why do you restrict your question to health care? too many Americans rely on heresay, rumor and "what I heard" as the basis for their political knowledge. makes me wonder if a chunk of the population has simply forgotten how to read.
2007-02-12 02:04:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by Alan S 7
·
1⤊
4⤋
So I guess you are insinutating that if the government is picking up the tab and health care is "free", consumers will have a better idea of the true cost of their health care?
And that the tab will no longer be passed on to consumers? Are taxpayers not also consumers?
And regarding the Canadian system, answer me why you have to wait an average of 18 weeks to get treatment in Canada, while we only have to wait an average of a day and a half in the U.S.
Overlooking the obvious is pretty typical of you though, ANswerman. Talk about misinformation.
2007-02-12 02:13:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6
·
6⤊
1⤋
And we all know that government is the model of efficiency and honesty...
Seriously, after seeing how rife with corruption, inefficiency, excessive costs and incompetence the government is with Medicare, Medicaid, Katrina FEMA relief, etc, why would anybody believe that they'd be any better with UHC?
And if you think the budget deficit is bad now, just wait until government takes over the health industry.
And looking at Canada, we note that the provinces and the national government are forced to raise taxes and put more and more of their budget towards health care. And when health care becomes a budget item, then what you will have is government limiting of health. That's why Canadians have long waits for routine procedures like CAT scans and then additional waits for operations, especially for those that have little chance of success, or those deemed "elective", like hip and knee replacements.
Last, but not least, Constitutionally, this is not within the federal government's purview. There is no clause, no amendment where the people or the states gave them this power. This is supposed to be a nation of laws - why don't we try to act like it?
2007-02-12 02:28:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
9⤊
1⤋
Get unmisinformed.
It's called National Health Service Corps since 1970, and has been in operation in the US since the late 1800s. In addition there are hospital and health care districts all over the US where the taxpayers fund indigent care.
A few useful suggestions would be to reform all 50 States' Courts where malpractice is concerned, cause pharmaceutical companies to rearrange their pricing so that Americans aren't caused to subsidize all the world's medications, and perhaps to issue ID cards so that only Americans get indigent medical care at US taxpayers' expense.
2007-02-12 17:39:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
the widely customary concept of a genuine society is a place the place the Society is barely as stable as its weakest link. via fact maximum of people would desire to care much less relating to the subsequent guy or woman and think of they're islands unto themselves there isn't any actual society and no actual expectation that an American might evaluate a countrywide wellbeing care device for all. They ruthlessly settle for draw back of others as as offensive and an confirmation of sloth and lack of know-how. a minimum of you could verify that Canada is a society and looks to have a "national Soul".
2016-12-17 08:11:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It has nothing to do with being uninformed, it is because many of us know the physical cost.
look at England, high cost of living across the board, taxed up the wazoo and why? one reason... their universal heath care...
sorry, I am not willing to loose more than half my paycheck so some one who is contributing less is benefiting more from my dime.
I have never, can never nor will ever support socialism.
You want to pay for it be my guest, and I will gladly not use it since i am not contributing to it. But I sure as hell am not paying for it, I barely get by as it is.
2007-02-12 03:14:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Stone K 6
·
6⤊
1⤋
"Ask a Canadian and get the truth?" OK, here's the truth from someone who has scads of relatives in Canada: The Canadian health care system IS broken. For starters, you're only covered in your province, so if you live in Ontario and go to Montreal for a visit and end up needing medical care, it's not covered unless you purchase additional insurance (which is cost prohibitive for at least 90% of the population of Canada). Here's another example: Windsor Memorial Hospital has an MRI unit that runs 24/7. Care to guess what the wait time is to get an MRI right now? SIX TO EIGHT WEEKS, and you may have to come in at 3:00 in the morning on a work day to get your MRI. Contrast that with my wife, who was complaining of severe headaches when she went to the ER on Saturday and got an MRI WITHIN ONE HOUR. Would you like another example? My Aunt Marilyn, who lives in Ontario, went to her doctor at age 55 and asked for a referral to get a baseline colonoscopy. She was told she couldn't get one because they only order a colonoscopy if you present symptoms. What?!?!!! Don't these doctors realize by the time you show symptoms of colon cancer it's already too late in most cases?
