I fully support that argument that our health can be very much out of our control and that takes away some liberty, therefore, having health care as a way of controlling the liberty is especially beneficial to the society. However, there are many other fields of our lives that are impacted by powers we cannot control, such as the place we were born, political situation in the country, economical situation, socioeconomic status, natural disasters, etc., which makes is unclear to me why health care stands out from the point of view of the Commission. Unfortunately, the essay does not give a better explanation of it, neither does the Commission, only stating that:
“Although some people might argue that the same is true with respect to socioeconomic status, and the purchasing power it enables, the Commission believed that the case was stronger with respect to health.” ( P.4)
I would like to see if there was a better explanation of this part of the argument, moreover, it is possible it would make the Ronald Sandler’s counterargument, which I present bellow, weaker.
…show more content…
The author is making a connection on which every argument in this essay is based on, which is health care is tied to health, which in turn is tied to justice. However, Ronald Sandler is questioning how special that tie is and whether it should be given separate treatment on the grounds of that extraordinary link. The argument the author is using coincides with not complete explanation that I pointed out above in the Commission’s statement about comparing all other factors, which contribute to health and/or its