Privilege Vs Right

“Scratch a pessimist and you find often a defender of privilege.”
- William Beveridge

As tempting as it is to talk about Healthcare Reform I am writing about this for myself, I would like to look back and this post years from now and see if I still have the same ideas. Even though I do work for the insurance industry, and worked for hospitals before. I had the opportunity to learn a lot about at least the money side of things, and still think I am not qualified to really inform anyone about this topic. To me a lot of this debate comes from a simple difference in the way we think about things being a privilege or a right.

Lets start out by defining those two words that are often misunderstood by most people;

Right – a moral, ethical, or legal principle considered as an underlying cause of truth, justice, morality, or ethics.

Privilege – the principle or condition of enjoying special rights or immunities.

A privilege is something that is not enjoyed by all, it is only a “special right” to some. Kind of like on the scripts of the 80s shows like the A-Team where someone has diplomatic immunity, that is a privilege. Knowledge is not a privilege, it should be a right, but for some time now it has taken a back seat to fantasy.

Back in the middle ages things seemed a little less obscure, everyone knew what was going on in the castle and well eventually it lead to French monarchs having their heads roll down a hill. Today we pay lots of taxes, sometimes even more (amount wise) than countries that have better social services, and everyone is scared of spending money but forget how much we spend for war.

The reality of the situation is that most of us don’t know how “the system” works. We don’t know if someone living with government help gets 800 bucks a week per child so they can be in daycare. We don’t know if someone is on their 7th child and they just named them Paycheck. Our taxes pay for all of those things and we just sit back and hope for oversight, for someone to make sure that programs that are supposed to be helping the people that needed, don’t abuse it.

Again it is all about knowledge and the right to have it, not the privilege to know. We don’t know what the situation is for the people currently abusing “the system.” We don’t know how many people take more pennies than they leave behind at the tray, we just simply don’t have the knowledge. The moment that someone wants to know more, control more, have more transparency people start yelling about privacy.

It would be great to be self sufficient, it would be amazing to not need roads and infrastructure. If you want that, an commune is waiting for you just around the cornfield.

To enjoy being part of a society we have to get used to its rules. We have to respect the fact that we are part of a system that is not perfect but will not change without action and involvement. Most important, it will not be changed without knowledge… and be very careful where you acquire that knowledge from.

I have been wrong in the past and supported at least mentally a president on a decision before. I might be wrong this time around but I am an optimistic and want things to work out not just for me but for everyone that is part of this great nation. As tempting as it is I will not even go into details about how some of this is life and death to a lot of people and some even close to me.

So if you believe that only some people deserve to know, and most of us cannot handle the truth, then move along and continue to be a pessimist about not just the country but about life because I find a lot of truth on the quote that I opened up with. Also click on the link and read some of the other quotes by that dude… look at the dates of his life and his mini bio, it is very interesting how history works sometimes.

26 Responses to Privilege Vs Right

  1. The problem with the current health care bill, is that it really doesnt fix any of the problems. Its just shuffling around how its getting paid for.

    One thing not mentioned at all in this bill is torte reform. Law suits have malpractice insurance rates so high that is not worth going into the medical field.

    And now we are going to add 30 million more people to the fold, sure those people deserve care, but there just aren’t enough doctor to go around, and we wont be adding any at the rate things are going.

    Fix the problems, not who is paying the bill.

  2. See… I get what Mark says. I know Mark very well and where he is coming from, not only does he know things because his father was a doctor and left his practice because it was just simply too expensive, but by living and having a business in Michigan he has been directly affected by bad government.

    Our Healthcare System has been broken for hears and we are just patching one hole on that huge dam. Is it the start to a new way of doing things in that area or simply chewing gum on a cement crack? Who knows. Its too hard to tell this early in the game.

    What I do know about all of this is that the changes proposed make sense. Getting more people into the system and preventing people from being sick or kicking the bucket is positive. I will stand by our previous conversations Emawkc and say it again… hungry and sick people cannot work to pay for taxes.

