Let's look at it from this perspective. Who would you rather have treating you, the doctor who is getting paid the same amount regardless of how many he sees or the doctor who can set his own price and hours?
What we're talking about is a socialized system. Socialism by it's very nature undermines capitalism. It removes competitiveness from the equation. It also removes individual responsibility. "It's not MY fault that I wasn't interested in studying in school, that the best job I could now get is flipping burgers for minimum wage..." Chances are, if you're working a minimum wage job, you have no benefits package and cannot aford health insurance on your own. So, can the government supply? Sure, if you don't mind astronaumical taxes. And here's that thing about competition... Why should I bust my hind end and work a job six days a week at a minimum of 10 hours a day if in the end, all that I've done to get ahead is taken away from me (by the government) and given to those who refused to put out? At that point, I will set back and work a bare minimum and say to heck with it! I won't bother to do my best -- it won't pay to try.
Back when the Clinton's were in Office, the First Lady took on the job of restructuring our health care system -- it wasn't her job, but what's that matter? She instituted the HMO system. In that system, your health care provider is almost guaranteed to not be the same one you saw during your last visit. Regardless of your diagnosis and the recommendations, it was then left up to the insurance company as to whether or not you really needed that treatment. Yes, the insurance companies have on staff, physicians. But for whom's best interest are they keeping in mind when they make their ruling? Have you ever tried to appeal an insurance company's decision or file a law suit against one? Good luck!
What the politicians are proposing is more taxation, lethargy, and complacency. Thanx, I'll pass.
2007-01-25 07:35:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Doc 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
There is very little evidence that socialized medicine works at all let alone if it would work in this country. The system has failed in the most socialist countries in the world, why should we even consider it here?
Look, when any politician around the world gets ill and needs medical treatment, they always find their way to this country even though these options don't exist for the people they represent. Why do you think that is?
The best way to make health care affordable is to remove the gvmts control in our health care. To prove my point, before 1993 there were about 23 Million without insurance. Then Hillary forced us to enter HMO's and have a Family Practice doctor become the gate keeper for specialist. Before 1993, you could go to any doctor you wanted to. This was considered the cause of our expensive health care.
Now there are 47 Million without health care, the cost are 4-7 times what they were in 1993, and you are limited in your choices.
The best course of action is to get the gvmt OUT of our bodies and our health care choices.
2007-01-25 07:47:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by radical4capitalism 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
If it happens it will be the end of the American Healtcare system. The government does such a poor job at everything else I can't even imagine how screwed up our healthcare system will be if they get more involved than they already are. We can barely affored medicare and medicaid right now, can you imagine introducing all those new people into the system. It would be a nightmare.
2007-01-25 07:11:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by jdtal7570 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
well... the problem is... IT'S ALREADY HERE... except the companies are setting the prices for it... and they are insanely high...
think about it for a second... if someone wants care... and they don't have insurance...they go to the emergency room... then the hospital charges them, they don't have the money... and the hospital says "we have to make this up somewhere"... so they raise prices for everything else...
then everything is a little more expensive... it happens again and again... and things get more and more expensive...
insurance costs are going up more and more... so more people have to drop it... and those people are going to the ER for "free" every year... so the problem is compounding more and more... and as costs increase, more are going to the ER for "free"... the problem is feeding its self...
the vast majority of these people have jobs... but fewer and fewer low end jobs have health care now days...
it is rediculous... cost are out of control...
we're basically paying the price they set for services they provide... no real free market here...
people don't price shop on medicine and care...
go look at how much prices have went up in health care over the past 10 years... the SIMPLE FACT IS... we can't keep up with that kind of increases... and more and more people are losing their health insurance every day as it skyrockets... it's increasing many times the rate of inflation...
are we kidding ourselves to think that the current system is going to continue to work and we will be able to afford it... as things are currently going?
and rumor of "long lines" are GREATLY exagerated.. if you've ever actually been to another country...
2007-01-25 07:27:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
It doesn't really work in the countries it's in now. Long lines, waiting periods, subpar care. And even so, it will only work on a small population of people. Besides, if the government contolled medicine, there would be less innovation, fewer specialties, and a dwindling supply of doctors.
2007-01-25 07:09:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by togashiyokuni2001 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Too many hypochondriacs to make it work. If they limit the number of visits for minor problems and make people pay for additional trips, maybe.
2007-01-25 07:14:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Nope..and i would not want it. We have a system of free enterprise. However, a government run health care system based on income is very necessary.
2007-01-25 07:09:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Shar 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Always darkest before the dawn.... It will take some major doing.. are we up to the task is the better question eh?
2007-01-25 07:09:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by claire_nite 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
To be fair, Romney's plan was a bit different than Obama's. Was only for one state, and the state offered low-cost plans to those who could not afford one of the normal private plans.
2016-05-23 23:04:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's a joke, it sounds nice on paper, but once you look at all the details it will never work. It's not fair that some people don't want to work but want quality health care.
2007-01-25 07:07:23
·
answer #10
·
answered by Pfo 7
·
0⤊
2⤋