Does a society have an obligation to ensure adequate health care for its citizens?

Resistance

I don't believe the government should be responsible for providing every one health care. They could however put some kind of regulations in place that would cut out the corporate profiteering that goes on in ours. That **** isn't moral.

thomas p

No. A true market based health care system would work. The problem begins with the artificial limits on the number of medical school student admissions. The AMA is a sophisticated union of professionals who poach off a generous private and public insurance matrix.

Robert S

No.

It has on obligation to maintain a government that maintains an atmosphere where they can be successful. Through this success and self actualization, they can become the most powerful nation in the world and can pay for medical care themselves. Competition, keeps prices low.

Insurance and insurance fraud destroys that formula.

In a Democratic republic like the US, nothing is assured to its people besides protection from foreign attacks. The Constitution (the written law of the land) states "...provide for the common defence..".

Health care is a sensitive issue that is overused and manipulated by politicians to gain power and maintain power. They have to have a reason for being an elected official.

Guaranteeing health care, money (income), etc. is in reality- welfare. This will cause problems and strife among the "haves" and "have-nots" in our country. The general welfare of our country will be threatened when we have money by the government taken from a certain group and given to another group. Again I quote the Constitution,"We the people of the United States,...in order to promote the General welfare..". It does not state promoting welfare generally.

It is important to understand the vary foundation of our country was made by freedom seeking people.

With more security (e.g. healthcare for everyone) comes less freedom. In a free society, the society does not have an obligation to ensure health care for its citizens. In a free society, its citizens have the privilege to seek health care.

JJ

desotobrave

No. Society has an obligation to provide liberty for all its citizens, and to keep one individual or group from usurping the liberty of others.

Bobbi

I would say No. Government intervention in the health care market has only driven up costs. Do you know why we have employer-sponsered health care plans? well, health insurance started after in WWII as a way to avoid wage caps by war industries competing for workers., the government capped wages. (again, government meddling into private companies). One way to attract new employees to your company was by offering 'benefits'. These were not part of the federal cap, so 'employer provided health insurance' was invented. Now we are stuck with health insurance that does not 'travel' from one job to the next. You can work for a company for years, pay for a policy and never get sick. Then one day cancer hits. You survive. Then you change jobs, and now you are 'uninsurable', or a plan for you would be sky high in cost. My employer deducted car and life insurance from your wages. You pick your own plans from a couple of companies. When you leave the company, your car and life insurance travels with you as long as you pay the premiums. I do not understand why health insurance is any different.

Boomer Wisdom

"Society" as an entity is a mythological construct.The reality is that some individuals need help, and other real individuals provide it. If they do it directly, it's better and cheaper.

Genealogical studies of my ancestors reveal that they were taken care of by charitable organizations such as church hospitals in the 19th and early 20th Centuries. The family lines that were extremely poor did not get charged anything. If they paid something, there are no records of note.

Myself, when I had no medical insurance, and needed surgery, I merely arranged for monthly payments directly to the provider. Got a hernia problem? Fine. $ 5,000 dollars, done the same week as diagnosis, and I'm back on my feet working the next week. Very useful service for the self-employed. That's quality care.

Not gonna happen that quickly or cheaply in Canada or England. Or even while dealing with US HMOs...

Don M

If by society you mean government, no--or at least not more than a very limited role. When government tries to run a nation's health care, the result is disastrous. In Canada and England health care is rationed, and the waiting list for procedures that can be performed quickly here is painfully long. In Cuba, supplies are woefully short, clinics are filthy, and if the government thinks you are too old and worn out to be of use to the state, you are denied health care.

A good alternative is health savings accounts. Your class should explore that subject. A good and compassionate society such as ours can do much to provide for the needy in ways that do not involve government. There are many clinics to which doctors donate some of their time to provide free care to those who can't afford it.

Thanks for asking!

phyllis seymour hoffman

Well I think if we pay taxes, that should be enough to give us SOMETHING. Paying $300 for a five minute hospital trip where the nurse just writes you a prescription that cost about another 60 bucks is insane.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: