How much we spend every day in Iraq? 1billion you think a lot of money?
2007-07-14 03:16:40 · 18 answers · asked by ? 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No. Universal healthcare, which relates to insurance coverage only, could save the country over $600 billion a year in insurance cost.
The idea of universal health care is a single payer system, not socialized medicine as the insurance companies want you to believe.
2007-07-14 03:22:20 · answer #1 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Medicaid comes close to bankrupting a lot of states already, and it pays so little that in most states it barely covers a doctor's expenses. If done poorly, yes, it can suck up a massive amount of the economy. We're not just talking a few billion here. If you're an average guy, think about an extra $5000 a year from you for health care, and you'll be in the ballpark to start, and half your annual income isn't impossible. The problem has been in limiting what's paid for.
There has to be some form of rationing of healthcare dollars. I can get a note from a doctor this morning saying I need a vacation in Bermuda for my health, but I can't reasonably expect you to be willing to pay for it (if you disagree, please contact me). The great majority of Americans will not tolerate anything like the British NHS, and finding a way to delineate what will be paid for and how is a real problem, especially since we are the place most innovations, driven by profit motives, come from. This is definitely NOT a liberal-vs.-conservative issue.
2007-07-14 04:05:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee access to health care as a right of citizenship. 28 industrialized nations have single payer universal health care systems.
Federal studies by the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting office show that single payer universal health care would save 100 to 200 Billion dollars per year despite covering all the uninsured and increasing health care benefits.
The United States spends 50 to 100% more on administration than single payer systems.
There would be free choice of health care providers under a single payer universal health care system, unlike our current managed care system in which people are forced to see providers on the insurer’s panel to obtain medical benefits.
2007-07-14 05:56:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would it bankrupt the US? The country wouldn't spend more on Universal Healthcare than it already spends on private healthcare.
We spend about $500 million a day in Iraq. More than enough to fund a Universal Health Care system. You have to ask yourself if you want that money going toward killing people or helping people.
2007-07-14 03:58:15 · answer #4 · answered by Incognito 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Medical costs are currently estimated at 1.5 trillion dollars and expected to grow at a rate of 12-15% annually unless something is done to address the cost (Having the government drive up demand with purchases does not address the cost. Any 'profit' that can be saved will be lost to general government inefficiency and the bureaucracy necessary to administer the world's largest health-care plan with 300,000,000 people.)
For a comparison, the cost of the Afgani and Iraqi wars, after five years, is about 600-700 Billion, or about half or what one year of medical costs us. Social Security is the 500-lb gorilla that will bankrupt us, but adopting a Universal Health Care system on top of our current debts and obligations is like shopping at a fancy mall when you already can't pay off the credit cards.
2007-07-14 03:31:29 · answer #5 · answered by freedom first 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That along with their favorite 'socialized medicine' is just propoganda. If done right a universal health care system would save the government and individuals money and guarantee health care for all Americans. We spend 12 billion a month in Iraq and the conservatives are OK with that because it stirs the corporate machine that most Repubs are tied to. But try to spend even a portion of that per month for the people of the US and the conservatives go on a rant.
2007-07-14 03:34:19 · answer #6 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
It just needs to be regulated but that's the crux. Pharmacutical companies are *already* getting huge profits from unecessary drugs and lots of real health conditions are caused by corporations making money off unhealthy products they sell. It's a complicated mess.
2007-07-14 14:19:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No just the middle class. The rich get paid in a way that most of their money is not taxed and the poor do not pay taxes.
Free heath care is a myth. Just look to the north and you can see the people coming to the state to get help.
If you think it is bad to have some insurance company deciding what you heath-care is going to be just think how bad it will be when some bureaucrat does it and now you can not run to the government to complain.
2007-07-14 03:26:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Not if it's funded correctly. I personally think that it should go down in the following order...
1. Demand transparency in the current medical world, pressure hospitals to cut prices. (*They're currently WAY over inflated because you HAVE to have medical care... they can charge whatever they want)
2. Use additional taxes to fund the health care system.
3. Be healthy.
2007-07-14 03:24:55 · answer #9 · answered by whiskeycasualty 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe we could start small with free dental care . Which is a small part of health care .
Then we could work up to free medical .
Its true nothing is free and we would pay for it but the south is sure in need of dental assistance .
2007-07-14 03:30:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