Why do so many people want to compare Universal Health Insurance to welfare?

Question

State distribution of healthcare for the needy is one of the worst things about our CURRENT system.

The local clinics for things like HIV, Eldercare and Drug Treatment (the ones that provide for lower incomes) are run so haphazardly because of lack of training and funds always being cut.

It is unfair and immoral to:
a) blame Universal Health Insurance for something that is a result of the current system.

b) to blame the faults of funding cuts on the clinics that have been abandoned.

Also - What is the logic in saying that dying people should go out and get a job? Isn't that overly simplistic?

Do people really think that their great grandmother or a 12 yearold crack cocaine addict are capable of working to pay off medical expenses when they are ill?

Answer 1

I think it's a very sad world when people can be tricked into voting for and believing in something that is not for their best interest. How could a program that takes care of Everyones Medical needs ever be so controversial? This program should not only be nation wide but world wide, all of humanity has the right to life, right?

Answer 2

Throughout the 80's, there was an attack on welfare and anything relating to the government. Social programs were demonized and people became very hesitant to support anything run by the government.

However, the idea of the "black welfare queen" living lavishly off your tax dollars has been grossly overstated. Whites use and abuse the system more often than any other American demographic.

The comparison is what allows these parasites (the Healthcare Industry) to stay in business. You are a bad citizen if you want a basic human right to be affordable, you should work and work and work in order to give up your hard earned money to a soulless corporation only to be denied the benefits that you barely could pay for.

It is a perverted system, perpetrated by the Health Industry only in order to stay in business and be profitable.

Answer 3

People who compare it welfare are generally people that are not paying for their own insurance. Their employer is paying most of it. They also have never watched a friend go bankrupt because that person got so sick they could no longer work, and thus lost health coverage.

Universal coverage just changes how we pay for it. I will still pay over $1,200 per month for family coverage. The difference is that the insurance company will not be taking 40 cents out of each premium dollar to run the insurance. It will be less than 10 percent like medicare. My rates will probably go down because there will be funding for all people.

Hell I'm already paying for the poor, the uninsured, and an inefficient market because the health insurance industry has gamed the system.

We are starting to see some push back here in California. The State insurance commissioner is cracking down on the Industries practice of dropping coverage on people that get real sick and still pay their premiums.

Answer 4

Because they adhere to a Lemming mentality fostered by so called 'conservatives"-they put very little thought into the issue.
While there is certainly an element of "welfare" (which means help for the truly needy) in Universal Health Care, its primary objectives are insuring a healthy society and getting some semblance of control over health care costs; both admirable, worthwhile objectives; and there is no shame in helping the needy stay healthy.
Any so called abuses of are not the fault of Universal Health Care itself, but of the design of the system. That can be handled by smart people, and we have a lot of smart people in America and in the government.

Answer 5

i believe in no health care, public or private, understand how this system works, everybody pays all year creating a surplus which allows the hospitals to over charge because even though the price is way over inflated its still a small piece of the pie we have all paid into, are you telling me that if there was no insurance that a heart treatment would still cost $50,000 ? no cause there aren't enough rich people to pay that much for something that everyone needs, hospitals would have to lower their rates in order to make money, just like every other aspect of the private sector,

ok I'm done ranting

Answer 6

No idea. Better to help out workers with life, health and disability insurance than have people on welfare. Many single mothers have trouble once they leave welfare because they do not get alimony and child support and lose their rental subsidy, food stamps and health care coverage. Why not cover some of their rent, health care and offer them food stamps while letting them work or go to school? Better to help them than some bummed-out crack addict who drinks two bottles of cheap red wine a day and watches t.v. occasionally delivering pot for his dealer friend and convincing girls to sleep with him for money and stealing.

Answer 7

Lessons learned, perhaps. Universal Health Care would lend itself to an abuse of the system in the way that Social Security has been abused, or Unemployment Insurance.

I don't deny that our health care needs to be driven less by corporations and more by the citizens, but the current ideas behind Universal Health Care don't provide safeguards against abuse by illegals and those who should take RESPONSIBILITY for their own actions, rather than depend on society to "take care" of them.

I don't understand your question regarding dying people "going out and getting a job." Never heard that phrase before, and don't expect to.

Answer 8

Because Universal Health Care is "Medical Welfare." Welfare is a government paid program to support a particular company or activity. (i.e. College financial aid, food stamps, tax breaks for a company to locate someplace specific, tax rebates for buying a hybrid car) all of those things are welfare programs.

If people cannot afford health care they should die. They are a drain on our society. Natural Selection needs to take root or we will all die under the weight of socialiam.

Answer 9

Universal Health Insurance would create a welfare state & by definition is the same thing.

Answer 10

You're preaching to the choir here, my friend.

I guess corporate welfare is more important than "medical welfare"