Conquer Club

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_HVyoT2PgM

Rand Paul at his finest.

How many will line up to take this guy seriously?



Never mind that physicians already have to treat anyone who comes into the ER every day. Panic! Send money!

Just look at just about every other industrialized country on earth ..even a few not so industrialized to see that universal healthcare is not the doomsday scenario they insist.

pimpdave wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_HVyoT2PgM

Rand Paul at his finest.

How many will line up to take this guy seriously?



Never mind that physicians already have to treat anyone who comes into the ER every day. Panic! Send money!

I heard that last week. I love it last week and I still love it.

WHERE'S OUR FREE OIL?!?!
WE HAVE A RIGHT TO FREE FOOD AND HOUSING!!!
DOCTOR'S FOR ALL! NURSES FOR ALL!
WE ARE ENTITLED TO ANYTHING WE WANT OR NEED! I WANT IT NOW MOMMY!

Universal healthcare is not free healthcare. It is however, cheaper and better.

Yeah I'm pretty sure taxes would still be collected to pay for this.

thegreekdog wrote:

pimpdave wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_HVyoT2PgM

Rand Paul at his finest.

How many will line up to take this guy seriously?



Never mind that physicians already have to treat anyone who comes into the ER every day. Panic! Send money!

I heard that last week. I love it last week and I still love it.

WHERE'S OUR FREE OIL?!?!
WE HAVE A RIGHT TO FREE FOOD AND HOUSING!!!
DOCTOR'S FOR ALL! NURSES FOR ALL!
WE ARE ENTITLED TO ANYTHING WE WANT OR NEED! I WANT IT NOW MOMMY!

Surely there's no economic argument to be made for it though.

I don't even have to watch the video to know that they are correct. Universal healthcare IS slavery to all medical providers. There is an easy litmus test for determining whether something is a right or not (unfortunately, I'm not the one who was smart enough to come up with this): At Whose Cost? If your "right" requires someone else to give you something in order for you to have it, then it's not a right. The freedom of speech doesn't require someone to give you permission. The right to bear arms does not force anyone else to give you a gun. The right of security from searches and seizures does not require anyone else to act. However, the right of healthcare means that someone else must provide you with a service no matter the time, place, and at no cost. So that's clearly not a right. The Constitution allows for exactly 1 right that allows you to take part of someone else's time and energy, and that's the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. No other right requires any positive action by another for you to enjoy that right, therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.

Q.E.D.

Night Strike wrote:I don't even have to watch the video to know that they are correct. Universal healthcare IS slavery to all medical providers. There is an easy litmus test for determining whether something is a right or not (unfortunately, I'm not the one who was smart enough to come up with this): At Whose Cost? If your "right" requires someone else to give you something in order for you to have it, then it's not a right. The freedom of speech doesn't require someone to give you permission. The right to bear arms does not force anyone else to give you a gun. The right of security from searches and seizures does not require anyone else to act. However, the right of healthcare means that someone else must provide you with a service no matter the time, place, and at no cost. So that's clearly not a right. The Constitution allows for exactly 1 right that allows you to take part of someone else's time and energy, and that's the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. No other right requires any positive action by another for you to enjoy that right, therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.

Q.E.D.

Yes, so if you're born into slavery, then I'm sorry but it's not your right to be freed.

Army of GOD wrote:

Night Strike wrote:I don't even have to watch the video to know that they are correct. Universal healthcare IS slavery to all medical providers. There is an easy litmus test for determining whether something is a right or not (unfortunately, I'm not the one who was smart enough to come up with this): At Whose Cost? If your "right" requires someone else to give you something in order for you to have it, then it's not a right. The freedom of speech doesn't require someone to give you permission. The right to bear arms does not force anyone else to give you a gun. The right of security from searches and seizures does not require anyone else to act. However, the right of healthcare means that someone else must provide you with a service no matter the time, place, and at no cost. So that's clearly not a right. The Constitution allows for exactly 1 right that allows you to take part of someone else's time and energy, and that's the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. No other right requires any positive action by another for you to enjoy that right, therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.

Q.E.D.

Yes, so if you're born into slavery, then I'm sorry but it's not your right to be freed.

Slavery was abolished 150 years ago here. Which country are you talking about?