Do us a favor and stop spreading misinformation. Also, I want to see this so-called source of yours that says the U.S. ranks 14th in quality but 1st in cost. Finally, your assertion that all the costs associated with health care are passed on to the consumer is an out-and-out lie. I won't even ask for a source on that one because I know you can't provide one. My sister-in-law works for the University of Michigan Medical Center, which loses millions of dollars every year because of state regulations and insurance company rules that dictate how much the insurance company pays for any given procedure, and that amount is directly tied to the insurance "premiums" we pay as employees. Those additional costs that the insurance companies don't cover are absorbed by the hospital, which is funded partially by the state and partially by the college tuition of the students who attend.
BOTTOM LINE: Universal health care is not the answer. If we hand this problem over to the government and ask them to fix it we'll be stuck with whatever program they come up with. We also know that the Federal Government has an atrociously bad record when it comes to fiscal responsibility and miring even the simplest of actions in government red tape, so those are two of the biggest strikes against allowing our government to take over the health care in this country. Add to that the fact that our taxes would double, possibly even TRIPLE, if we had a Federal health care system and you have strike three -- you're out.
2007-02-12 02:20:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by sarge927 7
·
8⤊
2⤋
I believe myself to be exceptionally informed. We already have a universal education system and it doesn't really work. If you graduate and are not academically inclined, or have little financial backing, or just didn't get "It" while attending school, chances are, you'll not be qualified to do much more than a minimum wage job -- and those jobs don't offer benefits packages. I own a small business and while I have gone the extra step to not just "hire" employees, but instead, insist that they get a small business license and learn to negotiate their pay, hours and be held accountable for their own taxes, I cannot aford to be generous and offer a "benefits package." I/we are barely making it as is.
So, about your proposed Universal Health Care. It is little more than another form of socialized slavery. Concider this. Socialism by it's very nature, undermines capitalism and competition. It strips the individual of responsibility and self determination. I bust my hump working minimally 12 hours days six days a week. What good is it if I works so diligently to get ahead only to have big brother government come in, strip me of what I've earned only to give it to someone who has not, could not or simply refused to work as hard? Where's the pay off? Why bother trying to get ahead? The slug beside me, who didn't care, still gets the same as me? That's not "fair," it's cheating me and relieving him of responsibility for his poor life's choices. And let us not forget, anytime you invite big brother government to come in and "assist" or take over, they screw things up miserably and regardless of what or how much they do, whatever it is, ALWAYS comes with strings. A price.
So, who would you rather have overseeing your healthcare? The guy who had to fight to get into school, busted his hump to make the grades, calls his own hours and pay? Or big brother, who probably got an inferior education, doesn't care about the quantity or quality of who he sees and medicine he puts out -- who works for big brother and only prescribes what big brother is willing to pay for?
Should something happen to me and I wake up in a hospital somewhere, I'd better have a semi-private room with someone who is of equal status. It's what I've worked for all of my life, I deserve it. If instead, I awaken to find myself on an open ward laying next to a bum, I'm gonna REALLY be pissed.
2007-02-12 02:24:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Doc 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
Health care is available to anyone in this country, even people who enter illegally. You pick up the tab on that too, to the tune of several billion dollars a year. Maybe getting control of that waste would be a better place to start.
2007-02-12 02:04:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by kathy059 6
·
7⤊
1⤋
What makes you think that Americans are so "un-informed" ?
Many Americans are quite informed about "socialized" medicine and the dismal failure of it. I have known many Canadian citizens who have told me of their difficulties of getting proper medical treatment in Canada. And some of those incidents involving Canadian health care resulted in the negligent death of my friends father.
The problem with the American system of health care is that lawyers file frivilous lawsuits against health care providers, causing medical doctors to have to pay extreme costs for malpractice insurance. Also, the drug companies tend to gouge the American public on drug costs so that they can make billions of dollars in profits. If they were appropriately regulated, the costs would go down, and health insurance would be more affordable.
I would personally oppose universal health care. Anyone who has ever dealt with government bureaucrats know that they are incompetent, and practically impossible to deal with. Why would we want more incompetence in our health care system?
Our system is not perfect, but we do get excellent health care. We just need to crack down on greedy lawyers and drug companies.
2007-02-12 02:14:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by C J 6
·
9⤊
2⤋
The Canadian health care system is a mess. Ask a Canadian who needs to wait for surgery. Dispelling misinformation begins with ceasing to spread it.
The answer to the health care problems in this country is not the federal government. Everything they touch turns to crap.
When will liberals realize that bigger government is the not answer to all of your problems?
2007-02-12 02:12:52
·
answer #11
·
answered by C B 6
·
7⤊
4⤋