Regarding nationallized heathcare, would it be fair to have the middle-upperclass pay for the healthcare of millions of people?
What about those people who take care of themselves and rarely need medical treatment, is it fair to have them pay for medical treatment of those who do not live heathly lives and take care of themselves?
2007-03-09 02:42:29 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sorry - who do nto live healthy lives and NOT take care of themselves?
2007-03-09 02:45:35 · update #1
Considering the mess in Canada and the UK, I don't want it here in the USA!
Canadians in need of vital proceedures come south to the USA for speedy treatment unavailable in Canada.
2007-03-09 02:47:04 · answer #1 · answered by WhatAmI? 7 · 6⤊ 4⤋
That is sort of how health insurance works. Those who don't use it pay just as much as those who do in many cases. As far as middle and upper class paying for the poor. Yes, that is kind of how it will work. But I personally don't mind helping out my fellow Americans when it comes to their health. Also, universal health care systems cost much less then privatized systems. But most plans politicians have are mostly privatized with a small amount of socialized programs. Like in Mass.
2007-03-09 10:48:50 · answer #2 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Everybody pays income tax yes? With the exception of those who are who are on Welfare or some other form of social assistance. Those are the people we are already paying for anyhow.
How is it just the upper middle class covering the cost when all of us working schmucks pay income tax?
I have had difficulty finding coverage on the basis of having Asthma, this isn't due to poor lifestyle choice, it is an ailment I was born with. I do not believe it to be fair or even reasonable that those who have had the misfortune of chronic ailments or have been diagnoses with a life threatening disease can be denied coverage. Let's face it some people just get sick regardless of their lifestyle choice.
2007-03-09 10:48:12 · answer #3 · answered by smedrik 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Contrary to popular thought the middle class is losing its medical benefits left and right. Check out the NYTimes article.
We would be paying for our own health care as we are right now. It would take care of a lot of descrepancies in health care from person to person. We are the only industrialized nation without nationalized health care. The 2 largest distributors of health benefits of NYS and California, isn't that technically government funded benefits? Beyond that, the next largest is the auto industry and they are slowly dying and part of it has to do with high cost of health care for their employees.
2007-03-09 10:50:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
theres nothing wrong with the national health service in the UK, apart from people abusing it. it works for many here and usually the stories you hear about it are exaggerated, lets face it people binge drinking and overeating are putting a burden on it. it was never set up for that, as for paying for it, i very rarely use it but have no problem paying for it hey who knows one day i might need it, you might as well say why pay insurance of any kind if you never use it to pay for others who do.
2007-03-09 10:52:27 · answer #5 · answered by bruce m 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is not fair for some people to pay for others misfortunes. Healthcare is a tricky subject. As i do believe health care for children should be free, and for those mentally or physically disabled. But thats it.
I even more believe that preventable health problems (obesity, smoking, and yes even HIV people) should not have other people pay for their healthcare.
Only help those who can not help themselves. Everyone else is on their own.
2007-03-09 10:51:44 · answer #6 · answered by iceblendedmochajavo 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are making an assumption that universal health care will derail the current level of care for those that have it. Perhaps the question should be, will universal health care reduce my current health benefits. If the answer is no, then, you would not be facing a problem.
2007-03-09 10:54:25 · answer #7 · answered by goldandsilver 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The staggering number and occurrence of self-inflicted diseases makes socialized medicine unfair, and it opens the door to more legislation about what you can and can not do to your own body. If the taxpayers have to foot the bill for medical treatments, they will be more apt to push for legislation that attempts to keep people healthier. I am just not comfortable with that. I smoke - I know the risks, and it is my responsibility if it makes me sick. I don't think anyone should have to pay for my decisions but me.
2007-03-09 11:58:42 · answer #8 · answered by smellyfoot ™ 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You'd better hit the streets and start campaigning against it, cause 71% of America wants natioanlized healthcare.
BTW- you are paying for the poor's healthcare anyway through higher charges and premiums from defaulted medical bills and from the poor who use the ER as general care.
2007-03-09 10:47:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Look at what is happening with the VA health care system right now. The VA is a government agency. They can not get out of their own way to provide even adequate health care to a small percentage of the US population. You want the government to run your health care system when they can't even take care of our heroes? I don't think so.
2007-03-09 10:51:57 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I kind of agree with you...but I see many people wealthy and poor not taking care of themselves..not exercising, eating fast
food, smoking. We should probably address that before we have discussions about paying for each others health care.
2007-03-09 10:48:25 · answer #11 · answered by Pete Schwetty 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