Do we have the Right... To healthcare, To drive, to have children, To electric

1. 68

   davenmidtownposted 11 years ago

   Do we have the Right...  To healthcare,  To drive, to have children, To electricity, etc.
   
   I am exploring the concept of how People assume the right of something... It is my right to... yet the constitution provides a set amount of rights... so pipe in people... do we have the right to healthcare? do we have the right to drive a car? do we have the right to education? do we have the right to __________.  I am interested in all answers regardless of my opinion. There are no bad answers... just participation in an exchanfe of ideas... have at it!!!

   replyreport
2. 40

   ChristinSposted 11 years ago

   we are entitled to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".  I would argue that to have life and happiness one should expect that healthcare and basic needs go towards that end - so yes, heathcare and basic needs are rights we all should have.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I would agree with most of that but politically speaking... what is the definition of " basic needs"? Does healthcare fall into basic needs? Say do we have the right to open heart surgery? I don't know if there is a correct answer... but go for it!

      replyreport
   2. 40

      ChristinSposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      meaning rights to access for these things and for them to be affordable and not be denied care by an insurance provider you pay for etc.

      replyreport
   3. 63

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You have the PURSUIT of happiness.  Doesn't mean you will receive it.  But, I think everyone could have a good life if government let the market work.  Markets create competition and low prices.  Government creates debt, inflation, war & dependen

      replyreport
   4. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      @SportsBetter: Just an interesting note... at least for me... I found it interesting the the people who wrote "Pursuit of Happiness" were men who held slaves... I must agree with you that with Governmental interference in the market is not wise!

      replyreport
3. 71

   lburmasterposted 11 years ago

   We have the right to pay for healthcare, we need to be responsible to drive, and you have to earn an education to have the right to all of these things. We have to work to have anything, or we will have nothing. This is the way of every race on the planet. Now the government is taking away our responsibilities. It's quite unfortunate.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      A good start! So what happens if you can not pay for healthcare? I totally agree that we have to work for things, etc.

      replyreport
   2. 93

      peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I couldn't agree more with this statement! We have a right to get things. That doesn't mean they should be handed out!

      replyreport
   3. 60

      umbertoobrianposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      what if you don't want to pay for your healthcare?  I am not relieved of my natural rights merely because I choose to not use them.  The RIGHT to live, liberty and pursuit of happiness do not disappear if I do not use them.

      replyreport
   4. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I have a basic  health insurance policy. I expect one day I will die. For myself... that is my choice. I would not want to undergo proceedure after proceedure only to be miserable. Death is what comes eventually anyways whether we want it to or not.

      replyreport
   5. 71

      lburmasterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You don't want to live, is that what your telling me? By not paying health care, you doom yourself. It's a choice. Do you want spend some money each month to make sure that if something happens you keep living? If not, you don't deserve the choice.

      replyreport
   6. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      @Iburmaster: Interesting reaction... I am saying that I have health insurance... but I that I consider the quality of my life more important than the length of my life... Much like abortion...it is my body.

      replyreport
   7. 71

      lburmasterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I'm sorry, I was responding to umbertoobrian. Your view on live and death is completely calm and relaxed. You seem ready and focused. I have no disagreement with your perception.

      replyreport
   8. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you. My calmness comes from having seen so much death...watching people take their last breath...holding their hands as they leave their body... creepy I know... but there is peace too.

      replyreport
   9. 71

      lburmasterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      That does not seem creepy at all. Just caring.

      replyreport
   10. 0

       Larry Wallposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Do you mean governments should not build hospitals or offer public health units,  There is one charity hospital in my city and five privately owned. Closed the public charity hospital and who pays the other hospitals to care for these people--you do.

       replyreport
   11. 71

       lburmasterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I believe hospitals should be privately owned. The government should be interested in politics, not healthcare. Unfortunately, healthcare right now is extremely costly.

       replyreport
   12. 67

       LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       The Gov't is the reason for the cost increase is the Gov't crowded out the competition.  If that were not the case private care would be extremely affordable

       replyreport
   13. 83

       Attikosposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Landmark hit the nail on the head. Every area of the economy government regulates heavily becomes concentrated, uncompetitive, and in time essentially an inefficient branch of the state. Postal service, transportation, food and drugs, health care ...

       replyreport
4. 63

   naeemebrahimjeeposted 11 years ago

   We don't have the right to any of these things.
   
   Society has evolved into a culture where people perceive it is their right to these things.
   
