The Instigator
SirJDKnightCroix
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points
The Contender
Scyrone
Pro (for)
Losing
21 Points

How can Libertarian be in favor of National Healthcare?

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
Con Tied Pro
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: 12/30/2007 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,164 times Debate No: 1160
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (14)
Votes (14)

 

SirJDKnightCroix

Con

I'm straight out confuzzled.

Why would a Libertarian be pro-national health care?

It's against the economic principles of limited gov't and a free market.
Scyrone

Pro

Because the Government can gladly provice it. They cannot force it onto you. They cannot make you pay for Universal Health Care, but they do provide it. As a Libertarian it will have no effect on my life whatsoever. I will still be as free from the government as I was before. It is just now if I am dying and need help I have that. It's the basic needs of mankind that I rely on the government for. Everything else . . . they can f*ck off!
Debate Round No. 1
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by SirJDKnightCroix 9 years ago
SirJDKnightCroix
Sounds like you're a strong fan of SicKo. I agree, it's an entertaining documentary that sells its message well, however, it's more than just what you say.

Sure it sounds all grand, and utopic, and beneficial to society a Universal Health Care society. The means however to put it into effect collectively are far more complicated.

In fact, I'd like to see a universal health care system attempted to be put into effect in the U.S. You'd see how it would not workout as it does in Sweden, England and France.

Additionally, the U.S. Gov't cannot afford with its current unbalanced budget.
Posted by SirJDKnightCroix 9 years ago
SirJDKnightCroix
...And I don't believe in them, I just don't believe in abolishing them because many people are dependent.
Posted by SirJDKnightCroix 9 years ago
SirJDKnightCroix
Who said anything about plastic surgery?
Posted by Scyrone 9 years ago
Scyrone
Yes, you could say I am not a Libertarian by my idea of I favor National Healthcare, but since you, KnightCroix, believe in Medicaid and Medicare; which acts in cohersion with the government. We pay for those things.

"They cannot make you pay for Universal Health Care, but they do provide it."

Oh yes, taxes exist, but then again you would not HAVE TO pay it. I do know some people who refuse to pay some taxes. Yes it is illegal, but they don't really care, and the government has +300 million people to take care of first.

It is more Libertarian to go into a hospital and be cured right then and there, than it is to be asked for all your information so the government can come track you down if you do have the money, but are not willing to pay it.
Posted by alexthemoderate 9 years ago
alexthemoderate
"...the United States is not France. It's not Cuba. It's not England. It's certainly not Denmark, Norway or Finland. Do they even have Big Mac's there?"

To answer your second question first, yes they do have Big Macs there...haha.

And although a geography lesson is nice, I know we're not those countries. You didn't really counter my point about there not being a 'physical' deteriment. What I was saying that there is very little that any of them can do that we can't, but perhaps a lot that they can't do that we can.

Economically speaking, a healthier workforce is a more productive workforce. Preventative medicine means that you are doctors don't promote people taking certain drugs in order to cure their ailments, but that from a young age, they help give them information about how to live healthier in the first place. They can go and kill themselves on bad food, but at least the doctors, who are motivated by financial incentives, won't as readily prescribe medicines because they won't have to.

(Please don't think that I think that doctors are being greedy. I don't think that they are by recommending certain drugs to get paid by drug companies. I think that they are donig what they have to in order to get ahead and succeed. I don't blame them for wanting to make money. And another thing--we should lower the cost of medical school! We want these people to be lifesavers, not debtors!)

Preventative medicine within a universal health care system makes it so that doctors will receive steady pay, but then, when they reach certain benchmarks with their patients (patient stops smoking, patient loses 40 pounds, etc.) then they receive extra pay from the government. Good doctors get good incentives.

And by the way, plastic surgery would NEVER be included in a universal health care system. Someone once asked me that and I was shocked that they actually thought that. Not that I think you're dumb. I saw you in another debate and I have respect for you.
Posted by SirJDKnightCroix 9 years ago
SirJDKnightCroix
AH, a true moderate arises at last.

You're right. You're absolutely right on the physical part.

Allow me to restate what I said. Physically, it isn't impossible. I'm sure it'll be quite easy for the members of Congress to rise from their seats and cast a "yay" for universal health care. Granted I'm sure they'd be more than willing to get up and cast a vote for Universal health care after all the incentive monetary assets that special interests groups, such as HMO's and pharamaceuticals have given them.

