Why is universal health care a bad thing for America?

Question

For a debate, I am argueing against national health care, although in reality I agree with it. I figure real opinions would help me understand why people are against and therefore help my arguement for my debate.

Answer 1

It's not - a universal catastrophic health care plan for all American citizens for one year would cost less than one day of our current adventure in Iraq.

Answer 2

It's not only a bad thing for America it would be a bad thing for the world. The American medical industry leads the world in developing new technology, treatments and drugs. It is totally dependant on a capatalistic system to fund the very expensive research required to develop any of the above.

Most people associate universal health care with a "one payer system" in which care is provided to citizens with no cost at time services are provided. The care provider bills the government for reinbursement. This is much like the medicaid programs in use in America today. These programs set limits on the amount of money that can be charged for each particular service and for the total amount of funding any single provider can receive. As soon as these limits are in place the providers will seek to cut their costs and the first thing to go will be research and development. No future cures for cancer, MS, AIDS, etc. etc. etc.

Many people point to the Canadian system as a model the US should follow. The reality of Canadian health care is a system that is effective at providing basic "preventive" type care. It is an awful system for taking care of anyone who is already unhealthy. There are shortages of doctors, emergency rooms & physical equipment such as MRI's and CAT scans. The government restricts the amount of money that hospitals can bill so when they run out of funds emergency rooms simply shut down. At one point in January of 2000 23 of 25 ER's in Ontario were closed for business. There are long waiting lists for any type of testing that requires lab time or special equipment. Then theres the cost. Canadians pay an average of 21 cents of every dollar they earn to support their government funded health care system. That's every dollar, not just taxable income. There is no money available to replace existing equipment as it ages and there is no money being spent on developing new drugs or treatments. The canadians hope America will bear the cost of R&D.

Answer 3

I think it would be wonderful to apply dollars to having a basic system of health care for all people rather than trying and failing to nation build elsewhere where. The government owes us to either use tax dollars on the citizens first or have a smaller government by imposing less taxes. However, I believe the government owes all citizens a fair system and must develop something that protects them from insurance companies and hospitals who look at the profit as much as the care they provide. If a law must be passed, so be it.

The basic plan doesn't have to be the cutting edge with access to all thee most modern and sophisticated equipment, but should be adequate to relieve the pain and suffering of citizens. any higher, more sophisticated medicine should be left up to the individual. The problem is that we all pay for the most sophisticated technology even though all we do is get a hang nail worked on...there should be different levels of care available to all people depending on their income and willingness to pay...the medical/insurance system is not a free market, it needs to be regulated

Answer 4

All completely incorrect. I stay in a rustic the place there is everyday wellness care, Australia, and genuinely none of those issues take place. you've the two UHC or partial insured care, your determination. the two structures artwork wonderful. you will get somewhat greater suitable wellness midsection care with insured care, yet there's no longer a lot distinction You pay a million a million/4% of your sales for this. noe of this stupid US gadget the place all of us is denied care because of the fact you at the instant are not insured. If there is an emergency you're taken care of under the UHC gadget until eventually your information are desperate. genuinely no distinctive care, basically while you're insured, your insurer ultimately will pay on your care. .

Answer 5

Canada is an excellent example. If you think waiting 5 or 6 hours in an ER in a charity hospital is bad, trying 2 or 3 days in Canada. The doctors and nurses are paid next to nothing. Ever wonder why so many Canadians (docs and nurses) come to the States to work? Many Canadians come here for treatments, also.

Sure, they have cheap medications, but we just need to do away with all the freebies the pharmaceutical reps are leaving with the docs.

Answer 6

It all boils down to two things: 1) Quality care 2) Affordability.

Take Canada as a prime example of what kind of quality they are getting from universal health care. It sucks! Many Canadians come down to the lower 48 for decent health care. It is really hard to get in to see a doctor in Canada, and once they do the work is so shoddy, they don't go back.

The financial burden for universal health care is so astronomically high, the average taxpayer cannot afford it.

Answer 7

America is a capitalist nation, not a socialist one for one thing. For another, look how well govt has done running other things. Huge waste, huge incompetance, theft, huge govt. growth and of course the huge bill that they stick the tax payer with. Want health care? get a damned job like the rest of us and then pay for it. But just pay for your own, not mine thank you, I'll cover that.

Answer 8

I'm on the fence about universal healthcare but some of the arguements against it are- it takes too much money from working people (the sickest people tend to be poor people who, naturally, are not "pulling their weight" in paying for their own care), countries who have it have experienced very long waits for care and often substandard care.

Answer 9

For people who have few health issues socialized medicine is great, except for the taxes. If you've got a chronic condition it's a nightmare.

Here's a link to a blog written by a physician in the UK's National Health Service. Read what he has to say about it.

http://nhsblogdoc.blogspot.com/

Answer 10

I sure would like to help you out with this but as one of 45 million without access to adequate heath care, I think it is something to which its time has come. However the lame excuses that repuglicans use for not having it, is just repeated from those that stand to lose the most if it were implemented. The insurance company's and the medical field, for the rest of the country it is a win, win situation. Sorry I couldn't help but I got to vent. Thanks for that.