Why is health care for all a human right?

[Raphael]

Bernie Sanders said that free health care for all is a human right. Why is it?

I didn't understand at the beginning, so after thinking by myself I came to the conclusion that the function of government is to create a fair society for all citizens that covers all their basic needs. It's not fair that some people are disadvantaged because they don't have the money to pay for medicine and doctors when they have health issues.

Are there some other components that I'm missing here? I would like to know your thoughts on this.

[Rilles]

because some people think it should be

[Apparition of Jack]

I like to look at it from Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It just makes sense that any collective effort - in this case government - should aim to meet everyone's most basic needs first (food, water, shelter, health) so they can function and grow as much as possible, and making healthcare a legal right is a powerful tool to achieve that.

[Bodigger]

Here in the U.S. it is not a Constitutional right, but the people have the right to pursue happiness, and that includes helping mankind.  Healthcare for all is a force onto the people, and does not empower people to care for one another.  Which is more conscious?  I will say the latter.

[Thomas_VH]

Because it is an act of Love to offer health care to those who need it; and Love & Unity is what evolution is pushing us towards.

[Rilles]

honestly because we are becoming less selfish as we go up the spiral, why is it right for someone else to suffer just so i can pay less taxes? what if i became really sick? would i want someone to help me? definitely 

[Leo Gura]

Look at society like a family. If your mother got cancer, you would never leave her alone to die because she couldn't pay $2,000 month for her medication while you were swimming in cash and buying million dollar vacation homes and sports cars. You would not charge your mother $70,000 for treatment.

It's just that simple.

60,000+ people die each year in America from lack of ability to pay for healthcare. Does that make any sense? Purely from a financial POV if these people didn't die think of how much tax money they would bring in over their lifetimes. It's idiotic for the government to let them die. The government is actually losing money on each death. Each person can bring in at least $5k to $10k in tax revenue each year. Not to mention the compassion angle.

[johncakecream]

Basic free- elective supplemental, good luck Bernie asking the status quo ' less profit please' in 10 to 30 years possibly, but lets begin the groundswell,

[Emerald]

In the declaration of independence it says "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". 

So, given that the founding fathers thought we had a right to live, that naturally implies that healthcare would be a right.

Mind you, a "right" is always a collective decision. So, we technically have no inherent rights. It's up to the powers that be to determine what is a right and what isn't.

And if there is a concern about people, it makes sense to make healthcare a right. Otherwise, poor and working people are more likely to die than rich people... which is a huge barrier to having a society that works for all people.

The only reason why the powers that be don't consider healthcare as a right is because it would disrupt their special interests and ability to siphon a bit of that money from the private insurance industry and Big Pharma in general.

 

[Roy]

When you have the capacity to do Absolute Good, and your actions aren't in accordance with that capacity; You are failing as a Spiritual being.

[trenton]

@Leo Gura That is an interesting counterintuitive point I noticed.  My grandma told me about how she was nearly thrown out of a hospital because she did not have health insurance and she could have died so I would not be typing this right now.

The hospitals charge a lot of money which a capitalist would think that this makes money.  Actually it loses money if people who could otherwise pay more money throughout their lives would not die because they could not afford health care.

The same counterintuitive point applies to getting the better of people in world trade, imperialism, and on an individual level criminal activity.  According to seven habits of highly effective people, a win lose is ultimately a lose lose because nobody wants business with you anymore, which in the long run is bad for you even though you won.  Meanwhile, someone I know, trying to survive, participated in a lot of criminal activity and he is still stuck pawning, plotting to screw others over, and people are stealing from him for all the same reasons.

If society is a collective survival strategy, then eventually we are screwing ourselves over by undermining this survival mechanism.  Can you find examples of selfishness not backfiring and actually being helpful?  One idea is selfishness teaching us not to be selfish.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, trenton said:

Can you find examples of selfishness not backfiring and actually being helpful?  One idea is selfishness teaching us not to be selfish.

Selfishness always works in the short-term but crumbles in the long-term because Truth is selfless and the self is false.

It's the same reason life always ends in death. Death is Truth so it must always win out.

[SOUL]

Quote

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It's in the US constitution..... allowing a corporation, group or individual to deny health care to someone because of belief, race, gender, nation of origin, creed or even profit violates their rights as a citizen. So to ensure the general welfare it is the government's duty and imperative to establish and protect the citizen's rights and to promote the general welfare of all it's citizens.... that includes but isn't limited to health care, clean water, safe food, safe housing, education, a safe working environment, living wage, fair market practices, preserving a clean environment, a stable currency and others all of which contributes to their general welfare.

Edited February 28, 2020 by SOUL

[Raphael]

Thanks you for answers guys.

