Dakryn's Batshit Theory of the Week

[zabu of nΩd]

What do you mean by "diminish the prestige of the health care industry"?

You have some legitimate concerns, but look: we're not going to end up with an ideal system no matter what happens. Whatever the Dems pass this month is likely going to be a vast improvement over what we currently have, and it has the potential to save thousands of lives each year. According to the CBO, it will even take down the budget deficit $100B.

 

[rms]

The harsh truth about the health care system is that it's still part of the job market. People don't only look for careers in the health care system because they want to help others; they do it because they want to be paid.

If the government regulates health care provisions, and therefore regulates the cost, it's going to diminish the prestige of the health care industry.

id say that's how i feel, itd be just like the military(army at least) and be shitty

 

[zabu of nΩd]

AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

 

[Cythraul]

That wasn't what I was saying, but if you're going to be a fucking faggot about it then I couldn't give a fuck if you ignore me. I actually find this response from you rather surprising.

I never said that's what you were saying. I said that's what you were doing.

So Cythie, where do you stand on the whole net neutrality thing? Seems like any hard-line capitalist is going to be against net neutrality legislation, but since the other side of the issue concerns the freedoms of expression and assembly in some sense (although not necessarily in the Constitutional sense), it presents an interesting challenge to a libertarian.

I haven't really looked into it in much depth. It seems like a complex issue. I take it that there is an issue concerning property rights in all of this, which is one reason libertarians are opposed to net neutrality. I think that is significant.

It seems like this is a case where the difference between libertarian and left liberal conceptions of rights is pretty clear. I don't think of rights as imposing enforceable obligations on people to provide something for somebody else or to allow the resources that one justly holds to be used in ways one doesn't consent to. But so often left liberal recommendations involve this very notion of rights.

 

[Einherjar86]

What do you mean by "diminish the prestige of the health care industry"?

That was very poor wording. I mean it will diminish the prestige of becoming a doctor. If the government wants to make health care affordable, then they have to set some kind of caps on how much people can pay for operations. It follows that they will then have to lower doctors' salaries. This will dissuade people from seeking careers as doctors.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

It seems like this is a case where the difference between libertarian and left liberal conceptions of rights is pretty clear. I don't think of rights as imposing enforceable obligations on people to provide something for somebody else or to allow the resources that one justly holds to be used in ways one doesn't consent to. But so often left liberal recommendations involve this very notion of rights.

That's rather depressing to hear you say, but yeah, it's consistent with previous arguments you've made here that you would be opposed to the net neutrality legislation.

That was very poor wording. I mean it will diminish the prestige of becoming a doctor. If the government wants to make health care affordable, then they have to set some kind of caps on how much people can pay for operations. It follows that they will then have to lower doctors' salaries. This will dissuade people from seeking careers as doctors.

A necessary evil imo, considering the alternative. But there are probably other things that can be done to help doctors, such as reducing the number of frivolous malpractice lawsuits brought against them. I hear that costs doctors a hell of a lot in insurance money to cover their asses against those.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I never said that's what you were saying. I said that's what you were doing.

He wasn't doing anything; he was typing on a forum, Mr. Semantics.

 

[Cythraul]

That's rather depressing to hear you say, but yeah, it's consistent with previous arguments you've made here that you would be opposed to the net neutrality legislation.

How is it depressing?

 

[Cythraul]

He wasn't doing anything; he was typing on a forum, Mr. Semantics.

He was throwing a tantrum via the interweb.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

You do the same thing a lot.

 

[Cythraul]

You do the same thing a lot.

The fact that I'm a hypocrite doesn't make what I say any less true.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

It sure does make it harder to take you seriously sometimes...then again, you support anarchism

 

[zabu of nΩd]

How is it depressing?

Because you seem to hold "freedom from responsibility to others" on a pedestal as some magical ethic that far supercedes any other imaginable freedom, and it's morally revolting.

 

[Cythraul]

Because you seem to hold "freedom from responsibility to others" on a pedestal as some magical ethic that far supercedes any other imaginable freedom, and it's morally revolting.

I don't know where you're getting that idea from. It would be more correct to say that I think the freedom of innocent persons from being fucked with supersedes other freedoms. But even that's not quite correct, because on my view nothing is being superceded; that's because you and I have different views of what freedom is.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Your view of freedom is WRONG!1!

 

[Cythraul]

Your view of freedom is WRONG!1!

I'm not too worried about it. I don't really care about freedom as such anyway. I just don't want the government to take my money to help my pals and poor people.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I was being facetious, obviously, you bitch.

 

[cookiecutter]

The harsh truth about the health care system is that it's still part of the job market. People don't only look for careers in the health care system because they want to help others; they do it because they want to be paid.

If the government regulates health care provisions, and therefore regulates the cost, it's going to diminish the prestige of the health care industry.

Secondly, I would like universal health care for everyone; but I don't want businesses to have to pay into the pot, especially businesses that already provide a health care plan for their employees. Obama wants a nationwide policy that all businesses (that employ less than a certain number of workers) must adhere to. The businesses that already provide health care shouldn't be forced to do this.

You're totally right. That's why there are so few doctors in Europe

In France, where doctors get paid far less than they do in the US, they have one of the best health care systems in the world.

 

[Evil?]

There are a lot of things the rest of the world enjoys that many Americans seem to think will doom the country to the abyss.

 

[cookiecutter]

I figure this whole thing will be like social security and medicare. Moranic conservatives will fight it tooth and nail until people finally push an imperfect bill through. People will like because it saves them money and makes them healthier, and then the conservatives will rally around it as "defenders" of health care the next time liberals attempt to improve the social welfare of the country.

If you have any knowledge of history it's pretty funny/sad to see Republicans staunchly defending medicare and social security when they fought so hard to stop those just a couple decades ago.