'Let him die.' -- a perspective on the individual mandate by NewOldBrownCoat

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

The question amounts to: Do you force people to help each other?

Add: "At Gunpoint" if you want to be completely honest.

It's easy to see why 'Let them Die' is not a popular humanist campaign slogan. However, "Steal money to pay for it" isn't exactly a rallying cry for Liberty, either.

It takes a special kind of person to say, 'Hell yeah, send him to the devil!'

But we should not fool ourselves into thinking that forcing X to help Y under threat of theft and violence is an endeavor born from a love of liberty.

Neither option presents a strong, magnetic beacon for people who love life and freedom. Someone is getting stepped on either way.

That having been said, I am not prepared to say "Let them Die." Even though I love Freedom, I can't bring myself to do it. It is a personal failing, and a failure of conviction to my philosophy.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 2:34 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
But we should not fool ourselves into thinking that forcing X to help Y under threat of theft and violence is an endeavor born from a love of liberty.

That pretty well sums up my objections to the Iraq War. It was stealing from me to "help" force democracy - at gunpoint, literally - onto people who didn't want it, and didn't want us in their country.

I suppose if I had to choose where my stolen money was being spent, healthcare for all would be a better end use than endless warfare.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 2:36 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"I suppose if I had to choose where my stolen money was being spent, healthcare for all would be a better end use than endless warfare."

Hello,

Such a choice, if one were to be asked to make it, should be universally simple. Steal for Life, or Steal for Death?

The answer is obvious.

And yet, we continue in perpetual war.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 3:22 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Even though I love Freedom, I can't bring myself to do it. It is a personal failing, and a failure of conviction to my philosophy.

It's not a bad thing to let humanity get in the way of ideological purity. Many of history's greatest monsters were people who clung so tightly and passionately to their ideology that they were able to make themselves insensible to human suffering. Ideological purists are the most scarily callous form of people imo.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 4:13 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

All I know is that in Canada they aren't required to treat people from out of country in their hospitals in emergencies.

I think we need to continue to treat people who come in for emergencies. Otherwise we are cruel folk indeed, I mean really. Now granted that's easy for me to say since I'm just a citizen and don't know all about the money and logistics etc. but it would be wrong not to.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 4:55 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
It's not a bad thing to let humanity get in the way of ideological purity. Many of history's greatest monsters were people who clung so tightly and passionately to their ideology that they were able to make themselves insensible to human suffering. Ideological purists are the most scarily callous form of people imo.

KPO- Perfectly said.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 6:45 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"The question amounts to: Do you force people to help each other?"

I realize your humanity had a strong conflict with your ideology (and your humanity won out) but I have a question about your ideology and this seemed as good a place to ask as any ...

Do you believe in NO laws?

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 10:57 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:
Even though I love Freedom, I can't bring myself to do it. It is a personal failing, and a failure of conviction to my philosophy.

It's not a bad thing to let humanity get in the way of ideological purity. Many of history's greatest monsters were people who clung so tightly and passionately to their ideology that they were able to make themselves insensible to human suffering. Ideological purists are the most scarily callous form of people imo.

It's not personal. It's just war.

Nicely said.

Of course if someone turns up at a hospital with a life threatening condition he or she should be treated, regardless of their capacity to pay.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 13, 2011 11:00 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
All I know is that in Canada they aren't required to treat people from out of country in their hospitals in emergencies.

I think we need to continue to treat people who come in for emergencies. Otherwise we are cruel folk indeed, I mean really. Now granted that's easy for me to say since I'm just a citizen and don't know all about the money and logistics etc. but it would be wrong not to.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

Are not required - does that mean will? I know that all emergency cases would be treated here, and then for uninsured visitors not covered under reciprical health arrangements (which many countries are) they would try and recoup costs. I'm not sure how hard they try. I guess in the end the taxpayer probably foots the bill. Ok with me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 2:36 AM

FREMDFIRMA

What bothers me the worst is that we *HAVE* the logistical capability to MAKE proper medical care a human/civil right... and we don't.

I don't think there's any humane excuse for it.

Besides, it might be worth remembering that I, personally, have BEEN on the receiving end of "Let them die", and if not for luck, folks willing to bend and break the rules to help me, and a phenomenal amount of willpower, I'd *BE* dead.
Sure hell they tried hard enough to help it along.

And allowing it to become the rapacious and exploitive model used by auto insurance companies is, IMHO, even MORE destructive, and will result in even more casualties of that nature, needless ones...

