Universal healthcare, who's telling the truth?

Question

On one side of the issue that favors UH, they say that UH is the best possible choice of healthcare. Everyone get's treated, regardless of your young, old, employed or unemployed, rich or poor, it dosen't matter. Eveyone get's free health care and the system we have now is run by greedy HMO's who care more about profits than health.

On the other side of the issue however, they say UH is a total mess and it'll only make things worse: long waiting lines, seeing a doctor who may not specialize with your health condition, UH is 'communism', 'socialized medicine', and that our system we currently have now is in fact the best. You are guaranteed to get treated and get medical care so long as you have the money to pay for it.

I watched the movie 'Sicko' by Michael Moore and I must say, I was rather shocked and impressed with the data he provided.

However, I also hear that the man is notorious for twisting up the facts and only showing the stuff that support his views.

*sigh* I don't know who to believe or trust anymore when it comes to healthcare.

What should we do? stick to the system we have now, or take a risk and adopt universal healthcare instead?

Which one would better serve the PEOPLE?

Answer 1

Listen to those abroad. Like me.

I live in the UK and work in the NHS (our universal health care system). It has problems, but not as many as the US healthcare system has. Despite spending much more per head of population than other developed countries, the US has worse health outcomes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care#Economics Life expectancy and infant mortality figures in the US are worse than in other developed countries, despite more money being spent (and wasted) in the USA.

In the UK there are waiting lists for routine problems. Problems that can not wait are treated as emergencies. Also, in the UK, people can also have private health care.

I can understand Americans being proud of living in the richest and most powerful country in the world. What I can not understand is why Amercians settle for an expensive healthcare system where babies die that would have a better chance of life if born in another developed country.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2167865,00.html

Answer 2

I think that Nataline's case will propel some people to consider being proponents for socialized health care. Giant corporations should not have control over public health like this. They tend to deny life-saving procedures that are in the six figure range, and regardless of the price it is still wrong. Nataline died because she was denied by a health care corporation, and I use her as an example because she's big news, but she is not the only one. In fact, there are many more.

I wonder if other countries look at us like we are crazy because we don't have a socialized health care system. Regardless of what the right side of the political spectrum says, we can clearly observe socialized healthcare working fairly well in European countries and Canada. It surely works better than the capitalist system we have now. What pissed me off about Giuliani is that he said we can't have a healthcare system that is socialized because it's not American. In other words, we have to stick with the shitty capitalist one because it's American, even though it doesn't work.

Nataline's case is extremely emotionally-charged and it's quite surprising that a family is suing a private corporation. I think this will get people to start thinking with a more leftist mindset. I know the lawyer for the family, whose name and previous cases I forget, is an extremely famous and successful one, so that's good news.

The general answer to the question is that it isn't a matter of "truth." It's a matter of what really doesn't work and what really does work. There are some people who BELIEVE that private corporations are better than having healthcare socialized, and some people who BELIEVE that corporations shouldn't have control over public health. What matters is that socialized healthcare actually works and has been a success, and it is better than the failing system that the US has. It has been a success in Europe and Canadad, and the US is an example of a failing capitalist healthcare system.

Answer 3

1) None of this is correct. Except for you take a number and wait. Some of it was true in the mid 70s. But that was 40 years ago. And even in America's perfect system, I've had to wait an hour when I had an appointment. And I left once because I heard the nurses say the doctor was late teeing off and was only on the 13th green. 2) Canadians are not perfect. Canada is not a perfect country. Their health care system is not perfect. 3) Americans are not perfect either. America is neither a perfect country. Our current health care system is not perfect. Any reform will not be perfect either. eventually, if we keep working on it. it will get slowly better, but it will never be perfect.

Answer 4

I think that it is an Utopian idea, but it wouldn't hurt to move in that direction. I am a Democrat and I want people to have medical care, but I also realize that not everyone can have premium health care coverage. I see a tiered system coming out of this this...a basic coverage for everyone and a pricier one for those that can afford it...maybe even requiring all employers to provide a base coverage as part of employment

Insurance companies and the medical community need to be controlled....and people need to be motivated to take care of their health (if you smoke or sky dive, you shouldn't be included).....we just can't afford to enable everyone to live to be 120 years old. I'm all for some sort of universal coverage, but not universal PREMIUM coverage

Answer 5

It works pretty well in Canada. And it is administered by provencies, not the federal government.

You do get to choose your own doctor, I can usually see mine in a few days. There are waits for elective things like joint replacements and people can choose to travel elsewhere and have them done and pay. I hear India is becoming more popular for that.

There aren't waits for more critical things, I have had cancer treatment twice and it was prompt and thorough both times.

Not everything is covered, dentistry, glasses, drugs, and cosmetic procedures are not covered. Many people have additional insurance either through their employers or purchased privately to cope with those expenses. Ontario has a special fund to help people cope with catastrophic drug costs.

I have done research in how patients use family doctors and actually there aren't many that are running in for every sniffle. The frequent visits come from chronic conditions like out of control blood pressure and diabetes.

There is no perfect system, and those who say there is no "free care" are quite right.

Answer 6

The system we have now may not the best and it needs to be improved but do we want the government to have control of our health care? I don't because the government's track record with most programs are not very good. There is no such thing as free health care, some one has to pay because Dr's. and other medical people have to be paid, hospitals have to be maintained and medicines have to be payed for. If you are a working person you will pay for your health care and my health care through very high taxes. If you don't work and pay taxes then you will get free health care but isn't that the way it is now people on welfare get free medical care and no hospital can refuse to treat a person if they can not pay. I could go on but let me just say yes Michael Moore does twist the facts and he doesn't make films like Sicko for the benefit of people like you and I, he makes them so that we will pay him to let us watch his films.

Answer 7

By socializing healthcare we would be putting 1/8 of our economy in the hands of the federal government. Not a good idea. The federal government is notorious for waste, fraud, and abuse of power. Remember the outrage over the conditions at Walter Reid Medical Center? Who do you think ran that facility...the federal government. Do you want your medical facility to look like that? I don't.

Answer 8

I believe that universal health care would be very smart and I think that we are greedy if we think that not everyone deserves health care especially in the USA where we spend millions on things that are not neccesary.

Answer 9

I really do believe UH will probably be better for the whole. I think what you need to decide for yourself is whether you believe health care is a privilege or a right. I think it is a right, especially for children and elderly.

Answer 10

It works in other countries, how much proof do we need?
People that have good healthcare are just not willing to sacrifice convienence for the sake of there fellow human beings.