A question for Conservatives/Republicans about Universal healthcare?

Question

I often read in YA that Cons and Reps think Universal Healthcare is Socialism/Communism, therefore you don't agree with it. My question is, What do you think is a viable and realistic solution? I am talking about healthcare for the "Working Poor", those families that work 2 jobs, make too much for medicaid, yet not enough to purchase private insurance. I have heard people say, get a better job, but in the "real world" there are always going to have to be people to do the lower paying jobs or the economy would fall apart. (Fast food clerks, grocery/department stores, gas stations etc). Please offer a realistic solution that is not basically "too bad, there will always be the "have" and "have-nots" (Yes I actually read an answer similar to that)

The working poor wouldn't go the hospital ER's if they had Health insurance, but if you don't have the $60-$80 for a doctor visit what do they do?

Ihate hippies.... I am talking about the working poor, the people who don't make enough money to even qualify for a tax credit, they do exist, I used to be one of them.

Yeah, Bush's tax break will work for people who make at least $60,000/year. I know many working families who don't make anywhere near that. I have yet to see a viable answer,for the most part, all I am seeing is the same old "I don't want to support others who don't want to work", you are not reading my question.

You are wrong, not all businesses have to offer health insurance, even if you work full time, and if you have a family the amount they take out is NOT small. And no, very few churches and social organizations will offer to buy health insurance for a family, also state offered private plans usually having waiting lists of a year or more, ask a person with breast cancer if they can wait that long. Most of you must be the wealthy people wearing rose colored glasses, the apathy I see is absolutely stunning. I should just withdraw this question, I was hoping to see answers and all I get is the same old Rep/Con rhetoric assuming all working people have access to health insurance. This just saddens and disgusts me.

MATT: Point out the "good answers", the solutions. The only solution I have seen is working to get Private Insurance companies to offer insurance. Look, I am not saying, just "give" everyone health insurance, I can't see why our government can't work with private companies to offer insurance to the working poor by having them pay premiums on a sliding scale. Then there would be less unpaid ER visits for illnesses that could be cared for with a less costly MD visit.

BONE G: You are apparently one of the few that has experienced reality from a working person's point of view. THANK YOU!

Crazybird....I know, I have been there, I was afraid I would die (and leave my young daughter behind) when I couldn't afford a mammogram. It is amazing how many people can give such glib answers when they don't NEED heathcare but can afford it.

Buzz...I didn't have a $15,000 car, I paid $1,700 thanks very much. I didn't have a big screen tv, nor did I want one and I never cared about fancy rims for my car. You are making stereotypical ASSumptions about the working poor.

Answer 1

Well you got your answer from the morons that answered your post. Keep going to emergancy rooms and the other another answer that means nothing... It is not working I would enjoy seeing their family going to a emergancy room every time they get sick.. The fact of the matter we need a program to help out the guy that cannot afford medical insurance. Bushs pharmacy plan is a worthless document just like his border fence..
We neeed to have the top companys of the United States pitch in they have made their money off of the land here Exxon alone mad 40 billion in profits last year alone. Hilburton who knows but the fact remains that companies have to donate some, the government has to donate some, and the consumer has to kick in also raise taxes to get it done but it has to happen.. Consertives belive they are not effected by this but you will one day.. 35% of the bankrupsies were connected to senior citizens and of those many had to go that route because their wife or husband got sick and they had to spend their life savings to get them better or they died. Bush had you belive that most were slackers but that was not true.
Again i would laugh to see some of these ultra consertives have to go to an emergancy room for their care cause you have lost every thing because of illness SHAME ON YOU

And for your information many companies do not offer benifits it is not an obligation they dont have to offer any thing except their payment into social security.
I had to pay over 800.00 a month on my cobra plan for my wife and myself it was every thing we could do to make th payments before the cobra plan we paid 575.00 not 60.00 dollors a week. You are getting answers from people that has not felt the hammer oflarge Medical insurance payments. incrediable

Answer 2

You can't get a good answer if twenty-five words or less and almost any solution either involves ecomony-crippling tax increases or deficit increasing outlays.

