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

Discussion in 'Health Care' started by Mitchell243, Jan 12, 2012.

?

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

  1. Yes

    40.6%
  2. No

    59.4%
  1. Mitchell243

    Mitchell243 Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hey Guys its Jarrod, Today i'll be discussing the topic of Free Universal Health Care. Lately i've been hearing alot on this topic. I realize that like anything else there are Pros and Cons that would come along with National Health Care. Why I think having Universal Health Care would be a good thing are as follows: In recent years health care has become increasingly unaffordable for businesses and individuals alike and with the cost of living increasing daily, some people are being forced to choose between buying Health Insurance or feeding their family. In my opinion people shouldn't be foreced to either pay outragous prices for Health Insurance or having to suffer when your sick because you can't afford the prices these agencies are charging these days. I think you should have the right to diagnosis and treatment if you become ill. Your income shouldn't factor into weather or not you recieve treatment, just because your poor doesn't mean you should suffer. When the topic of Free Universal Health Care was proposed to the government, they responded by saying, "The Budget isnt big enough to cover the expenses we have now". Since 2001 the United States has spent almost $1.3 trillion dollars on stabilizing the Middle East. What I would like to know is, Why is our Government spending that much money making sure the people of Iraq and Afganistan don't kill each other, when there are people right here in the United States that are suffering because they can't afford to go see a doctor when they get sick". I get that they had to hunt down Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein but, if they would of worried about just finding them and getting out of there; instead of helping to stablize their goverment and establish peace, it wouldn't have taken near as long or costed so much money. Also while they were over there, they killed countless United States citizens to stop the killing over there. I think our Government should stop worrying about other country's problems and focus more on whats going on here at home. In my opinion Free Universal Health Care would be one of the best things for this counrty. You've heard what I think now its up to you to decide. With that being said, I leave you to ponder this question, "Should the Government Provide Free Universal Health Care for All Americans?"

    Feel Free to Comment, Thanks for Reading, and God Bless America!
     
  2. verystormy

    verystormy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    444
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    28
    To have a system that puts the health care in the hands of private insurance companies is a bit like asking an arms trader to be a peace broker. The two are totally incompatible. When you get sick a private company wants you to either get better very quickly or to die very quickly. Not a good position to be in.

    Then there are those who get sick with a long disease and find that their health company pulls the plug on future claims.

    Then, finaly there are the huge amount of people that do not have any insurance
     
  3. Makedde

    Makedde New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    66,181
    Likes Received:
    345
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Its funny that our government can supply UHC to 22 million people, but the US governement (which is richer than ours) cannot afford to supply UHC to its people.
     
    ryanm34 and (deleted member) like this.
  4. savage-republican

    savage-republican Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,134
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Sure why not and lets give everyone free food, and housing, and diapers, and tissues for their tears, and where does it end. While I can see a need for some reform in America' health care industry, the government can not provide it for free. Well I guess it could be free if we just make all health care workers slaves and not pay them!

    Nothing is free in this world, someone has to pay for services, you just want someone else to pay for that which you do not want to pay for. Its been said here before, a lot of poor people smoke, a pack of cigarettes costs about 5-6 dollars in America, times that by 7 packs a week, 4 weeks a month thats about 150 dollars a month. Or how about a case of beer, 25 dollars times 4 weeks is 100 dollars a month. Basic health insurance can be had for that price in America. Maybe people need to realize how much money they spend on needless things, and realize they could afford what would be beneficial to them.

    I understand that some people can not afford insurance they dont buy cigarettes or alcohol, but for those there are government programs ever heard of medicaid. Its all about whats important, most people take for granted their health until they get sick then they cry poverty, maybe you should realize that taking care of yourself is your responsibility.
     
  5. verystormy

    verystormy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    444
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Nobody says it is free. In the UK you pay National Insurance which is an income tax. In Australia, it comes out of your tax. It isnt free. Also, consider this. The insurers earn billions of dollars of profits based on what you pay for insurance, one insurer alone recently spent $9 billion on advertising! Now, imagine that they did not have to make a profit, imagine that they didnt have to spend all that on advertising. Imagine how much cheaper your insurance would be. That is the case of UHC.

