What is so bad about government run health care?

I like the answers that don't want "socialized" healthcare. Is the fire department socialized? Socialized highways? Socialized police force?

We are at the point now that many people will be better off poor(in order to get healthcare) than working. Instead of paying for them for emergency room services, we could provide cheaper preventive care.

The VA hospitals have been privatized-we saw what that did for Walter Reed.

Hillary and Bill were right about fixing healthcare in 1994. I had no idea costs would escalate so much, so quickly.

The idea of universal health care is a nice one. The problem is that the government is so corrupt. Also if the government is providing your health care they are making decisions as to how and where the money will be spent and what care you'll recieve. With the bankruptcy of social security looming where is the government going to get the money to pay for your health care? Social Security is expected to take over 1/2 of the budget by 2030. How long do you think it would be before euthanasia would become a form of "health care" for the elderly? You know, a little cost benefit analysis of your age, expected health care expenses and potential tax revenue generated by you. They'll be putting you out of their misery before you know it. How much of your health care dollar would be spent just to maintain the bureaucracy around it before the first aspirin is issued? Read the Constitution. Especially article 1 section 8. Thats where it lists the extent of government authority to spend money. I don't see health care on the list. I don't see quite a few other things that the government is doing on the list either. They are all an unconstitutional misappropriation of tax payer money and health care provided by the government would be unconstitutional too. I don't want to give the government control over my health care. If you do, why not move to a "better" country where they already do that and become a citizen there? I'm sure they could use the tax revenue and we don't need socialists in this country. Unless you're a complete idiot you must have noticed by now that what politicians promise and what they deliver tend not to resemble each other. Especially when it comes to things the government has no business doing. When was the last time you saw an accurate cost estimate of something the government did? How many times has it cost less than the estimate?

The constitution limits the role of the federal government, because the farther away the government is from the citizens, the less control or say so we have concerning it. In 1913 the elite, was able to change the constitution. They created the federal income tax, the Federal Reserve- which is not part of the federal Government- like the federal express, and third our senators are no longer sent by the states. But are elected by us. This last disrupted our checks and balances. The federal government is no-longer watched over. Never the less, the Federal gov. has all but eliminated the Constitution. Ex, they now control schools, state health care, seat belt laws, drugs, collages, foreign aid, religion, etc. Under this system, federal senators can invest in certain health care providers and award them the contracts. You see, the government has become to corrupt and we cannot stop or control them anymore. It will take a God to bring it down.Now in closing, that ding bat captain collector is talking about a democracy, which is called a suicidal government, or a mob form of government. Where 51% of the people can take the rights away from 49% of the others. We were to be a republic form of government. To the republic for which we stand! The country is full of traitors and ignorant people.

We have socialized medicine for poor people. It's called Medicaid. Medicaid is WAY better than any type of socialized health care in the world. They pay nothing and get the best treatment including brandname medications (generics not allowed). For old and disabled, it's called Medicare. Medicare Part D is a complete failure. Also keep in mind that we have 20 million illegal aliens who are already getting free health care (Medicaid, ER, maternity clinics, local clinics) and do not pay into the system (I know some do but not enough to offset the cost).

My friend is a neurologist in upstate New York (borders Canada). 30-40% of his patients are upper and upper-middle class Canadians who cross the border and pay for treatment in the United States. Canadians will wait 8 weeks to see a specialist. Without this freedom for Canadians to come to the U.S. for specialized treatment, Canada's waiting time would double or even triple. No one has the exact number of how many Canadians come to the U.S. for medical treatment.

I come from a country (Australia) that has 75% government run health care and I never had a problem with it. In fact, now that I'm living in the US., I won't even go to the doctor. I've been appalled at the way I've been treated. I have the best health coverage around, but doctors still try to give me medication I don't need. They still try to tell me I have things I don't and wait for it, yes, I had to wait 3 MONTHS to see a specialist on 4 different occasions. I know which system I prefer.

edit: littletwin, I don't know where this is coming from. I've never had to wait to have a procedure done at home, but every time I've ever had to see a doctor in the US, it's taken months, unless I go to the emergency room, in which case it takes several hours. I know it's not France or Canada I'm speaking of, but it's still a similar system.

To the extent that health insurance executives are able to make profits thanks to their lobbying efforts, their insurance already *is* government run. You could argue that to cut them out entirely would cut waste and make insurance more affordable. I suppose that as long as politics is going to dominate health insurance that we demand that it be done to benefit people more broadly rather than protect the private interests of executives. Still, I take exception with the notion that "the government wants everyone to get care." Individual politicians may care to greater or lesser extents that their constituents receive care. To be sure, they must give at least the appearance of caring or else risk losing their positions in the next election. But achieving and retaining power requires much more than serving your constituents. It also requires rewarding your supporters and responding to the needs of special interests that can influence politics much more than general voting can ever hope. Of course, these requirements on politicians are just what have led to the dominance of insurance executives on the market. This is why I am skeptical that more political control can have the outcomes that people hope it will. I believe that health insurance executives could not run health insurance industries how they do without their political connections. The best course would be to deny political control to these industries. Insurance executives do not control their industries on their own. They seek political favors to give them special advantages. We should be interested in eliminating these advantages. I’m sure that you and I would agree on that. Can you see my argument that more political control might repackage the political favors while giving the appearance of reform?

corruption, besides that like the 28 Countrys that do have it like Canada which I live at would not want it any other way.

I seriously doubt that guy is waiting 2 months for an MRI, what city you live in?

EDIT: I agree that your system is full of corruption as well, even just leaving your system intact and just get the government to do what the insurance companies are doing now with little to no profits would be a huge difference in premiums. That alone can fix most of your issues.

Actually Government run health care works pretty good if funded properly, look at Medicare, seniors and the disabled can still see their choice of Doctors and it's extremely efficient with just a 1% overhead, right wing nut jobs don't understand there is no such thing as a purely capitalists society that has function well and lasted, every democracy throughout history has had a social safety net all functioning systems atre a blend of Captitalism and Social welfare

Socialized healthcare means this: That is is available to everyone, and that it is paid for by taxes.

Anything that makes it bad stems from poor implementation or people deliberately undermining the system. Otherwise, it's good.

(1) It IS socialized healthcare, you propose making some people pay for other people's healthcare, and additionally government-funded ANYTHING takes away choice - on both ends of the transaction.

(2) That's great that you want to pay for other people's bills - the rest of us don't. So you go to the hospital and pay someone else's bills, be my guest.

(3) "Revoking the tax cut on upper class people to cover it" - well, no, TAX REVENUE IS UP. THE TAX CUT PAID FOR ITSELF. And EVERYONE GOT A TAX CUT.