   Our real rights as humans are the most primitive things. Like the right to be able to have food and water. Have shelter. Fall in love with who you want etc
   
   What you refer to in your question are "benefits" of a wealthy state...

   replyreport
   1. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      True... can you expand your ideas, thoughts, and more into a hub about benefits of a wealthy state... or just add them here? I think you make a good point and would like to read more from you.

      replyreport
   2. 63

      naeemebrahimjeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I do find this topic very interesting, I think i will follow your advice and use this topic as inspiration for a hub. As soon as it's up I will link it to this question!

      replyreport
   3. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      awesome! I look forward to reading this.

      replyreport
   4. 63

      naeemebrahimjeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hey! Just to let you know i have written a hub influenced by your question here! The link is below!
      
      http://naeemebrahimjee.hubpages.com/hub … nced-World

      replyreport
5. 67

   Admiral Murrahposted 11 years ago

   I am not sure if you are asking for a delineation of our rights or whether there is an inherent right to the items listed. In my mind, there is no right to healhcare. If there was one, I question where it came from. In 1900, there were no health insurance companies like we have now. People paid for doctor visits. If you wanted more care, you paid for more. A great deal has changed since then, and not all of it is for the better. There have been some good advancements in technology and our ability to provide care, yet true to form, anytime the government gets involved, it gets messed up.
   
   In mentioning driving, originally, it was considered a right. It has only been through time that the licensing authorities stepped in and now refer to it as "a privilege and NOT a right".  I still view the operation of a vehicle as a right.
   
   With children, I subscribe that the right to have or not to have children is God-given. The government does not have the right to step in regarding whether or not you are 'licensed', approved or cleared for parenting. When government does that, it is overstepping its purpose.
   
   Right to electricity? Before electricity was available, there was no right to it. In some parts of the nation, electricity is still hard to come by. I do not see it as a right. It is a convenience, not a right. Like any other commodity, if you want more you pay for more.
   
   Although you did not mention it, I do not view cell phones as a right either. They, like electricity are a commodity. If you can buy one, great, if not, there is no obligation for government to do so.
   
   These are just my thoughts on the items you addressed.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Awesome... thank you for your imput.

      replyreport
   2. 63

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Healthcare, education, energy, and agriculture all areas government is involved in and prices are high and quality is low.  Computers, cellphones, technology, are cheaper and more efficient. Tech has a free market, with no regulations.

      replyreport
   3. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      @SportsBetter: I have often wondered about the difference between the tech market and the commodities market... I think that technology changes so quickly and government moves so slowly that Govt has not figured out yet how to control the teck mkt.

      replyreport
6. 67

   LandmarkWealthposted 11 years ago

   Thats an interesting question..Rights to pursue something like healthare for example...sure.  You have the right to pay for a service that someone else is providing to you assuming the counterparty is providing the service to you at a cost you both agree on.  However to just assume you are entitled to recieve it regardless is a false presumption.  Healthcare like anything else must be provided to you by the labor and expertise of another.  So if we assume you have an absolute right no matter what...then the counterparty must provide it under all circumstances.  This means the person providing the service is forced to provide something regardless of your means to compensate them.  So therefore they have no rights.   
   
   For Example the constituition grants us the right to keep and bare arms.   Does that mean we must all be provided with a firearm upon request.  Ofcourse not...The manufacter of the gun must be compensated.  His employees must be compensated for their labor.  If you are unable to pay them for the product or the service than can we force them to give it to you for free ???
   
   In effect you cannot have a right to the fruits of someone else's labor in a free society.  However you can always pay for that which you want to pursue. And you should be free to negotiate with the provider of the service or product.
   
   Many people have confused rights with needs and wants.  Regardless of how vital the need or want is, a right cannot infringe upon the rights of others.
   
   This infact is why virtually every Dr in the US will tell you they have no interest in seeing their children follow in their footsteps.  Because the Gov't has opted to no longer adequately compensate them anymore, while placing numerous mandates on the at the same time.  Years ago all Dr's would have loved to see their kids become Dr's.  Brace for the coming shortage over the next few decades.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Awesome! Thank you for your imput... RE: doctors today... care to do a comparision of how drs have changed from before  health insurance to today? What are your views on normal healthcare vs exceptional healthcare in terms of paid work.

      replyreport
   2. 67

      LandmarkWealthposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      That answer is complicated. I believe price distortion plays a large role.  At the risk of self promotion read the hub I wrote on the topic. Healthcare is covered in it. http://landmarkwealth.hubpages.com/hub/ … ease-Costs

      replyreport
7. 60

   umbertoobrianposted 11 years ago

   No, rights are not material things that one can demand others provide.  How does one have a right to the labor of a Doctor, the tax money taken from a fellow citizen, etc...?  The idea is that government is not to impede your working out your own fate.  All the things listed and everything that can be imagined are products one obtains by being productive, frugal, moral, smart.
   
