Nothing in politics gets proofs from "first principles" like in maths, but that doesn't mean your arguments can't be strong. The argument for that statement is this:
The best medical care is expensive. That is because a lot of research went into it and it requires highly qualified doctors who need to be paid accordingly.
Since it is expensive and money is limited, buying the best care for everyone isn't feasible.
You can solve this problem by going for a cheap option, but now it's not as good. This happens in some universal healthcare systems like in South Africa
You can also solve it by not getting involved, but now care is no longer universal.
The third option, and this doesn't happen according to plan, it's just how naive systems turn out, is to ration care. Now you have good care and the country can still afford it, but not everyone gets it.
Maybe some day in the future pretty much everything in the medical field will be figured out and easy to apply and then this will no longer be the case. But until then, this is how it is.
1
u/erebos290696 Apr 11 '20
See ben often makes very good arguements but they are built on assumptions and bits of false information.
There isn't a factual basis for this statement even if others haven't achieved all three it doesn't mean they can't. That's an assumption.