Universal Healthcare, Yes? No? How? When? Who?

[Sam]

I was wondering about peoples thoughts on proposed Universal Healthcare. For me, i feel it shouldnt be socialized as it assumes that everyone wants to pay for other's healthcare. But im open to debate and to be honest I im not that sure myself.

[Ken]

As citizens i feel we'd greatly appreciate it but the government borrows money from the reserve so paying for millions of people's doctors visits and surgeries is something they'd get pissy about. Lefties push for it. In fact Hillary did when Will was in office; that was her big thing. The whole borrowing money thing though is besides the point in this discussion.

Germany has, i think, a 75% government paid insurance plan dealie deal and the tax payers cover the difference which is definitely better than what we have over here. Even if it's to start things off, i think it could work, where the fed slowly but surely transistions into paying more and more for it

I go out and work, make money respective to what i do, so why pay for joe shmoe's stuff when i'm working to take care of the issues i have...just a thought

[jesse vigilante]

Yes, now, everyone. We are our brothers keepers. I'll happily pay more taxes so that my fellow man will have health care.

And once everyone has health care, the "market" for drugs will stop competing with each other. Often when a cure to some illness is discovered, it is not released, as so much profit is made off of the medicines that treat the side effects to said illness.

Our technology will greatly improve, and more effort will be made to make Americans healthier. (For instance, condom use will be promoted and programs like planned parenthood will receive funding, which isn't happening now, as the christian right doesn't want to promote sexuality of any kind.) Kids will start being taught in schools how to eat health and how to take care of themselves. Prevention and education will be exercised as well with a nationalized health care system.

[Never]

Absolutely. Quite simply A vast majority of our problems can be linked to health care and its cost. Think of the positive effect it would have on the nation if it was universal. I don't have much to say on the subject due to my lack of knowledge on the subject, but I know enough to form an opinion and theoretically it can be a very positive turn for our country.

[Monique Frugier]

THANK YOU jesse !

[Joel]

In my opinion, universal healthcare is essential in any modern country - not the kind that Clinton proposed, but the kind that Dennis Kucinich proposed (and is still proposing); a single-payer system, like every other industrialized western nation. No, not everyone wants to pay for the next person's health care, but some people can't afford to even pay for their own. These people don't have a choice about whether or not they get treated. I don't believe a person should need to have a certain amount of money to be allowed to survive.

I live in Canada, and let me assure you - universal health care works.

[John "Hai" Knapp]

Joel; I am very much with you on this. I am for HR-676 single-payer. No, it's not a perfect system; but better than the non-system we have in USA. Some say "I don't want to pay for your care" they are missing the idea. It is "we all pay into a pool via taxes, but in a sliding scale, based on what we can afford."

A-For-da-Ble Health' will save our economy,
it is in the best interest of everybody,
if every job moves out of the country,
than (tell me) whose gonna pay the medical fee?

[Ken]

could i further be enlightened on this single-payer system

[Meredith]

You should be able to read the full text of the bill (or a summary and other info) by going to:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR676:

It should help you better understand what single payer would mean for this country and how it would be brought about. I attended a conference on the push to achieve it at a state level here in Pennsylvania which opened my eyes to an additional reason we'd benefit from single payer; switching to such a system could save local government in stuggling areas from financial ruin and free up funding for other important things, like our public schools. I definitely support HR 676 (and the version we have sitting in our state House) but I might change the way the program is funded just slightly. I'd propose instead of just placing a small tax on employers and income, place special taxes on products that are proven to contribute significantly to common health problems for which the system would be paying the health care costs. I'd have to find the amount of $ spent annually in America on each of the products and what the current taxes on each are to come up with a new tax % that would logically fall on each type of product, but the list should definitely include tobacco, fast food, refined sweeteners (corn syrup, sugar), hydrogenated fats, and particularly unhealthy animal products like butter, red meat, ice cream, and so forth. These all contribute significantly to common and costly health problems here, so in all fairness the people who choose to put their health at risk should automatically contribute extra to the health care system each time they purchase these products (whether the tax is sales tax or on the producer it still reaches the consumer's wallet). That way, the tax on employers and income could theoretically be lower.

I almost forgot to add alcohol to that list.

[Ken]

Meredith, the page appears blank with links at the top
= (

[Meredith]

Google "HR 676" and the 3rd or 4th listing in the search results should have a URL beginning with thomas.loc.gov. Click on that. Near the center of the next page should be a link entitled "Text of Legislation"; click that. On the next page, look just above and to the right of where it says in large letters HR676 and you will see a link "printer friendly display"; click that to open the entire text of the bill at once for printing or reading.
If you try that and STILL can't get to the info, let me know.

[Joel]

Single-payer essentially means eliminating the private insurance companies completely and having the government as the sole provider of insurance. To clarify, that does NOT mean that the government has any say whatsoever in what doctor you go to or that the government has any kind of hands-on control of the workings in a hospital. The government is simply the entity that pays the doctors/nurses/health care workers to provide services to each and every human being, regardless of pay grade.

[wannabechef]

Here's an interesting take on universal healthcare:

http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2006/universal_heal...

The system that France has is efficient. It's not a single-payer system. It also apparently works.