What are the pros and cons of Universal Healthcare?

Question

If we where to have it here in the U.S.A.? Healthcare is a major problem and I want to know what the goodside and badside of universal healthcare would be

Answer 1

There are no pros to universal healthcare. The only universal thing about it is that it will be universally bad, and people that can afford it will still pay to go to better doctors. The poorer people will die waiting to see specialists or surgeons, all at a huge cost to the taxpayers. No one wins.
(I know I am going to get huge numbers of thumbs downs from the socialists, but I don't care--it's my opinion)

Answer 2

First of all, it is unconstitutional. There is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to do this.

However, that hasn't stopped them from creating Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, ATF, and the DEA.

The real downside is that the government has no way to actually deliver on the promise. The government is utterly incapable of creating enough doctors, medicines, and hospitals to provide Universal Healthcare. Hospitals are already overcrowded, how would that get better if people that aren't going to doctors now because it costs them money can go for free every time they get a runny nose?

Bottom line is, it won't "work" in that it will not deliver what it promises.

Answer 3

Bad:

A big government buraucracy. Would you want healthcare run like the US Postal Service??

Higher taxes to pay for the new social service. Once you start something like this it will only grow and there will still more taxes in the future.

Long waits for care and you would lose access to the latest medicines and treatments. Have you heard about the long waits in the UK and Canada to be seen for cancer? And then they have big debates in the UK about whether to pay for cancer meds that have been out for years.

There could be a greater impact of efficiency killing unions into healthcare. Unions love to get in on the government taxpayer paid trough. And once they get in - they don't leave.

Pro
Presumably more preventative care to everyone could bring down the costs of poor people showing up in the emergency room when a minor problem has become major.

Everyone has healthcare (duh).

There could be some cost savings by creating a single unified information flow standard. Currently a large portion of medical costs goes to paperwork and administration flowing through incompatible systems businesses and agency. (Only a pro if the government fixes it. They could make it worse as they often have with other government computer projects.)

Answer 4

The one big pro for an average citizen is "free" health care. The other pro only affects politicians as they will now have more power over everyday Americans.

The cons begin with it isn't really free. It will have to be funded somehow, and that somehow begins and ends with tax increases on all citizens. Don't buy anyone trying to tell you they will only increase taxes on the rich. It won't happen, never has, never will. It always seems to trickle down to the middle class. The quality of care will be terrible. If you look at how well the government runs our veterans health care, you can get a preview of how well you will be treated. There will be fewer doctors, and more importantly fewer excellent doctors. Since they will be on a government payroll there salaries will more than likely have to decrease. And since it is so expensive to get through medical school and with most med students taking out loans to pay for it, it will take them allot longer to pay back. Essentially there will less of an incentive to become a doctor. This will crush our health care and medical research making us less healthy in the long term.

Answer 5

Good side everyone can go to the doctor when they want and not pay much for the privilege, quality of life might be better, but then we all would have to be taking pills the rest of our life.

Bad side, doctors do not compete anymore they all get a straight salary, the quality of health care in general goes down so does the amount of time you can spend with your doctor, it takes a long time for an appointment or to have routine lab work done let alone surgery. (see England as an example of universal health care).

Aside from that, another percentage of your hard earned check goes to the General fund so you have less spending money to buy food, housing, a car, fuel for that car (that is past 3.00 a gallon now).. forget vacations or extras. We will all have to put everything on a credit card in order just to keep up with our regular bills. Charity will lose their income and the economy in general will spiral down in to the sewer.

No I don't think its a good idea at all.

Answer 6

There are categories of "standard well-being care". there is 'authentic' standard well-being care the place the government employs each and every of the scientific workers and owns the scientific centers. this methodology ensures insurance to all and sundry, yet limits selections. It additionally does not charm to the suited well-being care experts using fact the government won't have the ability to pay the salaries that deepest marketplace can. And occasion of this manner of well-being care already working interior the US is the militia and VA well-being care structures. the different equipment that many people erroneously call "standard well-being care" is "single-payer well-being care" it is the place the government does not very own the well-being care institutions, yet acts as you coverage business enterprise. under this methodology, your costs are lined via the government no count number what customary practitioner you elect and the government (appearing as an coverage business enterprise) can use the dimensions of it rather is consumer-base to get extra clever expenditures from pharma and healthcare businesses. An occasion of this methodology it extremely is already working interior the US is Medicare / Medicaid.

Answer 7

Government employees are never a good thing no matter how you slice it. Health care as it is today can be fixed. Why introduce a program that will lessen benefits, worsen care, and cost us all triple of what it cost now? Let's fix it. Let's limit the payouts, which will reduce the premiums which will reduce doctor and hospital operating costs. Lawyers and big payouts are whats killing us. Do you honestly think you will be able to sue a government run hospital like they do now in civilian care? Ask any military person and they will tell you NO you cannot.

Answer 8

Cons:
1: Incentive for medical research will dwindle as the profits dwindle.
2: Less people will join the medical field because their is no monetary incentive to work that hard anymore.
3: Less qualified individuals means longer waits for surgery and uncommon procedures.
4: Higher taxes as the government attempts to provide incentives for people to pursue medical field.
5: Wide scale mismanagement by the government usually occurs whenever government replaces private industry.
6: Less available drugs, vaccines, and treatment as fixed low costs for purchases by government make research unprofitable.

The cons just really go on and on.

Answer 9

This type of health care is available in several countries, but the monster of it is that it is pure socialized medicine at its worst. I work with a group from England and they complain that you can see a doctor fairly quickly, but if you need to see a specialist, forget it. The wait for one guys wife to see a cardiologist, was 6 months!!!!!!

Health care, if packaged as something people purchase and is affordable, would be the best way to go. Socialized medicine does not work. Look at Castro, he went to Spain when he needed specialized care. And the Cuban Health care system is suppose to be one of the best. Yeah, Right

Answer 10

Pro's Everyone gets healthcare
Con's The healthcare sucks