• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Free healthcare

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Absolutely. Profit in that case is stockpiled to fund services of public interest.
Or not; it all depends on how the company in question is set up.

But I think we can agree that this is not the case for most European public health insurance schemes, which, as far as I know, are not-for-profit throughout.
 

Azrael Antilla

Active Member
What money.... exactly?
If you spend beyond yours means you will either need to:

1) create money out of thin air, or,
2) borrow it from someone else, or,
3) seize it from someone else.

There is a limit to how much you can get from any of those alternatives. Unregulated spending will never be satisfied by any of those. There must be a budget. We can discuss about how big it should be, but there must be one.
Of course there has to be a budget. An irresponsible government that spends more than it collects is not going to stay in office long, no matter how well meaning that government is. However, universal healthcare should be one of those areas of public spending that is properly ring fenced and protected from the effects of economic downturns . In my opinion.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Of course there has to be a budget. An irresponsible government that spends more than it collects is not going to stay in office long, no matter how well meaning that government is. However, universal healthcare should be one of those areas of public spending that is properly ring fenced and protected from the effects of economic downturns . In my opinion.

Great.
In what way should it be protected?
 

Azrael Antilla

Active Member
Great.
In what way should it be protected?
Exclusion from any budget cuts to public spending (ring fencing). As in my view the provision of public health care, is a critical service. That ought never have it's budget cut, regardless of extenuating economic circumstances. So. In short. Protected by primary legislation or even with constitutional law it self. Depending on the mode of government, be it parliamentary democracy or otherwise.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Exclusion from any budget cuts to public spending (ring fencing). As in my view the provision of public health care, is a critical service. That ought never have it's budget cut, regardless of extenuating economic circumstances. So. In short. Protected by primary legislation or even with constitutional law it self. Depending on the mode of government, be it parliamentary democracy or otherwise.

Hmmm...
What if politicians in power decided to rise it to unsustainable numbers? Would the following politicians need to keep up with those numbers?
 

Azrael Antilla

Active Member
Hmmm...
What if politicians in power decided to rise it to unsustainable numbers? Would the following politicians need to keep up with those numbers?
Good point. Obviously any reasonable increases in spending would be congruent to mutable parameters like inflation and demographic changes. So when forming the legislation that forbids cuts. We include determinable objective terms of reasonableness to qualify or validate a level of spending. If a level of spending goes above the reasonable. Then the spending could be cut. Or perhaps, not increased, which amounts to the same fiscal outcome. Given inflation. Etc.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Hmmm...
What if politicians in power decided to rise it to unsustainable numbers? Would the following politicians need to keep up with those numbers?
Do you know what Seigniorage Banking is?
The State is the only one who is legitimized to print money and there can be no limitation.
Whoever prints that money, other than the State , that entity/ person is called falsifier.
 
Last edited:

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Great.
In what way should it be protected?
Over here, social security contributions are an entirely separate item from "regular" government taxes, and are exclusively marked for their respective insurance systems (specifically, healthcare, unemployment, pensions, and accident insurance).

I think that's a pretty smart way to do it, since in order to mess with it, a government would need to specifically pass a law with a majority, and couldn't just sneakily divert money behind the scenes via budgetary shenanigans.
 
Top