If some kind of Socialized Healthcare is so frightening to you, what is a better option?

Question

Some people have a lot of negative things to say about socializing healthcare. If you think it is so bad, what is the better option?

Personally I think healthcare is a right, especially in an affluent modern country like America. And from what I understand about Clinton's plan, there will still be competition and choices available for insurance providers. Far too many people are uninsured in this country.

Answer 1

The government can't keep illegals out, coordinate with states and local governments during a natural disaster, and does a crappy job maintaining the highway system. Why should trust them with my health?

Answer 2

How about a two tier system were those who want to deal with the insurance companies and are happy with their plans can keep that. And a coop system for the one's who don't want the insurance companies involved, we could roll the Veterans,Medicare,Medicaid and all other available systems together and also have coop members paying low cost dues to be in the plan, all the medicine could be bought in bulk to keep down prices. It would be great for the self employed which needs a break, basically unless you work for a giant corporation with a health plan the expense is to high so we need a plan and this would work, You may not know but the taxpayers pay a huge amount already for catastrophic care so we might as well have a system and maybe we could focus on preventive care.

Answer 3

It's not that I see it as a frieghtening concept, it's just that I view it as ignorant. Socialism goes exactly opposite of capitalism. Capitalism rewards those who do well, make good decisions and strive to do better. Socialism undermines that vary concept by taking from those who do try and do better and giving those gains to those who have not done as well, don't care or don't plan ahead or plan as well. Why fight to get ahead if in the end, whatever gains you've made are just going to be taken from you? Soon, in that environment, you quit trying and choose instead to just go with the status quo. What you end up with is a system where no one cares about doing better. And think about both the doctor who is treating you and the government that is "providing" for you. The doctor is paid the same whether he works hard or slacks off. Soon, he won't be as up on the latest and greatest. Why? Because it just won't matter. And the government? Given liberty to dictate what you will be treated for and what you will not, they will then begin dictating your personal choices. If you want to smoke and eat steak, you will be fined for excessive cholesterol intake and self induced carcinogens. Talk about giving up your personal freedoms... You can't get something for nothing and what ever the government "provides" ALWAYS comes with strings attached.
Do I have a better alternative? Yes. Extreme regulation of education. Our current system only produces two products. Those going on to higher education and those who are not. The latter are inducted into the work force as unskilled labor and as such, they are paid their worth. It isn't enough to raise a family. The government conducts a census every few years. They know where the money is and where the jobs are. They could streamline the education system to prep those not going on to higher education for those jobs. But then, that would allow for government controlled social engineering of entire communities and would not only do away with personal choice but also do away with reward and consequences for one's choices in life.
I am NOT a big fan of insurance companies. But I pay them for a service and they provide.

Answer 4

Here's a better plan:

- require all employers to provide private group insurance and all Americans to have insurance (this will ensure that those employers who don't provide insurance won't have a competitive advantage, and that wealthy and healthy workers will contribute to the insurance pool)
- allow small employers to join alliances that can buy policies as a large pool of employees, increasing their bargaining power so they can lower the cost of insurance
- provide government insurance to the unemployed

Oops, I just described the original Hillary Clinton plan from 1994. It wasn't socialized medicine at all, it was a plan that depended almost entirely on private insurance (despite the lies spread by those who wanted to defeat it). President Bush endorsed a similar scheme a few years ago, though of course he did nothing to advance it.

Answer 5

The negatives of Social Health Care only come from the very people who have the most to lose...you will always be told how bad it is in Canada but it is not the truth...I have been sick for 5 years now and have not spent a dime..and I would bet my taxes are not much higher than your's...I took someone to emerg the other night and waited maybe 10 minutes...no, open your eyes and read between the lines, it is the pharm and insurance industries that make it look bad..IT WORKS AND IS AMAZING...
My email is on site and I am open to any questions because I believe in the system.

Answer 6

I have no problem with the Government overseeing a national health care program. The program itself should be ran by the top 3 insurers in the United States. They should quote for the job with the cheapest getting it with stipulation on reduction of cost over 2 years. It should be re quoted every 3 to 5 years.

Answer 7

A better option is to get people off of welfare, or better yet, do away with welfare and MAKE THEM GET A JOB! Then they could afford the health insurance they need and not yet another government handout.

Answer 8

You are saying the truth, people have a right as human beings to universal health care and as such it is a moral duty of the goverment to make sure everyone in this country has it

Answer 9

It is a moral obligation to provide health care to everyone.

The military's health care resembles socialized medicine. if it's good enough for the defenders of freedom, why not for everyone else?

Answer 10

I agree with you. I think that we would simply see the money that is all ready taken from our payroll checks for insurance simply moved to a different bracket on our payroll checks. Beyond that, people can still contract out to get their insurance. It would just look a little different.