JimC wrote:Hyperbole apart, I would suggest that health care is in a special category, one that civilised societies should prioritise...
Special-er than food? Really? Food and water is prior to healthcare on the hierarchy of needs, isn't it?
How would you structure an argument in favor of the motion: Healthcare is a special category which must be collectivized, whereas food need not be?
I would point out that there are plenty of people making plenty of arguments that poor people do not have access to the same quality (nutrition-wise) food as rich people. And, certainly, a poor person's overall budget consists of a much higher percentage of necessary food - that is, as a percentage of total household expenses, food represents a greater proportion of the poor person's budget than the rich person's budget. As the rich person increases their budget, it's often with an unnecessary luxury increase in food expenditures with more expensive foods that may be more fun and tasty to eat, but otherwise unnecessary.
So, equal prices for food to everyone is clearly a bigger burden on the poorer folks than the rich. Also, the same is true of fuel. Home heating, and auto fuel costs the same for the poorer among us as it does for the rich. These are absolute necessities, aren't they? Or, do people have a "right" to health care, but not a right food and fuel?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar