Mark Cuban: Amend U.S. Constitution to Make Healthcare a Right

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/2017/03/19/mark-cuban-amend-u-s-constitution-to-make-healthcare-a-right/

“I think healthcare should be a right. If there’s a legitimate way to modify the Constitution, I literally think there should be an amendment to the Constitution for healthcare for chronic illnesses and serious injury. We all play the genetic lottery,” he said.

[txradioguy]

Mark should stick to what he knows...and health care isn't one of those areas.

[jmyrlefuller]

Mark should stick to what he knows...and health care isn't one of those areas.

  Cuban once said, getting insanely rich in a short time happens because you're lucky. It doesn't mean that you're suddenly an expert.

[Frank Cannon]

I wonder if he would mind if we did a 90% one time wealth tax to pay for this.

[ABX]

So what if doctors decided they will say no and not service this 'right'?  Will they be forced to perform services by the government if it is Constitutionally required?

Or more realistically, what if there are areas doctors don't want to service but there are citizens who have the 'right'?  What if you have a severe doctor shortage in middle of nowhere Alaska? If people have the right to their service, will doctors be forced to move there and service those people?

[CSM]

Dear moron billionaire, 

The Constitution doesn't confer rights to the people from the government.  It is an instrument to limit the federal government's ability to meddle with our natural liberties.

Sincerely,

Just your average American

[Jazzhead]

  Cuban once said, getting insanely rich in a short time happens because you're lucky. It doesn't mean that you're suddenly an expert.

And getting insanely sick in a short time happens because you're unlucky.   It can happen to any of us, and when it does it can cause financial ruin.   I agree with Cuban -  insurance for chronic illnesses and serious injury should be available to all.   And if it's financed by general tax revenues,  then it's paid for by all,  and does away with the current distortions that equate affordable health insurance with the good fortune of working for a large employer.

Such a change helps the poor,  and helps employers be more competitive with their overseas counterparts whose employees get health insurance through general taxation,  not their employer's bottom line.   

In a global economy,  we can no longer afford to be outliers,  placing the burden for  health insurance for catastrophic health expenses on the backs of employers, and leaving millions with no viable option to bankruptcy and ruin.       

[Jazzhead]

Dear moron billionaire, 

The Constitution doesn't confer rights to the people from the government.  It is an instrument to limit the federal government's ability to meddle with our natural liberties.

Sincerely,

Just your average American

 If you get sick, you can die.  Is that the "natural liberty" you're so keen to preserve? 

Average Americans can no longer tolerate our system where SHEER LUCK determines whether a catastrophic illness brings bankruptcy and ruin.   

[Axeslinger]

@AbaraXas

Further...
A Right is something that a person has IRRESPECTIVE of anyone or anything else.  By its nature, if it requires someone to do something for you, it is NOT a right.
I have the right to speak freely.
I have the right to practice whatever religion I choose.
I have the right to defend myself.
I have the right to use those same weapons to secure my liberty
etc.


What this fool is advocating, as you have said, is that I have the "right" to force someone else to perform healthcare...or at a minimum to force someone else to PAY for my healthcare.

The only healthcare I have a RIGHT to is that healthcare that I would perform upon myself.

[dfwgator]

I say attending NBA games should be a Right.

[dfwgator]

Even if what you say is a "good idea", that still doesn't make it a "Right."

[Axeslinger]

If you get sick, you can die.  Is that the "natural liberty" you're so keen to preserve? 

Average Americans can no longer tolerate our system where SHEER LUCK determines whether a catastrophic illness brings bankruptcy and ruin.

@Jazzhead
You are absolutely free to make that argument and to convince enough of your fellow citizens that you are correct.

However, you are not free to twist words into the meanings you choose.  What you are advocating for is NOT a right...it is just another government run entitlement, which will likely turn, like every other one...into just another ponzi scheme.

Rights are really pretty finite.  Don't diminish the ones we have to further your own advocacy.

It ain't pretty and it sure as hell ain't "fair", but sometimes sh!t happens...and sometimes it even happens to good people.  It is NOT the governments role to ensure it doesn't.  And it sure as hell isn't a right.

[The_Reader_David]

But there is a natural right to health care, just as there are natural rights to keep and bear arms, to speak one's mind freely, to publish writings on most any subject, to worship and follow the dictates of one's religiously informed conscience.

