Conversation
Notices
-
@se7en this must be the one of the worst arguments against socialized healthcare I know.
-
@lambadalambda @se7en "State healthcare is bad because someone needed an unconventional, specialized treatment for a terminal disease"
Friday, 17-Feb-17 08:19:21 UTC from web-
@lambadalambda @se7en
What @nerthos said. It is actually a valid argument.-
@dtluna @se7en @nerthos When you think the reductio ad absurdum is a valid argument, you might have taken the wrong turn somewhere.
-
@lambadalambda @dtluna @se7en The thing here is that state medicine rarely covers high complexity specialized interventions, because the hardware and personnel for those are expensive and not easy to find, and most of the population will never have a need of it. State medicine usually covers common health issues that most of the population is likely to suffer of, like wounds and accidents, common diseases, and general body maintenance to lessen the chance of chronical conditions later on. If you get sick with something that few clinics are able to treat, you might end up needing to pay for it yourself or travel somewhere else if there's no such clinic locally. It makes no sense for the state to cover it since those cases are rare, and mean huge amounts of money for one single patient.
Friday, 17-Feb-17 09:09:19 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