  3. Travis Nave

    The problem is that it’s always easy to spend somebody else’s money. Nothing that has value is free even if you don’t pay for it. This bill fails to actually address the problem but instead simply deems those who don’t have health insurance to magically be covered now — without any thought on how it will actually be paid for. Furthermore, some of the logic is not even reasonable. Sure it may sound like a good idea to never be denied coverage at any time, but consider the consequences. How long would it take State Farm to go out of business if I never carried full coverage until I totaled my car — and they were forced to sell me full coverage and replace my car? Now multiply that by 30 million times. Perhaps the prerequisite for governing should be experience in meeting a payroll.

    Now, I am not some heartless bastard that thinks that some poor kid who falls off his bike and breaks his arm is just shit out of luck. But what everybody fails to recognize is that even though some people may not have coverage, everybody has treatment. Nobody in this country goes without care because they can’t afford it. There’s no kid laying at home with cancer dying because a doctor says his parents can’t afford it. Trust me, the kid is getting covered and we are subsidizing it with higher healthcare costs already.

    Unfortunately, the government in its infinite wisdom has decided that these so-called evil insurance companies who deny coverage need to be replaced by an even more inefficient provider (the government itself) who will in-turn deny coverage with the benefit of not being able to be sued as a result. Anybody who thinks this notion is ridiculous only needs to ask a doctor who accepts MedicAid patients and gets a big fat 0 from Uncle Sam. The government has decided it should be the middle-man and tell you when and how you get medical coverage. Perhaps all the unemployed insurance workers can work for the Federal Government in a few years after their industry disappears. We all know that expanding government programs are always successful, right? I mean, just look at the Post Office and Social Security. Sign me up! Not that I have a choice…

    I think the part that really disturbs me and I find flat out unconstitutional is that the way the government is fixing those who are not covered is to mandate that those not covered buy insurance. That’s like me saying, “Well everybody deserves a new HDTV so go buy one right now. If you don’t, I will fine you for the cost of the HDTV anyway.” The fact of the matter is, it’s my freedom not to carry health insurance if I so choose. Anybody who knows me and my convictions knows I practice what I preach. That’s right, I waive my company provided healthcare coverage every year. I don’t want it and I don’t want to pay for it. But now with a stroke of the pen, Obama has made my freedom of choice criminal. That’s not Liberty.

    It begs the question, where does it stop? You know, we’re all in a pot of water and the fire has been on for awhile. It’s getting hot in here and if we don’t start doing something, we’re gonna be stuck in a boiling pot.

    The argument is not about how I *wish* things were or what decisions seem right because they make us feel good. I live and think in the real world. Freedom is not about fairness because ultimately what is fair is only relative to who is judging. If I had 3 cookies and you had none, but I was forced to give you one is that fair? It might seem fair to you because you have a cookie and it might seem fair to me because I still have more cookies, but the bottom line is when it comes to fairness there is always a winner and always a loser. I’d rather just be free to make the choices that lead to my success or failure. And I don’t want to stop you or anybody else from making your own choices. I may even think you make the wrong choices or vice-versa, but freedom is more important than opinion. Because opinion doesn’t make me right, it doesn’t make you wrong, yet having one makes us both free.

    Granted there are a lot of other arguments about this bill that take center stage, like public funding abortions, but those arguments are a distraction to the fact that we are giving up our right to choose what is best for ourselves. No matter how you look at it, it essentially comes down to two choices: 1) Either you think the government is the solution or 2) You think they are the problem. Personally, I believe that ‘We the People’ loan our power to those who are supposed to represent us. Regardless of politics, they owe us interest.

    In any case, what we have in America is the best medical treatment in the world. Given the choice between the best treatment or the best coverage, I’ll take the best treatment every time — and I will always choose freedom. Period.

  4. Travis, because I love you and appreciate you I will respond to your comment. Keep in mind that the moment that you enter this discussion we are going to at least have to agree that you live in a society, therefore you HAVE to come to this discussion with the understanding that in a society ruled under a government you HAVE to follow those rules until you exit that society. If you want freedom, Leo DeCaprio did a movie called the beach or maybe the Amana colonies will let you in.

    Travis says.

    The problem is that it’s always easy to spend somebody else’s money.

    DISAGREE COMPLETELY… the government spends my Money, and now that I am back in Illinois I am even more pissed off that my money gets spent on things I don’t care for. I do want people to be healthy so they can work and not milk the system… better regulation will help that, but we need to start somewhere.

