Health insurance problems:
Funding issue
Whether the universal healthcare law is justified in the social context.
Is it fair, which is the basis of the health care?
If it is, whether it is just?
My argument is that the law is fair at certain point as means, but unjust as the ends.
It is fair since it provides universal health insurance.
It is not just since it provided no solution to the funding.
————–
Sen’s model or design of the universal healthcare model is that:
Just law= efficiency + single-payer system
Efficiency=cost/benefit + equity of system
———————-
The content of the law is try to provide the legal frame work to every one to obey, but it does not provide the means to allow it to carry out in the long-run. Just like in the Hedge-fund, some greedy fund managers rip off the legal system and chasing super-quick money only in the short term. It does not only bad for the economy but also sad for the countries. Everything in the legal field is designed for the purpose of the economy but there is also something else need to consider as well. The law, which is biding everyone living within its jurisdiction, has to be in the content of fair, which leads to justice in the long run.
Sen argues that comparative approach to justice would concentrate on ranking alternative societal arrangements rather than focusing exclusively on the identification of a fully just society.
To be sure, Rawls need not agree that the world is really unjust if he remains fully attached to the belief that the concept of justice dos not apply at the global level.