Studies have shown that national healthcare plans WORK, so isn't it time we stop listening to Repub whiners?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070515/us_nm/healthcare_usa_dc

The study above found that the US ranked LAST behind 5 other countries with national healthcare plans in terms of health care quality AND cost.

And that study probably doesn't even factor in all the lost productivity time from uninsured sick workers.

And Repubs have shown that they're SOOO competent in managing things like the Iraq war and the national deficit.

So why should we continue to listen to these sniveling crybabies about health care?

Can you READ? The study found that EACH of the 5 countries that were ranked above the US had LOWER health care costs than the US.

That means that you're paying MORE than if the US had a national plan, whether you go to the doctor or not.

More costly means LESS growth for the country, MORE out of your pocket, moron!

When it costs the country MORE for health care, that means LESS invested in other productivity, LESS tax revenue from the gains of those investments, and you end up paying MORE taxes to cover the same burdens!

Answer 1

The recoil against national healthcare is insane. Even in Canada and Britain - the two biggest bogeymen in conservative diatribes against changing status quo - there is private healthcare available.

Where there's a market for people who don't want to use the national system, there will be alternatives for those who are willing to pay. What's funniest about this is that conservatives will be made to see real fast how much they are already being subsidized today, if tomorrow they start paying out-of-pocket to private providers.

Answer 2

Two of those 5 factors the study ranked on - 'access' and 'equity' - were clearly measures of how socialized your system was. Of course a private system will rank poorly!

I'd also note that the other countries were much smaller than the US - a national system is much more practical in a population of 4 million, than one of 300 million.

Answer 3

First ... the fact that you get your news from Yahoo! is scary. Second, you obviously don't have ANY idea what that study actually means.

They base the rankings off of things that don't apply in the American health care system. For example ... free access to health care. Oops, the U.S. doesn't have that so they get dinged a few points.

Before you spout off about "studies" like these you should learn where they come from and what the agenda is of the people who wrote it. This particular study is as slanted as the "proof" of global warming.

Answer 4

Hang in there!! Hillary is coming - National healthcare is on it's way.

It is her second priority after cleaning up Mr. Bushes little war.

Answer 5

Having to pay for emergancy services isn't just uneffective but it's completely unethical. This is about improving the quality of life for everyone not just the people who can afford it.

Answer 6

If you found a country where it works then I suggest you go there because if it's working somewhere then the people who work for a living aren't taking very much of their pay home! And I'm tired of my hard earned money going to some couch potato who's to sorry and lazy to work!