There has to be a better solution than giving our money to a goverment that has been know to pay $500 for a toliet seat.
2007-06-19 17:53:30 · 8 answers · asked by Dina W 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Mild.
That is just silly, the first would treat you and charge $100.00, that is not a good thing, but our goverment is very slow..
What is a better solution, do not just stay on your political soap box... Think on your own
2007-06-19 18:01:05 · update #1
We are talking about universal health insurance - this does not mean the government takes over all hospitals or anything like that.
Why are you being so anti-American as to suggest that something that costs less and produces better results in every other developed country in the world cannot succeed here?
Our system has failed us horrendously. We pay more per capita than any other country for our health care (sometimes more than twice as much) and yet have the worst health statistics in the developed world (a child has a greater chance of living to the age of 5 in Cuba than in the US).
44 million Americans remain uninsured. To accept that is not only immoral but also impractical (we want a healthy workforce).
If you are opposed to the solutions being put forward then suggest an alternative - but to continue to pay more than anyone else for a lower standard is just unacceptable.
www.who.org
2007-06-19 21:27:06 · answer #1 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The federal government currently administers the medicare program. The majority of patients in the hospital at any given time are elderly and on medicare, therefore it makes sense that they could also manage sick children and young to middle aged patients, too, if the right people were to be hired to do this job, and they would follow a well thought out protocol, etc.
2007-06-20 01:07:09 · answer #2 · answered by KIZIAH 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It would be an administrative nightmare! Canada and most of Europe are on the verge of scrapping their own versions of this due to runaway expense and their inability to effectively document/manage cases. The U.S. already accepts the financial burden of un-documented illegal imigrants. With ridiculously porous borders the system would be over-loaded. Another problem with nationized healthcare would be the cost. The ones hit the hardest would be middle class americans-they are the largest group of tax-payers.
2007-06-20 04:11:57 · answer #3 · answered by ugandanprince 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The US government has crooks that peg the price of a toilet seat at $500.00. Good men must replace the scalawags in government.
2007-06-20 00:58:07 · answer #4 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The cost of one smart bomb would help many people and the cost of fuel to the military would really help. The cost of medical services for the wounded could help many families. Now that is just the defense spending what about the pork? he plan is to leave it for another day and when that day come we will bail.
2007-06-20 01:30:11 · answer #5 · answered by Pablo 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The efficiencies of private insurance are NOT passed along to the consumer...so as long as the govt inefficiencies do not exceed insurance company profits, the consumer will be a net winner.
2007-06-20 00:58:47 · answer #6 · answered by Brand X 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
As opposed to the private insurance industry?
You know - the one that makes you see three doctors before you can have a band aid?
2007-06-20 00:56:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
NOT ME!
2007-06-20 01:01:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