Or else...
Friday, June 19, 2009
Debating Single Payer: The Rules
Rule # 1 for arguing against single payer health care: you can't raise arguments that have already been answered multiple times in multiple places. You have to show why the quality of your evidence against SPHC is better than proponents of SPHC. Proponents have done their work and, as my math teacher used to say, shown their work. Show yours. Make the debate deeper. Or shut up and stop repeating unverifiable stories of waiting, lower quality, etc., none of which would compare to DYING due to a lack of health insurance in the United States. I am serious about the argumentative rules--abide by them.
Or else...
Or else...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Amen, brother.
The strongest rejoinder to the litany of false claims is that death/profound illness outweighs, as in: saving an uncovered person from a lifetime of illness or death o/w some fat cat's right to an unnecessary MRI in 20 minutes.
But as you know, most of the specific lies can be flipped directly.
Rationing inevitable: wealth or need?
Waiting lines? My partner is still waiting after 4 mos to get her prescriptions reviewed - not an exam, just 'are they working well enough'? 4 months.
Lower quality? Look at the standard QoL measures: lifespan, infant mortality, rates of chronic illness.
The most frustrating thing is that anyone who studies the evidence knows all this, which means the arguments are really about care vs. profit, but that doesn't sell quite as well as scare stories.
Post a Comment