Should America have regulated FREE health insurance provided by the government?

Answer 1

Just as all citizens should be afforded an equal education, so should all citizens be afforded equal health care. It is the only right thing to do for the most vulnerable of our citizens--both old and young--who currently have to choose between medical care and food. We should not be able to look ourselves in the face each morning if we refuse to see to the basic welfare of our citizens.

Answer 2

No. Just look at what the "government" has done with social security. Then take a look at the VA system. No I do not believe that the government would do a good job managing health care. Let private insurance and industry do that. This is the ONLY way that costs can be kept down.

Answer 3

I am not a proponent of a 'wholesale-no cost' healthcare program in the United States, but I do see some serious shortfalls in our current system. There are far too many Americans with NO source of health coverage.

A reasoned compromise would include 'basic' taxpayer funded healthcare, with the option to obtain more advanced coverage on one's own.

Answer 4

First, nothing is free. We all would have top pay more income taxes to pay for it.

Second, you want the government to control it? Everything they touch goes to brown. There will be so much red tape, so much lousy service.

Absolutely not. Do not let the government get involved in health insurance.

Answer 5

Well, nothing is "free," and if the government got into the healthcare business it would discourage innovation and all that other good stuff that free enterprise has over socialism.

Having said that, you can't just let people die in the street. So, yes, the government should be an emergency health care provider. "Free" if necessary.

Answer 6

Are you for actual? you reside in a democracy. a thank you to end this 'attack' is to choose for somebody else in 2012. i do no longer understand why quite some individuals have fallen for lies approximately healthcare interior the rustic, overseas and additionally the planned reforms [a million]. I propose, if the healthcare device interior the rustic is so good, why have not the different international locations taken it up? ought to or no longer this is through right here info? actuality - the rustic spends greater on healthcare in line with man or woman than the different united states on the planet [2]. actuality - the U. S. has bigger death costs for infants under 5 than western ecu worldwide places with known wellness coverage [3]. Or if the U. S. healthcare device is administered so nicely, why no longer run the hearth provider like the healthcare device? [4] perhaps it relatively is with the aid of the fact interior the rustic, coverage firms push up expenses, purchase politicians and refuse to pay claims that folk pay for [5]. (look up Wendell Potter on YouTube to pay attention greater if the link under is in basic terms too long.) Obama needs to make coverage greater low priced, end coverage firms from refusing wellness coverage to those with pre-present situations, and make effective they pay out while they're meant to [6], a device equivalent to that which suits in Taiwan [7]. He debated this formerly he replaced into elected [8]. Is it appropriate that a lifeless American 4 300 and sixty 5 days previous might have had a greater appropriate possibility of existence in the event that they have been born in Canada, Cuba, Germany and quite some different industrialised international locations with known healthcare? in case you think of my arguments are incorrect, email me with evidence. yet once you are able to no longer, enable Obama attempt to help u.s.. If he fails, vote him out in 2012.

Answer 7

Even Canada doesn't have free health care, but they do have healthcare on a sliding scale according to your income. People on social assistance get basic health care paid for them as part of their benefits but if you have a job or an income you pay for your ownon a sliding scale.

Answer 8

No, it is another government program that will become inflated and inefficient. The private sector with competition always runs things more efficiently than the government.

Answer 9

no


anything provided "free" will always cost far more than the benefits it provides are worth -- precisely because there is no out of pocket cost to the person who benefits.

this effect has become so prevasive in Britain and Canada that "free" routine care uses up almost all the health care budget and large portions of their higher taxes while leaving seriously ill people in waiting queues for procedures that are done within days in the US.

Answer 10

Yes. I live in the UK which has the NHS (National Health Service) There is the option of private healthcare. We have our critics but it's the greatest healthcare system in the world. Did you just watch that documentary by Michael Moore?