The HUMANE thing to do, and we never do it, and folks wonder why I despise our society.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 2:51 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

What bothers me the worst is that we *HAVE* the logistical capability to MAKE proper medical care a human/civil right... and we don't.

There's no circumstance in the real world which this would / should ever happen.

We can't even decide what IS " proper medical care ", nor can you ever force anyone to perform a service, at the point of a gun, simply because we wants it done.

Maybe if you want to invent robot medics... but seriously, this is child's thinking, at best.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 3:39 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Many of history's greatest monsters were people who clung so tightly and passionately to their ideology that they were able to make themselves insensible to human suffering.

Sounds like those Tea Partiers and Paul would fit that bill pretty well, from the sound of it and what I've heard them say.

Quote:
Ideological purists are the most scarily callous form of people imo.

Boy, have you got that right; we've had many examples of it the past couple of years, and it doesn't look to stop any time soon...in fact it's getting worse! It scares the shit out of me, fer shore, because those people applauding are just one indication of where the Tea Party would take us, given enough power. It's pure "I got mine, fuck you".

I don't like the individual mandate, I don't think anyone does. But I still view it as a first step toward something better than what we have had, and hopefully toward a public option eventually. I'm ashamed of and disgusted by our current form of "health care" (which is an oxymoron if ever there was one!) and keep reminding myself that SSI and Medicare were terrible when they were first passed--most likely everything important one party dislikes can only start out with a ton of compromise. So I hold out hope.

The concept that they'd be happy to let people die makes me sick inside, and shows to me just how far we've strayed from what this country stands for, and used to believe.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 7:16 AM

You know, maybe times have changed or I'm naive or something and maybe most doctors are out for a profit nowadays instead of actually wanting to help people.

But the thing is, when I see a thread that asks a question like this, I can't help but wonder if the problem is we're just asking the wrong question.

Let's make an assumption, that even the doctors who are out for some profit justify their actions on the basis that they're helping other people. Lets say that even incompetent doctors who don't realize it, or naive doctors that believe everything they're told by the medical authorities, lets say they're not knowingly malicious.

If that is true, then so long as they continue to value helping and healing people along the lines of the Hippocratic Oath, then them taking on patients pro bono is not necessarily forcing them to do anything against their will. And the ones who are out ONLY for profit, maybe we shouldn't really be considering them doctors.

So given those arguments, not only is a humane system where people aren't denied health care based on money or lack thereof possible without violating the tenants of personal choice, but the biggest obstacle to that is lacking a balance between the price of schooling for doctors and the price of medicine/medical equipment and the price paid by a doctor's patients. Maybe there's a way for doctors/hospitals to both make a living (even considering the initial costs of training), AND for people to afford treatment.

Just saying.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:21 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Byte, that's kinda where I was going with that, given that the training and equipment of physicians isn't something I'd mind subsidizing with my tax dime - sure hell is a better use than welfare for the war machine.

And of course Rappy shows his true malicious colors, as usual...

Which brought me the wonderful thought that perhaps we should try to force the issue by adding a provision to these bills that said care plan is ALSO inflicted on Congress as their ONLY health care plan.

I bet that would cause them to re-think things oh so very quickly, wouldn't it ?

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:23 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Nothing remotely malicious in what I posted on this topic.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 3:57 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Nothing remotely malicious in what I posted on this topic.

rappy, just look at YOUR quotes (above)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:00 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"The question amounts to: Do you force people to help each other?"

I realize your humanity had a strong conflict with your ideology (and your humanity won out) but I have a question about your ideology and this seemed as good a place to ask as any ...

Do you believe in NO laws?

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

Hello,

I missed this the first time around. No, I am not an Anarchist, who believes that liberty is best preserved in the absence of law and law enforcement.

Rather, I believe that laws should be aimed at preserving the maximum amount of freedom for each individual. They should exist primarily to balance each person's sovereign liberty against his neighbor's.

This philosophy is regularly eroded by my desire to keep people from pain and suffering, but it is at least the foundation from which my thoughts spring.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." -Hermann Goering

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:38 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Is your philosophy rooted in a fear of anything that smacks of cooperative action?

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:40 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Is your philosophy rooted in a fear of anything that smacks of cooperative action?

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

Hello,

Not at all. I am a big fan of voluntary cooperation.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:41 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
maximum amount of freedom for each individual

Curiously, there are differing assumptions as to what "freedom" means. A Brit once told me (30+ years ago by now) that Americans think of "freedom" as "freedom to..." (freedom to vote, freedom to own) while Europeans think of freedom as "freedom FROM"... "freedom from hunger, freedom from oppression..." I've been thinking about that ever since.