   The idea that one has the right to claim the property of another is devoid of any morality.  When one sets about to claim the property of another without the approval of government is called theft.  How can it not be theft if government becomes the mechanism.  Where is the line drawn?  Do we have the right to demand to be housed, clothed, fed?  Why should anyone have to work for their own well being?  If one has a RIGHT to health care doctors and nurses become slaves to the state - how can a doctor not treat someone who demands it?
   
   I am disgusted with the very idea that one citizen can force another to serve him merely because we have wrecked the language and the understanding of Rights as understood by the founders and all Americans until the 1930s.  Our natural rights do not come from anyone or anything other than being human.  How can one have a Right to healthcare - life is a condition of being human.  Liberty is a condition of being human - food is not.  Food is a thing.  Rights do not come from government they exist completely independent of government. 
   
   It is a miserable state of affairs when we have drifted so far from the basic philosophical understanding necessary to remain free and be Americans.  If one does not work should one eat?  If one does not work should one have the right to demand others pay for his meals?  If one does not wish to feed himself does he have the right to compel others or use the mechanisms of government to compel others to pick up the spoon and feed him?
   
   How is healthcare different than being an infant who wants government to make someone else spoon feed him?  Appalling that we even give this kind of thinking a moments consideration.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      awesome comments! yet the government(s) forces citizens to do things all the time... I think we sometimes underestimate goodwill... and replace that with an expectation. WIthout thinking about these kinds of things how can we prevent or improve?

      replyreport
8. 83

   Attikosposted 11 years ago

   The Constitution provides no rights. It recognizes a few, and it acknowledges that there are others not mentioned.
   
   The cheapest way to achieve a political objective is to succeed in declaring it a "right." There can be no sustainable argument against that, once done. The end result of that process, a state of affairs we are suffering now, is that whatever a politically exploitable constituency influential enough wants can be institutionalized as a right, and everyone else just has to grin and bear it.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      awesome... I see the crux of your comment is between the words provide and recognize.... It is good to put such paradox forth!

      replyreport
9. 59

   lostdogrwdposted 11 years ago

   I said that you don't have the right to nothing unless I said you do, as for me, I have the right to any and everything I want. now the question is are you gping to accept what I say.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I am sorry... what?

      replyreport
10. 0

    Larry Wallposted 11 years ago

    As had been said we have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Having that right does not mean someone is going to give it to you. Therefore, I guess you have the right to life--no one has the right to take away your life, except some states with the death penalty. If life includes good health, then you should have the needed facilities available. Common sense would dictake that those who can afford to should pay and those that can't should not have too. Some people will object to that. That leads to one phrase in the Declaration of Independence that I always thought was wrong, politically right, actually wrong All men are not created equal. Some are born with natural gifts. Some are born blind, mental deficiencies and other problems. Health care for them should be made available if the family cannot provide it,
    When it comes to basic needs, we really need to define that. Does not mean clean water, indoor plumbing, a balance diet and education system. THose should be available but more importantly and what I think the constitution meant, is that they should not be denied. So cities maintain sanitary water systems. Most people pay their own water bill, but some need help.
    So to sum it up, we have certain rights and it is up to the individual to exercise those rights and at the same time there is a moral obligation to help the less fortunate. Thus we need laws to guarantee these rights. I cannot buy real health insurance because of my age and the fact I am a Type II diabetic, who takes no medicine or insulin for it, but it is an automatic denial for an individual policy. I am willing and able to pay reasonable premiums, but I am denied that right.
    There is no absolute answer. We can however, accept the basic concept and work from there.

    replyreport
    1. 40

       ChristinSposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I totally agree with you.  I am in a similar situation with a "pre existing condition" that makes it impossible for me to afford health insurance.  I believe that reasonably priced healthcare should be available to all contributing members of society

       replyreport
    2. 68

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       well stated Larry! However... I would not want to burden those that HAVE with the task of paying for my healthcare needs, etc. In the old days I could have paid the dr with chickens... how many chickens would it take to pay for an apendectomy?

       replyreport
11. 68

    Nathan Orfposted 11 years ago

    In order, yes, no, yes and no.
    
