views on universal health care?

Answer 1

Good idea. I have a million reasons why and could argue for this to the point of exhaustion. The only people who would not benefit are the insurance companies. For people who argue that they don't want to pay for other people's health care, where do they think their insurance premium goes to? ........ I could go on, look at Europe and Canada. I have had to go to hospital in England and it was quick and professional. Just as good as American hospitals. .... I'm tired already.

Answer 2

The candidates promising universal health insurance are pretending that universal health insurance is synonomous with universal access to health care. However, if you look at the UK, which has universal health insurance, most have to wait a year or longer for routine surgeries. Lord only knows how many never happen.

Answer 3

No. Canada has universal health care and you get wealthy people coming to the US to get transplants. Why? Because in Canada, depending on their age, etc. they can't even get on the waiting list and it's illegal to pay out of pocket for it. It's one closer step to socialism, where you life is dictated by the government. Want a nose job? Nope, more people have ingrown toenails that need removed and toenails are cheaper than nose jobs. Kidney transplant? Nope, dialysis is cheaper. Healthcare by committee? I would rather have my doctor and I making those decisions.

Answer 4

I am against socialized health care. Socializing health care would take away the incentive to become a physician. A lot of the physicians move from Canada to the US so that they can get away from the Canadian Health care system. It is difficult to find a physician in small communities, in Canada, that are accepting new patients. If we socialize our health care here in the US, our system would end up just like the system in Canada. Physicians fleeing the field.

Answer 5

health outcomes the U. S. trails something of the more suitable international in existence expectancy. The straightforward to gods actuality is that the present device fails individuals as an entire, it expenditures more beneficial than everywhere else contained in the international, and it truly is designed to make funds for the coverage organizations, no longer provide sturdy health outcomes. the region is vested pastimes have watered down the authentic needs so that you're growing an fairly 0.5 hearted attempt at providing commonplace coverage.

Answer 6

No one seems to agree with me, but I find it a bit sad that the people in poverty in this country can't even afford to take their children to the doctor for checkups. Heck, a kid in my area just died of a toothache (infection went to his heart) since his mom couldn't afford a dentist! I think it's a good idea. However, I think those who can afford good health insurance should have the option to have less necessary things (like elective surgery that is not medically necessary, braces, etc.) covered, while people who do not have the insurance will have to pay out of pocket if they want those.

Basically, necessities should be universal, elective things should require insurance.

And, those who say people in poverty are at fault for their poverty should take a sociology class. It's typically not true.

Answer 7

Ever been to a zoo? Ever see a camel? That's a race horse designed by a congressional committee.

I would be for Universal health care,but with the current people we have in congress, it would be a camel, not a race horse.

Answer 8

just about the whole world has it. why on earth dont you?

if the government controlled the health care system you would end up paying less for it then paying some big insurance company that needs to make (big) profits

Answer 9

Run our hospitals like the department of motor viehicles?

Have a bunch of non-caring buracrats in charge

OR

People that want to get payed and might *loose* their job if they don't work harder than the hospital across the street?

Tough choice here.. lemme think.. hmmmmm

I say no "universal" or other government healthcare and for that matter lets ax medicaid.

Answer 10

If you mean publicly funded healthcare or a government-guaranteed "right" to healthcare, then I am against it.

I shouldn't be FORCED to pay for anyone's medical care. I would almost always volunteer to help someone who needs it, and that's the moral thing to do, but the government shouldn't be in the business of legislating personal morality.