View Poll Results: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

Voters
99. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    81 81.82%
  • No

    8 8.08%
  • Maybe

    9 9.09%
  • Don't know

    1 1.01%
Page 11 of 32 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 312

Thread: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

  1. #101
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    13,212

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    The government engages other humans in protecting the right to life of its citizens all the time. That is a weak argument.
    Apparently, don't understand what the right to life means.

  2. #102
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    No It isn't.
    The police are Government actors.

    And it is a failed argument at that.

    Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/po.../28scotus.html

    No such duty, no such "right".
    That is an interesting case. I was not aware of that. My understanding is that the majority in that opinion felt that because of precedence and a so called "well established" tradition of police discretion that there was no such duty to protect in that case. I would say that is very disturbing, because if the citizens cannot count on police protection from physical harm from other people, then that means that the law of the west is in place.

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    On the other hand, a hospital is a private actor.

    You are hiring the Hospital staff to be your actors to interfere with your natural life, just as you could hire body guards to protect you from harm.
    But you are not entitled to them.


    Which is all irrelevant to the point made. "A right to life does not include a right to outside interference to sustain it."
    I disagree. The government makes use of private actors all of the time. There is no good reason why it could not make use of hospitals to sustain a person's life.

  3. #103
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    Apparently, don't understand what the right to life means.
    OK, what is it that I don't understand?

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by kerussll View Post
    Everyone has a right to life, and hospitals should care for everyone. They shouldn't have to eat the cost though. Everyone should help out with that.
    I agree. Although it has been put forward that the government is not duty bound to protect the lives of its citizens, I would disagree with that because if that is so, then citizens must rely primarily on their own means of protection, even from physical harm from other citizens. And if that is the case, then government is merely facilitating the usurping of the resources of nature by those with wealth. That is not government, that is robbery. Such a government is merely aiding thieves and is not worthy of the name "government."

  5. #105
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    13,212

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    OK, what is it that I don't understand?
    Your right to life means you have a right to a life of your own, lived according to your own judgment and actions. You seem to think that a right to life means a guarantee of survival granted by your fellow man. Your right to life requires nothing of me, nor does my right to life impose any burden upon you.

  6. #106
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    Your right to life means you have a right to a life of your own, lived according to your own judgment and actions. You seem to think that a right to life means a guarantee of survival granted by your fellow man. Your right to life requires nothing of me, nor does my right to life impose any burden upon you.
    No, that is not necessarily so. People get disease sometimes due to no fault of their own for one thing. The next thing is that even if it is their fault, because the government is placing restrictions on their behavior, they should expect something from the government in return. It is not a one way street where the government simply takes and gives nothing in return, except to the wealthy.

  7. #107
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    Yes but this is why I support the individual mandate, that great idea the Republicans came up with before it was more important for President Obama to fail, before anybody even knew who Obama was for that matter.

    If someone shows up at an ER without federally mandated coverage, garner their wages and tax refunds until the debt is paid in full. In fact, anybody who doesn't have coverage on their own is given the lowest premium coverage automatically and the costs are deducted from their pay. If an illegal aliens shows up, they get deported after they're well again, banned from entering the country until their debt is paid and if not paid within 10 years, that amount to deducted from whatever their country would have otherwise revived in foreign-aid paid instead to the hospital where their citizen was treated.
    Hmmm. That's interesting. I had not heard of that idea before. What happens if they are homeless or unemployed?

  8. #108
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    13,212

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    No, that is not necessarily so. People get disease sometimes due to no fault of their own for one thing.
    So. The fact that you come down with an illness does not grant you some sort of power over a doctor.
    The next thing is that even if it is their fault, because the government is placing restrictions on their behavior, they should expect something from the government in return. It is not a one way street where the government simply takes and gives nothing in return, except to the wealthy.
    The government shouldn't be taking, demanding and placing restrictions on a free people.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 08:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    So. The fact that you come down with an illness does not grant you some sort of power over a doctor.
    That is true. But if you have a disease that requires emergency treatment, the government can require hospitals to give you that treatment in the name of protecting its citizens. Of course, the hospital should be compensated by the government for doing such, if the patient cannot pay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    The government shouldn't be taking, demanding and placing restrictions on a free people.
    They should avoid such. However, that is essentially what governments do. They restrict people. Otherwise, they serve no practical purpose.

  10. #110
    Sage
    Fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Mentor Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    13,212

    Re: Should hospitals be forced to give emergency care to the poor?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    That is true. But if you have a disease that requires emergency treatment, the government can require hospitals to give you that treatment in the name of protecting its citizens. Of course, the hospital should be compensated by the government for doing such, if the patient cannot pay.
    The government can require anything because they have a monopoly on the use of force. But the role of the government of a free society is to protect the rights of each citizen. And the fact is, doctors are citizens too and are equal in their rights. That means the decision on how when and where and upon whom they wish to perform that service is up to them, THAT is the doctors right. Lets say I invent a cure for cancer. Can the government force me to share it with the world? If so, what happened to my rights?

Page 11 of 32 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •