Wonkette

"there is no right to health coverage" vs. "health care is a right, not a business." ann rynd will go down fighting but, she will go down.

The real moral travesty is that some people base their moral and political worldview on a shitty novel so boring most people would rather gouge their eyes out with a spoon than read it.

With the upfront proclamation that I am by no means a randroid, I will say this: the argument usually gets muddled this way when people accuse objectivists of disagreeing with things like healing the sick, helping the poor, etc. It's not the ends they disagree with, it's the means. They believe it is morally objectionable to achieve those ends at the expense of providers. Argue against that all you want, but it's not like objectivists are out to destroy the poor and sick.

And this being Wonkette, I am expecting a rousing denunciation of said ideas and personal anecdotes about Randians they know who hate group x. Discuss.

As well all know, only private insurance compaines are allowed to violate the rights of untold individuals. Duh.

So I'm sure the Randians have also been loudly and gratingly offended by the corporate welfare system that allows companies to internalize profits and externalize costs, thereby violating the rights of millions of people who don't benefit from increased share prices?

*crickets chirping*

This type of moral pronouncement often fades away when the pronouncer finds him or her self in the same predicament. Stem cell research suddenly becomes important when your husband has Alzheimer's, right Mrs. Reagan?

As one of those uninsured -- freelance has its trade-offs -- I think there are legitimate practical questions about how much of a token payment we can actually afford.

Not that Randians, aka The Most Obnoxiously Boring People on Earth, are asking them.

There needs to be a middle ground. Expecting Mercedes quality healthcare for free is just not reasonable (see also: providers taking it in the shorts), but there should also be some type of a minimal standard (see also: school lunch program) under which people are encouraged financially to see providers before that lump the feel in the back of their neck turns into a grapefruit.

"There is no right to health coverage."

yeah i guess that's why the country isn't named "canada"; surely we must be able to come to some sort of compromise.

Property, contrary to many libertarians, is not a natural right or law. If no natural right to health coverage, there is no natural right to property, either. So from a pragmatic standpoint, why should we put the arbitrary right to property above the arbitrary right to health coverage?

Shouldn't the providers taking it in the shorts give something in exchange, or are they holding out for a reach-around?

Wonkette: I think you should know that some people seem to be attempting to have a serious conversation about this article. I find this deeply offensive and will be forced to discontinue my subscription if this type of behavior is allowed to continue.

Property, contrary to many libertarians, is not a natural right or law. If no natural right to health coverage, there is no natural right to property, either. So from a pragmatic standpoint, why should we put the arbitrary right to property above the arbitrary right to health coverage?

One argument would be that health coverage cannot likely exist without a right to property, but property rights certainly can exist without a right to health coverage.

On a related note, I'm pulling for the Canadian system. Do you realize boobs jobs in Canada cost just $1500/pair? Shit, at that price, I'd buy a pair for every girl of summer.

The "means" test doesn't fly. Taxes and Insurance are the same share the burden racket except one is semi-voluntary and profit driven. Providing police, fire and education with taxes is fine but paying for health care is a tough love personal responsiblity? I can't follow the logic.

And it's Universal Health Care that's immoral? This guy must been suckled at the withered, old man tit of Bernard Lewis.
*****
http://dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=38431
Lecture discusses totalitarian regimes
Oct. 17, 2006 - Daily Bruin

…Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, discussed the problem presented by what he sees to be Islamic totalitarian regimes - and suggested a drastic way of defeating them.

Brook said Islamic totalitarian states pose a severe threat to the security of the United States and other Western nations and suggested that a way to defeat these regimes is to kill up to hundreds of thousands of their supporters. He said only a resurgence in the pride for Western civilization can help the West defeat those Islamic states.
….
The self-interest tenet of objectivism advocates that one's own life is worth defending by any means necessary, which would allow the United States to justify defeating Islamic totalitarianism by killing a large number of its supporters, according to Brook.

He said only a resurgence in the pride for Western civilization can help the West defeat those Islamic states.