Night Strike wrote: . . . therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.[/i]

Q.E.D.

Glad to hear. At least now we have a shot at it. If it were one of our Constitutional rights they would've already trashed it along with right to privacy, habeas corpus, due process, etc.


Honibaz

b.k. barunt wrote:

Night Strike wrote: . . . therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.[/i]

Q.E.D.

Glad to hear. At least now we have a shot at it. If it were one of our Constitutional rights they would've already trashed it along with right to privacy, habeas corpus, due process, etc.


Honibaz

CUZ WE GOTTA HOLD ON, TO WHAT WE GOT...IT DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE IF WE MAKE IT OR NOT.

Phatscotty wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:

Night Strike wrote:I don't even have to watch the video to know that they are correct. Universal healthcare IS slavery to all medical providers. There is an easy litmus test for determining whether something is a right or not (unfortunately, I'm not the one who was smart enough to come up with this): At Whose Cost? If your "right" requires someone else to give you something in order for you to have it, then it's not a right. The freedom of speech doesn't require someone to give you permission. The right to bear arms does not force anyone else to give you a gun. The right of security from searches and seizures does not require anyone else to act. However, the right of healthcare means that someone else must provide you with a service no matter the time, place, and at no cost. So that's clearly not a right. The Constitution allows for exactly 1 right that allows you to take part of someone else's time and energy, and that's the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. No other right requires any positive action by another for you to enjoy that right, therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.

Q.E.D.

Yes, so if you're born into slavery, then I'm sorry but it's not your right to be freed.

Slavery was abolished 150 years ago here. Which country are you talking about?

France

Army of GOD wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

Army of GOD wrote:

Night Strike wrote:I don't even have to watch the video to know that they are correct. Universal healthcare IS slavery to all medical providers. There is an easy litmus test for determining whether something is a right or not (unfortunately, I'm not the one who was smart enough to come up with this): At Whose Cost? If your "right" requires someone else to give you something in order for you to have it, then it's not a right. The freedom of speech doesn't require someone to give you permission. The right to bear arms does not force anyone else to give you a gun. The right of security from searches and seizures does not require anyone else to act. However, the right of healthcare means that someone else must provide you with a service no matter the time, place, and at no cost. So that's clearly not a right. The Constitution allows for exactly 1 right that allows you to take part of someone else's time and energy, and that's the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. No other right requires any positive action by another for you to enjoy that right, therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.

Q.E.D.

Yes, so if you're born into slavery, then I'm sorry but it's not your right to be freed.

Slavery was abolished 150 years ago here. Which country are you talking about?

Hell

phicsed

Let us therefor do away with all those limiting pesky laws like those that abolish childlabour, unsafe working conditions and you know, any form of solidarity.

A cost argument like you just made here ignores duties, responsibilities, and obligations to others. You are willing to let the victims of actions to suffer because you are not willing to impose action?
Example. I kill you, i asked no permission, because i felt none was needed. You are dead so you cannot act against me. Is the case then done? Nobody is getting me to give permission to put me on trail..
The only interest such an argument serves is self-interest, and when you are strong that’s nice, but you had parents and family to rely on while growing up, and you are still relying on your community to keep you alive, feed you clothe you and provide for all the other nice amenities. Modern society (anywhere after the discovery of farming) has a social contract kind of thingy. As a society there are things you do not want to happen or things that should be stimulated.
Healthcare like schooling is a universal right, equal like the abolishing of slavery. Simply saying it requires me to do something therefore it should not be a right entitled to someone else is short-sighted. Next to that, healthcare is asking for a lot of permitions, it is something that is limited because of rules, not because of choise. Besides that you don’t want to use it(healthcare), that is your own right. But you do not get to say what I can or cannot use, and by restricting access to healthcare you are essentially doing just that.

I am willing to concede this. The way in which access to healthcare is regulated does not have to be in the constitution. But that everybody should have access to healthcare should be in the constitution, or at the very least in the conscience of society and government.

Why is it that the right to live is not in the USA constitution by the by?

