Mind-Bending Irony and Justice Incarnate

[Ephirith]

This goes out to all you Libertarians, Ron Paul, and Paul Ryan supporters.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I find this to be some of the most cringe-inducing irony I've ever seen in my entire life. Joshua, a loyal acolyte in the cult of Ayn Rand and libertarianism, donates money to an organization that champions personal responsibility and the virtue of selfishness. They despise universal healthcare. They despise altruism.

But then, oh fuck! Joshua contracted lymphoma and he can't pay his medical expenses. I'm battling an overwhelming urge to say:

"Damn Joshua if you wanted medical treatment you should have worked harder and made more money, or gotten yourself a job with better benefits."

I just can't bring myself to do it through facebook. Nonetheless it brings me great joy knowing this scum is withering away with cancer and he can't afford medical treatment.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Also, note that if he were a citizen of Canada or almost any other developed country this wouldn't even be an issue.

He would have paid roughly the same, maybe slightly more, in taxes, but instead of his taxes going toward flying helicopters around Afghanistan it would have gone toward his healthcare treatments.

[Alawen]

I don't think I can find schadenfraude in someone getting cancer, but the irony is thick in this incident. I used to think I understood libertarians but now I don't see anything but greed and willful ignorance. Without a strong state, large populations devolve to anarchy.

[Maddox]

Libertarians don't say that you can't get cancer nor do they say that medical bills are too expensive. They stump for personal responsibility and charity in these instances. Basically, exactly what is going on. What you don't see in this situation is a group of people expecting their healthcare costs to be paid for by the government or trying to force others to be responsible for his problems. Personal responsibility and charity are tenants of Libertarianism.

Also, universal healthcare in the US isn't going to drive costs down nor is it going to do anything to actually improve care in the US for most people. The whole point against obamacare is that there are better ways to reform the health care system that involves driving costs down and improving the quality of care, not just making the incredibly efficient government responsible for it.

Lastly, your a tool for finding 'great joy' in someone else's cancer diagnosis.

[Maddox]

Also, it’s incredibly ignorant to think the WHO statistics of life expectancy is directly relative to quality of the overall healthcare system. Go look at the correlation of a countries wealth (per capita GDP) to overall life expectancy and you will see much more interesting tie. Once you do that and you also realize that people die for reasons outside of healthcare go look at the life expectancy numbers that take out violent crime, accidents, etc. that don’t actually engage the healthcare system and let me know where the US is on that chart. (you might want to check the top of the list.)

If you really want to get a feel for the quality of care for a healthcare system you should look at numbers / statistics that actually focus on healthcare involvement. Things like cancer survival rates when the healthcare system is involved would be good metrics. Also, Infant Mortality Rate could be a good measure, but at least compare apples to apples. There are numerous ways that different countries report IMR and what actually constitutes a live birth. In the US it is showing any signs of life at birth, in some countries it’s surviving past the first 24 hours which is past when ~40% of infant deaths happen. I’m not saying the US is number 1, just compare relative measurements.

I’m not arguing that the US healthcare system isn’t expensive and/or inefficient, but people aren’t necessarily hankering to get into Canada instead of the US to get quality healthcare.

Also, something to note, freedom is rarely easy or convenient, it is founded on personal responsibility. Just because it isn’t easy doesn’t mean we should have the government run our lives for us.

[Lucky]

The whole argument of libertarianism on health care is that charity > state forcing you to do something.

Therefore there is no irony, if it was in fact irony still need a p99 ruling.

[Lucky]

Also, note that if he were a citizen of Canada or almost any other developed country this wouldn't even be an issue.

If he was in Canada he'd be in a lottery for his death panel

[Tasslehofp99]

Who cares? We all have to die someday.

[Barkingturtle]

I don't think it's ever really the right thing to get a boner because someone has cancer, no matter how repugnant their politics may seem.

I mean, not unless you're gonna fuck that cancer, and show it who's Boss. Which frankly seems a less naive means of treating one's cancer than relying upon the charity of libertarians.

[arcanebrain]

You know, thank our holy lord and savior Jesus Christ that America is not a socialist country. It would just be terrible if we were all well-off, happy, and lived long productive lives! I much prefer our current situation where the poor can go fuck themselves and the rich just get richer by shitting on everyone below them and making fistfuls of cash by engaging in ridiculous money voodoo.

[Ephirith]

Originally Posted by Maddox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Personal responsibility and charity are tenants of Libertarianism.

Libertarianism and objectivism are different shades of the same color. This is a worldview that is obsessed with rational 'self-interest'. Charity is NOT a tenant of libertarianism, it is a footnote that they only allow because it's not managed by the government. Say what you will about libertarianism, it's the bastard hellspawn son of Ayn Rand-- who spent her entire life harping on handouts only to get lung cancer and cash checks from the government to pay for her treatments.

Originally Posted by Maddox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

not just making the incredibly efficient government responsible for it.

If the government is so terrible then why not work on making it more efficient instead of just scrapping the whole thing?

We have the government because we need to do things the free market can't do effectively on its own. No matter what, the free market can never be proactive, only reactive. It doesn't act with vision or calculation, it's little more than an anarchic force of nature.

Removing direction from society and leaving it at the whim of human emotions and natural forces just doesn't work, anyone who thinks so just wants to live out some redneck survival fantasy, or thinks the government is why they are a retail manager instead of a CEO. Libertarians are invariably poorly educated atheist adolescents who would be republican except fuck christianity and intellectual non-conformity is just so kvlt.

Originally Posted by Maddox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

doesn’t mean we should have the government run our lives for us.

This little piece of garbage rhetoric right here makes me so buttfrustrated I literally just developed a hemorrhoid, like I heard an audible "Pop" from my ass as it sprang forth. Not even going to bother.