-
Vlad-t-Impaler said...
You really must be living under a rock, because obviously you're not aware that we, as a nation, have no apetite for letting people die because they don't have health insurance. You might have noticed that people who need health care and don't have insurance STILL GET HEALTH CARE. And who pays for that? We do.
Do you remember Ron Paul's answer during the debates, when asked what happens to a young adult who chose to go without insurance and then got cancer?? His response was to the effect "Well...uh...um....his neighbors will pay for it....his church will pay for it." I didn't hear him say "Well, HE'S JUST GONNA HAVE TO DIE! HE MADE A BAD CHOICE, AND HE'S GONNA HAVE TO DIE!"
And it's entertaining that you want to talk about "human rights" in the context of a mandate to buy healthcare, BUT NOT IN THE CONTEXT OF HEALTHCARE ITSELF.
This post was edited by fallenangle on 7/5/2012 at 10:42 AM
fallenangle
- 4 stars Rating: 67
3286 votes total - (6251)
- 17 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
fallenangle said...
Where did I say anything about letting that person die? Between your hypothetical situations and the words you're putting in my mouth it's really confusing trying to follow along. I'll play along with your hypotheticals though because that's apparently all you got. So we're talking about young people who can afford health insurance but don't buy it. They get cancer. Is it termnal? OK so they're gonna die anyways. Is it not terminal? Ok, then since they have money they can pay for it out of pocket, they rolled the dice and lost so now they have to dig a little deeper into their pockets. Next scenario?
Oh, and so you're saying healthcare is a right? How many other rights do we have that we have to pay for? How many other rights do we have that, not only do we have to pay for, but if we don't decide to pay for our supposed right we are then penalized for this and have to pay a penalty?
VladtImpaler20535
- 4 stars Rating: 79
5958 votes total - (3332)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Vlad-t-Impaler said...
Man you're stupid....
1. Whether cancer is terminal or not is not an absolute. It depends! If a cancer gets detected early enough, in most cases it's not terminal. If it doesn't, it's terminal. Also depends on the type/form of cancer. 2. Whether the cancer gets detected early enough might actually depend on whether you have insurance or not. Without insurance, one might not even have a basic physical which might help to detect the cancer. 3. The level and quality of treatment you get (based on insurance, usually) will also determine whether the cancer ends up killing you or not. 4. Even if you have terminal cancer, you can live with some quality of life until it kills you, assuming you have enough coverage to pay for the treatment. Again, it depends on your coverage if you'll have this luxury or not. 5. Whether it's terminal or not, for most people, especiall young people, the treatment alone will empty your bank account without health insurance.
And BTW, these aren't "hypotheticals". This is exactly what the issue boils down to - If you choose to go without healthcare insurance, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU COME DOWN WITH A SERIOUS ILLNESS THAT YOU CAN'T PAY FOR?? Do you choose to suffer/die, or do you choose to go to the hospital and hope that someone else picks up the tab? Most people would choose the latter.
This post was edited by fallenangle on 7/5/2012 at 5:10 PM
fallenangle
- 4 stars Rating: 67
3286 votes total - (6251)
- 17 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
As a reminder, 2.5 MILLION young Americans got healthcare...