Night Strike wrote:I don't even have to watch the video to know that they are correct. Universal healthcare IS slavery to all medical providers. There is an easy litmus test for determining whether something is a right or not (unfortunately, I'm not the one who was smart enough to come up with this): At Whose Cost? If your "right" requires someone else to give you something in order for you to have it, then it's not a right. The freedom of speech doesn't require someone to give you permission. The right to bear arms does not force anyone else to give you a gun. The right of security from searches and seizures does not require anyone else to act. However, the right of healthcare means that someone else must provide you with a service no matter the time, place, and at no cost. So that's clearly not a right. The Constitution allows for exactly 1 right that allows you to take part of someone else's time and energy, and that's the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. No other right requires any positive action by another for you to enjoy that right, therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.

Q.E.D.

GreecePwns wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

pimpdave wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_HVyoT2PgM

Rand Paul at his finest.

How many will line up to take this guy seriously?



Never mind that physicians already have to treat anyone who comes into the ER every day. Panic! Send money!

I heard that last week. I love it last week and I still love it.

WHERE'S OUR FREE OIL?!?!
WE HAVE A RIGHT TO FREE FOOD AND HOUSING!!!
DOCTOR'S FOR ALL! NURSES FOR ALL!
WE ARE ENTITLED TO ANYTHING WE WANT OR NEED! I WANT IT NOW MOMMY!

Surely there's no economic argument to be made for it though.

I believe there were a number of economic arguments made for slavery, National Socialism, and Communism too.

Night Strike wrote:I don't even have to watch the video to know that they are correct. Universal healthcare IS slavery to all medical providers. There is an easy litmus test for determining whether something is a right or not (unfortunately, I'm not the one who was smart enough to come up with this): At Whose Cost? If your "right" requires someone else to give you something in order for you to have it, then it's not a right. The freedom of speech doesn't require someone to give you permission. The right to bear arms does not force anyone else to give you a gun. The right of security from searches and seizures does not require anyone else to act. However, the right of healthcare means that someone else must provide you with a service no matter the time, place, and at no cost. So that's clearly not a right. The Constitution allows for exactly 1 right that allows you to take part of someone else's time and energy, and that's the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. No other right requires any positive action by another for you to enjoy that right, therefore healthcare cannot possibly be a Constitutional right.

Q.E.D.

By your measure, then our current Blue Cross/Blue shield dominated system is EXTREMELY oppressive to most of the US population... as well as doctors.

Having basic healthcare is as much a right as access to food, clothing and housing.

Oh yeah.. you don't think WORKING people have any right to those things, either.

US doctors certainly get paid more. Though I think you'd be hard pressed to say someone making over 100,000k a year is a slave.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ ... ries-make/

PLAYER57832 wrote:Having basic healthcare is as much a right as access to food, clothing and housing.

Oh yeah.. you don't think WORKING people have any right to those things, either.

Wow.

Baron Von PWN wrote:US doctors certainly get paid more. Though I think you'd be hard pressed to say someone making over 100,000k a year is a slave.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/ ... ries-make/

For what is likely the 25,000th time, I will explain again that doctors, by the oath they take, are required to treat everyone regardless of their ability to pay. The difference between that and the "right to healthcare" is subtle, but important especially in light of my first post in this thread. In case you missed it...

WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO AFFORDABLE GASOLINE!
WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO HOUSES!
WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO FUEL EFFICIENT VEHICLES!

thegreekdog wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Having basic healthcare is as much a right as access to food, clothing and housing.

Oh yeah.. you don't think WORKING people have any right to those things, either.

Wow.

Wow.

thegreekdog wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Having basic healthcare is as much a right as access to food, clothing and housing.

Oh yeah.. you don't think WORKING people have any right to those things, either.

Wow.

That is what it means when someone says that people don't have a right to a wage that will allow them to have those things.

Oh yeah, here too

PLAYER57832 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Having basic healthcare is as much a right as access to food, clothing and housing.

Oh yeah.. you don't think WORKING people have any right to those things, either.

Wow.

That is what it means when someone says that people don't have a right to a wage that will allow them to have those things.

Read these things and get back to me (and you should actually read them instead of saying you read them and not reading them like you did with the oil company 10-Ks that I advised you that you should read):

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Report ... nimum-Wage
http://www.balancedpolitics.org/minimum_wage.htm

As far as I'm concerned, a person has the right to be paid what they can get paid... no more, no less.

thegreekdog wrote: As far as I'm concerned, a person has the right to be paid what they can get paid... no more, no less.

I disagree.