Thursday, September 23, 2010

More Shit That Doesn't Make Sense

Everyone knows where I stand on the health care debate in this country, so I won't repeat my reasoning and the facts that back up my reasoning. This blog post will not take a side in the health care discussion. It will simply point out a GIGANTIC logical flaw in the reasoning I often hear used to argue against universal health care.

"Health care is not a right. The Constitution doesn't have any mention of providing health care for the citizens of the United State."

These people are absolutely right. The Constitution makes no mention of health care. Want to know why? Because there practically was no health care in 1776!!

Penicillin wasn't even discovered until 1928. Surgery was rudimentary at best. Blood-letting was an accepted treatment for disease. Pretty much at the time the Constitution was written, a minor infection could, and often did, lead to death.

Perhaps if Thomas Jefferson lived in a time that had antibiotics, laparoscopic surgery, chemo and radiation therapy, X-Rays, MRIs, EKG's, blood work, and other common tools of modern health care practitioners, he would have made some mention about health care in that original Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Of course given the time period, he didn't, so we'll never truly know. Regardless, using the Constitution as argument against making health care a right to every citizen makes no sense at all. Hell, the original Constitution makes no mention of ending slavery either, but nearly 100 years later we managed to realize that perhaps our founding fathers had made an error on that issue.

Again, I'm not endorsing one side or the other in this post. I'm just pointing out some really stupid reasoning.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

And Mike this just shows how stupid you are. The Constitution (and for that matter The Bill of Rights) allows for individual States to guarentee rights not afforded by said Constitution to the people of said States.

Hence, we have States such as Mass. affording their people health care.

Not to mention each state provides indigent health care benefits which you have commented on multiple times without regard.

You seem to want it both ways. You desire everyone to be covered by some sort of universal feel good health care program and in the same breath chastise the fat lazy ignorants who abuse that same system.

I have challenged you before when you said your bonus should go to your techs or something because you make "too much money". I believe your response was something to the effect that you didn't know "how to give it back".

I don't speak for everyone reading this blog but I must say you are a hypocrite and a fool.

Oh, bye the way you you are a bullshit artist too for all the times you say you have "plenty of sources" for your arguments. I have seen one source you quoted and it was from the San Fran times or something. Yeah..Real unbiased journalism there!!

m said...

@Anonymous
Why are you so upset?
For me, the most confusing thing is the fact that a lot of those opposing health care reform are self-proclaimed christians.
I thought Jesus was all about loving the neighbors and helping those in need.
Those people are just so hateful and selfish.

Pharmacy Mike said...

Let's take your points one a time.

-Regarding the Constitution and Bill of Rights:

What are you talking about? I didn't even make mention to any of this in my post. I wasn't talking about this at all. In fact, I twice said that this post wasn't taking a stand on the issue but rather pointing out an illogical argument.

Do people not cite the Constitution as an argument against universal health care? Am I crazy feeling like I hear this all the time? When people say health care is a right, other people come out saying that it's not a right, and our founding fathers didn't include health care in the constitution.

My argument is that it's stupid logic because there was no health care in 1776. I didn't say whether national health care was right or wrong (though I have given my opinions, and I gave a shitload of statistics and sources to back my opinions). I just said that particular logic was wrong.

I'm well aware of Mass. health care. I understand the ability for states to make laws or rights not guaranteed by the federal government (i.e. gay marriage in Vermont and Mass.). Again, this had nothing to do with my post.

Obviously, reading comprehension is not your strength. Moving on...

-I do wish everyone to be covered by a Universal Health Care system. Just like there is in France and Germany... countries who demolish us in every single measurable category of health care (search my post about the French not being so bad for my sources). I don't chastise the fat and lazy for "abusing the system." In fact, I don't chastise them at all. I chastise society's lack of emphasis on a healthy lifestyle. I chastise the education systems and parents for not doing a better job educating the youth regarding the importance of exercise and proper diet. My ideal universal health care system would put a much higher emphasis on preventative health care education. My ideal education system would teach our youth not only math and science, but also nutrition. My ideal government would outlaw or severely tax foods that are excessively unhealthy, just like it did with cigarettes.