    It has nothing to do with cigerettes or alchol or anything else. The USA has a private system, yet the highest rates of obesity related problems in the world. Also, interestingly it is one of the highest countries in the world for womens mortality in child bearth. Actually beaten by several African counties. Maybe we should ask the UN to send field hospitals!
     
  6. savage-republican

    savage-republican Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,134
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ok then whose fault is it that America has high rates of obesity? Is it the fault of private insurance, is that 9 billion in advertising asking people to go out and over eat? The problem with America is that it is full of people who have no desire to take care of themselves. It is about cigarettes and alcohol and the consumption of fatty sugary unhealthy foods, and all the other stupid behavior. Does private insurance cause diabetes? what about heart disease and lung cancers? Really, most of the issues with Americas health has to do with unhealthy lifestyles.

    Besides, I acknowledge that our system is not perfect, but letting the inept American bureaucracy take care of health coverage, sounds scary to me. The American government is inept in everything it tries to do and this includes the military.
     
  7. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,922
    Likes Received:
    435
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My question is, what are Americans going to do when a UHC, because society pays in, gives society the moral right to interfere in those unhealthy lifestyles?

    What are Americans going to say when nanny Government starts taxing everything it considers unhealthy, or outright takes it away, because the liberal politicians feel they have the moral duty to protect society's "investment" in your health? Suddenly your body is no longer yours, but part of the social collective and Universal health care puts an unfair burden of responsibility on you to live a lifestyle society, through Government, deems you must.



    Not just scary for incompetence, but scary because America is full of busybody freakazoids who love to control people en masse through political movements. They think the radical Christian Social Cons are the only ones with a controlling streak? No, Liberals can be just as bad if not worse.

    They will demand exceedingly high taxes on everything they deem "unhealthy" and boss the rest of us around through hitting our hip pocket, and liberals love to use taxation as a means of social change. They never outlaw anything, they just price out of the range of the average person and suddenly only rich people get privileges that once were available to all Americans before busybodies got involved.

    This is how you end up with situations like in Europe where only the rich get to drive cars regularly, where only the rich get to own single family homes outside of the city, etc.
     
  8. cenydd

    cenydd Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    11,381
    Likes Received:
    190
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Those things aren't actually remotely true, by the way, certainly in the UK - just thought I'd mention it! Almost everyone has (and regularly uses) a car, and all but the poorest of families generally have more than one (i.e. most adults have their own car, rather than sharing one with family). Most families of lower-middle income or higher own their own single occupancy homes, and most poorer fmilies live in single occupancy rented accomodation.
     
    ryanm34 and (deleted member) like this.
  9. cenydd

    cenydd Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    11,381
    Likes Received:
    190
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Taxing unhealthy things at a higher level to contribute towards the higher costs of dealing with the healthcare issues of those who choose to live in an healthy way seems fair enough to me, and the 'banning' thing is pretty much a myth - it doesn't actually happen in practise.

    There is another point here, though:
    There is a cultural issue in the US, that of the sheer level of 'consumerism at all costs', that may prevent genuine UHC from being possible there (certainly in terms of public opinion). That's what makes the whole thing a matter for the US people to decide for themselves, of course.

    If the attachment to total consumerism (without the unpleasantness of hearing regularly that the lifestyle they are living might not be good for them, and without having to pay some higher tax levels on some of the least healthy things to pay towards the costs of healthcare to deal with the consequences) is so unbreakable that people prepared to cut of their noses to spite their faces, in terms of living entirely unhealthy lives without care or cost, while suffering under a health care system that has some very serious flaws in coverage terms which may ultimately effect those who live such unhealthy lifestyles the hardest (pre-existing conditions being a particular one), then UHC is just not going to happen.

