WickedCossack wrote:
Well the argument is that universal health care should be a right and not a privilege. Ergo in countries that have a health system reflecting this then it is a right and not a privilege.
i'm not aware of a single country that has a right to health care established. to me this is just another feel good slogan rather than actual policy.
Article 35 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Austria is a member state of the EU and therefore party of this treaty.
WickedCossack wrote:
Well the argument is that universal health care should be a right and not a privilege. Ergo in countries that have a health system reflecting this then it is a right and not a privilege.
i'm not aware of a single country that has a right to health care established. to me this is just another feel good slogan rather than actual policy.
Lots of countries have that:
More than half of the world's countries have some degree of a guaranteed, specific right to public health and medical care for their citizens written into their national constitutions. The United States is one of 86 countries whose constitutions do not guarantee their citizens any kind of health protection. That's the finding of a new study that examines the level and scope of constitutional protection of specific rights to public health and medical care.
The US healthcare system really isn’t fully private. It’s caught in the middle, with politicians consistently adding and taking parts away. I don’t have time for a long write-up but I enjoyed reading wardy and Chris’ posts.
You have a private sector that pays millions on millions for lobbying in Washington. What’s the word for it..ermm, crony capitalism?
WickedCossack wrote:
Well the argument is that universal health care should be a right and not a privilege. Ergo in countries that have a health system reflecting this then it is a right and not a privilege.
i'm not aware of a single country that has a right to health care established. to me this is just another feel good slogan rather than actual policy.
Article 35 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Austria is a member state of the EU and therefore party of this treaty.
access ofc, is that rly your argument?
as if thats the problem in the us that insurance companies simply deny giving ppl insurance no matter how much money u throw at them...
WickedCossack wrote:
Well the argument is that universal health care should be a right and not a privilege. Ergo in countries that have a health system reflecting this then it is a right and not a privilege.
i'm not aware of a single country that has a right to health care established. to me this is just another feel good slogan rather than actual policy.
Lots of countries have that:
obvsly european countries organize their healt care system quite different than the us. tho one part is quite similar in that usually it is connected to your employer/payroll. ofc it is vastly different if optional or a requirement and if the funds go to private insurance or one public one.
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
WickedCossack wrote:
Well the argument is that universal health care should be a right and not a privilege. Ergo in countries that have a health system reflecting this then it is a right and not a privilege.
i'm not aware of a single country that has a right to health care established. to me this is just another feel good slogan rather than actual policy.
Lots of countries have that:
obvsly european countries organize their healt care system quite different than the us. tho one part is quite similar in that usually it is connected to your employer/payroll. ofc it is vastly different if optional or a requirement and if the funds go to private insurance or one public one.
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
Oh that's interesting, it seems Austria has a state health insurance fund that you need to pay state health insurance to access? If I'm understanding that right then it's slightly different to the UK as the only health insurance we have is private (of which about 10% of the population pays.) The only requirement to access free healthcare from the NHS is to be a resident of the UK.
It seems like 99% of people pay the state insurance in Austria, is it fixed for everyone or do people with higher incomes pay more?
WickedCossack wrote:
Well the argument is that universal health care should be a right and not a privilege. Ergo in countries that have a health system reflecting this then it is a right and not a privilege.
i'm not aware of a single country that has a right to health care established. to me this is just another feel good slogan rather than actual policy.
Lots of countries have that:
obvsly european countries organize their healt care system quite different than the us. tho one part is quite similar in that usually it is connected to your employer/payroll. ofc it is vastly different if optional or a requirement and if the funds go to private insurance or one public one.
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
Oh that's interesting, it seems Austria has a state health insurance fund that you need to pay state health insurance to access? If I'm understanding that right then it's slightly different to the UK as the only health insurance we have is private (of which about 10% of the population pays.) The only requirement to access free healthcare from the NHS is to be a resident of the UK.
It seems like 99% of people pay the state insurance in Austria, is it fixed for everyone or do people with higher incomes pay more?
it increases with income and is capped at some point. low income lvls u basically simply pay health care and no or very little in income tax.
chris1089 wrote:
Again, you are kind of missing the point. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I don't accept the premise that government provided education or healthcare is a valid reason to take people's money, or the premise that it is efficient. I think that having free markets (including healthcare and education) is the best way to bring people out of poverty. Tbh that's probably why I'm a capitalist generally (because it helps the poorest.)
