Libertarianism: an abject moral and ethical failure, IMO

What do you tell a guy who is sick, goes into a coma and doesn't have health insurance? Who pays for his coverage? Are you saying society should just let him die?

That’s the question put to Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas) by Wolf Blitzer in the closing moments of Monday night’s Tea Party Express/CNN GOP Debate.

Before Paul could answer, several members of the Tea Party laden audience enthusiastically shouted out “Yeah!”

Yeah, let him die! Yeah!

Nobody in the crowd objected.

And then, right there, you got to see exactly who and what Ron Paul really is.


Read:  Brothers Keeper


Views: 810

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Excellent, so true. People who beat the shit out of the drum of personal responsibility are the same people who run the fastest from any sense of social responsibility.
the reason the roads are becoming safer and cars are becoming safer - and therefore less medical costs, although fewer transplant donors - is that we have govt building infrastructure and regulating manufacture and requiring protective mechanisms and strying to stop drunk driving..  The reason we don't have polio or smallpox is that everyone had to be vaccinated and govt required it.  the reason that we have a more whooping cough is that people have refused to vaccinate their kids.  Possibly the reason we are not speaking german on the east and japanese in the west is that the entire society was involved in WWII.  Libertarians can not escape benefits of communitarian govt and should not escape from responsibilities of same.  If they are now trying to impose a 'moral' justification for their self-centered 'philosophy' they are wrong.
"Libertarians are idiots and clueless"

I don't agree with that statement. Most Libertarians I know, and I know a few, are intelligent and well-informed people.  Their sources for information may be one-sided, but they are certainly informed about that side.

Libertarians are , however, "believers".   They bought on to an ideology that appealed to a core emotion - keeping what is "ours", without consideration for the long term consequences of that ideology.

The ideaology fails, IMO, like all ideaologies do.

I feel that the capitalist system should pay for the care of its people who are suffering from symptoms of living in it. It's no wonder that most people have some kind of vice. We get constant mixed messages. Pop culture and media glorifies rebellion and conformity. Everyone should share but don't take mine. If you don't own a jet you're a failure. We are taught sex is dirty and bad then they use sex to sell everything from beer to kids toys. Everybody gets  confused and many people develop a defeatist attitude. "Fuck it. I'll do something I like, that I can afford." Have some oreos, get drunk, smoke, screw somebody, go running, whatever.

And anybody that says to just stop doing x, probably hasn't dealt with it themselves. I quit smoking and it is a bitch. It's the hardest thing I've ever done. Lots of people can't stop. I started because it was encouraged when I was young. Everybody did it. It was on TV and in magazines. Be somebody, have a Marlboro.  


I've used the VA for years.  I have to tell you, the wait is actually much shorter.  The longest I have waited over my appointment time is 1 hour.  When I used a civilian doctor, the longest wait after my scheduled appointment time was over 3 hours.  I've had some bad doctors at the VA, but my worst health care experiences were all non VA.  Plus when I returned from the middle east with a strange middle eastern disease only the VA could figure out what it was.  Since they have a national data base, whenever I move or travel the VA who sees me has all my medical records.  It does have it's benefits.
Its ironic that having everyone pay into a pool for health care would save the big business owners billions but they think that its socialist devilry. If we had healthcare paid for from a pool funded by taxes then business owners wouldn't have to pay for their employees private insurance.

Well, I think there are two effects here:

1.  They don't see their health care costs as mattering, as they are such a small fraction of their income.  So they just don't understand why people who aren't rich are having such difficulties.

2.  They have much more in common with the health insurance executives that do actually stand do lose significantly with this sort of legislation.  They are part of the same club, and tend to stick together.

I know people who pay $400-$1,000 a month for health insurance with a $1,000 deductible which doesn't include dental or vision.  I can't imagine the taxes for health care would ever be that much.

Nope, they absolutely wouldn't.  In fact, after a few years of transition time, they wouldn't need to be any higher than the current Medicare tax of 2.9%.  It would take a few years to wring the inefficiencies and distortions out of the system, after all.  But yeah, that should be all that is required: 2.9%.


At an absolute maximum, initially you might need to double that to 5.8%.  But once the inefficiencies are cleared out, it should be able to drop back down.

Would that include dental and visia?  I have read over and over that  atttacks are linked to gum disease.  Weird, I know.  But good dental care can significantly reduce heart attack risk (by like 60%).  It's one of those little facts you have to search for.  Bad gums are worse than obesity when it comes to heart attack.
Well, that would all be a question of what we're willing to pay for.  I would really like to see full coverage of dental and vision, and I don't think that would noticeably increase our taxes, because those are quite small costs compared to other sorts of health care.
I think hearing aids should also be covered. They can make a HUGE difference for people of all ages with mild to moderate hearing loss. They can make someone employable who wouldn't otherwise be for lack of ability to understand speech. Some kinds of hearing aids can even help those with severe to profound hearing loss if they are started early enough (preferable in infancy). When you CAN help a person with a disability, why shouldn't you?


© 2016   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service