None of these natural rights create any obligation on the part of others to provide us with the means of exercising them.  Freedom of the press does not create a right to subsidized paper, ink and printing presses or to compel publishers to print and distribute one's writings; the right to keep and bear arms does not mean that others should be taxed to buy each of us an AR-15, ammo and range time or that firearms manufacturers be compelled to provide us with their products at government mandated prices; nor does the non-enumerated right to health care create a right to have anyone pay physicians on one's behalf, or to compel physicians to provide health care outside of contracts willingly entered into.

Most government regulations of health insurance and health care actually represent infringements of the natural right to health care.

What Cuban means is not a right to health care, but a "right" to compel others to provide us with the product of their labors to subsidize the exercise of that right.  This "right" is nothing of the sort, but a form of tyranny exercised on the plea of benefiting the citizenry (as all modern forms of tyranny now are).

[Jazzhead]

Even if what you say is a "good idea", that still doesn't make it a "Right."

I didn't say it was a "right", and it's not necessary to change the Constitution to make it a "right".   What we need is a populist President and Congress than can see the merit in the idea,  and the abject unfairness and arbitrariness of the current system. 

 Old age income security is paid for by taxes imposed on all employers/employees.   Security against financial ruin due to ill health should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.   

[andy58-in-nh]

If you get sick, you can die.  Is that the "natural liberty" you're so keen to preserve? 

Average Americans can no longer tolerate our system where SHEER LUCK determines whether a catastrophic illness brings bankruptcy and ruin.

Here are the three most important words you'll ever hear: Life Isn't Fair.

Either you accept that, or you don't. People that accept it are, on balance, happier and better adjusted than those that do not.

[TomSea]

I say attending NBA games should be a Right.

 

[corbe]

   Taking Constitutional advice from someone who can't even get his team into the NBA playoffs, where practically every team gets in, is foolish, at best.

[INVAR]

@Jazzhead
You are absolutely free to make that argument and to convince enough of your fellow citizens that you are correct.

However, you are not free to twist words into the meanings you choose.  What you are advocating for is NOT a right...it is just another government run entitlement, which will likely turn, like every other one...into just another ponzi scheme.

Rights are really pretty finite.  Don't diminish the ones we have to further your own advocacy.

It ain't pretty and it sure as hell ain't "fair", but sometimes sh!t happens...and sometimes it even happens to good people.  It is NOT the governments role to ensure it doesn't.  And it sure as hell isn't a right.

You're trying to reason with a Communist. 

Don't bother.

His arguments are simply fodder for all of us to practice our combat skills against the insanity of Leftism. 

You will no more convince him of the inalienable truth than you would convince Obama or the Clinton's of it.

He's not interested in being persuaded, but rather to preach Socialism/Communism/Leninism/Maoism on this board wrapped within the thin veneer of reason and compassion in a vain attempt to portray us all as intolerant, racist, unfeeling bigots.

[INVAR]

Security against financial ruin due to ill health should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.   

Security against homelessness should likewise be provided by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against hunger and bad nutrition should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lack of fashionable clothing should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lack of personal transportation should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against job loss should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against emotional anguish should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lack of personal internet and cable access to vital information should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lack of cell phone should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lethargy due to historical affronts to ancestry should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against white privilege should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.         



That's where Jazzhead's mindset takes us.  To full-blown Soviet/Stalinist Godless Communism - where the State is god and people like Jazzhead are their priests.

[driftdiver]

I didn't say it was a "right", and it's not necessary to change the Constitution to make it a "right".   What we need is a populist President and Congress than can see the merit in the idea,  and the abject unfairness and arbitrariness of the current system. 

 Old age income security is paid for by taxes imposed on all employers/employees.   Security against financial ruin due to ill health should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.   

@Jazzhead

Why should the govt step in and provide healthcare to everyone?   Name one place where that works well.   UK's system is going bankrupt and the wealthy have supplemental.  Canada is rationing care to avoid bankruptcy.   

What about letting people save their money themselves.   Sure have a safety net but that should be the exception and not the rule.   Why should we spend tax dollars to help someone stay in their cushy mansion using tax dollars?

Why not reduce regulation, reduce interference and allow the free market to provide a solution.    The real answer is to have a healthy labor market so people are working and getting health benefits through their employer.   Or perhaps being able to buy a reasonable plan at a reasonable price.   

