Can Anyone Provide Me With a Reasonable Argument Against Universal Health Care for ALL Americans?

Question

Universal Health Care provides coverage for every citizen.
Doctors are guaranteed payment.
Doctors can receive merit pay if they get their patients to lose weight, quit smoking, lower their cholesterol, etc.
There would be no HMOs to DENY LIFESAVING procedures.
There would be no HMOs to DENY Coverage to those with preexisting medical conditions.
There would be no more co-pays for doctors visits or prescription drugs.
We could replace Medicaid and Medicare which cost over $300 Billion per year. Combine that with the $92 Billion we can save by ending Corporate Welfare and we could provide every American with Health Care and Dental Care.
If you have money and want to opt out and buy your own insurance, you can do that too!
There are currently 47 million Americans without Health insurance.
The United States spends more on Health Care than countries that have Universal Health Care and those countries cover EVERY citizen.

Where's the down-side to Universal Healthcare?

We either pay for it through higher taxes or we pay for it by ending Corporate Welfare. The US Government gave out $92 BILLION in US Tax Payers money in 2006 alone to companies with profits in the millions and billions of dollars. Why isn't that money being used to take care of ALL Americans, and not just the rich? If we could cover every American with $90 billion dollars, then we wouldn't really need Medicaid and Medicare would we? That's another $300+ billion the US would be saving per year. Can you say TAX CUTS?!!? So not only do we cover EVERY American but we have $300 billion to give back to the people in tax cuts. That's win-win in my book!

There are LINES NOW! Has anyone ever gone into an ER and not waited for a few hours? Unless you're bleeding, etc. you WAIT. Sometimes you have to WAIT to see a doctor here too. If you're afraid of there not being enough doctors, then let's allow foreign doctors into the US who can practice medicine up the US standards. That measure alone would save another $80 billion per year or about $800 per family. (http://www.ConservativeNannyState.org) STOP TRYING TO SCARE PEOPLE! Our current system is BROKEN. We'll never know how Universal HealthCare will work here in the US unless we TRY!

The US pays MORE NOW than countries with Universal Health Care and those countries cover EVERY citizen. Do people who PAY HMO's ALWAYS USE their Coverage? NO! Should they get a refun? NO! But they still keep their coverage just in case. In the RICHEST country in the world, NO ONE should be without Health Care! STOP trying to SCARE people with "doctor shortages" and "waiting lines." We all wait NOW anyway. And we don't even KNOW for SURE that there would BE waiting lines.

STOP trying to SCARE people with "doctor shortages" and "waiting lines." We all wait NOW anyway. And we don't even KNOW for SURE that there would BE waiting lines. You can't just make up facts. We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. If anyone can provide me with sources with unbiased, non-partisan, reasonable, logical fact based cases against UHC, I'll gladly take a look at them.

Answer 1

There is NO down side to universal healthcare, except for those reaping $millions from the current system.

Any argument against universal healthcare overlooks the fact there are elected officials that can be held accountable for a system not working well.

Answer 2

There is no argument against it. Our economy is staggering in part because outside companies won't build factories with high paying jobs in America, because they don't want to take on the cost of healthcare. Look at the Toyota Plant they recently decided to put in Canada instead of America. HMOs have destroyed the health insurance industry through self-centered anti-American monopolism, so we can't afford to do it the way we always have.
Ignorance is doing the same old things when the situations have changed.

Answer 3

You do understand that in socialized medicine programs, they will determine whether or not you get an operation or not. If you above a certain age, you won't get a government covered knee replacement, etc. They tend to limit the care to the extremely premature. The insurance still can possibly refuse to cover certain procedures/medications. For instance, it is against the law for the federal government to pay for benzodiazepines and some other medications. You would still have a copay for your medications. All the socialized medicine programs do have that.
In the U.S, health care providers are starting to revolt from medicare/medicaid. The number of people accepting those plans is dropping. Everyone is getting tired to dealing with the government and all its rules. We are tired of waiting 3-4 months to be paid.

