The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Daxitarian
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points

Basic Minimum, don't have a cow?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/5/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,044 times Debate No: 3092
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i am one to push for all who work to get a basic minimum.

i've used examples like a giant on earth who tries to claim everything to the exclusion of everyone else to make my example. i think the following example i've used is best.

back in the day, the frontier days... if you wanted a surgery, you would simply give the doctor, at most, a cow, and he'd do it for you.

i've used this example before, somewhat facetiously, so i thought i'd bring it pu again as i got no major response.

do people have access to the cow metaphorically today?

if the average cost for a surgery is 14k and the average open heart is 100k, and we consider these to be pretty basic, then a working person to me should be able to get it. so, there should be catostrophic subsidies for those who need it from the government.

now, we can build into this things like the requirement to save in health tax accounts etc for yourself etc, and that if you make more you're more responsible to save etc. and we don't need insurance for all and paying for everytime ya go to the doctor. but that doesn't really say the thigs that matter.

but, to say no help at all.... when say all those 30 belows out there couldn't afford it primarly... is at least not addressing my metaphor.
(arguably this could apply to manys but it gets more gray)
by the time you're 20, you should be able to afford a cow. i don't think most 20 year olds could practically speaking.

if you disagree with me, but have no substantial methaphors back at me, won't you at least explicitly acknowledge that you don't think it's just to have the government do this, and ulitmately then don't care that that happens at least in the sense that of governmental help?

also... i used this point with that giant on earth but it's applicable here.... if we deny the earth etc to people to take at will and as much as they want with laws of claims and such.... aren't we responsbile for ensuring that at the least everyone has a basic cut to it?
Daxitarian

Con

Okay, several things wrong with the analogy.

First, the types of medical services we have now didn't exist back then; you couldn't give a cow to have open heart surgery because it didn't exist yet. There were only very meager procedures that could be performed to help the sick and hurt. At the beginning of the 20th century, the average life expectancy was around 40 years old. Today it is 77 in the U.S. and 67 for the world.

Second, not everyone had cows because they were very expensive. Meat was a delicacy and most people ate potatoes. So if you gave a cow for surgery, which didn't exist yet, then you were probably wealthy. Likewise today, if you can pay for surgery out of pocket, you are very wealthy.

Third, your metaphor doesn't capture how prices work. And this is why I worry when people with this line of thinking--who can't grasp these basic economic concepts--want to make policy. It's not as if there is a fixed price for cattle or a fixed price for medical services. Things change relative to one another. Changes in livestock processing make raising cattle more efficient, so the price of cattle goes down, while new technologies create new medical procedures which tend to be very expensive at first.

But to answer your question about if every one has at least a cow's worth of medical coverage, then the answer is yes. A cow today would run you around 600-1200 dollars http://newsok.com... Anyone can get a job that pays $9 dollars an hour and get an insurance plan that covers them for $5000 dollars. Easy. And even if they can't do that, medicaid and medicare or charity take care of the bill. So yes, everyone literally does have access to a cow.

The problem with your argument is that you don't think people should have some kind of basic cut, but rather are entitled to everything they need. But why does need equal entitlement? How much am I entitled to coerce you to fork over for my medical coverage? $10,000 dollars? $20,000 dollars? $2,000,000? This money has to come from somewhere--there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

And just closing your eyes and wishing the government would wave its magic wand and keep everyone from dying or getting sick, isn't the answer.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

the first point, that cows are cheap today, completely misses the point. i said we were talking metaphorically.

second, even if they didn't have cows back then, they could get access to basic care, as the rule. again, you're missing the point.
now, the rule is that when you're just starting out the decade after your parents, you can't. not to mention other poor people, but they are more debateable. younger people is not debatebale that you've shown anyway.

third, you said that our health care is great, because we live longer. again, you miss the point that i'm not talking literally of then and now. only that like then, all should have access to basic surgery procedures.

open heart is debateable. i'd say it's more in line with "basic" procedures genreally such that it should be transferrable to today. but, whtever teh case, there's procedurs that could be done back then, that cannot be done now due to costs.

as for the basics... consider the following, which shows we're not at all as good as we could be:
"The United States ranks 19th in life expectancy and 20th in infant mortality among 23 industrialized nations, according to the CIA's 1993 World Fact Book. The U.S. also has the lowest health care satisfaction rate (11 percent) of the 10 largest industrialized nations (Health Affairs, vol. 9, no. 2)."

