Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Rand Paul Thinks Universal Healthcare Is 'Slavery'" video.

If the government is going to guarantee healthcare it has to get it from somewhere. That means it has to one, raise spending in order to persuade more doctors to enter the field due to shortage of doctors. Two, ration out care, or three, force others to give out their services which is slavery. The only rule where physicians must provide healthcare to patients is in the ER. Every other time the doctor doesn't have to take the patient. If they do there are certain rules, but they must first want to take the patient. With government guaranteeing healthcare they will have to force doctors to care for patients (or do the other options I listed). Pakman completely missed the point. Look at the protected rights we have in this country. They are rights that the federal government doesn't provide with the exception of a fair trial. With healthcare the government has to provide it thus take with force either taxes or force doctors to work. So yes, universal healthcare is slavery. A crazy statement is saying that having someone else services is crazy. One also can't say that other countries are doing it right.
3
badnewsBH Slaves were paid. It isn't about being paid or not, it is about being forced to do work.
2
Sam Maxwell You have a right to free speech. That means the government can't deny you the right to free speech. For a right to healthcare the government can't deny it. If the government pays for it than they have to force someone to offer that care.
2
Anon Ymous Taking away other people's ability to pursue happiness so you can is not a right. You have the right to pursue happiness, you are not guaranteed it.
2
***** If government were to make healthcare a right than that means they will be forced to provide a service. As is a doctor can deny a patient, but if healthcare is a right than they will have to provide care making it slavery.
2
Justin King They feel entitled. They are greedy. Funny part is that they call other people greedy in the end.
2
badnewsBH As bluesrockfan36 said, saying something is a right means that the government has to provide it in someway. That means they have to force doctors to care for patients. Other options are either rationing out care or spending more to persuade doctors to work, both which goes against one goal of universal healthcare which is to provide healthcare at a more affordable price.
1
badnewsBH It isn't so much doctors, we have a shortage of organ donors. We have a waiting list for kidneys. If someone needs a kidney what do you do? Do you force someone else to give it up?
1
Malcolm Marks Roads, schools, police and firefighters are locally funded. A lot of libertarians support the idea of state rights. Ron Paul did for example. The issue is that while we can use a government, we have to make sure government doesn't become oppressive. The more local government is the more control people have over it to where government becomes the servants and it is more of society setting up a system to provide certain services to society. Take fireman, 70% of them are volunteer. There are small towns that get away with that. In larger cities they provide it with taxes. People can see if it actually works. In all cases it isn't a right though. If the federal government were to say firefighters were a right than they will use force to provide them.
1
Malcolm Marks " That's like saying we should have public libraries because the police will pull librarians form their homes to check out a book for someone. It's never happened once in the history of the world." It happens quite often. It happens quite a bit in public education.
1
Malcolm Marks It isn't a cop pulling a teacher out from their home. What we have seen is increased class sizes for example. Another is if a special needs students decides to go to a private school the local government, if they promised instruction to that special needs student, there have been instances of a special ed. teacher having to drive long distances just to tend to that one student. My school district also lacks substitutes meaning other teachers have to pick up more students for that day. The other alternative is having teacher unions which have lowered the quality of education. The same with happen to unionized doctors. Now let us throw a scenario out there. Say we have a lot of teachers quit. Now how is the government going to provide education that they promised? The same is with healthcare.
1
Malcolm Marks What cuts in education? We are increasing education spending yearly. Special ed. teachers go to private school if there is a special needs student. What happens is that the state promises to provide special needs students with proper training the private school that the student goes to does not have a teacher thus the state or district provides one. "Low healthcare and educations standards don't come from unions, they come from profit motive" Profit motives from teachers. "Guess what happens when a teacher or doctor quits. They hire new ones. " Yep, because we have a lot of teachers on hand. In reality we are short teachers.
1
Malcolm Marks Learn how to analyze statistics. For one France is an older country than us. The US is younger and not established. France is a country with 1/5 of the population and 900 years older than us. Now your source conveniently ranks the US out of 19 countries and compares it to them while disregarding the rest of the world. It is the same as in life expectancy and infant mortality rate. When you look at those stats you see the US ranks lower than those countries. But when you look at the rest of the world you see that the US in above the average and is one of the best in the world. Take life expectancy for example. France is at 82 years, the US at 78 years You may scream that France is better. Now consider that the world is at 71 years on average with a standard deviation of 7 years. That 4 year difference is considered noise due to several variables. Other parts of your reference is opinion based. In other words it lacks credibility.
1
Malcolm Marks What you are saying about France is an opinion. I have said Finland does well in education, but Sir Ken Robinson (look him up if you don't know who he is) said it was unfair to compare Finland to the US. You can compare it to a state though. Finland does a lot of things right education wise and I have said in the past that states should follow their model. So you saying that I don't wan the best is an asinine statement.
1
***** You mean I don't support the Civil Rights Act because the law violates the 10th amendment? I am going to ask you a question, do yo support the Westboro Baptist Church's right to assemble and free speech? Do you support Pat Robertson's right to free speech?
1
Malcolm Marks How was I lying? I said that Ken Robinson said you can compare Finland to states. You don't seem to understand what I am saying. It goes also with France. You are using numbers deceptively to support your opinion.
1
Malcolm Marks I know quite a bit about Ken Robinson, you don't need to send me to places I have already been. He is someone incorrect in some ways, the US has the department of ed. which has too large of a role in public education. We do need to get rid of the department of ed.
1
Malcolm Marks You didn't prove I was a liar. Ken Robinson wasn't comparing the US to Finland, he was comparing it to a state. What the video "Ken Robinson: How to escape education's death valley" and around 12 minutes you will hear "Now, people always say you can't compare Finland to America. No, I there's a population of around 5 million in Finland. But you can compare it to a state." You will see that I am not a liar, that you just don't understand what I am saying I did not back up and say the opposite. Lol, what a joke.
1
Malcolm Marks According to various dictionaries "bias" is a noun, adjective, adverb and verb. Definition of bias as a verb 1 : to give a settled and often prejudiced outlook to <his background biases him against foreigners> 2 : to apply a slight negative or positive voltage to (as a transistor)
1
Malcolm Marks I guess you didn't want the video I told you to watch. He was comparing Finland to a state, I said that as well, not the entire US. If you can actually understand what I am saying you will see he agrees with me. I have said in the beginning that we can compare Finland to states, not the US (as Ken Robinson said) and that we should, at the state level, follow Finland's model.
1
Malcolm Marks It is a part of state rights. Let us say a state develops a better model than what is out there all together? You won't be able to see that with a one size fits all policy. It is very complex issue and trying to create a one size fits all policy isn't the solution.
1
Sam Maxwell One of the ideas is to lower the cost of healthcare. Offering more money just increases.
1
***** But if healthcare was a right than I am guaranteed it. If all the doctors quit then what. Slaves were considered property and property is a right protected by the government. That is why slaves couldn't quit, much like doctors will now be considered property if healthcare is a right.
1
***** If doctors go on strike than any doctor that will take their place will be considered scabs and will be left out of the union (that is how unions work these days). If the pay isn't worth the work than doctors will quit.
1