    Nothing that has value is free even if you don’t pay for it.

    I think this is the main reason that this is not a matter of FREE money. From what I understand the people that benefit from this system (or potentially abuse it) are people that really need it. I wish there were more statistics on how welfare has worked and what good it has done beyond the whole having a bunch of kids and calling them paycheck.

    This bill fails to actually address the problem but instead simply deems those who don’t have health insurance to magically be covered now — without any thought on how it will actually be paid for. Furthermore, some of the logic is not even reasonable. Sure it may sound like a good idea to never be denied coverage at any time, but consider the consequences. How long would it take State Farm to go out of business if I never carried full coverage until I totaled my car — and they were forced to sell me full coverage and replace my car? Now multiply that by 30 million times. Perhaps the prerequisite for governing should be experience in meeting a payroll.

    Completely disagree. I thought your whole argument before about the bailout is that bad business should fail. If they cannot survive under fair practices and regulations they should not be in business.

    Now, I am not some heartless bastard that thinks that some poor kid who falls off his bike and breaks his arm is just shit out of luck. But what everybody fails to recognize is that even though some people may not have coverage, everybody has treatment. Nobody in this country goes without care because they can’t afford it. There’s no kid laying at home with cancer dying because a doctor says his parents can’t afford it. Trust me, the kid is getting covered and we are subsidizing it with higher healthcare costs already.

    This is completely untrue Travis and you have tunnel vision if you think that people are getting covered simply because Hospitals say that their cost have built in (for the people that don’t pay) costs. Those refer to the people that came in with an insurance provider but the insurance only covered so much, after that the person did not understand that the costs can be negotiated… but this is more complicated and I only know the numbers side from working on a repricing engine before… I am sure there is a lot more under the covers when it comes to those insurance agreements.

    Bottom line is that I know at least one person that died because of the simple fear or going to the doctor without insurance and having to pay a bill… a concussion complicated and somebody died. That is wrong and should not happen in a country that like you said has this kind of treatment available.

    Unfortunately, the government in its infinite wisdom has decided that these so-called evil insurance companies who deny coverage need to be replaced by an even more inefficient provider (the government itself) who will in-turn deny coverage with the benefit of not being able to be sued as a result. Anybody who thinks this notion is ridiculous only needs to ask a doctor who accepts MedicAid patients and gets a big fat 0 from Uncle Sam. The government has decided it should be the middle-man and tell you when and how you get medical coverage. Perhaps all the unemployed insurance workers can work for the Federal Government in a few years after their industry disappears. We all know that expanding government programs are always successful, right? I mean, just look at the Post Office and Social Security. Sign me up! Not that I have a choice…

    Again this is not true. You are not going to be forced to change your coverage. If your insurance provider fails there will be others. This is not going all government Travis. I could be wrong but this is not where things look to be going. Again, remember this is a reform, not a takeover. Time will only tell, but the first step has to be taken.

    I think the part that really disturbs me and I find flat out unconstitutional is that the way the government is fixing those who are not covered is to mandate that those not covered buy insurance. That’s like me saying, “Well everybody deserves a new HDTV so go buy one right now. If you don’t, I will fine you for the cost of the HDTV anyway.” The fact of the matter is, it’s my freedom not to carry health insurance if I so choose. Anybody who knows me and my convictions knows I practice what I preach. That’s right, I waive my company provided healthcare coverage every year. I don’t want it and I don’t want to pay for it. But now with a stroke of the pen, Obama has made my freedom of choice criminal. That’s not Liberty.

    I cannot believe you compared basic health to HDTV… I am not even going to go there. Again see the first part of my response, you can exit the so called system… its doable if you truly want freedom you can turn in your SSN.

    It begs the question, where does it stop? You know, we’re all in a pot of water and the fire has been on for awhile. It’s getting hot in here and if we don’t start doing something, we’re gonna be stuck in a boiling pot.