It puzzled me greatly when I first heard it, but the more I bang it against experience, the more it seems to make sense. I have yet to see that insight fail.

So, Tony... how do YOU define "freedom"?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:49 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

In my evolving view, I have found that the pure Libertarian philosophy (Freedom Tos, Primarily, with some caveats) is constantly being challenged by things that make me despair for my fellow man.

Presently, I suppose you could say I seek some kind of balance between Freedom Tos and Freedom Froms.

Until I'm ready to let the uninsured rot, for instance, it's probably not fair for me to claim a pure Libertarian philosophy of maximum freedom.

I'll have to find a new name for what I've become.

I liked the way your British friend put that, incidentally.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:55 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

...nor can you ever force anyone to perform a service, at the point of a gun, simply because we wants it done.

So you're saying we CAN'T depose a ruthless dictator with military force simply because "we wants it done"?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 8:33 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

Signe a chara, that was an interesting insight, the difference between freedom tos and freedom froms.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 8:55 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

AnthonyT

The reason why I ask is b/c sometimes a large number of people cooperate to do something a small number of people dislike - for example free themselves from British rule or free themselves from the rule of a small number of wealthy people.

If you are on the wrong side of such voluntary social cooperation, I can see how it can be an ominous thing.

Maybe the key to maximal freedom is to have a society that doesn't create large numbers of people sufficiently fired up and all aimed at a small number of people.

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:01 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

There will always be large groups and small groups, no matter how you organize a society.

Even in a 30 person classroom we had large and small groups. I think the trick is to ensure some basic rules that protect even the minority against the majority by declaring a few universally respected rights.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:42 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

On a theoretical basis it's all good, it's working out the nuts and bolts that gets hazy. What if the minority is exploiting the majority? Do you allow property rights to trump the right of the majority to determine the form (including the economy) of their society? It seems to me that we have allowed private (individual and business) property rights to distort the basic function of society which is to benefit and care for its members - under the banner of freedom. I'm wondering how, if we allow laws to infringe on our real freedoms, we balk at laws to help the members of society.

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:33 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
Nothing remotely malicious in what I posted on this topic.

rappy, just look at YOUR quotes (above)

Oh, THOSE quote! Gosh, great response there.

I stand by what I said.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:04 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
On a theoretical basis it's all good, it's working out the nuts and bolts that gets hazy. What if the minority is exploiting the majority? Do you allow property rights to trump the right of the majority to determine the form (including the economy) of their society? It seems to me that we have allowed private (individual and business) property rights to distort the basic function of society which is to benefit and care for its members - under the banner of freedom. I'm wondering how, if we allow laws to infringe on our real freedoms, we balk at laws to help the members of society.

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

Hello,

In what way do property rights prevent the majority from choosing the shape of their economy? Or are you contemplating an economy that does not recognize property rights?

I would probably have serious problems with an economy that does not recognize property rights.

Of course, if any majority is significant enough, they will simply re-write the laws to suit themselves, leaving the now oppressed minority to enjoy the choice of assimilation, imprisonment, or exodus.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:31 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Didn't read all of this, but I noticed it went off track almost immediately into a discussion of theories, etc.

So I'll ask it myself, and request that people respond to the specific question, not ideology or anything else, because if the people like that guy in the audience had their way, supposedly they WOULD let him die. So: To the specific question...you are there, you are looking this person in the eye, what would you do?

Quote:
Treat him and let the hospital pass on the costs to everybody? Treat him and sue later, hoping he'll somehow find the cash? Get the Feds to subsidize him? Suppose he's poor and can't afford private insurance?

Just to be fair, I'd treat him, come what may. I don't believe we are a country which has become so callous as to let him die on the ER steps and I find it inconceivable we will become one. We are STILL one of the richest countries in the world, so how can we just LET people die? That's where I stand.

Where do you stand--in this SPECIFIC example, please?

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:58 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I pulled it off track b/c of a related question - Anthony seems ok with passing some laws, like laws that 'make' society protect the power and property of the powerful and wealthy few, but draws the line at laws that might 'make' society help its members in general. I'm curious why he prefers certain laws over others. What is the rationale?

But I need to put this off until later, so ...

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:15 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"Anthony seems ok with passing some laws, like laws that 'make' society protect the power and property of the powerful and wealthy few"

Hello,

An interesting interpretation. I think you'll need to be more specific. Broad cat is broad.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:17 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"but draws the line at laws that might 'make' society help its members in general."

