has any reason to be homeless

Lokarin posted...

What y'all don't understand is America has the largest medical tax burden on Earth for their current coverage...

Something ain't right

I don't think anyone would argue the American healthcare system isn't fucked 10 ways from Sunday. The argument is over what the best way is to solve it.
---

Here in Brazil there is a public healthcare system aside from the paid ones, but it's not that good, there's not enough people working under it and they're probably don't get paid enough, not to mention the wait lines for some important procedures can take years and you would probably be dead by then. Also, the infrastructure sucks. At least the free vaccination system works well.

RoboXgp89 posted...

we need to ban things like sugar...

NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RoboXgp89 posted...

we need to ban things like sugar,

Nope. We need to ban things like taco bell and McDonald's.
---

VixYW posted...

Here in Brazil there is a public healthcare system aside from the paid ones, but it's not that good, there's not enough people working under it and they're probably don't get paid enough, not to mention the wait lines for some important procedures can take years and you would probably be dead by then. Also, the infrastructure sucks. At least the free vaccination system works well.

RoboXgp89 posted...

we need to ban things like sugar...

NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yknow how I post lots of anti-smoking garbo? Well, Transfats are statistically even more dangerous, contributing to around 500k deaths annually
---

RoboXgp89 posted...

but everyone there is skinny, there's no guns and no one has any reason to be homeless

70 hour work weeks are also the norm. Every country has pros and cons.

Dikitain posted...

(Free Speech, Guns, Legal Representation, etc.)

I'm confused by legal representation on your list here, given that if it isn't provided by the government, and you can't afford it, you just don't get it.
---

Lokarin posted...

VixYW posted...

Here in Brazil there is a public healthcare system aside from the paid ones, but it's not that good, there's not enough people working under it and they're probably don't get paid enough, not to mention the wait lines for some important procedures can take years and you would probably be dead by then. Also, the infrastructure sucks. At least the free vaccination system works well.

RoboXgp89 posted...

we need to ban things like sugar...

NEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yknow how I post lots of anti-smoking garbo? Well, Transfats are statistically even more dangerous, contributing to around 500k deaths annually

That's a fair price I'm willing to pay for it imo. XP

Healthcare should NOT be a right.

Because fat, unhealthy, lazy people abuse it, causing us ALL to pay more.

There's a reason our health insurance premiums keep going up. And that's because Americans are extremely unhealthy and go to the doctor for the littlest thing.

When I was growing up, if I got the flu....you know what I did? Took some over the counter cough medicine. Maybe slather some Vicks vapor-rub on my chest. Ate some chicken soup. Went to bed earlier than usual. And dealt with it.

You know what happens to kids who get the flu now? They get rushed to the doctor's office....where an extremely overworked and overpaid guy can prescribe them with medication they could have just bought at fucking Wal-Mart, and be told to stay hydrated and get lots of rest, which anyone with a brain could have told them for free.

And that's excluding the corrupt doctors who are getting an extra $3000 per month by Big Pharma if they can prescribe X amount of some new pill to gullible hypochondriacs, which will come with many side-effects (which they plan on) so they can prescribe you with additional medication to counteract the side-effects and basically use you as a human guinea pig until they works out all the "kinks" of the new medication, which they will then only sell to extremely wealthy people.

There's a reason it's a multi-billion dollar INDUSTRY. Because the goal has never been to heal people's illnesses. It's been to make $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
---

RoboXgp89 posted...

with the healthcare that people have in canada people will literally die before they see a doctor, which is why canadians come here if they have something serious

That's just not true. You can find examples online of that happening, sure, but it's by no means the norm. People in Canada are treated in order of "importance". If you are complaining of minor knee problems, you'll probably get dropped down the priority list if someone comes in with a work injury that requires an immediate MRI and likely surgery.

What is a lot more common is minor things going untreated for longer than they should and becoming more problematic. That's a serious issue and that main reason to want to shorten wait times. But we very rarely just let people die.

The people who go to the US for care are often there because they have a minor (in the grand scheme of things) issue, and they are fine with paying a fee to get it dealt with immediately rather than waiting their turn.
---

I'm in the school of thinking it should be free but only for a certain subset of people

anyone under 18 should get free healthcare

over 18? sorry, time to pay for yourself

Any service with the requirement of another person's time, effort, and money is not a right.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

Healthcare should NOT be a right.

