Hayek’s NHS argument

From Boganboy:

BIG: I’d argue that we’re compelled already to pay for universal health care for all others in our country. Indeed the real fuckwits insist we pay for the health care of the whole world.

Thus I feel that we can reasonably demand that those receiving the care should make sure it is at minimum cost to us. Hence the case for compulsory vaccination and indeed seat belts.

That is what Hayek’s argument about the NHS was. Why it will lead to serfdom. Because we do pay for the health care of others then we get to tell others what to do.

Simples.

11 thoughts on “Hayek’s NHS argument”

  1. Hang on a bit.
    Because we do pay for the health care of others then we get to tell others what to do.
    It’s not the same “we” though, is it?

  2. Spot on, Tim. A socialist healthcare system leads to authoritarian public health policies in order to try to contain healthcare costs. And all those bladders of lard cracking pavements as they waddle about are a tax burden on the rest of us under a socialist healthcare system. If we moved to an insurance-based healthcare system, the nannying would largely cease.

  3. Haven’t heard anything on the singapore model recently. Is there any think tank bods being asked by select committees to put
    their proposals for implementing that?

  4. If we moved to an insurance-based healthcare system, the nannying would largely cease.

    I think we should move to an insurance-based healthcare system, but I’m under no illusion that the nannying would even slow down let alone stop.

  5. BiW

    “…I’m under no illusion that the nannying would even slow down let alone stop.”

    Why? What would be the incentive to continue?

  6. @Theo

    For goodness sake, are you actually that naive?

    I find it interesting that Singapore was poster child for insurance based systems yet they’re also a supreme nanny state, taking things far past UK levels – perhaps a consequence of their avowedly technocratic government style. I had some younger Singaporean friends who had been subjected to the ultranannyish “Trim And Fit” programme at school: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2004/10/17/a-fight-against-fat-in-singapore/336f9315-6cb3-4f07-b2c1-4d8b9e3619f9/


    Democracy Dies in Darkness
    Get one year for £20
    Sign In
    Newsletters & alerts
    Gift subscriptions
    Contact us
    Help desk

    A Fight Against Fat in Singapore
    By Gillian WongOctober 17, 2004
    The fight against obesity starts young in Singapore. Fat children are separated from their classmates and ordered to do more exercising until they lose weight.

    Ten-year-old Mona Siow has been trying to lose weight for the last four years.

    Instead of joining her friends at the canteen during recess every day, the fourth-grader and other chubby students gather in the hall and follow a teacher’s instructions to jump-rope, run and dribble a basketball.

    “I feel sad to be overweight when I look at people and they’re so skinny and can wear so many clothes,” said Siow…

    Some of my friends had to do public weigh-ins, got to sit at a “fat table” in lessons and were regularly forced to stand up and perform exercises in front of the rest of the class. Harsh.

  7. Why? What would be the incentive to continue?

    Because the bansturbators enjoy it. They get their kicks from denying other people the little pleasures in life.

    They are the modern day Temperance Movement. And they aren’t going to give up the ear of the politicians without a serious fight.

  8. Bloke in North Dorset

    Because the bansturbators enjoy it. They get their kicks from denying other people the little pleasures in life.

    They are the modern day Temperance Movement. And they aren’t going to give up the ear of the politicians without a serious fight.

    As CS Lewis noted many years ago:

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

  9. What always pisses me off about this is that these people *insist* on paying – insist, at the point of a gun that you can’t not let them pay – and then turn around and insist that their paying means you have to do what they tell you.

    And they always forget that you paid too – this stuff is funded by forced communal payments. Its your money in there as well. But for some reason *you* don’t get a say in how its spent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *