What do you tell a socialist who insists that free market health care would abandon “the elderly, the infirm, diabetics, smokers, drinkers, pregnant women, the psychologically ill, those with congenital defects”?
Basically they say the free market in health would boil down to social darwinism, so government involvement is required. How do you begin to reason with such a person?
Don’t. Run.
The USA does not have a free market healthcare system right now.
The AMA licensing cartel restricts the supply of doctors. This drives up the price of medical care.
The problem with the US healthcare system is not “too much free market”. The problem is “not enough free market”.
Last I heard about those groups, the governments of the world were trying to euthanize/sterilize them. The Nazi’s just got the ball rolling.
Remind them of eugenics?
Does the market provide clothes for the elderly, why then would it not provide healthcare? Their first problem is the confuse healthcare with health insurance(which has been forced on us by government)
Sometimes, that’s impossible.
He should take a look at France and ask the elderly there how they like the system. Provided they’re alive, they could impart to him some useful information about socialised healthcare and “darwinism”…
Already did just that (plus some other points and minus the specific about AMA, good one), but I don’t think it’s gonna work. 
You know, it’s funny but they actually also did accuse me of “advocating a program of eugenics”. 
I wasn’t even going to grace that insult with a response, but then again, the fact that governments are the only ones who have ever actually tried this… maybe I should.
Ask him why this logic doesn’t apply to food? Or shoes?
It seems that such items are more basic then medical care.
If his knee jerk reaction is “Food is not as expensive”, then you just tell him: BINGO!!!
Tell him that, under socialism, everyone has free healthcare, but that hospitals don’t have medicine.
I’m trying to think like a dummy (socialist) here, and I think they’ll say something to the effect that “advanced technology is why health care has gotten expensive”.
I think another angle a socialist would take would be something like - groups with special needs simply couldn’t afford the extensive amount of medical care they need because they often have less (or no) income at all. How are these people cared for in free market healthcare?
They were thrown off the side of cliffs, those silly parasites…
There is no “advanced technology” in India that is making shoes still too expensive for everyone. Or what “advanced technology” is making the food process so expensive in Africa that half the population is still starving to death.
Look, I agree with LibertyStudent. If this is a typical Socialist and he’ll start blaming Capitalism, then RUN!
Or make him/her run…
“Advanced technology” is why most things have become so inexpensive.
Tell him in a sardonic tone " Why would a big greedy corporate capitalist pig let these people die when he can make a profit off of them."
Tell him to look up moral hazard in a dictionary, he might also do well to understand the entrepreneurs like profit, not death
“Well, now I know you have diabeties I won’t sell you any drugs except cynacide”.
I tell them that’s what socialist medicine always does, since it rations healthcare for the fit and eliminates the sick. Further, I ask them to prove it. Whereupon they whine, scream, and wail.
Does anyone have any links to an article or website (with some credibility) supporting the claim that those with the greatest medical need (who are least able to pay for it) are also neglected in a “universal” health system? I don’t think any of them would take someone’s word on such a thing without some kind of reference, at least.
LS’s advice probably is the best, these people are completely insane. But still, I can’t help but beat up on them sometimes.