    The argument is not about how I *wish* things were or what decisions seem right because they make us feel good. I live and think in the real world. Freedom is not about fairness because ultimately what is fair is only relative to who is judging. If I had 3 cookies and you had none, but I was forced to give you one is that fair? It might seem fair to you because you have a cookie and it might seem fair to me because I still have more cookies, but the bottom line is when it comes to fairness there is always a winner and always a loser. I’d rather just be free to make the choices that lead to my success or failure. And I don’t want to stop you or anybody else from making your own choices. I may even think you make the wrong choices or vice-versa, but freedom is more important than opinion. Because opinion doesn’t make me right, it doesn’t make you wrong, yet having one makes us both free.

    You confuse freedom with personal choice. You know semantics very well and you should not use them to tip over an argument into an empty discussion about something that you are missing which you never had to begin with. Freedom in the form you want to apply it and color it is not something that someone in a society has… because there are rules, and by being part of that society you make the choice to conform to that rule… again vox populi… democracy.

    Granted there are a lot of other arguments about this bill that take center stage, like public funding abortions, but those arguments are a distraction to the fact that we are giving up our right to choose what is best for ourselves. No matter how you look at it, it essentially comes down to two choices: 1) Either you think the government is the solution or 2) You think they are the problem. Personally, I believe that ‘We the People’ loan our power to those who are supposed to represent us. Regardless of politics, they owe us interest.

    In any case, what we have in America is the best medical treatment in the world. Given the choice between the best treatment or the best coverage, I’ll take the best treatment every time — and I will always choose freedom. Period.

    You simply forget that we are not the best in the world at everything anymore Travis. If someone has a spinal chord injury the best place for treatment is actually China because they have moved forward with stem cell research and have breakthroughs in that area… that is just one example, the list goes on. We (as Americans) have to wake up and see that WE ARE NOT THE BEST at everything, specially healthcare… we used to be the leaders of innovation but the smart people in the world are not all in our universities anymore, they are now all over the world making advances elsewhere… that is what worries me, education and how we are letting everyone get dumber and dumber because we simply are following what the TV or Radio is telling us instead of seeing… shit, we are not going to be the best country in the world if 90% of our people are sick, out of a job and without any innovation.

  5. Travis Nave

    I love the fallacy of circular reasoning. So in summary your responses come down to, “No, I disagree, that’s not true, and you are wrong.” It would have been easier just to say so instead of trying to expand it like a college student being wordy to meet the paper length requirement. Granted, that could have just as easily been my initial response, but doing so is about as productive as two blind people arguing about how bright the day is.

  6. Nothing there is circular. I honestly think you are very misinformed not just about this bill but about how great this country is.

    Don’t get me wrong, this country IS great for a lot of reasons, but just blindly saying we are the best without actually taking action is just empty words.

    Nothing is circular, I brought up examples of why your conclusions and reasoning is wrong.

    You bring up FREEDOM and I honestly don’t understand why you see this bill as anything different that driving over the speed limit and getting a ticket… isn’t your FREEDOM in that sense being infringed upon with the context you are bringing it up?

    You are part of this society and you need to conform, just like I did when we went to war and I supported the administration back then in doing so. I always feel that they should know something I don’t (maybe that being a politician is just better money and power, but that is our system).

    If you, and the rest of the people that just want to keep on saying AMERICA like there is nothing else but entitlement simply because of what the name has represented in the past is empty words and wrong logic. DO something to change thing, start an organization that changes something in your community, volunteer, donate blood, support research… those things mean something, diluting a valid argument as two blind man arguing over the brightness of the day nullifies your point that while I believe wrong is what this country has come to. Intelligent conversation has turned into debates of picking sides and it does not have to be this way… if the bill is wrong all over, then lets see what things make sense to change and together fight with our representatives to get that changed or stopped at the state level… but simply not wanting change and progress because it is the government, something that politicians have done nothing but grown is just weird to me… you are a lot more logic than that, not sure why you don’t even see this as a conversation where I disagree about your points.

