Lounge of Tomorrow - View Single Post

Alex · 03-22-2010, 06:19 PM

I think it is easy to see the primary problem the honest dissent has, but like abortion it is fundamentally a philosophical disagreement so there really isn't room for compromise and the opposite view is somewhat incomprehensible.

But I think to a large population Health Care Reform and this would be roughly equivalent:

We as a society think it is important for everybody to have access to university education. Studies show that such education leads to happier, longer, more vibrant lives. So we're going to require everybody to pay tuition to the University of Phoenix regardless of whether they are actually going to be taking classes any time soon, have any interest in classes, and even if they agree that they will never actually complain about not being able to take a class in the future if they reject kicking in their share.

And because we need the people who aren't taking classes to contribute so that we can subsidize those who can't afford to take the classes we're going to make it against the law to simply sit back and pay for your classes when you take them, regardless of your ability to pay and certainty that you'd personally never be a financial burden on the university education system.

I can see why mandating that every citizen buy a private product regardless of their need, intent, or ability is a very scary road. And it is not really equivalent to car insurance, medicare, social security. That's why I'm of the opinion that the right course is either to go more libertarian and accept the brutal outcomes that implies or go totalitarian and nationalize the entire healthcare industry both payer and provider.

I'm not too worried about the current bill because I don't think it really does much and it isn't likely to change in the future but I can see the seeds of something to be afraid of, especially as the logic is further internalized and inevitably begins to spread to other areas that seem nonsensical now (as the logic of anti-smoking regulations are inevitably moving into other areas).

I'm not on board with it (the assumption that this is the first step to ruination), but I don't dismiss it out of hand.

03-22-2010, 06:19 PM	#85
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I think it is easy to see the primary problem the honest dissent has, but like abortion it is fundamentally a philosophical disagreement so there really isn't room for compromise and the opposite view is somewhat incomprehensible. But I think to a large population Health Care Reform and this would be roughly equivalent: We as a society think it is important for everybody to have access to university education. Studies show that such education leads to happier, longer, more vibrant lives. So we're going to require everybody to pay tuition to the University of Phoenix regardless of whether they are actually going to be taking classes any time soon, have any interest in classes, and even if they agree that they will never actually complain about not being able to take a class in the future if they reject kicking in their share. And because we need the people who aren't taking classes to contribute so that we can subsidize those who can't afford to take the classes we're going to make it against the law to simply sit back and pay for your classes when you take them, regardless of your ability to pay and certainty that you'd personally never be a financial burden on the university education system. I can see why mandating that every citizen buy a private product regardless of their need, intent, or ability is a very scary road. And it is not really equivalent to car insurance, medicare, social security. That's why I'm of the opinion that the right course is either to go more libertarian and accept the brutal outcomes that implies or go totalitarian and nationalize the entire healthcare industry both payer and provider. I'm not too worried about the current bill because I don't think it really does much and it isn't likely to change in the future but I can see the seeds of something to be afraid of, especially as the logic is further internalized and inevitably begins to spread to other areas that seem nonsensical now (as the logic of anti-smoking regulations are inevitably moving into other areas). I'm not on board with it (the assumption that this is the first step to ruination), but I don't dismiss it out of hand.
	Submit to Quotes