There has to be a way where, if the working poor are given some type of tax credit, sort of in the vein of the Earned Income Tax Credit, they can pool the money into an HMO simply for them. Now, I know the word HMO freaks out everyone crying about health coverage, but this is only when certain people abuse their health coverage- and trust me, some people with health coverage do so.

Socialized medicine of any form might lead to this "universal coverage" everyone is trying to jump on the bandwagon for, but the more its instituted, the worse the coverage will be, Unfortunately, most Americans, and this includes a lot of middle class people, are satisfied with their employer provided coverage, to want the government to enforce rules which might tamper with it. However, for those without, as long as it is strictly means tested, that type of program should be instituted the way your traditonal HMO's are run.

Answer 3

First, let me start with the fact that I, among others, are tired of paying for the rest of the world to live. I do NOT, however, have a problem helping out those who are working and just need help.

We are among the few countries in the world that do not regulate the amount of money that can be charged for prescription drugs. That is why the drugs are cheaper in Canada and Mexico. That would be a good start to bring down costs.

The problem with Universal health care can be found in Canada. A minor operation has to be approved all the way up through the governmental agency that regulates health care. We have a lot of Canadian nurses here in the US that refuse to work under that system. It denies coverages to the poor who are unable, or unwilling, to fight for their medical coverage. It is not a viable answer.

Can I offer a comprehensive cure-all for medical costs? No. But the plan put forth by Hillary and Co. does not resolve the problems, either. It just moves them around and creates a whole new governmental agency. There go more wasted tax dollars.

Answer 4

common healthcare finally leads to poorer and much less finished healthcare. A scarcity of docs simply by low pay finally leads to long waits for the E.R. an 8 hour look ahead to a broken arm is on no account atypical, whilst sucj a wait would be unprecedented interior the U.S. common healthcare does no longer enable larger spending via the persons. each and each of the money for the equipment come from surprisingly larger taxes. fact: The GDP of the U.S. is larger than that of the U.ok, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and Canada blended. fact: All of those international places i discussed are the two totally industrialized or almost so. All of those international places have some style of common healthcare. i'm no longer announcing that healthcare is the reason in the back of the financial discrepancy, besides the indisputable fact that this is rarely the financial miracle you're saying this is. source-The Economist Pocket worldwide in Figures, 2009 version.

Answer 5

There is always health care for those that need it and can't afford it. C'mon we're the most generous country in the world. Some people can go to their local church others have to find other means through special groups to get covered. There is othe low income medical coverage. and for people that work in Grocery or fast food or dept. stores. Most of those places have benefits. But if we give in to socialised medicine we will have the same medical coverage the rest of the world will have. Now we can pick and chose a doctor and a hospital or even a specialist for pretty much anything. Socialised medicine would ruin our health care. Anyone that needs special treatment in Canada has to wait a very long time to get an average doctor. Thats's why they come here to get treated.

Answer 6

Any place you work (if it is a full-time job) has to offer some kind of benefits package. People have to pay for this, but it is usually a small amount taken out of your paycheck each week and you have to be employed full-time for a certain amount of time (3 months up to a year) before you are eligible. If you can only work part-time or you need benefits now, you can apply for a package from a state-run insurance company such as FamilyCare (in NJ). Most states have those options if you are below a certain income, but again, you have to pay for it. I personally think Universal Healthcare can not work because we lack the funding due to the vast amount of illegal people in this country who are using up the funds. They are drying up Social Security (we should privatize this while we can!!!) and in general, killing any chance we have to even think about assisting actual citizens. Remember, everytime a child is born here they become a citizen, even if the mother is not, and since the mother is illegal, the healthcare she received in the hospital while giving birth is covered by us...the working class dopes that let this country step all over us because they are too afraid to ship people out that don't belong here!! Average cost of giving birth in America: $5,000-6,000 and if the baby needs ANYTHING taxpayer dollars goes to that also because the mother is a foreigner and we have to take care of her "citizen" child.

Answer 7

I am the working poor. I have a doctor that I love. I only go to the doctor when I absolutely have to... and part of why I work more than one job is to afford indulgences like going to one particular doctor that I have trusted over the years.