    As with in all these discussions, I'm going to make it clear that it isn't my place to tell the US what to decide, whatever my opinions, but I will also point out that the important thing is to have an open and honset debate, without the silly scare stories and blatant untruths about what the real picture is in those countries that already have some form of UHC system well embedded.

    The key question, though, obviously isn't really about 'What is the best way of doing things?', but 'What are Americans going to say...?'. They have to decide, and that is fair enough, but they should have the real options, with all of their real advantages and disadvantages, placed before them in an honest and straightforward manner.
     
  10. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,922
    Likes Received:
    435
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I never did understand the cultural disconnect over taxation and Government interference between Europe and the USA.

    I mean, one of the primary casus bellis of the Revolutionary War was punitive taxation:

    These taxes were designed specifically to punish certain behaviors through hitting the hip pocket and force obedience.

    It is, IMO, evil to force social change. It is, IMO, wholly tyrannical to use taxation as a means of encouraging "positive" behaviors. Merely on principle! A principle passed down over 223 years of American history.

    Taxation is a necessary evil that should be kept to a minimum and never, ever used to force compliance or change social behavior!
     
  11. cenydd

    cenydd Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    11,381
    Likes Received:
    190
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Taxation WITHOUT REPRESENTATION was the key issue, rather than just taxation itself - the fact that America was a 'colony', and not represented in parliament, even though its people paid taxes to the UK. The new tax was the trigger that set it off, but not itself the key issue.

    I'd agree that it should never be 'punitive' (never be used to 'price something out of existance'), but I don't have a problem used to encourage (Note: 'encourage', NOT 'enforce') behavioural adjustments in certain curcumstances, as long as the additional taxation raised is genuinely required for meeting the costs created by those behaviours, as it is with things like smoking and alcohol. They create costs (under UHC, although drinking also has other social costs in terms of policing and so on), and the costs should be met by those who use them, so it makes sense to me - the fact that it encourages people to use them less (and create less problems for themselves and society as a result) is really just a side bonus to the main purpose - people paying for what they do.

    It could be said that the private insurance system does the same through premium adjustments, and to an extent it does. Where it falls down for me, though, is the fact that it can genuinely leave people 'out in the cold' from effectively healthcare, even when they have modified their behaviours to stop doing so much of what was causing them problems, via the 'pre-existing condition' clauses.
     
    ryanm34 and (deleted member) like this.
  12. verystormy

    verystormy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    444
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Firstly, the USA is a long way in front of Europe on the banning of things. New York, the home of the free market was the first city in the world to ban smoking. It is also now talking about bringing in some of the harshest alchol laws in the world.
    The USA in general has highly controlling laws on the sale of alchol and it is heavily taxed. You can die for your country in the US before you can have a drink.
    The unhealthy foods will never be banned in the USA, simply because being one of the most corrupt goverments in the world, it wouldnt want to lose all the $$$ that Macas "donates" to politicians.
    Second, i can only assume from your comments that you have never been to Europe. Most pensioners in the Europe have cars. As for housing, i think someone from a country that has some of the biggest slum housing in the world needs to be careful about what they say. Being from Europe, pretty much everyone i know owned there own house by the age of 23. Have a wander down to Florida and see how many of the houses there are second homes to Europeans. Not rich ones, just every day guys like plumbers and builders.
    If there is a place on the planet that show inequality between rich and non rich it is the USA. Republicans want that gap to widen. They want to stop tax increases on the rich even though most pay less tax than low wage earners. Donald Trump admitted that he pays less tax than his cleaners. But that is the republican way. After all the poor arent the ones giving big donations to the politicians (read bribes).
     
    ryanm34 and (deleted member) like this.
  13. Oakchair

    Oakchair Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2012
    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The sole reason that 15% of Americans don’t have health care even though health care cost more than double then other countries is because America has a privatized health insurance sector. Anyone saying different is clueless. The VA delivers vets 30% higher quality care at 40% of the cost, same with Medicare
     
  14. lizarddust

    lizarddust Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,350
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Not only that, America spends 700 billion on the military yearly, but can't even set up a UHC for the people the military is supposed to protect.
     