What I hope for is not a contradiction, but rather a movement towards better health that over time would dramatically decrease health care spending.

Pharmacy Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pharmacy Mike said...

(CONTINUED)

-My bonus... Of course, you only mentioned part of my response. My whole response to your "challenge" was to say that one person giving back a few thousand dollars doesn't even make a dent in things. My whole point was that the bonuses, given to the pharmacists at a time when our business is doing worse and pharmacists are being cut, don't make a lot of sense. The company shouldn't be doling out that extra money at all. I would be 100% on board with the company cutting all pharmacists salaries by 15%, giving part of that cut to technicians, and the rest as a little extra money to ensure that we can be well staffed and don't have to lay anyone off.

Basically, I would trade a good portion of my salary for job security. Me just giving back a couple thousands dollars, while the rest of my colleagues keep their bonuses doesn't solve anything.

So I've proven I'm not a hypocrite, and my views aren't contradictory to each other. You just seemingly lack the mental capacity to understand my viewpoint.

-as for sources...

My French Aren't so Bad universal health care article was well researched, and provided links with each bullet point I listed.

As for our most recent debate regarding the struggle of the average person from my generation, I listed the one site with a disclaimer that I'm not writing a dissertation in a blog comment, so I'm not listing 30 sources. That one source had plenty of statistics and charts that listed indisputable facts.

Are you going to challenge the notion that the wealth has dramatically shifted towards the top in the last 30 years? Are you saying this isn't true?

You didn't argue with the fact I listed that the ratio of CEO to average worker salary had exponentially increased. You simply tried to rationalize the increase. That's what your type does whether the fact listed is about other countries kicking our ass in health care or about the giant gap between the rich and the poor in the U.S. No matter what the statistic says, you come up with convoluted ways to fit them into your own view.

I brought up how the top tax rate throughout most of the "golden years" of the U.S., the 1950's, was over 90%. Eisenhower put the tax rate up there. No one ever called him a socialist. Obama wants to repeat tax cuts so that the taxes go back to where they were in the 90's, and people say he's got a socialist agenda.

I'm stating statistics. They're easy to look up. You don't even have to analyze or study them to figure them out. They're just there. You can get most of these stats from the freaking census bureau. They're well known.

And as I stated and provided a link to the report... even Citigroup knows this. They're actually developing investment strategies based on how far apart the rich and the poor are in our country. Again... a fact. Not speculation.

Pharmacy Mike said...

(CONTINUED)

So let's summarize your comment...

Everything you said regarding my most recent post was completely out of left field because it had absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about. Therefore, instead of showing how "stupid" I am, you showed your own lack of reading comprehension.

The stuff you mentioned about my previous posts does not refute the statistics I provided. They simply rationalized that it should be that way. Basically, you're arguing that it's perfectly OK for the rich to take a larger and larger chunk of whatever GDP growth we have, and the non-rich get less of it. However, according to you, it's only because the non-rich just don't work as hard as the rich, and are getting even more lazy, so that is the real reason people are in such hard economic times.

Tell you what though... Since I love these logic and reasoning games so much, I invite you to further try to break down my logic. You may not believe it, but if you can show me an error in my reasoning, I will admit I was wrong, and I'll even write a post about it. I've done it before (http://pharmacymike.blogspot.com/2008/07/poorly-thought-out-argument.html).

The challenge is there. Do you want to take a stab at it?

Pharmacy Mike said...

M...

Anonymous is mostly responding to our previous discussion in another blog post.

I have no idea what that whole Constitution comment has to do with this post because I twice said that I wasn't taking a side in the post. Nor did I mention anything about states rights or anything else of that nature.

Anonymous just doesn't like my views, and that's fine. I'm all for spirited debate. Seriously... I enjoy going back and forth about this stuff more than just about anything else. I can literally feel my brain start to light up. It's a good mental exercise. I welcome the criticism... just beware that I will defend what I think is right, and if you push me, I'll push back.

Anonymous said...

This is my first time commenting, but i've been reading your blog for the past few months. Really interesting stuff! It's a good mixture of work life/personal life and I hope you find time to post more often so I can further distract myself from mounds of college work. Definitely one of my favorite reads.