Because fat, unhealthy, lazy people abuse it, causing us ALL to pay more.

If healthcare were single payer, you'd save MORE money since preventative care is grossly neglected in America for that very reason
---

Smarkil posted...

Lokarin posted...

What y'all don't understand is America has the largest medical tax burden on Earth for their current coverage...

Something ain't right

I don't think anyone would argue the American healthcare system isn't fucked 10 ways from Sunday. The argument is over what the best way is to solve it.

Exactly. I would never deny that out Healthcare system is fucked. What I take issue with is the idea that socialism is the ONLY and best answer
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

It should not be a for-profit industry.

He's totally right, the insurance companies in bed with pharmaceuticals makes them billions but drains us, you do know their r&d is all tax payer subusidsed
---

It all boils down to if you believe every human being is entitled to an equal share of this planet. We have basically tamed the planet and humanity as a whole, owns it.

If each human being deserves a percentage of the output of the planet, and all of us need to share the work needed to cultivate it equally, then yes, we should also all be entitled to health care as long as we do our part.

That of course is not the way the world works, or even close. If we controlled our population growth though, and restricted the total number of humans on this planet to about 1/2 as many as we currently have. Focused our technological advances on reducing the amount of work humans as a whole need to do, and split the remaining work between the number of humans left, we would all probably need to work about 2 days a week or so probably, maybe 3 at first, and eventually possibly only 1 with enough automation and increased technology.

As long as we didn't continue to increase our population and developed alternative energy sources etc, everyone could live like kings. More work/specialized jobs would be available, but optional.

But yes, if we wanted to, we could totally afford to pay for universal healthcare and free education as well. Probably wouldn't even cost anything more if we just cut out all the tax loopholes and breaks that are currently being taken advantage of, along with the extreme reduction in emergency services that would cost. As far as free education, most of the "cost" of education is actually profit for someone. If students only got charged the cost to pay for professors/teachers, and they split it evenly among the class, the cost would be super cheap. Free education just means someone doesn't get rich of you.
---

Oh wolfy the herd will thin itself, soon enough
---

Lokarin posted...

What y'all don't understand is America has the largest medical tax burden on Earth for their current coverage...

Something ain't right

Source?

RoboXgp89 posted...

If we did it like japan it would be fine
5 dollars walk in see a doc walk out, heavily subsidized by the gov't
but everyone there is skinny, there's no guns and no one has any reason to be homeless

...what? Not even sure where to begin with that, although the fact that Japan *has* homeless is a good start.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Japan

Lokarin posted...

Yknow how I post lots of anti-smoking garbo? Well, Transfats are statistically even more dangerous, contributing to around 500k deaths annually

No, they're literally not. And you need to put away your copy of How to Lie with Statistics.

Dynalo posted...

Dikitain posted...

(Free Speech, Guns, Legal Representation, etc.)

I'm confused by legal representation on your list here, given that if it isn't provided by the government, and you can't afford it, you just don't get it.

I think he's referring to the ability to right to have representation, not the providing of representation. It's kind of like how the right to bear arms doesn't require anybody to give you a gun. Also there *are* pro bono lawyers who take on cases as charity, as well as non-profits that do the same.

Dynalo posted...

That's just not true. You can find examples online of that happening, sure, but it's by no means the norm. People in Canada are treated in order of "importance". If you are complaining of minor knee problems, you'll probably get dropped down the priority list if someone comes in with a work injury that requires an immediate MRI and likely surgery.

Having lived in Canada, I have personal stories where that clearly wasn't the case. Their medical system is one huge reason I would never live there again. (That and they return draft dodgers now, which kills the other only reason why I might consider it.)
---

ReggieTheReckless posted...

I'm in the school of thinking it should be free but only for a certain subset of people

anyone under 18 should get free healthcare

over 18? sorry, time to pay for yourself

I can *kinda* see that. Granted, from a utilitarian standpoint, you really want to keep working adults aged 22-40 alive and in good shape the most because the system has concluded its investment in them and they're starting to pay it back to society. From a sentimental standpoint, everybody loves kids.

Lokarin posted...

