Is it not obvious that you will be paying for it through much higher taxes? Look at England, they pay more than half of their income in taxes and still receive sub-par care.
To steal from another poster, imagine waiting in the line of any government service provider(i.e. the DMV) with abdominal pains or bleeding. Pretty scary I know.
The government has proven through out its history that is terrible at spending our money effectively and efficiently.
2006-11-15
05:06:13
·
14 answers
·
asked by
Time to Shrug, Atlas
6
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
To answerer "???".
CEO "greed" is what has spawned a vast majority of the innovation and research that has led to enormous advancements we have seen in medicine.
Remove "greed" from the equation, and you have socialism, and we see how well that works out for countries.
2006-11-15
07:13:20 ·
update #1
hichefheidi - i am not suggesting that the government should abandon all assistance programs. the government should always be there to help those who can't help themselves. however, a vast majority of Americans could afford healthcare if they simply lived responsibly (not smoking, good diet, cutting other corners to pay for health insurance if need be, etc.)
2006-11-15
07:18:53 ·
update #2
g - again, my point is not necessarily that it will cost more dollar-wise if we switch to socialized medicine. My point is that there are many other costs associated with the decision that people do not realize.
And BTW, one of the primary reasons that the world enjoys medical standards as high as they do is that America bares the cost of research and development through the inflated prices we pay.
2006-11-15
07:23:04 ·
update #3
Hit it right on the head. I was in England a while back and there was an issue where people were pissed because a stripper had her breast enlargement paid for via the health care system. Her claim was that it helped her earn more money. People here (in the US) need to stop trying to get the government to pay for everything. If a person will just get a job they can take care of their needs. People who can not work for legit reasons I have no problem with helping but the idea that everything should be taken care of by the gov is a socialist view. I do not want to live in that type of world. Survival of the fittest or at lest the hardest working works for me.
2006-11-15 05:14:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by joevette 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Health care can cost you upwards of 15k, for the bare minimum it will cost you 7k. That figure has doubled in the last 5 years, and last year you couldnt get a flu shot but you had no trouble gettin Viagra. Now look at the 50 billion boondoggle that is the Medicare drug program. The GOP supposedly anti big Gov and anti Social handouts has made the biggest one ever.
Remember the Savings and Loan debacle in the late 80's. As soon as the Govt deregulated and took their eye off those bankers they went wild and it cost the taxpayers 500 billion.
Medical coverage is the same thing it shouldn't be Govt owned but somebody has to keep an eye on it. With the present administration, again healthcare cost is worse then the cost of a gallon of gas, its doubled or tripled in some cases. The cost of healthcare is the reason for the loss of many American jobs, employers cant pay it. And if they cant what chance does an individual have. No ones in favor of govt sponsored health care, I Guarantee you. But its a fact that Govt has to be the watchdog because otherwise you get the S&L scandal or Enrron, Worldcom.
2006-11-15 08:16:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by gdeach 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Your figures are wrong, in England overall taxation(including all forms of tax) accounts for about 38-39% of income not over 50%.
Then there is the fact that it is not driven by the need to make profit for greedy CEO,s.How can anyone say they live in a civilized country if they are not protected by the state from all forms of possible harm injury/illness.This also has to be taken in the terms of equality as well.
2006-11-15 05:14:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by ??? 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yo, dude: something is better than nothing. And I"m not saying something for nothing: I'm saying something in place of not being able to afford diabetes help, etc, that eventually ends up costing the state lots of money. Medicine has proven over and over again: preventive medicine is much less costly than medicine that tries to "cure."
And because England's system -- which is socialist -- means they pay half their taxes doesn't mean we will. I say chop off half a percent of the miliary spending and your taxes are just fine where they are.
2006-11-15 05:11:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by fatjunkcat 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Everyone gets sick and needs health care.. that is just the nature of growing old.
Some countries would rather build air-craft carriers than provide universal health coverage.
You do not get the "best care" under this system. You get the best care ONLY if you are in the top 40% percentile of income earners and can afford that cost. Otherwise,. you'd wish you had UK or Canada's coverage (substandard as you feel it is).
The problem is that universal coverage is expensive and the hospitals are overworked. They are just doing thier best with the resources they have.
2006-11-15 05:13:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by Vanchaser 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Have you been to a hospital lately? It's already like that. Will they free market fix the problem when half the population is wiped out by some simple virus that started to spread because too many people couldn't afford to go to the hospital.
2006-11-15 05:09:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by Balaam's Talking Donkey 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Dems want the American people to be under their thumb. They want us to have universal heathcare so they can decide which procedures we need and which ones we don't. If you think waiting for 4 hours in a waiting room in the ER is bad now. Just let them pass universal healthcare on the American people. Are you really wiling to let Hillary Clinton decide if you need a kidney transplant or not? That is what it is coming to, if we don't stop it now.
2006-11-15 05:22:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
... do you have any facts to go along with your idea?
does no one pay for their own insurance that makes these questions? do you not realize that it would still be cheaper in the end to pay more in taxes than it is now? fewer and fewer jobs are offering healthcare and those that do are only paying smaller and smaller portions of it as prices go up...
and America ranks 37th in the world in healthcare, below England according to the WHO... is that not subpar?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/799469.stm
2006-11-15 05:12:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
By the time they hire enough bean counters to over see the money, then they hire their friends, there wont be enough left over for health care "mission accomplished"
2006-11-15 05:12:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by AD 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, some people get sick all the time so with the free health care, people can get the treatment they want.
2006-11-15 05:25:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by Webballs 6
·
0⤊
0⤋