Health Care and Rights

“It’s our right!” 

If there ever was a national rallying cry - like the national bird or anthem- this might be it.  But do we always use it in the proper context?  Chris Wood an economic and political analyst with Casey Research LLC has these potentially clarifying words to say about rights:

“Health care reform has been in the news a lot recently, and I feel compelled to mention that nobody has touched on what I think is the fundamental issue at hand – the issue of rights.

Although health care and health insurance are often used interchangeably, there is an important difference between the two. Whereas “health care” consists of the actual goods and services necessary for medical care (i.e., consumer goods), “health insurance” is one means of affording such care. The two are closely related but distinct. If health care is a consumer good, like shoes, does it make sense for the president to base his reform plan on a belief, “that every American has the right to affordable, comprehensive, and portable health coverage”? In a word – no. Proponents of the Austrian School of Economics would recognize this statement as a logical and economic fallacy.

Here’s why.

Throughout time, human rights included the right not to be murdered, not to be raped, not to be robbed, not to be kidnapped, etc. These are the classical “negative” rights. A negative right is a right not to be subjected to an action of another human being or group of people – including the state – in the form of violence or coercion. 

many politicians today invoke so-called “positive rights” – the right to such things as food, clothing, shelter, and medical care. And whether the advocates actually believe it or not is a non-issue – in this universe, it is empirically impossible to simultaneously apply a positive right to all people. 

That’s because: 

The only way to apply a positive right to a consumer good (like a right to medical care) is by violating the negative rights of certain persons. In this instance, taxation is the only way that government can apply a positive right to an economic good. In other words – to steal resources from productive persons to pay for benefits to others. Taxes, by definition, involve people being subjected to a coercive action of the state – explicitly protected by negative rights. This coercive action violates innocent individuals’ rights to life, liberty, etc., by not allowing them to use their earnings to support their own lives.”