    Give this a read :) I am not crazy or the only one that sees things in a different light…

    http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/a/m/americandad/2010/03/an-open-letter-to-conservative.php

  7. Travis Nave

    The problem is that this is a discussion in the realm of ideas, where there is no right and wrong. Your reasoning is circular because your basis on calling me wrong is your opinion on the condition that I was already wrong to begin with. The use of relative conditional phrases like what is best and the implications that you truly believe I am not informed has no basis for the argument because you have no grounds to know how informed I really am. Even so, to say I am not informed assumes that you are qualified on the subject, which I doubt anyone is. Had this been an argument in a court of law, there would have been objection and the jury would have been told to disregard the statements.
    You accuse my comparison of HDTV to healthcare as ridiculous but follow it up with a comparison to a speeding ticket? Really? The difference here is staggering because driving is a privilege and I can choose not to drive. Even so, choosing to speed can be enforced with a fine because of the notion that I am putting society in danger by doing so. The government does not force me to drive, yet at the same time, not having healthcare does not put society in danger. Thus, my position is simply this: It is not Liberty for the government to mandate me to purchase a product under penalty of fine and even imprisonment. From this point, it doesn’t matter how good the bill is. I am not free to not comply if I wish. Opinion about the bill and the reasoning for the bill is a moot point if there is only one choice… theirs.
    And that’s my point about the HDTV comparison. Is it ridiculous? Absolutely it is, but forcing everbody to pay for an HDTV for the right to have an HDTV under penalty of being fined for the cost of the HDTV should they not comply is exactly what this bill is doing. Up until yesterday morning I had the freedom of choice. This morning I woke up a criminal.

  8. I will continue to disagree with any argument that is as general as some of the statement you made above because you are trying to paint this bill with a broad brush “spending somebody else’s money.” and refusing to awknowledge the hypocracy of politics being played.

    What about just giving this bill the chance to take a step in the right direction, or just waiting until it has had a chance to be executed? You cannot call something a failure before it even has had a chance to be put into action.

    I would love to argue politics a lot more often, but all it does is polarize people. Again my post was about the idea of privilege vs right, which I think is the fundamental fork in the road in that discussion… do you think healthcare is a privilege or a right?

    I am not simply assuming you are uninformed, just based on your statements I KNOW you are not very informed because the moment you call America the best at treatment I can put you in that category. You obviously have not read or experienced healthcare treatment in other countries.

    I know the highlights of the bill, and I honestly tried to talk about ideas {like you pointed out) and not specifics on the post.

    My comparison might not be relevant, but the way I looked at it is that you have to follow rules if you chose to drive. If you chose to live in this country you have to follow yet another rule, you pay taxes and already pay for medicaid… so how is this that much different when not paying for those already makes you a criminal?

    Is it a new tax? Or is it a way to make sure that everyone is into the system so that everyone is covered one way or the other. So that when someone walks into a hospital and they are a citizen of this country they will be taken care of.

    The argument on this point as is that if you chose not to have health insurance the cost of health care (which many think is the real problem, and it is to an extent) would just normalize itself. I highly doubt that. If that was to be put to the test and it failed, then your notion of having the best treatment would be deemed a mute point because we would have NO healthcare being provide or it would simply be for only those who could afford it, and trust me when I say neither of us would be able to at that point. Again, that is all speculation.

    I think since Obama took office you have been waking up in a different world every day, and for some reason it seems like you are more and more afraid of it… I don’t understand that at all. Fear is powerful when understood, this healthcare bill is nothing to be afraid of. I am excited that more people are actually looking at everything that is being passed instead of before when we had no clue what was becoming law. That makes me happy.

    In the end this all might be assuming a bunch of stuff and just assuming how you feel from words on a screen either here or on facebook, beyond that I think we could have a way better conversation when we see each other. We need to spend more time together, that’s for sure. Maybe you won’t be as a afraid, lol

  9. Let me give you a real-life, all-too-common example of insurance companies denying someone due to pre-existing conditions:

    If a baby is born chubby, insurance companies can and will often times deny that newborn coverage due to it being “obese” and therefore was born with a pre-existing condition.

    Allow me to give you another common example:

    When my wife was a teenager she was involved in a car accident. She was not driving and was buckled in when their car was hit by a drunk driver. Since then she has been plagued with back problems. When we got married and began looking for health insurance, there was only one company that would cover her due to “pre-existing conditions” and the one company that would throw her a bone charged 3x the rate they charged me.

