Nationalized Healthcare?

Question

Have any of you who support Socialized Healthcare in the U.S. actually stopped to think about what this will involve?

First of all, look at all of the problems we are having with any other such government controlled programs like Welfare and Social Security - Both in shambles.

Now do you honestly want the same people responsible for that mess to pick your doctors for you and tell you when you have to have a checkup?

Why are you willing to put your health and well-being into the hands of carreer politicians who essentially will be running the medical proffession and telling doctors what they can or cannot do?

Now what of the people who choose to remain independant fron Nationalized Healthcare? Have you stopped to think about how much insurance rates will soar.

It is estimated that there will be AT MINIMUM a 20% increase in Federal Income taxes to maitain this program. Do you realize how much 20% more will cost you per year?

Don't anyone dare try to say that I am wrong about any of this. Look at any other country which has adopted Socialized Anything, and you will see what I am talking about.

I have done my homework, now do yours.

Answer 1

I don't favor National Health Care....I do favor National Health Insurance with a single payer system in which all doctors must participate and accept as FULL payment whatever the system pays adjusted for local cost of living. You choose your own doc and docs are still in private practice. I know people in Canada and England and they wonder why we have opposed a similar system. They're happy with theirs, altho they don't claim to be perfect. Ours should carefully avoid any of the pitfalls they experience, and I believe theirs are health care rather than health insurance. I'm real tired of seeing 30-40% of my premiums going to health ins. co. overhead and profit and CEO McMansions and Jaguars. It is projected that a single payer system would cost 3-4% in overhead and NO profit on our misfortunes.

Answer 2

Socialized medicine merely replaces profit with bureacracy. Anyone that has ever found bureacracy better at solving problems then profit is a moron and an idiot (or a health care unionized socialist that really doesn't like the 28 hour weeks for 90k a year they have.

Seriously if our government wanted to solve health care they could do it in 5 years - flood the market with health care professionals, mandate any school getting federal funds increase the supply of health care professionals each year for 5 years and the market place will get flooded. Then those who don't really want to be nurses and doctors won't have to be - they can get "real" jobs like the rest of us.

Answer 3

Yes, I support nationalized health care and it comes down to numbers. Right now we have about 50,000,000 Americans that cannot afford health insurance costs. Remember if you will the last time you were in the hospital and someone gave you an aspirin. That aspirin cost the hospital less than 1 cent for each tablet, yet when you got your bill you were charged $20.00 for it. We consumers are already paying for medication that others can't afford. If the feds took all the "fat" in the budget we now have, the taxes that are already collected by the IRS would pay for the cost of such a program. OK so, you don't want it - fine, but there are others who should have an opportunity to choose. By the way, why is it that our government representatives, senators and other officials get the best health care in the land? Why should they get what the rest of us can't get? It comes down to fairness for all - and not a chosen few!

Answer 4

First, Social Security is not in a shambles, only in danger because the Federal Government keeps raiding its piggybank for funds it wasn't supposed to be used for. Welfare is funded by the individual states and works either well or poorly depending on the state.

Second, socialized medicine doesn't tell you when you have to have a checkup. You may have to schedule it a year in advance, but they don't tell you to.

Next, in Britain, they have socialized medicine and private insurance without any conflict between the two. How well are we doing with our current private insurance situation? Rates not soaring, huh?

Medicare runs very well on only a 3% administrative cost. Check out how much it costs to administer other insurance.

And the Federal taxes wouldn't have to go up if we weren't throwing 3 billion a week down that sinkhole in the middle east!

Answer 5

It won't do to equate universal heath-care coverage with socialized medicine. That's painting with too broad a brush. Medicaid is a mess, but Medicare does pretty well, and take my word for it: Medicare is a huge controller of everything else in American medicine. What CMS want, they get. The simple fact is that private insurance is on the verge of collapse, so something is going to have to be done, and it's going to be expensive. Expanding coverage to those who are uninsured now is a non-issue from a free-market point of view, because you with private insurance are being charged extra to compensate for care to the uninsured. It will cost nothing to offer limited care (and I stress the word limited) to all, and there are significant benefits to those currently insured if we don't have to worry about the drain of the uninsured. I don't look for much real change in the near future, though, for the simple reason that those who propose universal coverage generally aren't willing to place limits on it, and that's obviously unworkable.

Answer 6

First of all, nobody is talking about socialized health care in the US-except the right-wing.

What peopleare talking about is fixing a system that is BROKEN. If the cons don't like the reforms proposed, try coming up with some realistic ideas for making health care more accessible--and I mean REAL ideas that are workable, not smoke and mirrors or ideological rants.

BTW--there are now 40 countries in the world which have higher life expectancies than the US. all of them spend less on health care per apita--and most of them have a greater role for the government than we do--or that the Democrats are suggesting. At the least, they do provide universal access.

So--put up. Or shut up. There is going to be health care reform. And if conservatives DON'T want it to be more in the hands of th egovernment than it is now, they had better quit whining ideological slogans and start coming up with some real ideas.

Answer 7

i do in contrast to Billary yet nationalized healthcare might make beneficial human beings have scientific well-being coverage , i assume to a pair people who's good. maximum civilized countries have it. Canada is purely a million occasion, undesirable human beings die before than wealthy human beings through fact they can't get preventative healthcare and generally wait until finally a ailment diabetes, cancers and so on. are way out of control until now they might get scientific interest. there's a different choose for it in this u . s . yet understanding how horrified it makes those with $$$, I doubt this is going to ever be instituted. In usa the neocons and cons purely have self belief in human beings procuring their own healthcare, so in fact they have self belief in case you haven't any longer have been given $$ for scientific care, difficult cheese don't get your shorts in a knot as i'm beneficial it won't in any respect ensue

Answer 8

Oh dear. Despite your claims of "having done your homework" i'm afraid I am going to "dare to disagree" with you.

Here in Britain we have a National Healthcare System (NHS), we were in fact the first country to introduce this in 1946 and as far as I can tell it hasn't brought the country to it's knees as you appear to be insinuating.
Firstly our doctors are not picked for us we have the opportunity to select our General Practitioner (GP) from our local areas.
Secondly we are certainly not ordered to have a check up as you seem to imply. Having an NHS does not lead to a dictatorship you bizarre man.
Thirdly should you wish to have private healthcare then that exists perfectly well alongside the NHS. Insurance rates have not "soared" and Britain has the lowest income tax rate in europe.

Now I won't deny there are problems with it and it does need tinkering with but I certainly wouldn't wish to resort to the US system of turning up at a hospital in dire need and the first thing i'm asked is " how would you like to pay?".

Answer 9

You obviously haven't traveled much. People in Europe, Israel and Canada are, for the most part, happy with their health care services. If they were not, they would be marching in the streets demanding the right to to pay for their own private insurance.

Heck, I bet Blue Cross would sell Canadians a policy now and they could drive across the border for that colon exam. I have relatives in Canada and I don't hear any complaining.

Answer 10

We already have socialized health care. It's called medicaid and medicare.

I would be opposed to someone choosing my doctor and telling me when to go, but other than that, I probably would not care because I am paying $400 a month in premiums to Blue Cross Blue Shield anyway.