Hello,

Actually, I've repeatedly expressed an inability to draw that line, despite a distaste for forcing such behavior on people.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:35 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Didn't read all of this, but I noticed it went off track almost immediately into a discussion of theories, etc.

So I'll ask it myself, and request that people respond to the specific question, not ideology or anything else, because if the people like that guy in the audience had their way, supposedly they WOULD let him die. So: To the specific question...you are there, you are looking this person in the eye, what would you do?
Quote:
Treat him and let the hospital pass on the costs to everybody? Treat him and sue later, hoping he'll somehow find the cash? Get the Feds to subsidize him? Suppose he's poor and can't afford private insurance?
Just to be fair, I'd treat him, come what may. I don't believe we are a country which has become so callous as to let him die on the ER steps and I find it inconceivable we will become one. We are STILL one of the richest countries in the world, so how can we just LET people die? That's where I stand.

Where do you stand--in this SPECIFIC example, please?

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

Hello,

We let people die every single day, actually. The example is noteworthy in that the dying person is dying right in front of you. But right now, as we are having this conversation, someone, somewhere is dying. And we probably could have helped them to survive within the means at our disposal.

In this specific example given, I could never personally save the individual in question. I can't even afford to go to the hospital myself. A hospital trip of longer than 24-48 hours duration would force me into bankruptcy, as would any kind of serious surgery. If I could not save the man with the skills and strength at my personal disposal, he would die for lack of money to sustain his care.

The only way to save all the saveable people is for humanity at large to invest the collective resources necessary into the endeavor.

Ideally, humanity would choose to do this of their own volition. No law necessary. Thus far, this has not proven to be the case. There are sick and starving people everywhere.

Alternatively, if we wish to save everyone, then the collective of humanity will have to be coerced into such assistance by force.

If that prospect is pleasing to anyone, I would be surprised. Even if your ethics demand that this man should not be allowed to die, the actions you must take in order to save him should be partially repugnant to you.

I don't think I would be able to let a man die in front of me if there was any means at my disposal to save him. So if I had a magic 'Tax' button to save his life, would I push it? Yes. But in doing so, I am doing something wrong to achieve something I consider to be right. It is not an entirely happy solution.

Forcing people to aid their fellow man is a philosophy that has borders only in the mind. If you will do it on ethical grounds within your own area or country- because life trumps freedom- then there is no reason to stop at the border.

Life trumps freedom everywhere. And if violence must be threatened or committed against non-complying people? As in the enforcement of all law? Life still trumps freedom.

Why not war with the wide masses of the world, and bring them to heel under the premise of life trumping freedom? Why should such a tax or philosophy end in your city, state, or country?

It is an evil thing to force people to do things. If it is a necessary evil sometimes, it is no less evil, and no untroubled joy should spawn from it.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:36 AM

Quote:
It seems to me that we have allowed private (individual and business) property rights to distort the basic function of society which is to benefit and care for its members - under the banner of freedom.

Um. First I'm not sure that property rights are the issue you're looking for in regards to health care or pro bono cases. But second, I can name a number of instances where the exact opposite is a problem - mostly relating to pollution, but also underhanded tactics to force people off property to construct buildings or highways. Just because something is for the public or even for the greater good does not necessarily mean that all the actions to bring it about are justified.

The problem is, most people seem to disagree what is for the greater good. The natural gas drillers will say that they are boosting the American economy and decreasing our dependence on foreign oil, which results in death by terrorism and war both here and in the Middle East. But the people in the towns they are afflicting with pollution and having their property ruined would disagree that they're doing a good thing.

The world is awash in greys, and nothing is straightforward.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 7:12 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
[B I don't believe we are a country which has become so callous as to let him die on the ER steps and I find it inconceivable we will become one. We are STILL one of the richest countries in the world, so how can we just LET people die? That's where I stand.

Where do you stand--in this SPECIFIC example, please?

Thanx for bring us back to topic.
If you were asking me, of course you treat him. It was Tea Partiers in the crown who shouted " Yeah, let him die."

This is where medical reform is needed- the Doctors, nurses, medical tech, etc. want to help people, want to treat sick folks, want to make folks well. They deserve to make a GOOD living doing it-- able to afford houses, not have to live 2 hours away from their jobs, have nice cars and nice clothes, good schools for their kids, XBoxes and a reasonable number of toys. THey deserve a reasonable number of hours off every day and every week, and reasonable vacations to rest up.