If healthcare were single payer, you'd save MORE money since preventative care is grossly neglected in America for that very reason

wtf? lolno, that's the stupidest fucking claim ever. If you're saying that the current costs are one thing when it's NOT being paid for by the government, you're not magically going to be paying less while covering everybody. That's just stupid. As for preventative care, there already *are* people on public benefits who don't bother seeking it. Unless there's a problem, people put it off. Even I spread it out more than I should because I don't like bloodwork.
---

Zeus posted...

Lokarin posted...

What y'all don't understand is America has the largest medical tax burden on Earth for their current coverage...

Something ain't right

Source?

RoboXgp89 posted...

If we did it like japan it would be fine
5 dollars walk in see a doc walk out, heavily subsidized by the gov't
but everyone there is skinny, there's no guns and no one has any reason to be homeless

...what? Not even sure where to begin with that, although the fact that Japan *has* homeless is a good start.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Japan

Japan at that time was 25,296

25k in a country of 100 million people
that's laughable
that's 1/10th of what we have in any given state because real estate agents/land lords don't care about human beings.. at all.

This whole article seems a little biased and only contains facts about how bad homelessness is and not any other relevant information. Perhaps how there are around 10,000 homeless people in all of Japan, or maybe that there are around 5 times more homeless people in Los Angeles than all of Japan combined. Possibly even the 3 different systems of help for homeless people that can be found on the Japanese page for homelessness in Japan.

wolfy42 posted...

It all boils down to if you believe every human being is entitled to an equal share of this planet. We have basically tamed the planet and humanity as a whole, owns it.

If each human being deserves a percentage of the output of the planet, and all of us need to share the work needed to cultivate it equally, then yes, we should also all be entitled to health care as long as we do our part.

That of course is not the way the world works, or even close. If we controlled our population growth though, and restricted the total number of humans on this planet to about 1/2 as many as we currently have. Focused our technological advances on reducing the amount of work humans as a whole need to do, and split the remaining work between the number of humans left, we would all probably need to work about 2 days a week or so probably, maybe 3 at first, and eventually possibly only 1 with enough automation and increased technology.

There's no logical justification for the idea that every person is entitled to the same share of the planet. A person born into Guatemala didn't collectively do anything to build Germany or Japan, so why should they be entitled to the same thing as a German or Japanese citizen? The idea that citizens of a *nation* should have a measure of equality is more logical because, in theory, their collective efforts (and those of their ancestors) built those nations.

And, more broadly, there are many nations where if they didn't exist at all, the world would still basically be as it is today because those particular nations didn't contribute to human achievement as a whole. As for why they didn't do more, it could be a matter of never having a sufficient population, maybe they lacked the right natural resources, or -- most likely -- they just didn't develop the right kind of culture for whatever reason. However, some cultures which *had* fallen behind were able to modernize at an incredible rate whereas others are kinda stuck where they are, again often due to culture.

wolfy42 posted...

As long as we didn't continue to increase our population and developed alternative energy sources etc, everyone could live like kings. More work/specialized jobs would be available, but optional.

Unlikely. Population wouldn't necessarily factor into that but, more importantly, population is *needed* for development. Innovation generally requires large populations since it increases the chance of great minds being born.

And the system of complacency you promote would effectively be a slow, protracted death for humanity because you'd create an environment where people wouldn't need to innovate and where minds would atrophy.
---

tiago92 posted...

I think healthcare is definitely is a right, and I don't mind paying more taxes in order to have a healthcare system that can treat people when they need it.

I just can't understand how can some people see healthcare as a commodity.

Healthcare is already treated as a right. You cannot be denied medical services unless you voluntarily waive this right. Coverage for said healthcare is a service someone has to pay for. If we were on the Denmark model for health coverage via taxation, the average person would spend over a million dollars in taxes over the course of his or her lifetime, two thirds of which would be going toward health coverage. Even if we were to maintain the current tax rate, you'd still be paying $400,000 over the course of your lifetime for healthcare service coverage, but that money's already relegated to other government bodies. The problem with this is that the average person only spends $360,000 on health insurance under the current model, over the course of his life. Either way, you end up with a deficit ranging from $40,000 to well-over $600,000, just for having agreed to this ludicrous model. In other words, you expect the majority of us to foot the bill for the rare individual who needs significantly more medical attention over the course of his or her lifetime.

