A topic to discuss....need input....

[blixation]

I've got a question to ask since a lot of this has been much disscused, but I just want to know what everyone thinks about it. Share some input and give some support to why you think we should or should not...

The question is....

Should the United States empliment a national health care system that would give equal medical rights/benefits to every U.S. citizen? Why or why not. please explain.

Everyone has equal opinion and input so lets have fun and a safe debate.

 

[Ave Maria]

Yes, it definitely should! The reason is because there are way too many people out there who simply can't afford health insurance (like me) but who seriously need it. I have a condition called ADHD which makes it very hard for me to concentrate. This makes it very hard for me to hold down a job. Unfortunately, there are thousands if not millions of other people just like me who need health insurance but cannot afford it because health insurance prices are so high.

 

[Blackguard_]

Should the United States empliment a national health care system that wouls give equal medical rights/benefits to every U.S. citizen? Why or why not. please explain.

NO! What are we, Socialists?

And funding for this system would be gotten from taxes, which is robbery/extortion.

And it would ruin the free-market drive for innovation and replace it with mediocre government standardized stuff. Why do you think sick and powerful and/or rich foreigners go the Mayo Clinic in Minessota and not Socialist Europe with their allegedly number 1 health care system?

 

[trunks2k]

meh. there's arguments for both sides. I believe healthcare should be free. However, countries that do have national health care have some issues with it. From what I have heard, the health care works well for stuff that you need, i.e. emergency care and anything else that is life threatening. But it's a pain when it comes to more elective medical care. In this case there should be a combined system. The government will provide you with the necessary medical care in emergency and life threatening situations, but if you need elective treatment that is where insurance should be.

 

[Monsignore Postiglione]

Yes, and for the following reasons :

- All men are equal and the United States, one of the richest countries on earth, are rich enough to afford their equal treatment.

- a public health care system signifies an economic boost in domestic demand, by redistributing income from rich to poor, augmenting the average propensity to consume. A way more efficient and moral economic boost than buying bombs.

 

[blixation]

I say we should not. I believe that there would be an inherent danger of more potential abuse than we have now (for example welfare) if we were allow a national health care system that gave every citizen equal medical rights.

 

[Euryale]

NO! What are we, Socialists?

And funding for this system would be gotten from taxes, which is robbery/extortion.

And it would ruin the free-market drive for innovation and replace it with mediocre government standardized stuff. Why do you think sick and powerful and/or rich foreigners go the Mayo Clinic in Minessota and not Socialist Europe with their allegedly number 1 health care system?

Why is it many Americans go to several British Hospitals for certain treatments?

US healthcare though good is not exactly a world leader in all areas and is at times downright shoddy.

The insurance company/HMO system here is no more efficient than government.

I for one am willing to sacrifice a few tax dollars so some people don't receive any care at all. Show some compassion!!!!

 

[blixation]

Why don't you go ahead and remove the cross symbol. You are more concerned about some tax dollars being misspent than someones health. Typical!

It's not taxes that I would have a problem with but the currupted heart of man.

 

[Ave Maria]

meh. there's arguments for both sides. I believe healthcare should be free. However, countries that do have national health care have some issues with it. From what I have heard, the health care works well for stuff that you need, i.e. emergency care and anything else that is life threatening. But it's a pain when it comes to more elective medical care. In this case there should be a combined system. The government will provide you with the necessary medical care in emergency and life threatening situations, but if you need elective treatment that is where insurance should be.

Personally I think that they should definitely provide free health care for emergency and life threatening situations. As for other situations, it should be based upon your income. If you are low income and can't afford health insurance then you should be able to either get discounted health insurance from the government or free health insurance. However, I'd still much rather have free health insurance for everyone and for all situations.

 

[Jacob4Jesus]

I don't know if I really have a good opinion on this one way or the other. The fact is, I have severe Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and that makes it very difficult for me to work. However, I struggled through it for many years and did very well for myself. As a high school graduate, I landed myself a job that paid college level wages. Luckily for me, that job had awesome medical and disability benefits. I am on disability now and have been for almost a year. My company pays for all of my medical insurance while I am on leave. So, I am very fortunate.

Now, I don't know about all states, but I also filed for state disability in Illinois. After I have been on it for two years, I would then be eligible for medicare. Hopefully it won't come to that, but you never know.

So if people are unable to work due to a disability, I think they should definitely have access to health care. However, I don't think that Joe Schmo down the street who is too darn lazy to get a job, should automatically get it.

 

[Euryale]

It's not taxes that I would have a problem with but the currupted heart of man.

