If you get STDs, it is your own fault

Nope, still unintelligible. I'm struggling to find your point,

I went back over and cleared that post up. Are you willing to clear the blatant idiocy out of your many posts?

Nope, still unintelligible. I'm struggling to find your point,

I think he's saying that the freedom guaranteed by a free market in health care is not worth the deaths and suffering that would be caused because capitalist corporations would charge high prices, leaving the poor to die from lack of treatment or starvation due to spending all their money on treatment.

I do not endorse those views in any way, for the record.

He claims that paying for your own healthcare will give you more freedom. Assuming that he's not saying you should save up a massive fund to pay for really expensive healthcare procedures on your own, this generally means private insurance. In private insurance, the insurers do not want to give you money for your claims, so it is in their best interests to make it as hard for you to get treatment as possible. You are dealing with a bureaucracy of a different kind, and are therefore no more free than someone with national health care.

He claims that paying for your own healthcare will give you more freedom. Assuming that he's not saying you should save up a massive fund to pay for really expensive healthcare procedures on your own, this generally means private insurance. In private insurance, the insurers do not want to give you money for your claims, so it is in their best interests to make it as hard for you to get treatment as possible. You are dealing with a bureaucracy of a different kind, and are therefore no more free than someone with national health care.

Well at least it is efficient, which cannot be claimed for the NHS.

Hold on just a second. You're definitely more free. There is no coercion involved in the decision to pay. That's freedom.

Hold on just a second. You're definitely more free. There is no coercion involved in the decision to pay. That's freedom. Further, an open market means consumer choice in terms of care providers and insurance providers. Now, you can argue that the freedom granted isn't worth it compared to the loss of freedom under a system of socialised medicine, but it's definitely more free. Freedom isn't always fun, but that's not really the point of it.

Well at least it is efficient, which cannot be claimed for the NHS.

In a private system they can refuse to give you insurance (or jack your premiums so high that there's no point) if you have preexisting conditions, so yeah, it might be a bit more efficient after they kick all the people out. Kinda like how Ancient Greek hospitals had a lower rate of patient deaths than ours, since they turned away those too ill to treat and kicked out anyone who looked like they were not going to make it.

Not in a competitive market, please read some basic economic theory.

Can everyone really afford that to make that decision? Are they given a choice? Does that constitute freedom?

Not in a competitive market, please read some basic economic theory.

Please be considerate and debate at a level of the rest of us, or explain your point.

He's doing A level. It's not his fault he's probably better at it than the rest of you.

Personally, apart from the exception of rape, it's people's own fault, and should be treated as such. They should pay for their own treatment cure.

He's doing A level. It's not his fault he's probably better at it than the rest of you.

Not in a competitive market, please read some basic economic theory.