Administrators and insurance brokers and salesmen do not. They should be reduced to the absolute minimum of numbers, not allowed to take extreme vacations and frequent golf holidays, not be allowed to make " obscene" profits. The notion of "profit" should not be compatible with health care- making a living from doing it, yes. Making money from it without being in actual contact with the patients should not.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 7:30 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I wonder what list of noble and ignoble professions one might conjure, and what diagrams of acceptable wealth and pleasure one might draw, and further what penalties one might impose upon a man who dares pursue too much luxury in his life.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 8:48 AM

Another question of balance: in a fair and reasonable world, the price for medicine and treatments should be set by three considerations, 1) how much patients can or are willing to spend, 2) how much the doctors and support staff need to make a comfortable wage, and 3) human decency and consideration for the sick and dying.

In some places in the west, it is a crime to charge a person dying of thirst for a glass of water if you are a restauranteer. Perhaps it is equally exorbitant if a bed for a sick person in a hospital and a saline I.V. costs 1,000 dollars a night.

Perhaps there are fair prices that all the people involved might agree to. Perhaps profit, in this case, should be a consideration of the quality of the service provided. Perhaps a life saving treatment that doesn't save lives because it is too expensive to afford is not worth the price being asked for it.

And while there might exist dishonest people who want to drive up prices for necessary goods and services to an obscene amount because they are only interested in profits and not consumers/patients, perhaps they should be out-competed by the honest people who do not.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 8:58 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

I wonder what list of noble and ignoble professions one might conjure, and what diagrams of acceptable wealth and pleasure one might draw, and further what penalties one might impose upon a man who dares pursue too much luxury in his life.

--Anthony

Good questions-- you might start with whores vs whore house owners and whores vs companions ( at least from Inara's POV).

Diagrams of acceptable wealth and pleasure: NOT guys who talk on a telephone for 2 hours a day, eat at expensive restaurants on the way to the golf course, and then home to their yacht for a month long cruise to Bermuda while the workers in their factories and coal mines risk their lives 12 hours a day to get paid starvation wages and go home to cold water flats and shacks.
NOT CEO's who get paid 100's of Millions a year while their workers earn minimum wage, or get paid in bowls of rice in foreign countries.
NOT Kenneth Lays and Bernie Madoffs.

What can you do about it? How 'bout increasing Income Taxes and Social Security taxes on folks with incomes of more than $ 250 K a year, and reducing their Social Security benefits?
And that's just a few quick responses off the top of my head. Some of them might sound familiar, both as proposals you've heard recently, and as proposals you've heard argued against.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 9:13 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"In some places in the west, it is a crime to charge a person dying of thirst for a glass of water if you are a restauranteer."

Hello,

It was this very fact that started me on my current road. I live in one of those places. A desert, where it is illegal to refuse a man a drink of water. And I found myself willing to accept this gross violation of personal freedom out of ethical concerns. It was the thin edge of the wedge.

"while there might exist dishonest people who want to drive up prices for necessary goods and services to an obscene amount because they are only interested in profits and not consumers/patients, perhaps they should be out-competed by the honest people who do not."

That would be nice. I think the barriers to entry in these businesses limit competition and prevent the expected course of competitive pricing. It's like an exclusive guild.

"Good questions-- you might start with whores vs whore house owners and whores vs companions"

I don't see such professions as having an inherent moral value, either positive or negative.

"NOT guys who talk on a telephone for 2 hours a day, eat at expensive restaurants on the way to the golf course, and then home to their yacht for a month long cruise to Bermuda"

I don't see this as evil, wrong, or ignoble in itself.

"the workers in their factories and coal mines risk their lives 12 hours a day to get paid starvation wages and go home to cold water flats and shacks."

This is the problem, yes? Is it inexorably tied? Can a man not have a simple job, a house, a boat, and an easy life without creating this kind of condition? Is it impossible for anyone to come about wealth and to enjoy it without being a monster?

"What can you do about it? How 'bout increasing Income Taxes and Social Security taxes on folks with incomes of more than $ 250 K a year, and reducing their Social Security benefits?"

I constantly feel that I have an ignorant or naïve view of the Social Security system, because I always saw Social Security as a retirement plan that you invested in throughout your life, and then were allowed to draw from during your declining years. As such, I'm not sure why there are caps on it, or why Social Security benefits should be attenuated amongst portions of the population. Isn't everyone entitled to these benefits in proportion to their investment?

