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

This is an offshoot of Hillary's question, but this is the **** she is proposing. Personally, I prefer to keep my income and find a health insurance policy that fits me and my families needs, not have the government tell me what they think I need. As far as making insurance affordable- how about lowering our taxes so that people can afford health care? You think premiums are too high- thank the lawyers.

2007-01-26 11:08:34 · 15 answers · asked by rwill54287 3 in Politics & Government Government

15 answers

While the idea of universal healthcare might seem fabulous on the outside, I don't agree with the concept of socialized medicine. I certainly do not want the government holding my health and life in their dirty little hands. Our health care system will not be better off with their involvement.

I fail to see how social healthcare will improve society. We already see the faults our welfare system has. It's great for those who need it temporarily in desperate situations, but others abuse it long-term. The same thing would happen with healthcare, if it were offered for free by the government.

With universal healthcare, you'll be waiting 3 weeks to see a regular doctor, you probably won't have a primary physician, you'll wait 10 hours in an ER, and you'll wait months to see a specialist. Not to mention, we'll all be paying higher taxes to help pay for everyone, with a decrease in overall efficiency. This includes people whom have never worked a day in their lives, drug addicts, and alcoholics. Why should those of us who are productive members of society continue to pay for those who are not? I've lived a good, clean life. I pay my taxes. I worked for an education. Why should I be punished for doing well? It's not the American way to punish success, nor should anyone be rewarded for never contributing to the system. It's not selfish, it's realistic and fair.

If anything, healthcare does need a serious reform to make it more affordable, but not universal. We need to start with the scam artists known as HMO's, what they are charging the working class is highway robbery.

Edit:

"Do not believe the myth that you have to wait to see a Dr. if you need them because that is purely not true. The myth and right down lies about their system are abounding, I suspect that the insurance and medical industrys are the ones that say these things as they do not want to cut their profit."
-John T.

Ok, Mr. John T. I found it laughable that I was accused of being an employee of an insurance company trying to scam the public with "lies." That made my day.

That being said, it's not a myth. There are a couple of million people residing in NYC alone, not to mention how many reside in this country as a whole. Unless you live in an extremely rural area, you WILL be waiting a very long time behind others to get universal care. Along with the shortage of qualified health care personnel, the numbers are not a myth, this is fact.

You say mine was a self-centered response, but like a lot of liberals, you need to look at the bigger picture. If you keep giving things for free in this country, it makes the ideals of independence, education, and actually working to better one's life mute. They won't, because they won't have to. It's about time we all said enough is enough, and give people a hand-up, not a hand-out.

But, I digress. Carry on.

2007-01-26 11:20:01 · answer #1 · answered by Karma 6 · 1 5

But what about the working poor? Lowering taxes and tax breaks do nothing to help them. If a family of 4, with 2 parents working only makes $25,000/year and doesn't have insurance thru their employer, they are basically screwed. They will probably make too much to qualify for medicaid and private insurance would be all but out of their reach. Sure I like my health insurance too, but I know too many families that don't have insurance so they go to the hospital ER when they are sick (for illnesses that could be resolved for alot less at a family MD's office.) and never pay the bill. Guess who does? Taxpayers. What do you propose for these people? They aren't just gonna disappear. So I am all for Universal Healthcare for those who need it.
EDIT: You can give me all the thumbs down you want, but it doesn't change the facts. Are the working poor and lower middle class supposed to just die? These people are the "little people" who do all the jobs that the rich don't want to and people on medicaid don't have to.

2007-01-26 11:21:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

This is a typical repuglican self centered response, there are curantly 47 million people in this country that do not have access to affordable health care. The cost of our system of health care is alful, we rank number 1 in the cost and rank number 14 in quality. The CEO of General Moters has said that $1500 of the cost of a new car goes directly to the cost to insure the employee's and retiree's, I am sure that this can go to the cost of every thing that is produced in this country where they offer health care for their employees. You pay that almost every time you buy something. This also contributes to why it is harder for the U.S to compete in the world market. You pay for this when your company moves off shore and your job is lost as many have. The cost of insurance and health care is also higher because people that have health problems and no insurance cannot pay the bill, guess what you pay for this too. If you ask a Canadian if they would trade their universal health care system for ours you will get a resounding no. Sure there are problems but nothing is ever perfect, but they do get a discount on their drugs, medical service is there when you need it. Do not believe the myth that you have to wait to see a Dr. if you need them because that is purely not true. The myth and right down lies about their system are abounding, I suspect that the insurance and medical industrys are the ones that say these things as they do not want to cut their profit. Bottom line is Universal Health Care is something that is sorely needed in this country, by both you and me.

2007-01-26 11:32:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

It isn't socialized medicine that Obama wants. It's making sure that every person in the country has access. If you are under employed, laid off or under insured, under his plan, you can get some kind of coverage. People who can afford it will pay, others will be offered discounts or have it provided. Not everyone in the country will have to switch, if you are happy with what you have then you can keep it. Washington will not force anything on anyone. Insured or not, we all will have a choice.

2016-05-24 03:19:45 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Of all of the industrialized countries in the world (G8 + 1) only the US does not have social medical care.

Medical bills are the most common reason for personal bankruptcy in the US. 100 million Americans do not have basic emergency medical coverage.

Canadian medical coverage covers all emergency and critical care issues. It does not cover dental (except hospital emergency), cosmetic, or non-needed proceedures.

From my personal history having checked my father into an American hospital for a heart attack and a Canadian hospital... I was far happier with the immeadiate response I got in Canada rather than the "How will you pay?" question as my father gasps for breath. $30,000 and a itemized bill that counted the kleenex he used. Same issue in Canada costs me $125 per day for a private room the rest was covered.

Yes, I think it is a good idea and the rest of the world does too.

2007-01-26 11:23:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Not only lower taxes to make it more affordable, but cut regulations and limit lawsuits.

The problem is the idea sounds noble, but look at the results. People die in England and Canada waiting for the care they need.

2007-01-26 14:36:34 · answer #6 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 0 1

Would you want to catch a contagious disease from
someone who cannot afford to seek treatment?
It's just a matter of time. Ignore the poor, consequences
will result.

If politicians could be stopped from voting themselves a
raise every 4 months, there might be enough money for it,
without raising taxes.
Or, there would probably be plenty of money if they would
do away with the "pork barrel" pet projects.

2007-01-26 11:53:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

and what about the people that cant afford it even without taxes? the old, the young, the big family, the poor. No matter how much you lower taxes if you only make 12,000 a year and one script costs 5,000 a year you cant afford the medicine. We absolutely need universal health coverage. Wah fo you if it costs you an extra couple of bucks out of your 80,000 a year, if it saves lives it saves lives. No one should be refused health care becuase they are less fortunate, thats capitolist bull ****.

2007-01-26 11:16:39 · answer #8 · answered by raztis 3 · 4 2

socialist healthcare is a great idea first of all the insurance companies are full of scumbags who use any and every excuse to raise prices and overcharge every child should have a right to free healthcare

2007-01-26 11:18:54 · answer #9 · answered by wylted 3 · 4 2

Limousine Liberals do but they'll never use that system for their BOTOX and Plastic Surgeries of course, just let the masses be subjected to socialized medicine or worse, while Nancy Pelosi gets her face stretched regularly ... or should we say "lifted".

2007-01-26 11:15:39 · answer #10 · answered by baltic072 3 · 3 4

fedest.com, questions and answers