Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 12:18:45 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: How much health care should the government provide?
None, because government is wrong. - 8 (21.6%)
None, because governments shouldn't provide health care. - 8 (21.6%)
Public health issues only (like vaccinations, water fluoridation, etc) - 1 (2.7%)
Preventative care only - 0 (0%)
Emergency care only - 1 (2.7%)
Emergency and preventative care only - 1 (2.7%)
Enough for a natural human lifespan - 1 (2.7%)
Enough for a typical modern human lifespan - 6 (16.2%)
Enough for a 120-year lifespan - 0 (0%)
Enough to freeze everyone who dies until a cure is found - 0 (0%)
Enough for 120-year lifespans plus freezing - 2 (5.4%)
As much as the recipient wants - 7 (18.9%)
However much best promotes economic growth (not an ethical obligation, but it's a good idea) - 2 (5.4%)
Total Voters: 37

Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: How much health care should the government provide?  (Read 1499 times)
Explodicle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 06:44:18 PM
 #1

I've seen a few people mention that the government has an ethical responsibility to provide health care to its citizens. So how much?

Let me know if you'd like me to add any more choices.
1480853925
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480853925

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480853925
Reply with quote  #2

1480853925
Report to moderator
1480853925
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480853925

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480853925
Reply with quote  #2

1480853925
Report to moderator
1480853925
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480853925

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480853925
Reply with quote  #2

1480853925
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480853925
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480853925

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480853925
Reply with quote  #2

1480853925
Report to moderator
1480853925
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480853925

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480853925
Reply with quote  #2

1480853925
Report to moderator
vampire
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574



View Profile
July 25, 2012, 07:11:30 PM
 #2

Too many choices. Cut down to two or three.
evoorhees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 994


Democracy is the original 51% attack


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 07:31:19 PM
 #3

The most that any government should ever do is protect citizens against force and fraud. This means having a police system, court system, and perhaps defensive military. That's it.

It is both highly immoral and highly destructive for a government to provide healthcare. Immoral because it must steal and coerce in order to do so, and destructive because, compared to any market alternative, it will be less productive at a higher cost, meaning society is poorer for it.
Explodicle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 11:07:13 PM
 #4

Bonus question for people who didn't select "none" - why that much, not more or less?
pekv2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770



View Profile
July 25, 2012, 11:18:47 PM
 #5

As much as it takes to save a life, and cure or help any diseases that are not life threatening.
yogi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


Hamster ate my bitcoin


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 11:26:30 PM
 #6

Ability is responsibility, if you are able to save another's life without endangering yours, and you do nothing, then you are responsible for their death.

Explodicle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


View Profile
July 25, 2012, 11:59:28 PM
 #7

As much as it takes to save a life, and cure or help any diseases that are not life threatening.
As much as it takes to save which life? A dehydrated infant, or an ancient cancer patient?

Ability is responsibility, if you are able to save another's life without endangering yours, and you do nothing, then you are responsible for their death.
If I can extend my life by saving money for future medical expenses, then does spending it on someone else count as endangering my life?
yogi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


Hamster ate my bitcoin


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 12:06:46 AM
 #8

Ability is responsibility, if you are able to save another's life without endangering yours, and you do nothing, then you are responsible for their death.
If I can extend my life by saving money for future medical expenses, then does spending it on someone else count as endangering my life?

It's a social contract, others are also responsible for you.

Explodicle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 12:20:43 AM
 #9

Ability is responsibility, if you are able to save another's life without endangering yours, and you do nothing, then you are responsible for their death.
If I can extend my life by saving money for future medical expenses, then does spending it on someone else count as endangering my life?
It's a social contract, others are also responsible for you.
That just confused me even more. Tongue Is that a yes or a no?
yogi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


Hamster ate my bitcoin


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 12:34:25 AM
 #10

Ability is responsibility, if you are able to save another's life without endangering yours, and you do nothing, then you are responsible for their death.
If I can extend my life by saving money for future medical expenses, then does spending it on someone else count as endangering my life?
It's a social contract, others are also responsible for you.
That just confused me even more. Tongue Is that a yes or a no?

That's a no.

I live in a capitalist country, and I'm going to assume you do too. We are bought up to be selfish and greedy, it's what drives capitalism, so the concept may sound a little strange. But, if in the future you don't have the money to pay for your medical expenses then it is the responsibility of others to pay them.

Raize
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1374


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 01:48:08 AM
 #11

Yogi, do you think Ayn Rand should have collected Social Security?

OrganofCorti's Neighbourhood Pool Watch - The most informative website on blockchain health
yogi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


Hamster ate my bitcoin


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 02:37:13 AM
 #12

Yogi, do you think Ayn Rand should have collected Social Security?

