2006-09-11 17:03:41 · 13 answers · asked by Priyanka A 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Its a tough question without defining rich. I think that in the US we should avoid socialism and socializing medical care but I do believe that there is a capitalist option. The government could strengthen the Veterans Administration health system and make it available as a subsidized health care alternative for the general population with costs scaled based upon income. By creating a competitive parallel system to the private health care system it would improve the funding and quality of the VA system already serving millions of Americans and create a viable affordable alternative. Competition is always the key to improving quality and controlling costs.
2006-09-11 17:18:11 · answer #1 · answered by white_yack 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The flip side of the question is, is it just for the government to destroy the middle class and tax the lower class so that the upper class can have multi-million dollar tax cuts? The government will pay a lot of lip-service to the fact that millions of Americans don't have health care. After the mid-term elections, things will get back to "normal".
2006-09-12 00:14:35 · answer #2 · answered by Monsieur Rick 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
thety do tax the rich but not enough to offset the expensive healthcare of those that cant afford it.no matter how young you are you need medical insurance.anything these days can happen to young and old and those on medicade have to pay a high copay plus a higher copay for services and drugs.this government doesnt tax the rich those over 140k as much as those under 100k and those that are in a higher earnings get back a higher percentage of income taxes.
2006-09-12 00:11:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No because the rich can afford it and the poor get it thru social services. What about the 45,000,000 working poor that have no health care. If virtually every other progressive G-8 country can provide this service, surely the great and glorious USA can.
2006-09-12 00:09:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I dont get your question, consider rephrasing. but yeah the rich should be heavly taxed to provide for the poor, because the rich do not hurt when you take away thousands of dollars. But being that one day I will be in the %40 tax braket, I am strongly against taxation of the poor. i am a democrat now, but a republican later. LOL. jk maybe.
2006-09-12 00:06:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If they started a national campaign to seek more donations for hospitals, I doubt the topic would even be an issue. I think taxes to help pay for things like medical care are good, keyword is 'help', not 'free ride'. If you use medical services, have something in your wallet to help pay for it, or expect to pay for it later...and now it's not just america's poor, either, but apparently half of Mexico, too. If you REALLY wanna save money on medical care, start teaching people how to take care of themselves instead of turning everything under the sun into a fee-based service.
2006-09-12 00:09:34 · answer #6 · answered by gokart121 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that it isn't fair, but the rich would be all snobby and never care about the poor if the government didn't do it. So I guess it should be done even if it isn't fair.
2006-09-12 00:10:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Communist countries provide a universal healthcare system why can't we? its sick to see an 84 year old woman spend half her income paying for medication.
2006-09-12 00:33:37 · answer #8 · answered by marquita 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
why not, they tax the middle class to line their own pockets and the middle class is a much bigger community than the wealthy (or rich class as you put it)
2006-09-12 00:08:42 · answer #9 · answered by Aussieblonde -bundy'd 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
if the goverment would regulate the doctors wages & the price of medication then we all could afford health care
2006-09-12 00:06:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