Reduce healthcare costs by reducing regulation and legal reform and all of the above is easier.

[driftdiver]

Security against homelessness should likewise be provided by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against hunger and bad nutrition should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lack of fashionable clothing should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lack of personal transportation should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against job loss should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against emotional anguish should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lack of personal internet and cable access to vital information should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lack of cell phone should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against lethargy due to historical affronts to ancestry should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.

Security against white privilege should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.         



That's where Jazzhead's mindset takes us.  To full-blown Soviet/Stalinist Godless Communism - where the State is god and people like Jazzhead are their priests.

Sounds good comrade!!!!

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead

Why should the govt step in and provide healthcare to everyone?   Name one place where that works well.   UK's system is going bankrupt and the wealthy have supplemental.  Canada is rationing care to avoid bankruptcy.   

What about letting people save their money themselves.   Sure have a safety net but that should be the exception and not the rule.   Why should we spend tax dollars to help someone stay in their cushy mansion using tax dollars?

Why not reduce regulation, reduce interference and allow the free market to provide a solution.    The real answer is to have a healthy labor market so people are working and getting health benefits through their employer.   Or perhaps being able to buy a reasonable plan at a reasonable price.   

Reduce healthcare costs by reducing regulation and legal reform and all of the above is easier.

I like what I think Mark Cuban is advocating -  provide by means of broad-based taxes basic protections for all citizens against financial ruin with respect to medical catastrophe -  serious injury and chronic illness.   Perhaps just simple taxpayer-funded "stop loss" insurance that would pick up when a citizen's total medical expenses exceed a threshold amount.

Then couple that with a robust, competitive private insurance marketplace for common medical expenses,  that would be neither controlled nor mandated by government.   That seems to me to be the best of both worlds - competition and innovation in the market for insurance covering most medical expenses,  with security against catastrophic less provided by government, just as Social Security provides income security for the aged.   

[Cyber Liberty]

I didn't say it was a "right", and it's not necessary to change the Constitution to make it a "right".   What we need is a populist President and Congress than can see the merit in the idea,  and the abject unfairness and arbitrariness of the current system. 

 Old age income security is paid for by taxes imposed on all employers/employees.   Security against financial ruin due to ill health should likewise be provided for by means of broad-based taxes.   

What you have taught us rubes on TBR is you don't even need a President or Congress to enact your superior vision, just a Court because decisions made by a Court are very wise and inviolate.  That politics stuff is messy, just get a wise Judge and all will be well. 

Your approach to these things is remarkable consistent...except for educating your particular children. In that case you should be allowed to sacrifice to provide them a better education than other children get.  Rubes don't need that, they just need to shut up and knuckle under to their betters.

[driftdiver]

I like what I think Mark Cuban is advocating -  provide by means of broad-based taxes basic protections for all citizens against financial ruin with respect to medical catastrophe -  serious injury and chronic illness.   Perhaps just simple taxpayer-funded "stop loss" insurance that would pick up when a citizen's total medical expenses exceed a threshold amount.

Then couple that with a robust, competitive private insurance marketplace for common medical expenses,  that would be neither controlled nor mandated by government.   That seems to me to be the best of both worlds - competition and innovation in the market for insurance covering most medical expenses,  with security against catastrophic less provided by government, just as Social Security provides income security for the aged.

@Jazzhead

Sounds a lot like what Social Security was meant to do, but wait that system is bankrupt.

hmmmmm seems to be a trend

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I like what I think Mark Cuban is advocating -  provide by means of broad-based taxes basic protections for all citizens against financial ruin with respect to medical catastrophe -  serious injury and chronic illness.   Perhaps just simple taxpayer-funded "stop loss" insurance that would pick up when a citizen's total medical expenses exceed a threshold amount.

Then couple that with a robust, competitive private insurance marketplace for common medical expenses,  that would be neither controlled nor mandated by government.   That seems to me to be the best of both worlds - competition and innovation in the market for insurance covering most medical expenses,  with security against catastrophic less provided by government, just as Social Security provides income security for the aged.

I read an article in which the credit bureaus were going to de-emphasize medical debt for other types of debt.

So if you're poor, don't have any substantial assets, then that will act as a sort of safety net for medical issues. If you don't have an assets, why pay medical bills at all if it won't hurt your credit?