If Ayn Rand was hungry, then I would feed her.


Bimmerhead
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 968



View Profile WWW
July 26, 2012, 02:44:40 AM
 #13

I live in a capitalist country, and I'm going to assume you do too. We are bought up to be selfish and greedy, it's what drives capitalism, so the concept may sound a little strange. But, if in the future you don't have the money to pay for your medical expenses then it is the responsibility of others to pay them.

You weren't brought up to be selfish and greedy, you were born that way.

That is why capitalism is successful: it has a proper understanding of human nature.

That is why socialism is an utter failure: it is fundamentally flawed at its root.  It can never succeed because it depends on human beings to be angels which they aren't.  Without the incentive to produce most people won't. 

Auroracoin forum: http://auroraspjall.is/   Auroracoin-enabled Q&A: https://spurt.is/
AuroracoinLocal: https://www.skiptum.is/   Auroracoin twitter tipping: http://auroratip.auroracoin.io/#/
yogi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


Hamster ate my bitcoin


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 03:15:32 AM
 #14

I live in a capitalist country, and I'm going to assume you do too. We are bought up to be selfish and greedy, it's what drives capitalism, so the concept may sound a little strange. But, if in the future you don't have the money to pay for your medical expenses then it is the responsibility of others to pay them.

You weren't brought up to be selfish and greedy, you were born that way.

That is why capitalism is successful: it has a proper understanding of human nature.

That is why socialism is an utter failure: it is fundamentally flawed at its root.  It can never succeed because it depends on human beings to be angels which they aren't.  Without the incentive to produce most people won't. 

I agree, all species and individuals are ultimately selfish, and capitalism is successful because of material rewards and the incentive to survive.

However, I maintain that we are all responsible for our own decisions. If you are faced with the choice of buying a shine new car or preventing someone's slow and agonising death. You are not only responsible for the choice but also it's outcome.

Explodicle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 03:41:19 AM
 #15

However, I maintain that we are all responsible for our own decisions. If you are faced with the choice of buying a shine new car or preventing someone's slow and agonising death. You are not only responsible for the choice but also it's outcome.

Then who should buy shiny new cars?
yogi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


Hamster ate my bitcoin


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 03:56:44 AM
 #16

However, I maintain that we are all responsible for our own decisions. If you are faced with the choice of buying a shine new car or preventing someone's slow and agonising death. You are not only responsible for the choice but also it's outcome.

Then who should buy shiny new cars?

You can buy a shiny new car if you like.

But you are still responsible for the consequences of your decisions.

FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 06:37:18 AM
 #17

That is why capitalism is successful: it has a proper understanding of human nature.

Incorrect. Capitalism, properly implemented, can be effective. Capitalism, unchecked, will destroy a lot of things.

Quote
That is why socialism is an utter failure: it is fundamentally flawed at its root.  It can never succeed because it depends on human beings to be angels which they aren't.  Without the incentive to produce most people won't.  

Incorrect. Actually, it is capitalism which required human beings to be angels. Socialism, properly implemented, can achieve things which require unified efforts, which capitalism is unable to achieve.
bb113
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 06:46:14 AM
 #18

That is why capitalism is successful: it has a proper understanding of human nature.

Incorrect. Capitalism, properly implemented, can be effective. Capitalism, unchecked, will destroy a lot of things.

Quote
That is why socialism is an utter failure: it is fundamentally flawed at its root.  It can never succeed because it depends on human beings to be angels which they aren't.  Without the incentive to produce most people won't.  

Incorrect. Actually, it is capitalism which required human beings to be angels. Socialism, properly implemented, can achieve things which require unified efforts, which capitalism is unable to achieve.

Really?
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 06:50:02 AM
 #19

That is why capitalism is successful: it has a proper understanding of human nature.

Incorrect. Capitalism, properly implemented, can be effective. Capitalism, unchecked, will destroy a lot of things.

Quote
That is why socialism is an utter failure: it is fundamentally flawed at its root.  It can never succeed because it depends on human beings to be angels which they aren't.  Without the incentive to produce most people won't.  

Incorrect. Actually, it is capitalism which required human beings to be angels. Socialism, properly implemented, can achieve things which require unified efforts, which capitalism is unable to achieve.

Really?

Yeah: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rXtG3vfAlA (turn the volume up)

Or, another example would be healthcare for everyone.
bb113
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728


View Profile
July 26, 2012, 06:54:55 AM
 #20

So despite having satellites in orbit being a clearly profitable business, no group of people would have ever gotten together to develop rocket technology (which really was first developed for warfare to begin with...)? Capitalism does not forego cooperation. I won't claim it is always the best or most efficient solution possible, but saying that groups of people working together out of selfish motives is incapable of achieving such success is kinda out there.
Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!