English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

why r cons so down on "socialized" healthcare when we have "socialized" firemen, "socialized" police and "socialized" schools. what i mean is that why should we not have government-run heathcare when all those things i just mentioned are government run. insurence companies want to make a profit and not help you. in england and france they have great government run healthcare so why can't we. like insurence companies find ways to not help you. If your house was on fire would the fire dept. not put out your fire because the fire was caused by a prexisting condition on your house??? no they would put out the fire. why cant healthcare be that way???

2007-07-14 16:54:30 · 8 answers · asked by patsfan 3 in Politics & Government Politics

bush screwed up the schools but that wont last past november 08 and they havent really screwed up the fire and police so yeah

2007-07-14 17:29:52 · update #1

8 answers

I'm all for it. We need a government that provides for the people who provide for it. Take away the greed completely.

2007-07-14 17:34:22 · answer #1 · answered by Jeremiah 5 · 1 1

Ok the reason for socialized emergency services is simple. If these were capitolized then services would be exploited for profit. you would have a fire and the truck would not leave the station until they had your insurance account or you had provided them with your bank routing number. Same with the Police, which would be even worse. Crime would be so rampant today that noone could leave their house after sunset. The people who need the police services are predominatly lower income. Coincidentally hte people who commit crimes on the lower income are also low income. In rural areas volunteer fire departments are pretty much the norm. This works because theyhave a stronger sense of community than in the city. Time and time again when crisis hits urban areas city dwellers tend to turn into selfish animals stoop ti the lowest of the low preying on the weak and stealing anything they can. Look at what happened at katrina. If the government does not provide these services when they are needed we will be left in the cold by our fellow "civilized" man. As for education, we had very little alternative, or would you rather we reenstate child labor, I would love for corperate sponser to run some of our schools, they would probably do a better job than our "socialized" schools and even if they paid for it out of pocket instead of with government funding the dividends the better educated students would probably be able to gain employment straight out of school. Imagine if your child would get their higher education in the same school they recieved their high school diploma. Some states were, and still are doing so poorly legislators stepped in to try and get things back online. All these programs are the responsibility of the various states/counties/cities/townships. The Federal Government actually should not have anything to do with these services except for enforcing federal laws. socialized medicine is overall bad medicine, it is extremely expensive. The wait for routine medical care is very long. The level of innovation produced by countries with socialized medicine is next to nothing. Why do you think they send their doctors in training to our medical schools for their educations. Look at medical specialists, how many cardiologists would spend the years to learn that specialty without their huge fees. They went into great amounts of debt for their education.

Here is my proposal. Make advanced education cheaper by regulating unchecked loan practices.

And start cutting down on frivolous lawsuits. Doctors fees would be far more resonable. The insurance companies will charge less if they do not have to pay less.

The basic desire to excel is fostered by capitolism. Socialism fosters apathy. It stifles the imagination and breeds ineptitude.

2007-07-15 01:16:42 · answer #2 · answered by cutiessailor 3 · 1 0

Americans are generally too egocentric to realize that they are already spending the same fiscally per person for medical care as Canadian's do. The difference? The money the Americans are spending all goes to elderly, disabled, and government employees. Canadians have the money spread evenly across the board so that EVERYONE has health care.

2007-07-15 01:02:15 · answer #3 · answered by starrrrgazer 5 · 2 0

I hear that the English hate their healthcare system, but I still feel it is needed.

Where will millions of dollars of campaign funding come from though if we lose the Insurance companies?

2007-07-15 00:02:12 · answer #4 · answered by Cable Dude 3 · 2 1

I’ll bet your are the same Liberal that says the government is all screwed up and can’t do anything right and now you want to give them power over your health care. Does the word fool come to mind?

2007-07-15 00:27:18 · answer #5 · answered by Flyflinger 5 · 2 2

You are trying to compare apples to oranges. Medicare is not successful. Many physicians are choosing not to participate with Medicare due to decreasing reimbursement rates. In many regions it costs the doctor more to provide the service than he/she is reimbursed. This leads to limited access to health care for Medicare recipients. I don't consider that a success.

2007-07-15 00:07:58 · answer #6 · answered by vegaswoman 6 · 2 2

Obviously you don't mind paying several hundred dollars more in taxes a year.

2007-07-15 00:05:38 · answer #7 · answered by Greg 7 · 3 2

We also have socialized medicine in the US - medicare. It is very successful. That really makes conservatives angry.

2007-07-15 00:01:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

fedest.com, questions and answers