Universalized health care: Are you for or against and why?

Answer 1

I'm against anything that doesn't work. Socialized medicine has not been proven to work in any setting or any variation. It is a trainwreck in every form except in Michael Moore's lie-filled fantasy world.

I am against giving the federal government any more control of our lives.

I am against paying for more benefits for people that refuse to better their situtation. I am against working my fingers to the bone to give my family better things in life only to have them recieve the same care as the kids of some unemployable welfare cow's kids. I am against being smarter and not recieving the rewards for that.

I am against stiffling the competitive innovation that our healthcare system breeds. There is a reason almost all of the great innovations in medicine come out of this country, because our doctor's are rewarded for hard work. That isn't the case in socialized medicine. Everyone is rewarded for mediocrity.

I am against further diluting the competitive edge that made this country better than everyone else. Every kid gets a trophy and every person gets the exact same treatment no matter how hard or smart they strive. That single ideal, that appeal to mediocrity is destroying our nation and us as a people.

Answer 2

For.

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.

Answer 3

Totally against. For one reason if the government gets involved you will lose your freedom of choice. It will go from who you like best to who has low bid. Don't believe me talk to people on medicaide and medicare on who they get to go to.

Also, we cannot as a nation afford it. There is a huge entitalment bill coming with the retirement of the baby boomers. Taxes have to go up to cover that and to tack this on top of the bill coming would bankrupt most Americans.

We as a nation cannot do it. We do not have the facilities nor the personel. We don't even have the population to recruit from to do it. There is a nation wide shortage on medical personel as it is and it is going to get worse when the baby boomers need care.

And lastly, the cost is a cut off for some people and incentive to take care of themselves. There is a thought process that if anything isn't right people need to go to the ER, head over to the health section and see how many responses are for the asker to call 911. If it were free hang up going to the ER, waiting will be increased by a huge margin. You will not hear about people dieing in the lobby because it will happen so often it won't be news (by the way, that lady who bled to death in the lobby did so at a general hospital, a scocialized facility).

Most people who want socialized medicine are saying so because they have no clue what consiquences will be if it happens. Scocialized medicine will boil down to dollars and cents much worse than any insurance now, and you will have no say because the govern will do what is best for it, not you.

Answer 4

Against it. It is a nice term for socialized medicine. The government is a terrible manager of money and red tap would actually hamper the quality of medicine. Ask any Canadian who has come of America for health care why they came and you'll find out quickly that this socialized medicine (call it what you like) does not work.

Answer 5

I'm for it. If we can spend 12 billion dollars in Iraq every month (or was it week?) we can definitely create universal health care.

Getting it to work and perfected is another story, but we wouldn't know until we try; and we definitely should because having 1/6 of our own population uninsured says a lot about our priorities, especially right now.

Answer 6

Support it.

It is a disgrace that this country has 40+ MILLION people without healthcare.

It is also a disgrace that healthcare companies bump their stock prices and the rich get richer by denying care to people that have insurance.

The rest of the first world has universal healthcare. It is time we did too.

Answer 7

It doesn't work. Canada doesn't support a military like we do, and even then, lines are long and care is suspect. Even France forces people to carry insurance. It's another bad idea and will ruin healthcare in this country far worse than what we have now. Besides, who now is denied healthcare in this country?

Answer 8

Well the system we have is broken and something has to change the only thing is the parties get locked into positions and they can't possibly look at something innovative that might solve the problem because the special interests won't let them.

Answer 9

I support at least attempting to do something about Health Care in the USA

Answer 10

I am for a single payer (universal) INSURANCE (not universal healthcare).

Universal insurance would be cheaper to operate than the current plethora of redudant adminsitrative services now in place. More importantly, it would also allow freedom to choose your doctor, treatment, etc...