"Changes in livestock processing make raising cattle more efficient, so the price of cattle goes down, while new technologies create new medical procedures which tend to be very expensive at first."

as for the above, you have not explained yourself clear here. i can't read your mind.
if people are being denied the basics, we can't simply think "gee, at least someday i will be able to afford the basics" nevermind though, that even with this reasoning, the skyrocketed costs of health care will continue if today is any indicator, and they won't be able to afford the health care. the reason is, you act as if a doctor is like making a motor faster and more efficient. it's not... a doctor is such that you have insurance costs artificially causing prices to go up, and people to abuse the system, and cause problems for others.

it strikes me as you're finding a theory to justify a preconseived notion that you dont want to help them. not that you're finding theory and seeing that helping them would be not economically doable so you don't want to. the reason i think this, is because it seems pretty apparent to me the effects wouldn't be that bad. can you give specifics like i did, how you claim it's as bad as you say? eg, the motor analgoy showed the flaw in your thinking.

i'm not really sure what your point was clearly but from the best i could gather, i got it done. i recommend you go to the other debate, cause he had some interesting ideas on supply and demand, which i also refuted, and if you bring them up, i'll refute htem ehre. my point is that he's got some ideas you might be able to expand on, and has more basis to.

you can close your eyes and pretend our laws and system isn't depriving people of a basic cut, but reality will always triumph over warped thinking.
Daxitarian

Con

"i'm not really sure what your point was clearly but from the best i could gather, i got it done."

Reply: The point is that your analogy, falsely, assumes that at one point everyone had access to some basic medical coverage which they no longer have. Also, that you are not arguing for some type of minimum, but rather that people are entitled to whatever they need, costs be damned.

"second, even if they didn't have cows back then, they could get access to basic care, as the rule."

Reply: You still haven't shown what medical coverage someone could get back then that they can't get now. If you got a cold, you could die; Now one just needs to walk to a drug store and buy some cold medicine.

"now, the rule is that when you're just starting out the decade after your parents, you can't."

Reply: Let's take me for example. I'm 22, work, and have medical insurance. I just had an ingrown toenail taken out. My co-pay was about $15 dollars. Now if I lived a 100 years ago, I would have either to take it out myself, or pay a specialist that would be very expensive. But the amount of work I have to do now to get it taken out compared to the amount of work I would have to do back then to pay for it are very different. Now I have to do less than 2 hours of work, where as then it could be several days worth of labor.

Furthermore, it's not that most young people can't get health insurance--which is false because they younger you are, the easier it is to obtain--it's that most young people don't get it because they don't feel like the risk compared to the amount of assets they own would be worth taking insurance out on.

"third, you said that our health care is great, because we live longer. again, you miss the point that i'm not talking literally of then and now. only that like then, all should have access to basic surgery procedures."

Reply: False premise here is that everyone had access to basic surgery procedures, which is why people only lived to be around 40.

"i'd say it's more in line with "basic" procedures genreally such that it should be transferrable to today...there's procedurs that could be done back then, that cannot be done now due to costs."

Reply: Again, you haven't said what "basic" is, or what these procedures are.

"The United States ranks 19th in life expectancy and 20th in infant mortality among 23 industrialized nations"

Reply: 1. Life expectancy is influenced by other variables besides our healthcare system. 2. We may be 19th, but those statistics are misleading because it is an ordinal type of data that tells you nothing about the differences between 1 and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 4, etc. The average life expectancy in Great Britain is 78.4 years while in the U.S. it is 77.8 years. But you are 4 times as likely to die while undergoing surgery in Great Britain as you are in the U.S. (http://www.reason.com...)

"a doctor is such that you have insurance costs artificially causing prices to go up,'

Reply: The only way prices are artificially made to go up is through government intervention. When the government mandates that insurance companies provide coverage for things their clients don't need or want, that drives up prices. Doctors can drive up prices when they use government regulation as a way to fix market entry and control prices.

"it strikes me as you're finding a theory to justify a preconseived notion that you dont want to help them."

Reply: Giving money to help with someone's medical expenses is a noble thing to do. Giving other people's money is not. Don't think you have discovered some sort of moral high ground because you want to give everyone health care. YOU are not doing a damn thing for anyone; you want to force other people to do it for you. Coerced virtue is no virtue at all. Arguing for socialist policies may help you sleep at night, but doesn't change the fact that you are doing nothing to help anyone and the policies you push for end up making everyone worse off.

"you can close your eyes and pretend our laws and system isn't depriving people of a basic cut, but reality will always triumph over warped thinking."

Reply: The only thing that is depriving people of anything is the government. In a free market, nobody takes anything from you without your consent. If you had any grasp of reality, you would have studied economics by now.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
Daxitarian

Con

Daxitarian forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Dairygirl, we don't care about your metaphors when they fall apart :D.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
dairygirl4u2cDaxitarianTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
dairygirl4u2cDaxitarianTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
dairygirl4u2cDaxitarianTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
dairygirl4u2cDaxitarianTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 8 years ago
Vi_Veri
dairygirl4u2cDaxitarianTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03