Funny how easy it is to dictate how other people spend their money, huh?
---

RoboXgp89 posted...

Zeus posted...

Lokarin posted...

What y'all don't understand is America has the largest medical tax burden on Earth for their current coverage...

Something ain't right

Source?

RoboXgp89 posted...

If we did it like japan it would be fine
5 dollars walk in see a doc walk out, heavily subsidized by the gov't
but everyone there is skinny, there's no guns and no one has any reason to be homeless

...what? Not even sure where to begin with that, although the fact that Japan *has* homeless is a good start.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Japan

Japan at that time was 25,296

25k in a country of 100 million people
that's laughable
that's 1/10th of what we have in any given state because real estate agents/land lords don't care about human beings.. at all.

This whole article seems a little biased and only contains facts about how bad homelessness is and not any other relevant information. Perhaps how there are around 10,000 homeless people in all of Japan, or maybe that there are around 5 times more homeless people in Los Angeles than all of Japan combined. Possibly even the 3 different systems of help for homeless people that can be found on the Japanese page for homelessness in Japan.

Not sure if you did quotes wrong at the end or if you were quoting a comment in the article. However, you claimed that there was no homelessness there, which was just a flat-out lie. Now you're trying to move the goalposts. However, people are homeless in Japan for the same reason that they're homeless anywhere else: lack of family to support them, mental illness, addiction, long-term loss of employment, etc.

As for the 25,000, the government is likely under-reporting that number considering that Tokyo alone was estimated to have 5,000 homeless. However, Japan has a shrinking population and they push for far smaller housing so it's possible that there's also less of a strain on the housing market in general.

RoboXgp89 posted...

25k in a country of 100 million people
that's laughable
that's 1/10th of what we have in any given state because real estate agents/land lords don't care about human beings.. at all.

1) Landlords in Japan don't care any more than American landlords and it's stupid to believe otherwise.

2) The US's *total* homeless population is nowhere near large enough for that to be true.
---

Some things should be universal because if more people had easier access to checkups and preventative care then that could cut down on the number of people that even need more acute healthcare

Other things should be covered by optional insurance
---

I think it is even more important now for the government to help keep the population in shape so that the US can deal with its population pyramid problem.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

It should not be a for-profit industry.

This. Healthcare didn't start nosediving into the shitter until Nixon let hospitals, insurance companies, etc. start functioning as for-profit entities.

As others have stated, there should also be a focus on preventative care. The reason your average ER wait is so long is because people ignore common problems that could be fixed with a simple doctor's visit until it becomes something more severe.

Rampant medicaid abuse doesn't help either.
---

Mead posted...

Some things should be universal because if more people had easier access to checkups and preventative care then that could cut down on the number of people that even need more acute healthcare

Which, again, brings us to the issue of people *with* healthcare not taking the preventative checkups/care. Not that I'm entirely sure that wellness checkups do all that much good outside of the bloodwork, considering I've had checkups where I didn't even remove my shirt (then again, I think I have a terrible GP)

jramirez23 posted...

I think it is even more important now for the government to help keep the population in shape so that the US can deal with its population pyramid problem.

While the idea is nice in theory, there's no great way to legislate people to take better care of themselves without going pretty damn fascist.
---

Here's some of the health care stats

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2017/08/18/20plus-healthcare-stats-that-will-blow-you-away/104612016/
---

Keebs05 posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

It should not be a for-profit industry.

This. Healthcare didn't start nosediving into the shitter until Nixon let hospitals, insurance companies, etc. start functioning as for-profit entities.

For starters, that's not even true. If you're posting the meme I think, you're referring to the HMO Act of 1973 but prior to that the healthcare system had -- as it always had -- been able to act as a for-profit. Since the founding of this nation (and before that), doctors *could* go into it for profit.

Keebs05 posted...

As others have stated, there should also be a focus on preventative care. The reason your average ER wait is so long is because people ignore common problems that could be fixed with a simple doctor's visit until it becomes something more severe.

...ER wait time is usually less a matter of "preventative care" and more a matter of a myriad of other factors including triage, busy times, the fact that people go to the ER instead of other facilities which could also handle their problem, etc.

https://advanceer.com/7-reasons-for-long-er-wait-times/

Keebs05 posted...