Sarcasm aside, the United States is not France. It's not Cuba. It's not England. It's certainly not Denmark, Norway or Finland. Do they even have Big Mac's there?

Second. The economy, w/o gov't interference whatsoever can handle health coverage for Americans. Not the government. The government can't handle Medicaid or Medicare well. Trust me, I was in Medicaid as a child myself. I witnessed it first hand. Look at TennCare in Tennessee, when socialized medicine was institutionalized by the state gov't. Didn't work. Look at Canada. Long wait lines and more. They come here for medicine.Prevention is a desirable solution, but that can only be done by changing the mind's of individuals, not legislating morality that imposes what people should consume. If some people want to eat all they want, and clog the linings of their blood vessels with all the LDL produced from ingesting french fries, let them. I personally don't. I personally encourage friends and as many people to eat and live a healthy lifestyle.

Who is to say the government is going to prevent? Why is the government going to meddle in the dietary habits of individuals?

Economically, it is impossible. With all the gov't spending that goes on in all these overseas operations, with the cost of maintaining our global empire with these absurd wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and more, social programs like Social Security, Medicaid, will have no funds to provide assitance to those who need it.

- J.D.
Posted by alexthemoderate 9 years ago
alexthemoderate
**"Personally, I think it's economically and physically impossible for the U.S. to put into practice a Universal Health Care. They're bad enough with Medicaid and Medicare."

You would ACTUALLY believe that it would be impossible for the U.S. economy to handle a Universal System? I think you are overstating. Cuba has a Universal system. They have a TERRIBLE economy but for other reasons. France, with their high unemployment, has a universal system. The Scandanavian countries have respectful economies and universal health care. We might take a hit, but we would change the way we administer health care. A universal system is one that promotes PREVENTATIVE health care over REACTIVE. We'd be preventing the problems from even coming.

No, it's not impossible. A lot of people just don't like it. A lot of people are under the impression that it would make their health care worse. It's never been an impossibility, UNLESS you are talking about the possibility of passing it through Congress, which might be a respectable point, but you said that you thought it was "economically and physically" impossible.

**"Not only that, but since there is so little money in the fund, they are often denied these resources."

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security make up almost exactly HALF of the U.S.'s budget. People are not denied because of money, they are denied because the system isn't properly structured and there are restrictions and red tape. These restrictions are understandable because this is a socialized system within a free-for-all society.
Posted by SirJDKnightCroix 9 years ago
SirJDKnightCroix
I agree with your ideas, which is what I believe Libertarianism to encompass.

Personally, I think it's economically and physically impossible for the U.S. to put into practice a Universal Health Care. They're bad enough with Medicaid and Medicare.

Also, while I disagree with Medicaid and Medicare on principle, we can't get rid of it. Too many people are presently dependent on it. One day we'll phase it out...Personally, I'd donate money to disabled individuals that need medical assistance. I think its cruel to have them asking the gov't for medical utilities, such as wheelchairs, walkers and standers. Not only that, but since there is so little money in the fund, they are often denied these resources.
Posted by alexthemoderate 9 years ago
alexthemoderate
The money has to come from somewhere, so you saying that they can provide it but that they can't make you pay for it. That doesn't really add up in a market economy, which Liberatarians believe we should have an almost absolute model of in practice.

The thing is, I don't know if our Liberatarian above really actually understands what Liberatarianism is. The true doctrine of it says that government should be a mechanism against defense of foreign invaders (military), an enforcer of contracts (litigation), and a protector of property (police, fire). And that is really about it.

Universal health care is something that I believe we could do if we scale back on some other programs, such as social security, Medicare, and Medicaid (the latter two would obviously be obsolete in a social medicine system), and I would never consider myself a Libertarian for believing that.
Posted by SirJDKnightCroix 9 years ago
SirJDKnightCroix
exactly. thankyou.
i meant to make it 3 rounds but i think i accidentally clicked 1.
my bad.
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by pcmbrown 8 years ago
pcmbrown
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by C-Mach 9 years ago
C-Mach
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Ethereal 9 years ago
Ethereal
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by AndrewNietzsche 9 years ago
AndrewNietzsche
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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 l2jperry 9 years ago
l2jperry
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by dorobo 9 years ago
dorobo
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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 Chob 9 years ago
Chob
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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 Korezaan 9 years ago
Korezaan
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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 civilian_kritik 9 years ago
civilian_kritik
SirJDKnightCroixScyroneTied
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:30