  15. mupp3tbab3h

    mupp3tbab3h New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think that there needs to be some type of reform, no doubt, and I don't know much about the "quality of life" details/results of many of the choices, but when looking at it using a moral compass, the idea irks me.

    Nobody is entitled to anything, the government doesn't owe people "free" health insurance, or whatever people like to call it. People don't want the government to decide what they eat, but it's okay for the government to wipe their butt? Besides, nothing is free. There is always someone paying for it, and it is not their "moral duty" to do so.
     
  16. verystormy

    verystormy Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    444
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    28
    It comes down to what is the role of goverment and what is the nature of society. I would have thought a basic principle of goverment is to carry out actions for the benefit of its population. One of the fundamental benefits any population can have is access to health care. The current system operates on a lottery. If you are lucky enough to find an employer that either pays you enough that you can afford private care or they offer you it as part of your salary, then your fine. But is you arent lucky enough then you die.

    For any society to function there has to be a element of each part of it wanting to help or look after others. Thats not socialism, its a fact. Its why the armed forces exist and stops anarchy. Healthcare has to be part of that. Anybody who thinks that the lowest paid part of the population has no right to health care is clearly a sociopath.

    Next, if the US wants to be taken seriously as a leading developed country, then it needs to get its health care beyond that of the developing world. At present, the childbirth mortality rate in the US is about the worst of any developed nation. There are African nations that are better.

    Lastly, and this is the bit that makes me laugh. The USA parades itself as a place of high economic understanding, yet it refuses, for purely political reasons to accept that it is cheaper to have UHC. The current system allows for billions of dollars that US people pay in to insurance companies to create a profit and a lot of that profit goes out of the country to the multinational hedge funds that own most of shares.

    You are paying for your healthcare and your paying too much. Your paying for the healthcare + profits + huge advertising budgets + lots of exucutives + administration of claims - one company recently spend $9 billion on advertising, another spent $6 billion on adminisatration processing claims. Thats $15 billion that in a UHC would have been for patient care.

    The bit that i think a lot of Americans dont understand with their private care offered by their employers is that its not free. The budget the company is spending on it is comming out of the budget that your salary comes from. Anyone who works internationally knows this. I live in Australia and my package includes private health care. But the guys who work in other offices where this isnt private health policy get a higher salary because the company isnt paying their healthcare.

    The hidden economic benefits are huge. There are millions of lost working hours in the US economy because of people being away from work ill that would either not be ill or have a shorter illness if they had free healthcare at an earlier stage in their illness. This is a massive drain on buisness and goverment revenue in lost taxes. It then creates later revenue loss as patients that could have been treated cheaply and easily at an early stage end up in a public hospital requiring expensive treatment.

    In harsh economic climates, the USA needs UHC because it can not afford not to
     
  17. bclark

    bclark Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    2,554
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    While I agree to helping with health care costs may be a government function what I can't get by is that the real problem with American health care is the cost. You need health insurance, because it takes 10K these days to treat a sprained ankle.

    Most of the costs are because of over regulation, and subsidization of stupidity. (Look at the congressional analysis of the alarming increases in health care costs.) Seriously, why can't we first fix the cost. Yeah, this means we probably have to vote against our elected officials that refuse to cap malpractice awards, and those who decided to play doctor, and pass a bunch of stupid regulations.

    Once that is done, we can work on providing a public subsidy for those who can't afford it. Seriously, I wish I could afford to drive a Lexus to work, but I have a mini Yaris instead. It's not because I don't want the other, it's because I don't have the money.
     
  18. JamesDF

    JamesDF Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2012
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Actually the real reason American health care cost so much is we have a privately controlled helath system. Medicare is a govenremnt controled one and it costs 40%.
     
  19. Clint Torres

    Clint Torres New Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    5,712
    Likes Received:
    75
    Trophy Points:
    0
    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.
     
  20. lizarddust

    lizarddust Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,350
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Bingo!

    Putting profits before people's health.
     

Share This Page