PT5.S3.Q19 - Privatized health care versus Medicare for All

Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
edited December 2020 in Logical Reasoning 2249 karma

Could someone explain exactly what L is doing in response to S's argument? I thought both were interpreting access in different ways, for S it was about access to high tech care and for L it was about access to basic healthcare. I just feel that there is some sort of disjoint between the two arguments; does L even address S's argument at all?

Comments

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐
    8491 karma

    That's it. L is basically saying access isn't only about high tech treatments.

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    A has extremely confusing language. Is there an easier way to state this?
    S would...disagree? Because the patients in his argument are getting rejected due to long wait lines and rationing of care, not because they can't afford the treatment and L would argue it's worse that people are denied care because they are low-income (aka cannot afford even basic care)

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐
    8491 karma

    A. is saying L is attacking the relevancy of access to high tech treatments with regard to which system is better.

    If this were the case L wouldn't just be arguing that denial of basic care is worse, but that rationing of high tech treatments should not even be a consideration.

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    hm. I don't know. I just have a hard time seeing that because L doesn't mention HT treatments at all.

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐
    8491 karma

    @"ashley.tien" said:
    hm. I don't know. I just have a hard time seeing that because L doesn't mention HT treatments at all.

    No, you're right. That's why A is wrong... L is not doing that. L offers no opinion of the relevancy of what S is saying.

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    Oh oops, I was looking at 18 so sorry

Sign In or Register to comment.