11 hours ago, Apparition of Jack said:

I like to look at it from Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. It just makes sense that any collective effort - in this case government - should aim to meet everyone's most basic needs first (food, water, shelter, health) so they can function and grow as much as possible, and making healthcare a legal right is a powerful tool to achieve that.

?

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Look at society like a family. If your mother got cancer, you would never leave her alone to die because she couldn't pay $2,000 month for her medication while you were swimming in cash and buying million dollar vacation homes and sports cars. You would not charge your mother $70,000 for treatment.

It's just that simple.

60,000+ people die each year in America from lack of ability to pay for healthcare. Does that make any sense? Purely from a financial POV if these people didn't die think of how much tax money they would bring in over their lifetimes. It's idiotic for the government to let them die. The government is actually losing money on each death. Each person can bring in at least $5k to $10k in tax revenue each year. Not to mention the compassion angle.

I'm emotionally very detached from people and even from my family, so many times I have trouble understanding why people gets so emotional. I also have trouble to understand why people get attached to me. But of course they are nuances here and I'm sure that if it was a life/death situation for my mom I would be affected. I was affected affected even if it was not highly when my grandpa died three years ago.

From what I can see health care is related to survival, which is the base for the universe to continue its evolution.

If the government is thinking of health care as a way to get more money, then that's really selfish.

5 hours ago, Emerald said:

And if there is a concern about people, it makes sense to make healthcare a right. Otherwise, poor and working people are more likely to die than rich people... which is a huge barrier to having a society that works for all people.

?

What do you guys think of the argument that people should be responsible for their health, eat healthy, and exercise regularly to avoid diseases?

I personally think it's a valid point, but that at the same time we can still get sick and that a certain amount of people will still get rare to cure diseases and that's when free health care have its place.

[Leo Gura]

56 minutes ago, Raphael said:

I'm emotionally very detached from people and even from my family, so many times I have trouble understanding why people gets so emotional. I also have trouble to understand why people get attached to me. But of course they are nuances here and I'm sure that if it was a life/death situation for my mom I would be affected. I was affected affected even if it was not highly when my grandpa died three years ago.

As you do more of this work you will become more compassionate with regards to the needless suffering of others.

You need a heart awakening to really start to care about people. Most peoples' hearts are so closed and all they care about is themselves. But you cannot create a well-functioning and healthy community that way.

Imagine a family in which no one cared about the others. It would be a toxic disaster.

[Raphael]

42 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

As you do more of this work you will become more compassionate with regards to the needless suffering of others.

You need a heart awakening to really start to care about people. Most peoples' hearts are so closed and all they care about is themselves. But you cannot create a well-functioning and healthy community that way.

Yeah, I intuitively feel that progression even if I'm still lacking compassion. I'm currently mostly at stage orange with some little shadows of red/blue, so I guess it will happen naturally when I will evolve more into green.

45 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Imagine a family in which no one cared about the others. It would be a toxic disaster.

I personally experienced that with my dad's attitude, so it makes sense to me. Thanks for your time Leo.

[Raphael]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Imagine a family in which no one cared about the others. It would be a toxic disaster.

I just realized that the same principle is also clearly visible in very low developed countries both both the government and the people are very selfish and it results in a total mess.

[Leo Gura]

28 minutes ago, Raphael said:

I just realized that the same principle is also clearly visible in very low developed countries both both the government and the people are very selfish and it results in a total mess.

Yup! You got it.

That's devilry.

[LfcCharlie4]

@Leo Gura This is so true, once you realize love is all there is, and The Self is literally everything, why would you want millions to needlessly suffer when they don't have to. 

I really hope Bernie wins, our progressive candidate got fucked by a nationalist movement and we will be under this government for 10 years I reckon, and the Labour party now are doubting being that progressive and want to go back to more Centrist-Left which would be a shame. 

Bernie could really spearhead a movement, but are we ready for that level of development? Will their be too much resistance that pulls us further back down the spiral after 4-8 years? 

Also, how can people (regular people not like interested in personal growth) actually start to grow beyond selfishness, as the education system is so flawed, it's almost dumb luck stumbling into Non-Duality and Personal Development work, the majority couldn't give a toss. 

[Apparition of Jack]

@LfcCharlie4 If Bernie wins the presidency, then the answer will be yes, we are ready. There’s never a perfect time for social progress to happen, there’s never a moment when all the naysayers can come to the table and say “ok, we’ve heard you, at first we didn’t agree but you’ve convinced us so now we’re on board.” There are people who are so stubborn that they will go ahead and reject Medicare for All up until the day they die. But they are an extreme minority, and most people - even many people who initially opposed these ideas - will get on board once the ego backlash has come and gone and society has integrated this new, more holistic way of being. 
 

In 10 to 20 years from now, even Republicans will accept the need for universal healthcare, cheap education, and so on. That’s the whole point of evolution. It’s always happening, even if there are hurdles along the way.