It is a different debate if what you are saying is that under our current economic circumstances universal right to healthcare is not feasible and/or affordable.
But somehow I get the sense that you do not want universal right to health care even if it were affordable. That is something entirely different.
Yes, it is different.
This is what I was trying to explain to John yesterday. (John doesn't care about the difference. For him it's just "fer me or agin me.") I operate in two different modes, the principled and the pragmatic. I didn't start out a libertarian. It's something I came to appreciate and internalize after decades of experience with systems. I realized that collectivism, although it feels noble and can arguably be construed as fair, isn't workable in our society. I thought about what works best and developed my principles from those practicalities. Having done so, I found that the new principles resonated with other parts of me, such as my left-libertarianism, in a synergistic way.
[I laugh now remembering an incident that occurred in the US Embassy in Mexico when I was a student. I argued for centralization against states rights on the grounds that it was more efficient. At the time, I did not understand the economic meaning of efficient, only the operations meaning.]
So I can see why you are having trouble interpreting the duality. I question the right to health care based on feasibility/affordability. And my principles go hand and hand with that. I don't reject the government like so many on the right out of distrust or on a constitutional basis. I'm a retired fed, for heavens sake, a public system designer and analyst. I know when and how the government works well. I like to think I contributed to it doing so in places where I had influence. I am questioning the right to health care based first on cost, which is what the issue is almost entirely about. The assessment that it would be too costly is compatible with and goes hand in hand with my carefully hewn principles and with the constitution. It all plays together neatly, which is reinforcing for me but probably confusing for others.
If the right to health care could be implemented in an affordable way, I would reevaluate my stand, which would mean disassembling my whole set of principles. I would do that, though, if it could be demonstrated that I am likely mistaken about the cost. That's why I ask so many questions. That I get no answers increases my confidence in my assessment of the cost. |
