Thread: Rand Paul: Right to Health Care is Slavery

Originally Posted by George Aligator

If we were really serious about libertarian freedom from statist regulation, we would insist on ending state accredition of all schools especially including medical schools. Why have intrusive licensing and and regulation of doctors anyway? Why can't anyone call himself "Doctor" and set up a practice? Won't the "free market" take care of inept practitioners? Why should state-approved doctors be the only ones to control distribution of oxycontin etc.? I mean, where does Dr. Paul draw the line?

Libertarians would probably agree with most of that. But they arent against govt, just big govt. As long as all the people consent to the law, and have the freedom to leave it if they dont, libertarians dont really care what you do. Both the people who are free and the people who want to be controlled are happy.

If Rand Paul had not profited heavily for the majority of his life through direct and very extreme government intervention in who may or may not offer the services of a physician I could see his point. As it is all I see is another rich man screaming that the government should use my taxes to increase and protect his wealth while ignoring me.

He should maybe read up on what Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize Winning CAPITALIST economist says on the subject

Originally Posted by Dick Martin

I think the state not only has the right, but the obligation.

That doesn't deal with the issue though. Don't we both generally believe in following the laws, even the ones we do not agree with?

That's not the issue I'm raising. Of course I agree with following the law (within reason), but I'm asking if it should be a law in the first place. The issue is whether people have the right to think for themselves, to decide for themselves how they want to live. That's fundamental to freedom.

Can we go sideways then? There are nail salons all over the place now. They are licensed. Do you believe licensing them is silly power grabbing over reach? Or do you believe it is best if we enforce some minimal level of regulations concerning their activities? ( I am in favor of regulating them, for several reasons.)

Well, I don't believe it's silly. But I do believe it's wrong and an example of overreaching government.

Originally Posted by dblack

... The issue is whether people have the right to think for themselves, to decide for themselves how they want to live. That's fundamental to freedom....

It isn't just a matter of thinking though.

I know nothing about putting a roof on a house. I have done it twice in 70 years. Even with all of the documentation, advertising I can trust, referrals, and misinformation out there, no amount of my thinking is going to make me a top-notch consumer of roofs.

I count on the government assuring me I can trust the labels, the products were made with appropriate materials, and will not harm me. I need that and count on it in most of the things I do.

Pitting myself against the world of commerce, where the one I am dealing with knows his business inside and out gives him a huge advantage over me in the process. I don't care how much you or I think, he's already spent more time thinking on the subject than we ever will.

Originally Posted by dblack

That's not the issue I'm raising. Of course I agree with following the law (within reason), but I'm asking if it should be a law in the first place. The issue is whether people have the right to think for themselves, to decide for themselves how they want to live. That's fundamental to freedom.

I would have to argue that a proper medical license is essential for writing prescriptions. Otherwise you have to deal with higher incidence of recreational use, overdose for valid use, and over use of antibiotics.

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of the whining from I-hate-the-gov't folks who seem not too eager to burn their Medicare cards or give up their gov't health care plan.

Until Rand Paul does either of those two things, his words don't mean a whole lot.

Originally Posted by Jason Marcel

I'm sick and tired of being sick and tired of the whining from I-hate-the-gov't folks who seem not to eager to burn their Medicare cards or give up their gov't health care plan.

Until Rand Paul does either of those two things, his words don't mean a whole lot.

I haven't followed Rand Paul that closely, but I'm reasonably sure his dad would be in favor of getting rid of Medicare if there was decent public support for the idea. Rand Paul probably has similar views. Are you suggesting otherwise?

Originally Posted by jviehe

Libertarians would probably agree with most of that. But they arent against govt, just big govt. As long as all the people consent to the law, and have the freedom to leave it if they dont, libertarians dont really care what you do. Both the people who are free and the people who want to be controlled are happy.

Yeh, they're not against government regulation as long as it's not BIG government, and any government that's 'big' is government that's not IN THEIR FAVOR. In the libertarian system the people who are free are also called "rich" while the poor bastards they get rich by controlling aren't so much "happy" as just 'poor'.

Try following Milton Friedman's suggestions, hang your own shingle out saying you're a physician, see how big or small the cop is who comes to arrest you

Bastards want to defend my right to starve to death, while they use my taxes to up their fees, fuck that.

Originally Posted by John Drake

Yeh, they're not against government regulation as long as it's not BIG government, and any government that's 'big' is government that's not IN THEIR FAVOR.

I wouldn't even say it's a matter of the size or amount of regulation - more whether it's really protecting people, or just controlling them for the convenience of the government and those who control it.

In the libertarian system the people who are free are also called "rich" while the poor bastards they get rich by controlling aren't so much "happy" as just 'poor'.

That's nonsense. In fact, the kinds of regulation we're most against are the kind that exist to protect the vested interests of corporations and the wealthy at our expense.

Try following Milton Friedman's suggestions, hang your own shingle out saying you're a physician, see how big or small the cop is who comes to arrest you.

Yep. You'll get beat-up and thrown in jail. Hardly sounds like freedom to me.

Bastards want to defend my right to starve to death, while they use my taxes to up their fees, fuck that.

Can't say I appreciate being called a bastard, but I don't think you have a clear understanding of what rights are all about.

Originally Posted by John Drake

Bastards want to defend my right to starve to death, while they use my taxes to up their fees, fuck that.

I'm willing to bet that's the coolest thing you've ever said. I commend you for it.