Rampant medicaid abuse doesn't help either.

When you have a government-sponsored system, you *tend* to have absurd amounts of abuse. Speaking of, there was actually a pretty egregious one lately, tied to a senator running for re-eelection in NJ

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/palm-beach/fl-pn-doctor-medicare-sentencing-menendez-20180222-story.html
---

Lokarin posted...

Here's some of the health care stats

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2017/08/18/20plus-healthcare-stats-that-will-blow-you-away/104612016/

You know that the claims you cited aren't represented in here, right? Otherwise, I'm assuming that you were misstating claims you heard other people make.
---

Zeus posted...

Lokarin posted...

Here's some of the health care stats

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2017/08/18/20plus-healthcare-stats-that-will-blow-you-away/104612016/

You know that the claims you cited aren't represented in here, right? Otherwise, I'm assuming that you were misstating claims you heard other people make.

Y'know, everyone tells me to google stuff when I ask

YOU google it!

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/03/u-s-pays-more-for-health-care-with-worse-population-health-outcomes/

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/us-spends-health-care-countries-fare-study/story?id=53710650

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/22/the-real-reason-medical-care-costs-so-much-more-in-the-us.html
---

No one is allowed to have a viewpoint or opinion without Zeus trying to debate it
---

see him try to afford a room in any coastal state without 3-4 weeks of min wage full time
it's not happening

Lokarin posted...

Zeus posted...

Lokarin posted...

Here's some of the health care stats

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2017/08/18/20plus-healthcare-stats-that-will-blow-you-away/104612016/

You know that the claims you cited aren't represented in here, right? Otherwise, I'm assuming that you were misstating claims you heard other people make.

Y'know, everyone tells me to google stuff when I ask

YOU google it!

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/03/u-s-pays-more-for-health-care-with-worse-population-health-outcomes/

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/us-spends-health-care-countries-fare-study/story?id=53710650

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/22/the-real-reason-medical-care-costs-so-much-more-in-the-us.html

For reference, this was your claim:

Lokarin posted...

What y'all don't understand is America has the largest medical tax burden on Earth for their current coverage...

What you've provided has nothing to do with what you claimed >_>

As for your second claim (blaming preventative care), your sources seemingly contradict that as well and instead put the onus on things on things like prescription costs, salaries, etc.

And, when you're making a claim, it's really on you to back that claim unless it's legitimately a matter of public knowledge (ie, Al-Qaeda being behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks) or something that can be readily accessed (ie, the date of a major event happening). Otherwise you're asking somebody to prove a negative (such as Erik claiming that a photo existed which didn't). However, the second you made the first claim, I *did* try googling it and couldn't find anything to support the idea which is why part of the reason I asked for a source.

Mead posted...

No one is allowed to have a viewpoint or opinion without Zeus trying to debate it

Zeus is never allowed to question a wrong (or seemingly wrong) view without Mead chirping in.

RoboXgp89 posted...

see him try to afford a room in any coastal state without 3-4 weeks of min wage full time
it's not happening

You HAVE to know that's completely wrong, right?
---

the biggest city in japan tokyo you could get an apartment albeit small for like two weeks worth

in new york it'd literally take you over 3 weeks of work for a shit hole, you'd have maybe 300 bucks left over

Dynalo posted...

Dikitain posted...

(Free Speech, Guns, Legal Representation, etc.)

I'm confused by legal representation on your list here, given that if it isn't provided by the government, and you can't afford it, you just don't get it.

Legal Representation meaning you are allowed to have someone represent you, not meaning you need to have someone represent you if you can't afford their services. People get that mixed up. The "right to an attorney" and "if you can't afford one, one will be provided for you" are two separate (but important) laws. The first is a right, the second one isn't.
---

Dikitain posted...

Legal Representation meaning you are allowed to have someone represent you, not meaning you need to have someone represent you if you can't afford their services

But it still requires a governing body. You don't have the right to an attorney if there literally aren't laws. If there is a group of people that enforce rules, that effectively becomes the government, even if that's the only power they have.

You don't have a right to an attorney by your definition, because you don't even have the right to due process.
---