If it were our goal to do something to push down the middle class, but not significantly hurt the very rich or very poor, would instituting Universal Healthcare, along with big new taxes to pay for it, be a good way to do this?
2007-07-18 09:19:33 · 7 answers · asked by mikeburns55 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
It's already working.
Because of the government intervention already imposed on the medical industry, the cost of medical care has gone up more than four-fold (in terms of real dollars) since the inception of Medicare and Medicaid. The effect of these programs has been to shift the burden of caring for the elderly and the poor to the middle class. The cost has been so astronomical that the middle class cannot afford health care either. Thus, more people are clamoring for government help. So socializing medicine in this country was just the natural end game for those who sought to socialize just a portion of it.
The middle class always suffers (and shrinks) whenever some commodity is socialized.
EDIT: Feline11105, I disagree with your statement that "By now, the Randian/Friedman approach to the healthcare system has been discredited." It has never been tried. The closest we ever came to a "capitalist" system of health care was in the 40s-50s, when it was undisputed that we had the best health care in the world for the most people. Only when medicare and medicaid came into play in 1964 did health care costs begin to skyrocket. Each year brought more government intervention, and each intervention brought higher health care costs and decreasing efficiency, which, in turn, made health care unaffordable to more people.
So, government is and has been the problem. Socialized medicine advocates tell us that the solution to the problem is...more government? That is a little like telling an alcoholic that the answer to his problem is to drink more.
2007-07-18 09:22:29 · answer #1 · answered by Martin L 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Ask the people in Canada who are being treated in broom closets. Ask our missionaries how many months waiting it is if you are unfortunate enough to need medical care whether it is life threatening or not. I think it will hold everyone back. The rich won't be as rich because the govt will make sure that reimbursements are so low that they need to make it up on the cash paying customers. We see that in medicaid. Socialized medicine is a bad plan. Please rethink all talk of doing this to America.
2007-07-18 09:31:40 · answer #2 · answered by bfldmom3 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Universal healthcare would likely help the middle class. Healthcare is becoming increasingly expensive and increasingly meager. A great deal of bankruptcy filings are due to medical expenses. If we had universal healthcare, people would avoid these sorts of dilemmas.
Other industralized nations have universal healthcare and a solid middle class. "Free-market economics" just don't work for healthcare, and the US healthcare system is proof of that. By now, the Randian/Friedman approach to the healthcare system has been discredited.
2007-07-18 09:42:29 · answer #3 · answered by feline11105 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Yes.
Good Thinking!!!
The whole concept of Socialism, is the goal of keeping the Middle Class down.
In fact, to make them poor.
2007-07-18 09:35:46 · answer #4 · answered by wolf 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
yes ,great way to destroy the middle class with high taxes to pay for this nightmare!
2007-07-18 10:15:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
most industrialized nations have a universal heath care program and a vibrant middle class.
The examples would lead me to the conclusion No.
2007-07-18 09:22:44 · answer #6 · answered by smedrik 7 · 1⤊ 6⤋
you bet ye, it would at least even the playing field.
2007-07-18 09:49:34 · answer #7 · answered by acid tongue 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