    This leaves people in those two scenarios with two options: go uninsured or apply for public assitance (in CA it’s called MediCal). Many times to qualify for MediCal you make too much money and that then gives you another choice: remain uninsured or stop working so much to get your income to drop within the acceptable “low income” bracket.

    Catch-22. Nice to meet you!

    It’s that kind of mentality that has people fed up with how these companies have been operating and I urge everyone to think twice before making a rash judgement and damning those of us who have valid reasons for wanting health care reform to a lifetime of being bent over a barrel by insurance companies.

  10. Travis Nave

    I do fear that one day I will awaken and my freedom will have been lost. All I can do is shake my head because, but at least you have proven my point that you have categorized me based on your own opinion, which by its own merits is still only opinion. To answer your question, I believe healthcare is a privilege. I believe life is a Right. The fundamental difference being that a Right is not something that the government can give you, nor can they take away. But again you cloud the discussion with what you hope and feel this bill can do while you ignore the simple fact of what it does do. And that is simply that it imposes a mandate under the guise of general goodwill. Give it a chance? Please do not placate to my emotions. By that argument alone you could say, why not give Communism a chance? Results are not measured by potential. And the potential of the bill does not warrant argument because the absolute single reason that I am in disagreement is because it is forced against the will of those it is enforced upon. How any of us feel about the contents of the bill is relative to each of us alone. The point is, regardless if this bill benefits me or not, do not take away my freedom to choose not to be a part of it. Because to that end, I may still have my life, but I have lost my Liberty and my pursuit of happiness.

  11. Is there a precedence for the Federal government forcing people to buy something whether they want it or not?

  12. Travis Nave

    EMAWCK, Nope there is not. And that basically sums up my entire point in one sentence. Thank you.

  13. Logtar, I just read most of the link you provided in comment #7. It’s a great example of what both sides do in lieu of honest debate. Blame the other guy for hyperbole and hypocrisy. Bot sides are guilty of hyperbole and hypocrisy. The very fact that this person went to all the work to collect all of the references is an amazing example of hypocrisy in action. The goal behind the piece wasn’t to exchange ideas or find solutions, it was to score some kind of fantasy points in a meaningless contest.

    A pox on both their houses.

  14. @Travis Nave,

    Now that I think of it, I think there may be a precedence for the Federal government forcing people to buy something. I would need to find someone who is an expert in Native American history to confirm this, though.

  15. Travis Nave

    I do agree with your assessment of the link and the hypocrisy. That’s why I am arguing on the side of personal Liberty rather than an idiology from one side of the political spectrum or the other. While each side squabbles over the scraps, they forget their Right to freedom.

  16. Of the 3 houses that I have owned I believed one was in a flood plane, I am not 100% on this, but I believe that I had to buy federally mandated flood insurance or face a penalty and it was mandated by the government. Now, I could have chosen not to live in a flood plane. I need to call my lawyer to confirm this though, its just what came to mind.

    I don’t know many people that don’t have or want health insurance though.

  17. Travis Nave

    True, you could have chosen to not live there. But the other side of that coin is that nobody other than the government offers flood insurance. We’ll save that comparison for a later day.
    As for your last statement, you do know me. And you know that I waive health insurance and I do not want it. Up until yesterday I had the freedom to choose. So you see, it is no more fair to give healthcare to someone who wants it if it means to force healthcare onto someone who doesn’t — even if the end result is that both now have something that they didn’t before.

  18. I don’t claim absolute knowledge on this, but I think you’re only Federally mandated to buy flood insurance if you carry a mortgage on your home. The insurance is to protect your bank/mortgage lender, not you.

  19. Speaking of Privilege vs. Right, if you start with healthcare, when does the next set of human rights get paid for everyone? Roof over my head, food on my table and clothes on my back.

    It just seems to me that there have been numerous states that have tried similar plans already (MA, TN) and have had to start rationing care because they simply can’t afford it. How are we going to afford it when we know government cost estimates are always low and that government programs have a way of inflating over time and increasing themselves.

    I just wish the focus had been on specific items that needed fixing such as the “working poor” that have no coverage, torte reform, freedom of competition. If we are just going to “try something” why not start there instead of coming up with such a massive change? I guess politics would never accept small victories?