I had lots of pride in the civilization lead by our carousing, smart, slick-talking, sax playing President of the roaring 90s'. Our civilization was so swinging bad ass, some jealous fuckers knocked down two of our biggest buildings.

But the bible-thumping, thick tongued, speech-addled pretzel choker of the 00's sure has peed in my pride punch, I must admit. And those jealous fucks now? They could care less - haven't even bothered for a return visit.

My self-interest in living in a world free of twatwaffles leads me to the conclusion that someone needs to firebomb the Ayn Rand Institute. And them deny them band-aids and soothing ointment for their wounds.

And how could you do a posting about Ayn Rand without an assfucking tag? You know that Allan Greenspan used to ride her chocolate highway on a regular basis. Nothing says "vain cult of individuality" as much as ritualistic assfucking.

Thank you Spence! I thought I was in the wrong place until I read, "assfucking". Just in case any more debate might break out... look over there its Tricky Dick and Elvis!
http://wonkette.com/politics/richard-nixon/elvis-and-nixon...

Ah, doesn't anyone remember the good old days when Wonkette commenters' most serious arguments were about the Borgen Project...?

My mother is a good old commie pinko lefty from the 50s and 60s. One of her favorite stories to tell is of an encounter she had with a doctor as a young social worker for a Hospital in Phoenix, AZ. When asked what he expected one of the current patients to do, if he was not willing to help them, he replied with all the gravity and seriousless that an entitled, rich prick with an overinflated ego can and said: "Madam, if God had meant those people to live, they would have been born rich."

Fuck the Randians and fuck the libertarians. Want the government out of your lives? Fine.....but when your bank accounts disappear, when you can't get utilities, and your house is burning, and someone is breaking into your house, don't come running for help. Pull yourselves up by your bootstraps!

Screw fairness... I don't want to be surrounded by diseased poor people.

Lack of affordable health insurance is a travashamockery. Fix it, Terminator!

Not if Teddy Kennedy beats him to it.

Hate to get serious, but health insurance that pays for routine health care is NOT insurance at all. It's closest analogy is TAXES. We've been paying these PRIVATIZED taxes for 2 generations and what is clear is that the PRIVATE SECTOR has perverse motivations that continuously drive up the costs while driving down satisfaction. Time to put the taxes where they belong, in the public sector. Maybe government can do what it usually does, deliver pretty good service (think about the quality of your sewage system) with modest costs while everyone thinks he or she is the ONLY PERSON IN THE WORLD who is getting screwed over the costs.

One of the things I love about this website is in addition to the superb snarkiness, you do get glimmers of brilliance... I don't mind occasional seriousness, GeorgeTenetFanGirl.... as long as I get my snark at the end! Speaking of which, plutoboy, in your bootstrap comment, I think Rummy would have said pull their own socks up, or something like that. He sure did take a powder, huh?

I continue to find it absolutely amazing that the richest and most powerful country in the world continues to treat Health Care for it's citizens like a LUXURY ITEM for only the well-to-do .

Gary Revine
Ottawa, Canada

Nothing can be a right if it involves the violation of the rights of others. Health Care is not something that grows on trees - it is a service which must be produced by doctors who undergo years of extensive training, and the discovery and implementation of its methods require a complex, non-automatic process of reasoning. To treat Health Care as a "right" to which every random person on the street is entitled by virtue of his birth is to enslave the doctors who provide that care - to treat them as "sacrificial animals," to use Ayn Rand's term. One man's "need" does not give him a claim on the life of anyone else. Expropriating unearned value from innocent people has a name: "theft." The fact that a specific instance of theft is sanctioned by a large group of people does not change its essential nature.

Gary,

This from a man whose government has screwed up healthcare so bad, people have to wait weeks to get a doctor's appointment for a simple check-up. When you start socializing healthcare, the quality of care goes down. England and Canada are great examples of this. Canadians come across the border by the tens of thousands every year for medical care. This is not reciprocated by US citizens, I wonder why?

Count me among the Randroids. Socialism has never worked, and it won't work in this case. There is a principle involved here: rights protect your freedom, they don't guarantee you property and services.

--Dan Edge, NY, USA