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.

[insanityfair]

for universal healthcare i would have to say that it is probably a very good idea and would have many positive effects,
therefore i say it is something a future president would hopefully do and i think nanobots is another thing that would have a positive impact on society so to conclude it should be greatly considered by the general people of this
country

[Monique Frugier]

To answer you question, I do have a question first: Why on earth do people in the U.S are afraid of the word "socialism"? It seems to me that many people associate it with communism and this is what scares them.
My opinion is that YES Universal health care is good and works very well. In country like France or Canada ( to name a few) people do pay higher taxes and Universal health care comes from those taxes that all citizens pitch in. There is one problem though, especially in France where people abuse of the program -just like in our system now abuses are made- Such abuse may bring an end to it and this is why responsibility must come from all . This is my take: if we all agree to pinch in to stop gloal warming, if we all agree to pinch in to stop waste (the USA is the most guilty for this one), if we all agree to save our planet for the future of the children why cannot we pinch in so all of us have a health care coverage?

Monique

[Willie]

Care is something we give when people need it. We do this because we want people to care for us when we need it. The problem isn't healthcare, it's health insurance. We can provide more healthcare by shutting down the health insurance industry. Insurance is what made healthcare so expensive in the first place. If everyone could afford to be hospitalized, why would we need insurance? At the demands of the insurance industry, the health care industry keeps it's prices higher than the average person can afford to pay. This way, people are forced to buy health insurance, "in case something goes wrong." Why else would the hospital charge you $25 for a tylenol?

[Trudy]

One thing that seems to be misunderstood about universal health insurance is that it's just insurance and is not health care management. It is like one big group policy, which automatically lowers costs for everybody, and not just the cost of health insurance, but the cost of doing business also. For example, were it enacted, according to management whines about health care costs for employees, it would reduce the price of a car. So why aren't they asking for universal health insurance?

[theoriginalanomaly]

I think it is the wrong direction. Most people look at health care and see that it is becoming more and more unaffordable and the service is going down. I agree. But most people don't agree why. I for one believe it is because of government interference. The medical industry has a monopoly on health care. You have to be licensed to practice and blah blah blah. And many people would say of course. But since politicians don't know jack shit about medical industry... the licensing is handed over to the industry itself. The medical association is made up of doctors. And they have control over what is taught, and what schools are accredited. They can control in this respect how many new doctors enter the field. And are quick to keep the numbers lower. It is no different the a Union. They protect their jobs and their pay by restricting competition. I for one would rather go to someone who is trained to examine patients and makes 10 - 15 $/hr who actually looks at you and examines you. If they have questions we have all sorts of wonderful technologies like the internet that can help. I would imagine that there would be service sites where the people could operate without doctors. If you had 1 person who was a doctor doctor on a website who answered questions from around the country all day we would all get way cheaper service, and better. As now only a doctor can prescribe and diagnose. So there are not enough doctors. And they want to keep up and make the same money that other doctors make. So you spend about 30 seconds, and they don't even look at you, and they charge like 120 $. The service has gone down, and the price has gone up.... It is a monopoly. Obviously, surgery and emergencies cannot be handled by untrained people. But taking readings, giving shots, and other even basic diagnosing can be handled by the average joe with a little training. Of course the MA is heading in this direction with nurses, and nurse practitioners... however they are still limiting the numbers to keep the pay higher, and to maintain the control that they do have.

Also, I find it funny... One of the big arguments for establishing the MA was because of all the "Quacks" selling snake oils. Many of these "quacks" like acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, herbal remedy, and other such practices... are now considered quite serious. And currently over 50% of todays practicing doctors prescribe placebo's.

Another argument for establishing the medical monopoly was for safety. The number of deaths related to poor service has increased. Partly because doctors are overworked... because there aren't enough. And also because doctors review doctors. So many doctors with poor records, can continue to practice. Their friends in many cases are the ones who decide if it was a foul or not. But the safety has decreased. I mean seriously it wasn't even 25 years ago when...

"According to a report by the International Graphoanalysis Society (IGAS), between 1980 and 1986 there were 70 lobotomies performed in Belgium, 32 in France, 15 per year in the United Kingdom and several cases performed for the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston." (wikipedia.org)

(ECT is electric shock therapy)

"The American Psychiatric Association released its second task force report in 1990 where specific details on the delivery, education, and training of ECT were documented. Finally in 2001 the American Psychiatric Association released its latest task force report. This report emphasizes the importance of informed consent, and the expanded role that the procedure has in modern medicine." (wikipedia.org)

There are always two ways of looking at things. Some people look for government to fix all the problems. Some people see it as the government causing the problems. I generally hold that using force does not mean your solutions are good. In fact it keep bad solutions going for longer then they should. And that private competition can only use good ideas and good service to get people to use them. So, no I don't think giving the government more control will help.

[PrometheusForLiberty]

The intentions behind Universal Healthcare are good, but the results will be awful. Voluntary actions and prices allocate resources and make things much cheaper than corrosion and central planing.The State is already in charge of more than 50% of the health care market and they make the prices on everything they touch go throw the roof. What we need is for insurance to go back to only covering dangerous surgery and accidents not ever procedure under the sun. If we did this people would care about the prices of medical care and shop around. Which would intern bring the price of medical care down to a more affordable level.