  20. Travis -

    you wrote: “not having health care [insurance] does not put society in danger”

    Yes, it does. It put society in danger of having you show up at the hospital in an ambulance and having to treat you the same as someone who has insurance no matter how much it will cost to treat you and having you walk away and never pay for the services and having the hospital to write those costs off as a loss and having the rest of us make up for it with higher medical costs and higher insurance premiums.

    In reality, you embody what you claimed was the problem in your initial reply to Logtar’s post when you said,
    “the problem is that it’s easy to spend someone else’s money.”

    You seem like a reasonably intelligent person, why can you see flaw in your logic? Sure, complain about the mandate, I am complaining also, but only because the legislation does not include a strong public health insurance option. But to spout off about freedom and the government taking your money while you walk around with no health insurance coverage spouting about how you are not harming anyone, knowing all the while you will always receive treatment in the case of an accident is just being willfully ignorant.

  21. Travis said “In any case, what we have in America is the best medical treatment in the world.”

    That is simply not true. The World Health Organizations ranks the United States as having the 37th best health care in the world. http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html In fact, France is ranked as having the very best health care in the world.

    Travis also said “That’s right, I waive my company provided healthcare coverage every year. I don’t want it and I don’t want to pay for it.”

    By not taking personal responsibility for yourself, you are taking away my freedom of choice by forcing me to pay for your medical expenses via my tax dollars if you get into an accident or contract a serious illness. If freedom is so important to you, shouldn’t you respect the freedom of your fellow citizens by taking personal responsibility for your health care costs and not relying on us to save you from your own bad decisions?

    Sounds to me like it’s pretty easy for you to spend other people’s money.

  22. Travis Nave

    @ Muddy & Xavier:
    Thank you both for placing me in the deadbeat welfare category based on your own assumptions that I am not fiscally responsible for my own medical bills. Just because I waive the option for some HMO to take my money then deny my coverage does not mean that I am not responsible for my own expenses. I am not spending any body else’s money. I pay out of pocket for my doctor bills, my dentist bills, and my eye exams. I paid out of pocket for my vasectomy. And I pay out of pocket for any Rx that was prescribed to aid in the healing process. The fact of the matter is, not only did I get the care that I need, but I was responsible enough to pay for it directly.
    The same would be true for your hypothetical ambulance trip. To assume that I would not pay my medical obligation is rather bold of you, considering that you do not know me. I am someone that takes personal responsibility very seriously. I carry no personal debt, I pay off my credit card usage every week, and I pay all of my bills on time.
    I am also not ignorant of major medical accidents, thank you. Again, bold words considering that you fail to take account that the majority of major medical accidents are typically covered by other forms of insurance. For example, my sister was involved in a car wreck that left her in a coma for a week. Does health insurance pay that? No. Car insurance pays that. My brother busted his front tooth at his friend’s house. Does health insurance pay that? No. Home Owner’s insurance pays that. My father injured his neck at work and required extensive multiple surgeries. Does health insurance pay that? No. Workmans Compensation pays that. But you make a bad assumption that I would not do everything in my power to pay my debt obligation – even if it means getting a home equity loan to pay for it.
    Again, thank you for the vote of confidence. We all can’t fit into the same mold. Personally, I am just tired of the government punishing me for being responsible. I’ll just keep my freedom. Thanks.

  23. In case anybody thought i was making up the whole “baby denied health coverage” thing, check out this article from yesterday: “10-Day-Old Baby Denied Health Care Coverage”

    http://cbs11tv.com/local/Baby.denied.coverage.2.1587978.html

  24. Travis,

    You wrote: “you fail to take account that the majority of major medical accidents are typically covered by other forms of insurance.”

    That doesn’t negate the fact that you will not be denied trauma treatment just because you made the choice to not purchase health care insurance. And in the event the cost of those trauma services were so great that you are unable to pay, the consequences of your choice will be borne by others.

    These facts make your assertion, “I’d rather just be free to make the choices that lead to my success or failure.” empty rhetoric. And your choice greatly increases the risk of you becoming something you’ve spent significant energy ascribing to supporters of HCR: a freeloader.

  25. Travis Nave

    Name-calling does not win debates. Nor does speculation and what-ifs. It saddens me that freedom is only rhetoric to you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Go to top