The Right to Healthcare?

I found the clipping below (for lack of a better word) in my drafts from awhile back. I remember I was looking up something political and came across this post in the comments of whatever the article was that I happened upon (I don't know about you, but I do often enjoy skimming the comments of posts and articles from time to time, to see people's reactions and sometimes even learn something about things the article failed to mention or purposely left out). 

I found this one to be quite interesting though and good "food for thought" on the matter of healthcare.

On an article back in November about Ron Paul, user TheSmallAxe posted this comment:

"No one has a right to health care.  No one has a right to a house.  No one has a right to a car.  No one has a right to food.  No one has a right to clothing.  No one has a right to a cell phone.  No one has a right to a computer. 

No one has a "right" to any good or service that is made or provided by someone else.  Claiming a right to a good or service is saying that whomever makes or provides it MUST give it to you, regardless of whether you do something for them in return or not.  Thus, a right to health care assumes that a doctor is your slave, and that all the various people who work to produce the medicine you need are likewise your slaves.   A right to a house assumes that the builder is your slave, and that the people who produce the 2x4s, nails, pipes, electrical wires, etc. are all your slaves.  A right to a car assumes that everyone who worked to make each of its parts, and everyone who assembled the parts into a an operable machine are all your slaves.  You cannot enter a restaurant and demand a free meal, because the cook is not required to do your bidding; nor are the people who grew the vegetables; nor are the people who raised the animals; nor are the people who transported the food from the farms to the store room in the back.  You cannot enter a department store and demand a shirt or a pair of pants without paying, because the retailer purchased said shirt and pants from the manufacturer, so they belong to him.  The owner of the store did not steal the clothes from the textile mill; he exchanged something of value for them.  Likewise, the owner of the mill did not steal the cotton from the farmer; he purchased it.  Therefore, when you enter the store, and you wish to leave with the shirt or pants, you must first give something of value to the shopkeep.  The same applies to cell phones, and computers, and anything else.  If you want something that another human being had to work to produce, you must give him something in exchange. 

A right is something that cannot be justly taken from you by another person or group of persons.  You have the natural right to your life, your liberty, and your property.  Concurrent with these is the right to defend them against anyone who would seek to violate them.  You own your body, the vessel in which you live.  This is the most essential axiom to understand.  Any and all true rights flow from this source.  You do not own your neighbor's body.  He does not own yours.  The ownership is absolutely exclusive.  You may not harm or destroy that which does not belong to you.  Assault and murder are violations of your right to your body, without which your life on Earth is not possible.  Now, we all know that our flesh and bones are not self-sustaining.  Without food and water, we will die.  Without clothing, our bodies can suffer injury from exposure to the elements.  Without shelter, we risk attack from predators, loss or damage to our belongings, and again, detrimental effects of cold, wind, and rain.  Food, water, clothing, shelter - we must obtain these things if we are to survive for any length of time.  None of them, however, just jumps into our laps.  Humans must work to secure the things our bodies require.  We grow and hunt food, we search for water, we fashion garments, and we find or build shelters.  When a person mixes his labor with useful things he finds in the natural world, the result becomes his property.  Your right to your property is one and the same as your right to your own labor.  Since you must survive by working for what you need, you have the right to keep the fruits of your labor, i.e. the things that you acquire through work.  The right to one's property is essential to the right to one's life.  If this were not so, another person could take from you the things you need to maintain the proper functioning of your body, and thereby deprive you of your life.  The right to liberty is also necessary to your survival.  Liberty is the ability to do as you please with your time, your body, and your property, so long as you do not interfere with the same rights of others.  Without this freedom to pursue your own interests, and spend your time as you see fit, your ability to do those things that sustain and protect your body could be erased.  If another person can force you to do what they want you to do instead of doing the tasks that you deem necessary, that person is basically stealing from you the time that you would otherwise be using productively for your own betterment. 

When you leftist/progressivist/socialist/communist types claim a right to health care, you are actually claiming the "right" to violate the liberty of others.  You are saying that all the people who work to produce medicines and provide analysis of your ailments MUST give you their time.  You are saying that they MUST give you the fruits of their labor, while you give them nothing in return.  There are scant few things you could ever say that could be more selfish and despicable than this.  Now, you can try to argue that you aren't really advocating a situation in which doctors should not be compensated, since what you want is free health INSURANCE, but it's the same thing.  People who are employed in the medical field must be paid for their efforts one way or the other, the same as everyone else.  The money to pay them has to come from somewhere - it does not magically appear from thin air (unless you're talking about the central banking racket known as the Federal Reserve System, but that's another issue entirely).  Well, we can just get the money from government, right?  Hopefully if you have read this far, you should recognize how idiotically naive that is, but in case you still don't get it, let me spell it out for you.  The government is the opposite of the economy.  In the latter, wealth is CREATED through the productivity of all the individuals in the workforce.  In the former (government), wealth is CONSUMED.  Some of the wealth that is consumed is used for valid purposes such as defense against external enemies, law enforcement, justice systems, and various infrastructure projects that are used by all in common.  However, much of what government consumes is used for things that fall well outside the scope of its proper authority.  Either way, every dollar that government spends, it must first collect from taxpayers, who must first produce it in the course of their economic activity.  Thus, the money to pay for health care does not originate from government, but from individuals working to make a living in the private economy.  So, instead of saying that doctors must give you the fruits of their labor in exchange for nothing from you, you are saying that EVERYONE who pays taxes must give you some of what they earned without receiving anything in return.  This THEFT is a violation of the natural human right to property.  It should also be viewed as a violation of liberty, since it allows one person to dictate to the other what he must do with his time (given that money is merely a medium that allows people to easily exchange what is produced with their time/labor).  You do not have the right to command that another human being has to take time and labor that belongs to him and him only, and spend it for your benefit.  That is SLAVERY.  It may work with genies in fairy tales, but in the real world, your wish is not my command.  A need on your part does not constitute a requirement on my part to fulfill it. 

Socialism is the enslavement of every man to his neighbor."

What do you think?

Personally, I think it's a pretty interesting viewpoint, for sure!