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 9:37 AM

Quote:

That would be nice. I think the barriers to entry in these businesses limit competition and prevent the expected course of competitive pricing. It's like an exclusive guild.

I was referring more to customers choosing people who aren't price gouging. The emphasis was on people driving up prices obscenely. The guy charging double or more the approximate range of prices the other providers are charging should get fewer customers by that factor alone.

No guild or even backroom deal price setting required.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 9:58 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:

That would be nice. I think the barriers to entry in these businesses limit competition and prevent the expected course of competitive pricing. It's like an exclusive guild.

I was referring more to customers choosing people who aren't price gouging. The emphasis was on people driving up prices obscenely. The guy charging double or more the approximate range of prices the other providers are charging should get fewer customers by that factor alone.

No guild or even backroom deal price setting required.

Hello,

I am positing an opinion as to why this isn't happening right now, in an ostensibly free market. Why is such price gouging going on and why aren't people taking their business elsewhere?

The only logical conclusion I come to is that there is nowhere else for people to take their business, else they'd be doing so.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:16 AM

Actually, there are places like this, they're just not as well known because they have less money to advertise. *shrug* But they do all right. In Salt Lake City we have about an equal number of U of U clinics (moderately for-profit) and IHC clinics ((affordable care). Very few private hospitals, which tend to price gouge the most, and provide the worst quality of service. Like, for example, constantly missing the cancer on my two grandparents on my mother's side that eventually killed them.

EDIT: Technically affordable care clinics are also private, they just use a different business model than the other hospitals.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 12:52 PM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

JUST fond this over on CNN.com
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2011/09/14/tsr-todd-ron-paul
-uninsured.cnn?hpt=hp_t2

A member of Paul's staff, a guy Paul had known for 12 years, died of pneumonia, and was uninsured. Paul raised $ 50,000 in an internet campaign, and used that to pay part of the guy's $ 400,000 hospital bill. The dead guy's estate got the bill for the other $ 350,000, but it seems the hospital hasn't made any effort to collect.

I thought pneumonia was almost totally curable, and generally only fatal in tiny babies, very senior citizens , and folks weakened by other medical conditions. I wonder why they couldn't save this guy.
Paul also claims that friends, churches and charities should be able and willing to step in and pay for medical care for people who can't pay. He says this guy was a personal friend of his, as well as a staff member. How come Paul personally won't help pay his friend's debt, or won't call in a few favors among his constituents and campaign contributors ? Or maybe he already has, and that's why the hospital isn't after the guy's estate. If so, he should tell us that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 2:14 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

Usually pnemonia only kills babies and elders, but sometimes, if a person has a compromised, or crummy, immune system it can kill them, pnemonia can be very dangerous indeed. The average adult under, say, 60, doesn't have to worry too much about it but if you have asthma or anything else like that or a weak immune system you need to be vigilant.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 4:52 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Tony, if I may jump in on Kiki's point for a bit...

We have laws that PROTECT ownership. Laws that say that "ownership" is a real thing that must be protected (Ownership: one of those "rights" which I keep saying don't really exist, like "life" and "liberty".)

So we have laws that punish "thievery" and define by what and how much force you can protect "your" things, and that you can sell them or save them, or use them as security for loans, and write contracts about them.

Not only that, we have laws that give corporations EXTRA rights... a theft from a person may be a misdemeanor, but a theft from a business (no matter how small) is a felony. Intellectual property rights, where you CAN "own" an idea. Or even own someone else's genetic material. We allow businesses to pollute and abuse the air, water, and soil that we ALL (in theory) "own".

Our laws don't really detail "rights" as much as "OWNERSHIP".

And presumably you support THOSE laws, which are just as artificial and arbitrary as human sacrifice laws, and are willing to accept or use force to protect them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:12 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Here I am, fashionably late to the party again.

But yes SignyM, that pretty much was my point - if you are going to gag at a law, why gag at one that makes society help its members, rather than one that enforces power of one over another?

Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in taxpayer funded bailouts, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?

Yeah, me neither....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:30 PM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

I have trouble envisioning any system where I can not own anything, and any item in my possession can be taken from me.

Abolishing property rights means that I can never be sure of retaining any product of my labor. It seems as unethical as letting someone die.

I do not think I have the imagination or stomach necessary to imagine such a society.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:49 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
It seems as unethical as letting someone die.

Tony.. does it seem as ethical as making one die? The law gives you the right -in some cases- to kill someone, to take a life to protect "your things".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:55 PM