Zep-mediate-astoli.
1 Like
Neither does capitalism. I donât think thatâs the point. Is universal healthcare a right? Whatâs a right until a government says it is (i.e., a privilege)? Itâs a right in some countries so as a concept at least yes it is a right. The question isnât whether or not universal healthcare is optimal because optimal always comes with âunder the given conditions.â Now, some will say it doesnât work as well as what we have here but they arenât basing that on any factual evidence. I think it hasnât been mentioned that in Japan, hardly a socialist paradise, healthcare is a right. They build better cars than we do, even when they build them here. So, can capitalism and universal healthcare coexist without Ayn Rand rising from the dead? I think it has. I know it bothers the capitalist purists, but when were we ever some pure capitalist nation? Elon Musk has gotten handouts from the government. Survival of the fittest doesnât apply apparently.
Are you gonna cry or something? Just asking you for some facts turned you into a crybaby. Oh, and that CEO is dead and no one is crying over it. Like I said, in your world, thatâs called winning. When your business model is simply make as much money as you can (even if itâs illegal) and not to actually provide the service you are being paid for (because you arenât smart enough to make money doing it the right way), maybe you shouldnât be running a business.
I was being sarcastic, just in case you missed it.
What?
Right, but thatâs not whatâs happening. So are we circling back to the top?
Or jumping back in to contractual exclusions?
Yes. You just havenât informed yourself with regard to this case.
The fact you keep bringing this up shows you donât know what the issue is. Claims were denied that were not exclusions. Like I said long ago, youâre way off.
Well, were back to âyou have a right to someone elseâs work/services.â But, you dont.
Then donât accept their insurance premiums.
So if we are being super technical about one very specific case, the CEO of United Healthcare does not process claims. Kind of a moot point considering.
However, as it appears the killing was a message more so than a targeted act of vengeance on an appropriate party, if United Healthcare did breach contract they were inline for a court correction and massive lawsuit, and at their stature likely one that would see an industry wide level of scrutiny and potential process overhaul.
In any case, this would be the exception and not the rule.
None of the response makes sense, and itâs still targeting the incorrect entities. The costs were high because of the medical industry. Not the insurance industry.
Itâs all very misguided and youâre intentionally convoluting the issue by playing dumb to force a misguided point.
1 Like
Yeah, thanks Obama. This has been discussed.
He created the policy of how they are processed.
Which is why the conspiracy theory is they had him killed to keep him quiet, because guys like him would give up their mothers to avoid prison.
You donât even know what my point is.
But donât you have a right for something you paid for? To go back to an earlier example, if someone paid me to make them duck confit, then I kept their money, but denied them the food because I decided theyâre too fat, is that ethical?
Only true if you ignore the fact that capitalism always seems to turn into socialism eventually.
No. It canât be. Edit: Healthcare, in general, canât be.
Life, liberty, and property are negative rights, at least in the Lockean tradition that inspired this country.
How can it be a right, when it requires action from others?
Right. Some people have The Faith, and others do not. Just because something fails under other conditions doesnât mean it will fail under every condition. I guess.
It would be hard to base that on factual evidence without us taking the leap of faith first.
I defer to you, as I have little knowledge of Japanese healthcare.
Better in which ways? I prefer them, but Iâm not sure that makes them better. There may be reasons for this other than socialized healthcare anyway.
Sheâs not rising from the dead. Whether the two can coexist depends upon how loosely we use âcapitalism.â
Pretty close until 1913 or so.
Yeah. Without a doubt. And Iâm sure heâs looking for more of them. Whatâs your point?
YeahâŠweâre definitely nothing close to a purely capitalist society.
1 Like
No he didnât. This wouldnât come close to fitting the CEO role.
Insider trading and monopolies are not the same thing as claim processesâŠ
This is very true.
The more accurate scenario is that somebody propositioned hiring you to make duck confit, you investigated them and found out they are too fat for duck confit, let them know you could still be a chef and shared an approved menu that did not include duck confit, they agreed and contracted your services and then shot you because you did not prepare duck confit.
State and federal governments have done the most to increase costs. When you go back just before obamacare, id give my right nut to pay those prices again.
1 Like
I feel thatâs a much more inaccurate scenario.
Very true. Largely administrating the poor people offset as they enter the healthcare market place with zero financial contribution towards cost, yet receive equal access. Supply and demand in the end, the same death knoll for all social healthcare plans in a nutshell.
1 Like
Youre referring to taxes in this case? Should we equate the amount of healthcare someone receives with how much tax theyve paid in? Half the US pays no income tax, what do they get?
If that happens, the capitalists can only blame themselves for not reading the room. The French monarchy made the same error.
Ok, then change healthcare to insurance. Healthcare is a very huge umbrella term.
And the government can take all of those from you. One could say all rights, such as they are, are conditional.
If you have negative rights, you logically have positive rights. And even negative rights may require actions from others to protect them.
When you want to sell it, youâll find out. \
Yes. We use it very loosely today.
See below:
Itâs literally how insurance works. Health assessment based risk bands are baked in to coverage and premium levels, and spelled out in contracts. Itâs a very objective scenario. Itâs even a direct part of the application process, from day one.
Edit: group coverage can be a little less transparent, because you just sign up on an Internet portal your job set up after HR gave a shitty 30 minute rundown.
Especially important to read your contract here, and I guess we can add HR to the shooting list.
Just take it easy on the hot ones.