Thread: Should the Government Provide Free Universal Health Care for All Americans?

Today i'll be discussing the topic of Free Universal Health Care.

There's no such thing as "free" universal health care, but it would be much cheaper than what we are currently doing even with the indigent added in. That 30% 'administrative mark-up' that the private insurers are hitting us with buys a helluva lot of medical care.

but letting the inept American bureaucracy take care of health coverage, sounds scary to me.

Don't be frightened. Just ask those people that have been on Medicare for decades if they would like to convert to private coverage. You'll get your answer.

It comes down to what is the role of goverment and what is the nature of society.

The role of any government is to do exactly what it's people want it to do. Corporations aren't people, but the government is supposed to be.

Seriously, why can't we first fix the cost.

Give me until lunchtime tomorrow and I'll fix the physician and pharmaceutical costs. It will take me another day to fix hospital costs.

I voted no. Not because I think universal healthcare is wrong, but because I think we will have to pay for it regardless. Taxes would ultimately have to be increased to cover this cost. I don't believe all the right wing rhetoric about inefficiency and so forth. I think the main reason the very wealthy oppose this is because they are invested in the current healthcare system, if it was made a public right they would lose money.

Private doctors would have the right to operate outside the federally funded system for patients who have the means to pay for them. In other words if you are well off you will still be able to get fast and triage free service for a price. But you will be forced to pay a higher tax rate to pay for the clinics that serve the public, which will be seen by the upper class as unfair.

As an aside I pose the problem of for profit healthcare competing with provided healthcare. There are many forces working to keep healthcare a profitable venture. Do you think they will take publicly available healthcare lying down? I expect this would be a war in washington that would go on for years if not decades.

A rational conclusion is reached if view it this way.

Intelligent goverment using public funds for the good of the people.

But the problem the usa always has is a mixture of fear and paranoia with their own goverment infrastruture and weird loyalty to corperations who they know will never treat them fairly.

Originally Posted by TBryant

I voted no. Not because I think universal healthcare is wrong, but because I think we will have to pay for it regardless. Taxes would ultimately have to be increased to cover this cost. I don't believe all the right wing rhetoric about inefficiency and so forth. I think the main reason the very wealthy oppose this is because they are invested in the current healthcare system, if it was made a public right they would lose money.

Private doctors would have the right to operate outside the federally funded system for patients who have the means to pay for them. In other words if you are well off you will still be able to get fast and triage free service for a price. But you will be forced to pay a higher tax rate to pay for the clinics that serve the public, which will be seen by the upper class as unfair.

As an aside I pose the problem of for profit healthcare competing with provided healthcare. There are many forces working to keep healthcare a profitable venture. Do you think they will take publicly available healthcare lying down? I expect this would be a war in washington that would go on for years if not decades.

But you pay for your healthcare now. Even if you get it via your employer, your employer is paying for it and taking that money from the same pot that you would have otherwise have recieved. But, at the same time it costs your employer time and effort to administer. So its bad for buisness as well. You are of course also paying for things like advertising and administration of claims - that was $15 billion recently for two heath care companies. Thats a lot of care that you could have had but will never get.

Of course it is the politicians and wealthy that oppose it because they have shares in the system.

It hits buisness in many other ways and is atrocious for the economy. The current system means that many people do not get care when they first become ill and at the time it would have been easy to treat because they cant afford it. Then if they become so sick they have to have treatment it is now a much more expensive option and is likely to result in lost time from work and a drain on the employer.

Many countries in the world offer healthcare and none have ever abondoned it because it is a far cheaper and more efficient way of ensuring the nations health.

It is better even for those who even have insurance. Do you think that a corporation has your health at its centre? Of course not. In fact it is arguable that it would be immoral for it to. The main function of a company is to make money. That is what it is legaly and morraly obliged to do. The result is that a lot of people think they have fantastic private health care. Not so many do when they get diagnosed with a long term illness that is going to be expensive to treat and find their insururer now pulling out.

Any society that has a goverment that does not provide has to have a hard think about what it thinks it goverment should be doing.

Originally Posted by Clint Torres

The Medical industry of the USA will not stand for anyone messing with their growing profits. That is why the medical industry pays billions each year to lobby the government to allow free market medical industry.

If you're talking specifically about the insurance industry, then I agree. My dad is a doctor and he 100% supports socialized medicine. The only reason medical care costs so much is because of the insurance companies. The system worked just fine until the insurance companies bullied the docs into doing business with them back in the 80's, and it's been spiraling out of control since. And the claim by some people that socialized medicine would cut down on doctor's salaries isn't true either. Here in Hawaii, specifically Kauai, the local system is largely socialized, yet my dad makes a HELL of a lot more here than he did working for a private practice back on the mainland.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "Obamacare" just a mandate that people sign up for medicaid if they do not have or can't afford private insurance? If so, then what's the big deal? Why all the whoopla? Not exactly a huge victory, or a defeat. LOL

I agree with those who believe private insurance is just a money making scam. Government insurance would be a non-profit insurance funded by taxes and would cost much less than private insurance while giving more coverage. This is fact. I have no issues paying taxes for healthcare. I would also like to see more preventative education and less catering toward unnecessary prescription medication. I believe having universal healthcare would give incentive for the government to fund more of these programs. I realize that the government is not perfect, but we do have the ability to change it through representation. I am not sure why people are so worried about the government who's interests are supposed to be for and by the people when large corporations who are in charge of so much in this country are only interested in the wallets of a few.

Israel has health care coverage that is provided by USA taxpayers. If our tax dollars can be used to provide for others, then these same funds can be used to benefit Americans as well. It is only fair.