I don't think pure capitalism is the best economic/political system for the healthcare industry. It has it's benefits but the industry has some unique features that don't function well with the system e.g a couple:
Due to start up barriers the pharmaceutical sector essentially functions as a monopoly under capitalism. As their primary goal is profitability they can charge whatever prices they want it's not regulated, and they do. Medicince is often marked up 1000% and more in America (Insulin is a good example which is about ~1000% atm.) The cost of course is passed directly to the consumer (if they can even afford it.) I think even a proponent of private health care can agree this needs to be regulated?
Hospitals as profit seeking organsiations independent of insurance options. The primary goal of private healthcare is to make profit and not to provide health care, and while these two should allign to some extent, the fact that you can't always choose your hospital (limited by location, urgency of health etc) and lack of transparency of the product (costs) severly limits the driving force of capitalism which is consumer choice. Hence this system can easily facilitate over-charging and under-servicing without the normal drawbacks.
I think it's also worth acknowledging that under an ideal (functioning) universal healthcare system a sector for private healthcare still exists, opponents of universal basic health care don't recognise this enough. It should work quite well in harmony with state care as the main incentive to use (and consequent avenue for profit) can only be for quality of service.
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
I am not sure if you are bending words here?
In my country at least, you can sue the state if you do not get proper healthcare. And yeah, it is a basic right we have. I am not familiar with your system, and maybe yours are way worse than the one Scandicanivan countries have?
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
I am not sure if you are bending words here?
In my country at least, you can sue the state if you do not get proper healthcare. And yeah, it is a basic right we have. I am not familiar with your system, and maybe yours are way worse than the one Scandicanivan countries have?
i'd assume it funded out of general tax revenue. my question would be, if i move to norway i receive health insurance per default?
i'd keep it lowkey with judgement like worse or better in case one rly doesn't know anything about it...
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
I am not sure if you are bending words here?
In my country at least, you can sue the state if you do not get proper healthcare. And yeah, it is a basic right we have. I am not familiar with your system, and maybe yours are way worse than the one Scandicanivan countries have?
i'd assume it funded out of general tax revenue. my question would be, if i move to norway i receive health insurance per default?
i'd keep it lowkey with judgement like worse or better in case one rly doesn't know anything about it...
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
I am not sure if you are bending words here?
In my country at least, you can sue the state if you do not get proper healthcare. And yeah, it is a basic right we have. I am not familiar with your system, and maybe yours are way worse than the one Scandicanivan countries have?
i'd assume it funded out of general tax revenue. my question would be, if i move to norway i receive health insurance per default?
i'd keep it lowkey with judgement like worse or better in case one rly doesn't know anything about it...
Yes you would, and the same in Denmark.
i don't think we have the same defintion what free or basic human right means.
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
I am not sure if you are bending words here?
In my country at least, you can sue the state if you do not get proper healthcare. And yeah, it is a basic right we have. I am not familiar with your system, and maybe yours are way worse than the one Scandicanivan countries have?
i'd assume it funded out of general tax revenue. my question would be, if i move to norway i receive health insurance per default?
i'd keep it lowkey with judgement like worse or better in case one rly doesn't know anything about it...
Yes you would, and the same in Denmark.
i don't think we have the same defintion what free or basic human right means.
We probably do, I mentioned Denmark but you posted something about Spain.
maybe this is a misunderstanding or some lack of understanding what and how we view human rights. coz noone here is insured by default and u certainly can't sue the state or anyone else that u have been denied your human right to have insurance.
I am not sure if you are bending words here?
In my country at least, you can sue the state if you do not get proper healthcare. And yeah, it is a basic right we have. I am not familiar with your system, and maybe yours are way worse than the one Scandicanivan countries have?
i'd assume it funded out of general tax revenue. my question would be, if i move to norway i receive health insurance per default?
i'd keep it lowkey with judgement like worse or better in case one rly doesn't know anything about it...
Yes you would, and the same in Denmark.
i don't think we have the same defintion what free or basic human right means.
We probably do, I mentioned Denmark but you posted something about Spain.
u r right, my bad - that flag of yours caught my attention xD