But it's just money. You know, that printed stuff - not flesh and blood. Talk about corrupted by false idols.

 

[Blackguard_]

- All men are equal and the United States, one of the richest countries on earth, are rich enough to afford their equal treatment.

Does not justify stealing from the rich to gove to the poor. And "equal" means equal in the eyes of the law, such as social class will not put you on or get you off the hook, it does not mean all are equal in the Communist sense.

- a public health care system signifies an economic boost in domestic demand, by redistributing income from rich to poor, augmenting the average propensity to consume. A way more efficient and moral economic boost than buying bombs.

How is the government stealing peoples money and then putting that money back in the economy considered boosting the economy? It seems to me the economy broke even.

And you still have no moral basis for stealing money in order to re-distribute it.

 

[Blackguard_]

 

[Euryale]

Does not justify stealing from the rich to gove to the poor. And "equal" means equal in the eyes of the law, such as social class will not put you on or get you off the hook, it does not mean all are equal in the Communist sense.



How is the government stealing peoples money and then putting that money back in the economy considered boosting the economy? It seems to me the economy broke even.

And you still have no moral basis for stealing money in order to re-distribute it.

For the final time:

Health care has a higher moral basis than money

 

[Euryale]

Well, you are the seeming State worshipper who believes the State has the right to steal peoples money and that the all-powerful benevolent State should provide.

It's money. It's not that important in the grand scheme of things. You really have the American obsession with money worship down pat. One of the reasons when I hear American moral lecturing I turn the volume way down.

The health of one person is more important than keeping that extra 200 bucks a year in taxes for a National Health Care plan.

 

[Blackguard_]

Why is it many Americans go to several British Hospitals for certain treatments?

Is this becasue of advanced research or expense like how how people here buy drugs in Mexic/Canada?

US healthcare though good is not exactly a world leader in all areas and is at times downright shoddy.

I'll bet you'll find shoddy health care in any Socialist country too.

The insurance company/HMO system here is no more efficient than government.

But isn't that all heavily government regulated and subsidized?

I for one am willing to sacrifice a few tax dollars so some people don't receive any care at all. Show some compassion!!!!

This is why ther are charities. Voluntary giving money for others health is different from having it forced out of you.

Health care has a higher moral basis than money

Yes, which is why there are these things called "charities". It is wrong to fund healthcare using the theft that is taxes.

It's money. It's not that important in the grand scheme of things. You really have the American obsession with money worship down pat. One of the reasons when I hear American moral lecturing I turn the volume way down.

It's not the money, it's how the government gets the money, by theft and exortion.

The health of one person is more important than keeping that extra 200 bucks a year in taxes for a National Health Care plan.

Donating 200 to a charity voluntarily is quite different from having it extorhted out of you.

 

[simple5]

No, I think everyone should be charged to be healed. Just like Jesus charged all those people He healed. No one deserves to be well and happy unless they're rich.

Besides, heaven forbid, some people might actually take advantage of the system.

Poor people are like that, you know. Rich people never take advantage of anything or anybody.

:eyeroll:

 

[Euryale]

Why is it many Americans go to several British Hospitals for certain treatments?

US healthcare though good is not exactly a world leader in all areas and is at times downright shoddy.

The insurance company/HMO system here is no more efficient than government.

I for one am willing to sacrifice a few tax dollars so some people don't receive any care at all. Show some compassion!!!!



Yes, which is why there are these things called "charities". It is wrongto fund healthcare using the theft that is taxes.

So how come people fall through the cracks in the system then?

Answer: because charities are an inefficient way of handling this and they just don't have the resources anyway.

I'm not advocating the same system for everyone but a minimum National health care system is required.

 

[-Truth-]

I would like my taxes to go to things that benefit me and people I care for.

Health care would be one of these things. But my taxes I pay go to places I disagree with, like weapons to kill. I would rather my taxes save lives then take them away.

http://consumeraffairs.com/news03/health_costs.html

The overhead cost of operating the United States health-care system is more than three times that of running Canada's on a per capita basis, and the gap is getting bigger, according to a study published today in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Savings gleaned from a national health insurance system like Canada's would be enough to provide medical insurance for the 41 million Americans who now lack coverage, the researchers said.

 

[Blackguard_]

Answer: because charities are an inefficient way of handling this and they just don't have the resources anyway.

Becasue a lot of money people might have given them was taxed away. Plus why would not private hospitals work?

No, I think everyone should be charged to be healed. Just like Jesus charged all those people He healed. No one deserves to be well and happy unless they're rich.

Are you under the delusion that National Healthcare would be free? Jesus didn't heal people by stealing from others did he?