For a short while, I had something called Care-Link... I paid full price for doctor visits, but I paid in increments based on what I could afford. I was limited to seeing only the Care-Link docs, and they were horrible. Universal healthcare would decrease the quality of care, while increasing the wait-time to receive care.

We have community hospitals for people like me who can't afford private hospital costs, but our community hospital has the reputation of having the BEST ER in the country... so who am I to complain?

I am on a family member's computer, since I cannot afford Internet services at this time... but I have to say, I am AGAINST universal healthcare, so please DON'T speak for me, when you speak of the working poor, working more than 1 job to get by.

**EDIT** I make BELOW 20 thou a year. BELOW. That is below the poverty line, even in a depressed state like Texas. I STILL DO NOT WANT universal healthcare. I have lived below the poverty line all of my adult life, and I am 45, now. Some years, I have worked 4 jobs, 7 days a week, 60+ hours a week... Healthcare IS available to us. I have lamented that healthcare is NOT perfect, yet, but knowing the struggles of other countries with this, I DO NOT BELIEVE universal healthcre is the answer.

LEAVE the government OUT of my healthcare!!!

Answer 8

I don't mind the idea of Universal Healthcare. What I don't want is a government monopoly system. That won't work.

If true universal healthcare is going to work in the long term, systemically, it has to be provided by private insurers.

Additionally, there is a dire need of tort reform in this country, so that doctors can actually afford to practice the form of medicine in which they are trained.

Answer 9

"If history is any indication, any single-payer initiative will end up costing much more than advocates claim. That, in turn, will lead to higher taxes and/or rationing under which the government will determine which medical treatments will and will not be covered. How do we know this will happen? Because single-payer health care has already been empirically tested on seniors in the United States." See link.

The only solution in a free-market economy and a free society is to let the private sector handle healthcare. Anything else and you've got socialism.

Answer 10

I wish I had an answer because I've basicly always been the working poor. I could never afford the insurance offered at my places of employment because it would take atleast 1/2 of my pay. Usually it was only accepted by certain Dr's and rarely could you even get in when you needed anyway. I had my kids on an affordable state plan which was equally useless because we could never get in and they'd send you to the ER and then the insurance would say they wouldn't pay for it because it wasn't an emergency so I ended up paying anyway.

Now they say I need a mamo-gram but I can't afford one. I went to the county health dept but you couldn't even get in the door to see if you could you even qualify. The also want bone scans because x-rays show osteoporosis but then they also want extensive blood tests as well to determine what sort of medication to help etc. Again....if you can't pay in full....up front....forget it.

When I was growing up my parents were able to make payments. What ever happened to that option? There really isn't any need lets say for the mamogram. No symptoms, no history, couldn't afford treatment even if it came back with something.....but it's "time". It's also my "time" to start falling apart too and I can't afford the tests to prove what's already obvious. But I also know they need them to protect themselves for legal reasons, whether they actually need them or not.

I'm not stupid concerning medical issues and I've been around the block enough times to know when I have strep throat or something. I don't need a swab or phlem results to know if there's an infection. I already know I'm allergic to alot of antibiotics and there's only 2 I can take, so I don't need yet another test to prove it AGAIN. Been there, done that.

On the other hand I've had to fight to have tests done that were needed. Not for me but for my ex because they weren't considered "necessary" by his insurance. It seems once these insurance companies stuck their noses in, they even made it harder for people who have insurance to get the care they need.

When I was young, Dr's were almost considered Gods , expected to perform miracles. Many times they did. It was when they couldn't and people had to blame somebody that the problems started. Now they are so overworked with all the budget cuts they make more mistakes than ever which increases the chances for malpractice.

Personally....I prefere the old days where you had your nice Dr. who could spend more than 30 sec. with you and you worked together to find something you could afford or make payments. You had nurses in the hospitals who weren't being run ragged with too many patients to care for. I know there were problems but I don't remember them being as serious as they are now. Atleast back then you could afford basic care. Ya...no liver transplants or dramatic new things.......but you weren't dying over not being able to get care soon enough for a lung infection or something.