I cant exactly remember the statistics for the national bankrupcy list because people cant afford health care and they dont qualify for Medicaid, but i believe that about 17% of the population dont have enough money to afford health care and they dont qualify for medicaid as well. If anybody has a real opinion on this then please answer.
2007-02-22 05:33:23 · 11 answers · asked by Sesshoumaru 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Other then denying a large amount of the population their legal right to operate private business I have a couple of HUGE problems with "free health care".
One, the government would have to run it. Do they run anything well? Have you ever been in a goverment (VA) hospital?
Two, there is no such thing as "free". Someone has to pay for it. The only way to pay for it would be huge tax increases.
2007-02-22 05:42:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
FREE Health Care is never going to happen. What defines "health care" which would be covered by this free program? I'm sure we all can agree that emergency services should be affordable, and breast implants should not be included, but where does the line fall in the gray area in between?
Some people only go to the doctor when they have a serious problem, but others are hypochondriacs, and may go to the doctor once a week. Where is the money going to come from to pay for these people to abuse the system?
I would be in support of "More affordable" health care. Methods of insuring that people who need care can get it, would certainly be a great idea. Perhaps a tax on elective procedures to fund emergency health care would be a good start.
2007-02-22 13:47:51 · answer #2 · answered by Worst Answer Ever 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sess:
There is ABSOLUTELY nothing free. You can relax though; you will get your way on this issue. The Socialist and Communists will win this fiasco and when they do, and our medical system is like Canada's, where will the Canadians go for timely health care? Do you know it is against the law in Canada to have private health insurance? And further, are you aware that medical professionals are the biggest group of criminals under that law? They say they want private care because the public medical treatment is abysmal.
When any country goes to socialized medicine there is a tremendous influx of capital. Then it STOPS. No more advancement in technology, in diagnostic tools, in surgical procedures and even drugs. If any advancement occurs at all it is imperceptible.
The high cost of medications pay for development of new medications. If you tell the pharmaceutical companies they will give there work away, how long will the work continue? No profit equals no incentive equals no advancement. Doctors will operate in a law suit free bubble where they can not be held accountable for there actions. So who will care if you get an incorrect blood type for transfusion or a lethal dose of radiation? Only your family will care and they will be powerless. If there is any compensation at all it will be a penny or two on the dollar and it will come from a Federal Fund. It might be enough to bury you but even that is questionable. All of the above will only lead to more and more Federal bureaucracy. And we all know how well Washington manages our money.
I have four friends, all alive and well thanks to our system. They would all have died if they were forced to wait just half of the average wait in Canada to see a specialist.
Find out how many CT & MRI machines are in Canada and England. Then compare it to the number in the US. Do it on a per capita basis. We do want to be fair.
Waits for bypass surgery can be months to years (with an "s") in either country. A friend waited 3 DAYS and my Mother-in-Law waited less than 24 HOURS. The only person in England who would get that sort of care is the Queen and maybe not even her.
I am retired. I did what was necessary to ensure my continued health care. I spent a fortune doing that. Any socialized medical program would require 100% participation. So you want me to pay all over again, and go into a second rate system. God; one of my biggest fears is to be out of the Country and need medical care. I mean serious care, like a headache, nose bleed or a studded toe.
IMO it is HIGH TIME the people of this planet started taking some responsibility for themselves. Instead of telling those of us who have done something that now we can take care of them too.
You may love for the government to care for you cradle to grave. As for me, leave me alone and don’t punish me for taking care of myself. But, as I said earlier, you will win this, just as sure as you’re born, you will get your FREE health care and I will get to pay for it.
2007-02-22 17:16:33 · answer #3 · answered by gimpalomg 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Quite honestly, no I don't think there should be blanket fre health care.
I work my butt off, and have since I was 16. My husband does as well, and we have health insurance - which costs us a substantial amount of money every month. Why should we have to wait in line behind thousands of people who never bothered to get their lives together enough to find a job that offers benefits. I am sorry if that seems cold hearted, but I am sick and tired of making it easier and easier for people to be lazier and lazier.
Why should people give up something they worked hard for in order to benefit those who don't?
I realize there are some people who work hard, but don't have health insurance, and there should be in place an affordable alternative, but definitely not a blanket free for all for everyone.
Then again - I believe that there is no excuse for being on welfare more than 2 years except sheer laziness.
That's just my opinion - maybe if we stop giving handouts people will start reaching for goals to make their lives better.
2007-02-22 13:44:02 · answer #4 · answered by Susie D 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There is no such thing as "free" health care. Doctors and nurses don't work for free. Medicine is not free. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE HEALTH CARE!!
Somebody must pay for it. If you want the government to pay for it, then you want tax payers to pay for it. TAX PAYERS ARE THE ONLY SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT. Therefore, you want to raise taxes on 240 million people that do have health insurance, to pay for 40 million that don't.
If you are going to raise my taxes and FORCE me to pay for somebody elses health insurance, then I have some conditions: the recipient can not smoke, can not drive over the speed limit, can never drink soda, can never eat junk food, must wash their hands every 2 minutes of every day, can not play any sports, can not have sex, can not go to work if anybody there has a cold, can not go to any public place where they will be exposed to germs (mall, theater, resteraunt, etc.).
If you are going to steal my money to pay for your health insurance, then you must agree to these terms because I WILL NOT BE FORCED TO PAY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR ACTIONS!
Where did people ever get the idea that they are entitled to steal what is rightfully mine to pay for the consequences of their actions? That is pure evil. Anyone that supports such evil should be terminated.
2007-02-22 13:49:52 · answer #5 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do. I have that problem. I don't qualify for a lot of things. But I'm a student and have a part-time job. I can't afford huge medical or dental bills.
2007-02-22 13:37:40 · answer #6 · answered by Alice M. Ayres 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you believe in the idea of "free health care" I've got a wonderful bridge to sell you - cheap!
2007-02-22 13:39:54 · answer #7 · answered by Fast Eddie B 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Other countries have tried Socialized Medicine with only limited success. I'll stick with a free market solution.
2007-02-22 13:41:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I wish but as we all know, nothing is truly free. Someone fronts the bill somewhere.
2007-02-22 13:40:33 · answer #9 · answered by casey_leftwich 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not if you want all our hospitals and Drs to be sub par. the good ones will all leave.
2007-02-22 13:43:27 · answer #10 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