    Everyone has the basic right to be healthy. That gives them the right to healthcare. Driving is a privilege, not a right, and I don't think anyone would argue that it is one. A right cannot be taken away by the state, or any level of government, unless you have taken away another persons right.
    
    Here are the rights listed in the Constitution; Personal Security, which means two things, 1. not to be killed, and 2. not to be abused or injured in any way. Personal Liberty, which means that you have the 1. right to freedom of movement, 2.the right to assemble, 3.the right to bear arms, 4.the right to practice your own religion, 5.to express your own opinion etc.
    
    Driving, riding on an airplane, having access to electricity, none of these are in the Constitution. Even privacy. The word privacy is not in the constitution. That right is only an implied right, that is, backed up by 6 different amendments.
    
    In fact, the U.S Constitution is vague about what rights we have. The Bill of Rights gives us the basic rights of an American citizen, but those may or may not be valid in another country.
    
    In short, there are some rights that government needs to keep out of, like having children. Other rights need to be protected, like having the freedom to express your own opinion. And all levels of government, that is, local, state and federal, are tasked with the duty of deciding what warrants taking a persons right away. Intrude upon someone else's right's, and you have lost your own.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       well stated... so... it seems you are implying that healthy is a choice... everyone has the right to be healthy... but isnt that different than having the right to access healthcare? I can eat healthy, live healthy but I can not force a Dr to cure me

       replyreport
12. 0

    Old Empresarioposted 11 years ago

    I suppose not. But do we want to be the nation that does not educate or give electricity to its people? Do we have a right to have a million-man "defense" force that takes our tax money and builds billion-dollar aircraft and nuclear weapons when we safely live between two oceans?

    replyreport
    1. 68

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Old Empresario: Nothing is really given to the people.. it all comes at a cost... electricity, education, healthcare, food... it is paid for by cash in hand, credit or through taxation... nothing is ever really free...

       replyreport
    2. 0

       Old Empresarioposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Well, the question didn't say anything about whether we would have to pay for these things or not. It said do we have a right to it? I said not really. But I do say that if we are paying taxes, we do have certain rights like healthcare and education.

       replyreport
13. 63

    SportsBetterposted 11 years ago

    When these are made into rights you end up with much less.  The government uses their power to create these rights for certain groups.  They usually have a good intention, but end up ruining what didn't need fixing. 
    
    Lets use healthcare for an example.  Government creates Medicare, Medicaid, and the Food and Drug Administration.  All of these programs cost money.  Government has no money, so they tax you.  They can only tax you so much because you need money to pay for things.  So then they start to borrow and eventually they run out of credit.  Last they use a hidden tax, they print money.  Once they start the printing presses, prices go up because of inflation.  This happens especially in areas government is involved in. 
    
    Since government has a presence in healthcare, education, energy, and agriculture, inflation occurred in those areas.  Prices rise, quality lowers.  People pay more for less. 
    
    We have to learn that government isn't good at anything.  Everything becomes political, corporations buy off politicians to pass the regulations they want.  Regulations are created by lobbyists.  What do you think they lobby for? Why do you think Obama likes regulations, he gets paid for those.
    
    Corporations are able to lobby to government because they have so much power.  If government didn't have power, they wouldn't be able to auction it off to corporations.  The founders of the US knew this and tried to warn us.  The truth was hidden from the public, while the international bankers put corporations in power.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       davenmidtownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Interesting and honest... nice job.

       replyreport
14. 58

    ib radmastersposted 11 years ago

    Technically, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, if you believe the founders of the country.

    replyreport
15. 79

    Mitch Alanposted 11 years ago

    One person does not have RIGHT to anything that would have to be taken from another. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness...these do not require actions of any one else to exist. They just "are". Healthcare requires someone to administer it. If someone is force to provide healthcare then their Liberty has been compromised. You can not make THINGS, whether goods or services, "free" to one person without infringing on the liberty of another.
    Should we as individuals, communities and private organization help out those less fortunate? Yes. But, this should be out of choice and not government mandate and confiscatory taxes and redistribution.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Larry Wallposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       This comment is for everyone. If you do not like mandated health care, what is the answer. Do we ignore the sick. Do we deny them access to doctors, hospitals, etc. I would like to hear some suggestions and not just opposition.

       replyreport
    2. 79

       Mitch Alanposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Allow competition across state lines, real tort reform...get the government out of healthcare/insurance and allow more free-market answers. More options and more free-market control will bring costs down.

       replyreport