English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-12-03 04:27:45 · 8 answers · asked by Tanasia R 1 in Science & Mathematics Medicine

8 answers

yes?! if the poor pay the same percentage as the rich and politicians do! as in if the rich pay 10 percent of their income to their health care then the poor can do the same its called sliding rule. so that you cant say that its free but fair and will encourage everyone to stay healthy!

2006-12-03 04:29:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Look at Canada; it takes an awful long time to first see your primary care doctor, then get a referral, then you wait to see a specialist, and so on, and so on. On the other hand, in the US, you can pretty much see any doctor you want any time you want to. The problem with socialized medicine is that, say I never get sick, and somebody goes to see a doctor for every little cold. Why the heck should I pay for that person seeing a doctor? If people can pretty much get unlimited health care (social system) then they'll take more of it; this puts a strain on the system, which means either increased costs for the taxpayers, or increased waiting times to see your doctor. This system harms everyone. If you go against socialized health care system, your own means and preferences determine how much health care you can purchase, and you get just that amount. Of course, there's always charities that can help out the poor! In this system, the health care industry can adjust: is there a greater need for a certain kind of doctor? Great, people are willing to pay for it, we're willing to put an extra person through med school for that specialty and hire that person. Socialized medicine doesn't have this kind of flexibility. Another example, drugs. You want the latest and greatest? Great, pay for it. You want the cheap proven generics? That's OK too. In a socialized system, where drug prices are controlled, the pharmacies no longer have an incentive to create those expensive cutting-edge-research drugs. Why would they? They'd be at a financial loss. As a final example, ever seen the TV show ER? It's about Chicago's Cook County hospital, a great example of socialized medicine. The ER must take every patient who walks in. End result? Even though they have lots of moeny, great equipment and facilities, you still have to wait over 24 hours to be seen by a doctor...I've been there...No, thank you! Socialized medicine ultimately means giving people as much as they want. Without socialized medicine, people get and pay for what they want. Remember when the government some decades ago tried to control prices of gas? What happened? There wasn't any, and people had to wait in long lines to get it. Do we seriously want the same thing for health care?

2006-12-03 12:36:03 · answer #2 · answered by Nick C 4 · 1 0

I am for a degree of socialized medicine in the form of national health care. With medical costs getting out of control, and private companies refusing to offer health benefits to their workers, I think we have no choice, but to have the government take charge. After all, every politician and government worker in Washington DC is covered, and we all pay for it.

2006-12-03 12:39:10 · answer #3 · answered by Feathery 6 · 0 0

I think I'm for it, must be something better than what is out there now. Seems a little more fair to everyone. They have to do sommething, unless its what the govt. wants, which is no health care for many. Sort of like population control. I also believe many diseases that haven't been cured in so many years is because they don't want them cured, they make way too much money leaving them unsolved.

2006-12-03 12:30:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It needs to happen. The current situation isn't working. Health care is no longer affordable in the US. The doctors want more, the lawyers want part of it and the insurance companies base their rates on cost plus. It's easy to see why health care is skyrocketing above the consumer price index.

2006-12-03 15:26:23 · answer #5 · answered by Scott K 7 · 0 0

thats a tough one...being a nurse in ny near the canadian border you would be surprised at the number of people who opt to come here for simple procedures that they would be made years to wait for in canada,things like knee or hip replacements,and even things considered emergency like cardiac bypass surgery,pacemaker insertions...the concept of everyone being covered is good but covered for what,yeah you have coverage for this or that but it could take years to get the procedure done

2006-12-03 23:24:39 · answer #6 · answered by charmel5496 6 · 0 0

We can do without it.

2006-12-03 15:01:08 · answer #7 · answered by spir_i_tual 6 · 0 0

Can you elaborate?

2006-12-03 12:29:03 · answer #8 · answered by Miss Emily 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers