Is Universal Health Care A Good Idea?

there are several countries that the WHO ranked higher than the US in quality healthcare.....those countries all have universal healthcare.

Cutting out the middlemen (insurance companies), would allow more revenue to flow directly hospitals and doctors, and would ultimately lower the cost and raise the standards of quality.

The argument that we would have to raise taxes is completely unfounded and just plain wrong. If everyone were forced to pay, we would all pay less. Anyone who says..."well I don't want to pay for healthcare for the uninsured or immigrants with my tax dollars.."...I got news for you....you already do. Your premiums are high at the moment because of all the uninsured people who stiff the hospitals...so the hospital charges 50 dollars for a tylenol...and passes that cost on to the insurance company who will in turn raise premiums to keep in line with their profit margins.

So lets cut out the middlemen....health insurance companies.

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/av3pC

Nope. It's a horrid idea. When you institute socialized health care, quality of care goes down and cost goes through the roof. You do not get the cream of the crop becoming doctors - you're right. They prefer to do something where they can earn a nice living and get a return on investment for their educational commitment. In addition, wait times go way up. Since health care is "free" people see the doctor about everything. With fewer doctors and more mis-diagnosis because you're not drawing the best of the best, the health care system becomes more like a maze for people who are ill. Personally, I prefer to make medical decisions with my physician instead of having the government decide on my health care. Yes, healthy people from other countries love socialized care (apart from the taxes). They feel they'll be able to go in for anything. However, people who are sick hate it. They can't get in, wait times are long, care often doesn't come in time and people die, quality of care is poor and recovery times longer. These are not phantom issues. They are well-documented issues from studies on the Canadadian and English health care systems. It's a disaster. We need to elect Dr. Ron Paul if we want care to be kept between doctor and patient. HMO's were a government idea. Prior to that, patient AND doctor satisfaction were higher. How can we solve the problem by throwing more of what we know won't work at it?

Wow, I am impressed with you enlightened question. That is a great viewpoint to take. Keep that and you will go far in life. It is not the governments role to provide health care for all Americans. If you think it is, I pray you dont get cancer. In the military, we have this thing called triage. Triage is when patients are divided by injury levels. Those that have no hope are placed to the side, while less injured are cared for. If you get cancer or AIDS, that is a sure death sentence and therefore the lowst priority of all medical conditions. You will be left to die. Also, anyone that would be a doctor under social medicine is a verifiable IDIOT. Like the questioner noted, lower pay, higher regulations, fewer doctors, more malpractice and misdiagnosis. Say bye-bye to the best medicine in the world. Socialism has a way of destroying everything it touches; I refer to it as an "anti-Midas" touch; everything it touches turn to SH*T!

At first glance Universal health care sounds good. but how do you implement it if you have the government paying for it. Any time the government gets involved there is an almost automatic waste factor of 35% caused by bureaucratic paperwork required for accounting.

You might think you are going to end up with more money in your pocket but in the end someone has to pay for it. And that is going to come out of your pocket in the form of taxes. Every dollar the government spends comes from YOU. There ain't not such thing as a free lunch.

Every time you hear a politician talk about universal health care ask them how it will be paid for. A lot of them talk about the benefits will be but NONE of them even give you a hint about how it will be paid for. They have no idea how much it will cost the government.

I've a friend I chat with in Canada. She has a knee problem and needs surgery. She's been waiting three months and is expecting to have to wait at least three more before she can be operated on. In the mean time she can't work. So much for the 'free' health care system.

No, I think it is a nice idea but it is not practical. It is horrible that some people cannot afford health insurance. However, that is what government assistance programs are for. If a universal health care system is put into place, people have less control over their health care. For example, doctors could refuse to perform an expensive surgery because the patient is elderly. I beleive that each person should be in control of their medical decisions. As of now, we do that by choosing an insurance company that meets your individual needs. If everyone in the nation has the same coverage, the individual decision would get lost in policies and decisions made by medical personel rather than the individual whom it affects. America is a nation where people have control over lives and their decisions. By taking away the right to make your own medical decisions, you are taking away a freedom that makes the US such a great country. There is little that is more important to a person than their health. Therefore, there is little that is more important than the right to make your own medical decisions.

The argument of such a program raising taxes may be ridiculous if you could tell us what the cost of such a program would be huh? If you can't tell us what the cost would be, therefor how much taxes must be raised, then that is somewhat ridiculous is it not? And that in a nutshell is what we get from the government. They do not seem to think that there is a limit on what they can pay. Now that's ridiculous. If you can show me that UHC would "definitely" put more money in my pocket then I will begin to consider whether or not the new system would be as good as the present one. But if you want me to give it a moments thought because you say that it will "probably" put more money in my pocket in the end without showing me how that is, now that's ridiculous too.

How do you figure it won't raise taxes if I'm having to pay for my health care and yours too. Do you really want the government running your health care? What makes you think they can do a good job at that while looking at their track record. In Canada they have 86000 people waiting to get medical help. If Canada's population was the same size as the US that would translate into 8000000 people waiting on health care. Does that sound Universal to you?

I am Canadian, and it is true that many must go to get treatments in US hospitals. Its not because our system is not efficient, it would be more than efficient in normal conditions, but the reality is that our baby boomers are monopolizing our health system as they reach an advanced ages...

Other wise everything would work fine, as our system has been built about 30 years ago, to respond to this period needs, now we need to increase its capacity, without making it cost too much as in few years, demand will slow down to normal levels again.

It is why our government try to make us believed that our system is broken, as they want to make it half private, half public... Which may be good, but I am wary of the private sector...

Horrible idea. I don't want to be on a waiting list for routine procedures such as is common in Canada, Ireland and the UK. Moreover, I work hard for my money and really don't want to finance someone else's insurance bill. What we have here is not perfect, but it works. NHS does not.

How many politicians do you think you could get to sign a binding agreement to use only NHS provides serves for the rest of their lives? Didn't think so....they know it doesen't work also.

I think so, and would like to see it implemented here. Not believing it's a 'good thing' is a fool's thought. We have other programs not so different than what we're asking for in healthcare, such as,

Public Schools

or the Post Office.

Even Mexico is trying to implement U.H.C. Most countries partake in it, and are happier because of it. They don't have to worry about going bankrupt if they have a major health problem.

.

No, it's a terrible idea because the fact remains that while I may want to do something that will help those who can't afford healthcare out, it is not my RESPONSIBILITY to do so. Let me do with my money what I want to do with my money. Don't force me to give it away. And stop trying to make the universal healthcare system of the Europeans look so good. I've lived there. It really isn't.