Perception of the Universal Healthcare System by the Left Political Essay

Perception of the Universal health care System by the Left Political Movement - Essay ExampleAs intellectually unmindful as any plan for this type of legislative takeover of the medical industry may be, it so far attracts widespread adherence from those who know only to ask questions of why while strategically evading how. This is our present train to examine the political and philosophical premises of the Lefts motion toward a organization of socialized medicine which (a) integrates contrast with the government, (b) takes control away from doctors, and (c), in the end, takes control away from patients. In addition to presenting anecdotal evidence, I shall go bad the emptiness of the Lefts film that such a universal health care system is a moral imperious, or a product of social justice. Thus, finally, I will show that although the present system is not utopian, it is not a complete disaster, as utopias tend to be when transforms from just mere blather to reality.Our present s ystem of healthcare, that of a mixed state, is already partially socialized. However, the principle of an individuals office to choose his healthcare coverage and costs, although buried under heaps of government regulation and red tape, still remains somewhere. socialize medicine, in effect, proposes to remove the last pieces of capitalism from which the nascent American healthcare system was born. ... What the Left similarly carefully ignores is the fact that, very often, poor health is the result of poor decision-making of individuals-particularly those individuals who demand the most from healthcare. interact medicine, instead of fixing poor decisions, fixes only the results of these decisions, and so serves more like a band-aid for a plaza which requires more invasive measures. The oppositions claim is that the American healthcare system is unequal and social justice requires a change to socialized medicine that while the rich prevail awesome healthcare, the poor get hand le like dirt.The skilful-hand(a) response to such a claim is to question how it may be back up by an argument. One may claim that this philosophy is supported by some natural right theory that people have a right to life. Nevertheless, a right to healthcare is not a proper application of the right to life. If one does not have money to pay for a dainty house or medical services, and the government gives him a right to those things, where does the money come from Other citizens is the proper answer in fact, it is the only answer. Most Americans would agree that the right to free speech does not bear on that my right requires others to give me a microphone and an auditorium, but few (especially on the Left) would be willing to claim that the right to healthcare is somehow less important than the right to free speech-and no American would only if give me an auditorium and a microphone simply on the basis that I have a right to free speech. At best, the right to healthcare is a wi sh, insofar as I wish everyone could have a decent house and medical services.