Do US citizens have the right to affordiable health care and prescription drug coverage or is this a?

Question

priviledge, since we must spend billions on foregion aide and wars abroad?

its not about who pays but a yes or no issue, do we have the right to affordiable health care! As far as being a dem fault then why did the drug companies and the ama give 85% of its contributions to the republican party in the recent election?

Answer 1

Yes we deserve affordiable health care and drug coverage. As you say we send billions of dollars to other countries and leave us here back home to dig up enough money for a $75 pill. Bush stated that he would send billions over to Iraq to aid everyone there to get the health care they need....huh??? What about us.
We bring people over here from other countries to have surgeries they cannot get in their countries and they get it for free because we feel sorry for them...huh??? What about the people holding bake sales to help a child in the neighborhood get a heart transplant.
I could go on an on....rant rant.

Answer 2

No, there is no such RIGHT. A democratic view of the situation suggests that health care and medicines should however be affordable to all. I do think people are in business to make money, not give their products away for free. With that said I also think there are many times the term "it's just business" is used to throw a blanket over some pretty unscrupulous practices that are morally wrong. Such as the outsourcing of jobs. IBM is laying off Americans while hiring foreigners because it is cheaper for them to do so. This applies to many corporations in America. Blaming unions for killing the country while CEO's are pulling millions out of the companies they work for each and every year. Exxon-Mobil recording record profits while we pay three bucks for a gallon of gasoline. When Henry Ford starting making the model T it cost eight hundred and some dollars. By the time Ford finished making that car it was down to two hundred and some dollars. He wanted it to be affordable for everyone, yet he still made a fortune. Business today does not work that way. It's all about a very few making vast sums of money, screw the workers and you if you can't afford the product. The health care field and drug companies are no different, it's just business. Pretty soon we'll be fighting the illegals for a job to flip burgers. If you don't like it call customer service and try understanding the person on the other end of the phone. Know what I mean?

Answer 3

They gave the contributions because the Democrats want to make advertising drugs illegal.

In 1992 GOP Sen Dave Durenberger (later found guilty of hiding income) brought to congress a bill that would federally fund state run programs that filled in health care gaps. The Sen, knowing the waste in federal bureaucracies, felt the states were best to run their own plans. The system was implemented in many states, Minnesota being one. MN Care provides health coverage for anyone making 19999.99 a year and less for about $75 (single) to $125(family) a month. If this program would get federal funding it could be increased to all those making up to $29,999.99. The Democrats killed the bill.

Answer 4

Here are the rights of all Americans for health care:

You have the right to obtain insurance that will pay a small percent of your costs on health care and drugs but you still must pay the majority of costs and premiums

You have the right to have emergency care regardless of your insurance or lack there of.But whether or not you have insurance, you are getting a bill and if you don't pay your credit will go bye-bye and you may be sued.

You have the right to health care if your are poor or disabled or elderly.But the system will make it extremely hard for you to apply, maintain, and gain coverage and the system will occasionally be changed in order to drop your coverage and make it more confusing for you to have any health care.

For these reasons, you have the ultimate right to be without health care and life will be easier financially unless you get sick or have an accident.And a great many Americans don't have health care because of the rights I have mentioned.

Answer 5

I would contend that it is neither a right or a privilege. It would better be classified as a basic need. As a conservative this is one thing that bugs the heck out of me. Rights are inborn and granted at birth such as Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.. Right infer that it is the obligation of the government to uphold the stated right., needs are another thing altogether we all have basic needs such as nourishment, Companionship, health care.. By simply replacing the term need with the term right progressives seek to empower government to practice social engineering. This can be taken further do you have a "right" to a fair wage you see where this goes don't you. My point is that using the term rights in the place of needs can have unintended consequences. I'll use your example If we have a right to health care then it is the governments obligation to fulfill this right despite what the electorate might decide. legislation conferring a private model for health care would be illeagal since it was dreamed a basic right. Now Replace the basic need or nourishment with the right to food now do you see the dangers. While inferring rights can be appealing such as in health care it imparts a governmental obligation which you may or may not want to honor. While it is a just a noble government that provides for the basic need implying that needs are rights is dangerous

Answer 6

No we have no right to such crazy things like that. People in Cuba or in Western Europe have such rights. But these are terrible countries. America is the best!
This situation does not depend on our foreign budget. It has been this way for decades. The health industry and the pharmaceutical industry have good lobbies and grease up our politicians ( who are there to help the people not themselves) and do not have the balls to help and give the people such normal rights.
We also have the right of free speech and the right to run for
public office. Does someone have the balls to do that?

Answer 7

Foriegn aid should be minimized. The politicians have the ability to lower costs, but that would mean taking money from some other programs. And that means less government if you start taking away programs. They always want more responsibilities that way they can keep taxing more and still not do their jobs.

Answer 8

I should be allowed to make you and your neighbors pay for my health care. While I am taking your money, I think you should give me enough to pay for a house roughly as nice as the one you live in. I'd also like a nice new car, maybe a convertible, since so many of you neighbors of mine have one. You also seem to be eating at nicer restaurants than I can afford, so it'd be great if you gave me an unlimited gift card for "The Gilded Truffle".

I am sick to death of the Entitlement mentality developing here in the US. There is no where in the world where there are no poor people who have less than the middle class or the wealthy. At some point, we have to take responsibility for our own position in life. If that means getting more education, working overtime, changing jobs in order to afford what you need, then so be it.

I am NOT saying that there are not some people who cannot work due to catastrophic injury or illness, and those People deserve public help. The money to pay for such help has to come from the people whose work EARNED it, so we ought to be really vigilant about who we sign up.

Answer 9

Everyone has a right to health care and everyone who CAN should have a job - but they don't. There are TOO MANY freeloaders in this country and we have to work on getting people TO WORK if they can. Then THEY can earn the money to buy their pills.

Answer 10

No. They have a right to seek it and to be give equal care for the same money, but a right to have it? No. Rights are spelled out in the constitution and I do not believe it says that we all have to pay for everyone health care.