Answer 4

No because there are none. All arguments are fear mongering or downright social Darwinist ideas. Every Industrialized country in the world has Universal healthcare. They're not all socialists and they don't all have lousy health care, most have comparable or better standards as the US

Answer 5

1. I don't believe the Constitution gives the government power to do this nor do I think we need another big bureaucracy

2. We are having trouble paying for the safety nets that we ALREADY have like Social Security so I fail to see how we will pay for this one.
3. With the dollar going down , gas going up, the stock market shaky, trillions in national debt in addition to a trillion dollar trade deficit I don't think it is wise to begin a new program that would by definition have to cover 300 million people right away and many more in the future because of population growth
4. WE HAVE SAFETY NETS for people who can not afford insurance. They are called Medicaid and Medicare so I don't even see the point. Emergency rooms already can not turn anybody away and the poor are covered by these programs. This means that we would not be giving new coverage to the poor or those in dire need but expanding coverage to people who can already afford it if they choose to pay for health care instead of a second or third gas guzzling car or a nice European vacation.

5. By nature of it being universal it would also cover the rich not simply those who cannot afford it. that means that working people would be financing health care for the rich as well as for themselves which to me makes no sense.

6. I would support an EXPANSION of existing programs as well as a yearly audit which would have to be made public in order to eliminate waste from these programs end also corruption.

Answer 6

What you're talking is plan B: Bondage to Law.
You should be talking plan A: Approved unto God

A: No Law = No Dis-ease = No Need for U Health Care
B: Universal Law = Universal Dis-ease = Need for UHC

Albeit your plan B is Universal, but so is Extinction

Plan A is also Universal, but it's about Salvation

Answer 7

Universal Health Care for ALL Americans? NOT a good idea. For one thing it would ensure that more Americans survive illness, meaning more of the pariahs in the world. The more Americans alive means more war in the world, more people shot in schools, more drug addicts, more sexual disease, more abortions. We need one thing above all else. That is LESS Americans in the world. Universal Health Care would go against that. This is a Reasonable Argument.

Answer 8

I can't give you an answer-universal health care is a necessity. We are responsible for helping our neighbor aren't we? Amazing to me that so many "christians" are against this.........didn't Jesus say "if someone is cold give them your cloak" or something like that? Why are they against helping others out with something as basic as health care? I wish I knew..............

Answer 9

Stewie
there is not branch of government working very well, so hold those accountable.

Check with people in Canada, the UK and others and see how long the wait is for lifesaving procedures. 3 months for an MRI in Canada...8 days max in the US. How long for a neurosurgeon in Canada..5 months...US wait 5 days.

Brain tumors grow while the patient waits and waits and waits. Cut the administrative costs from our system that was imposed on providers in the mid-90's with a new feature each year that adds to the cost and everyone could afford health care.

Cradle to grave care by "the government" is not an entitlement.

Answer 10

Dear, dear, dear. ItsyourW, early this year I had to take my youngest to an ER -- he had a full thickness lac. about 5 cm in length in his forehead. On just about every wall was posted a plaque announcing that regardless of inability to pay or lack of insurance, the law requires the ER to treat and then find adequate follow-up care for everyone who walks through their door. We waited three hours while they sorted through and treated all of the indigent for head colds and what have you. If that's not "Free" healthcare, then I don't know what is. It took my threatening to suture my son myself to get them to stop with all of the garbage GOMERs (Get Out of My ER). Had I not made the credible threat, we'd have waited at least two more hours. It's the law and it's abusive. Your argument:
We already have a "Universal Education System" in place. The law requires all to attend. Even if you do well and actually graduate, what kind of employment can one reasonably expect? Flipping burgers at a fast "food" joint? And that will allow you to start and raise a family and offers all of the "BENEFITS" you seek to make mandatory?
Do you REALLY want to know how well your socialist programs work -- across the board? Money and education are the root of all success and failure. Right? So, why do inner city schools do so poorly while rural schools and those servicing up-scale neighborhoods do so much better? Our tax dollars are not kept locally. They are taken from us and "spread around" to cover those poor performance schools. And STILL even with all of that money funneled in, they still are little more than a cesspool that will graduate at best 1 in 5. Mayber we should stop blaming the teachers and begin instead to look at poor parenting skills. I have seen it up close and personal.
Ours is a capitalist economy. If you want those benefits, health and dental, you should strive to get a better education and work for it. God knows I had to. And, by the way, I don't have dental coverage, nor do I want it. It would be a huge waste of money. I average one carie (cavaty) every ten years. It costs me all of $85 to get one filled.
Why are people so opposed to working these days? Everyone feels so entitled. It's pathetic!