Animal’s Daily Single-Payer News

Hello, Nurse!

National treasure John Stossel has weighed in on the single-payer health care issue, and as always, it’s worth the read.  Excerpt:

America needs single-payer health care, say progressives. That’s a system where government pays doctors and hospitals, and no sick person has to worry about having enough money to pay for care. After all, they say, “Health care is a “right!”

“Who pays for it?” asks Chris Pope, “And that’s really not a rights question.”

Pope studies health care systems for the Manhattan Institute. In my newest video, Pope explains that although many Americans think that Canada and most of Europe have single-payer systems, that’s not really true.

“In Germany, employers provide most of the health care … just as they do in the United States,” he says. France and Switzerland also offer multiple options, public and private, and most people buy private health insurance. Some of the Swiss government subsidies are similar to those of Obamacare.

But Canada, England, Norway, Cuba and a few other countries do have genuine single-payer. I’m constantly told that it works well — people get good care and never have to worry about a bill. They spend less on health care and live longer.

Pope says that claim is naive.

Yes, the claim is naive, yes, Pope and Stossel debunk it; but what isn’t mentioned here is the moral issue.  Namely – how is another person’s health care my responsibility?  Stossel discusses a few ways to improve the funding of health care, and let’s be clear about one thing, the issue with health care in the United States today isn’t how we deliver care, it’s how we pay for care.

But what he doesn’t discuss is why the government should pay for health care.  Something can’t be a “right” if your exercising of that “right” requires that the government, through the use of force, to confiscate a portion of your wealth/property to pay for it.  (And yes, the use of force; try not paying your taxes and see how long it takes them to send men with guns out looking for you.)

In other words, your exercising of a “right” that you can’t afford on your own requires me to labor on your behalf.  I have no choice in this equation; for that portion of the year I am simply required to labor on your behalf, with no recompense for me.

There’s a word for that.