Universal Health Care now! (for the US)
By poingly
@poingly (605)
United States
December 9, 2009 1:18pm CST
Though I have no doubt that with each and every day, Congress and insurance companies make health care more and more of a mess, I do believe strongly in universal health care funded by taxes. Here is some reasoning.
(1) Make it progressive! Right now, poor people pay a much larger chunk of their income to for insurance than rich people do (if they can even afford it). By making it a progressive/part of our income tax, health care costs for 95% of Amricans would go down. I guess I can understand why the top 5% would oppose Universal Health Care, but the rest of you would be opposed to your own self-interest and your own wallet. It's sort of silly.
(2) Dispelling the death panel myth. I hate the death panel argument, and here's why. I understand why people would be opposed to death panels, but THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE NOW. You heard me; if you oppose death panels, the only solution is a government law that GUARANTEES health insurance. Right NOW we have insurance companies deciding who lives and who dies. There are death panels as we speak--they are just corporate board rooms and not in government agencies. I guess people opposed to Universal Health Care are simply fine with death panels--as long as they are privatized death panels! Government run health care could wipe this out easily!
(3) Money saving! We don't have to get rid of insurance companies! They can still stay in business and provide jobs--in fact, the more people you can insure on the government's dime, the better these companies will do! It will also reduce costs like advertising! This could be a pot of gold for the profits coming into insurance companies. However, it also means they will HAVE to provide care (where they REALLY cut corners now--see also how there are death panels now). In which case, we'd just have to accept that maybe health care isn't profitable, and that is one more reason it should be run like other things that the government does that simply doesn't make money (like fire fighters for instance).
4 people like this
5 responses
@MrNiceGuy (4141)
• United States
10 Dec 09
How do the poor pay more for insurance? Thats just a lie. If the poor even have insurance, they're probably paying less because of government programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
If you want universal health care you will have to pay for it out of increased taxes. Period.
And government health care would destroy insurance companies. How do you suppose those companies would make money? Who would buy insurance when you could get it for free?
Not to mention how terrible the quality of this health coverage would be.
1 person likes this
@poingly (605)
• United States
10 Dec 09
First of all, and let's get this out of the way now: King of the Hill rules!
At my last job, health care cost around $400-$500 a month for each of us. It didn't matter if you were the guy making $18K a year or the guy making $100K. That means the poor guy pays much MORE of his paycheck to healthcare.
As far as the quality? Are you suggesting it is of good quality now simply because people are just dieing instead of using it? Isn't that a horrible thought? How would it get worse?
Yes, more taxes. Period! I know, but it would also mean you would have to pay that bit of your paycheck for healthcare that you are currently paying. People on the low end would pay less. People on the high end would pay more (that's what progressive means). The people in the middle would pay exactly the same--of course, considering we have very few people on the top and a lot of people on the bottom--the middle income wise would actually be very, very high; giving most people a tax BREAK if done right.
Having an army doesn't put Haliburton out of business (or Blackwater)--it thrives because of it--health companies would be like this--however, they would have to stop denying people care... Oh, and also UPS survives despite the USPS.
2 people like this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
11 Dec 09
Does the person who makes more money get a better policy for the same money? No you are purchasing a product or service and you both get the same. If the person making $1,000,000 a year and a person making $50,000 a year both order a Ford Focus does the person making $1,000,000 pay more for the same car?
2 people like this
@MrNiceGuy (4141)
• United States
11 Dec 09
You aren't understanding the bit about quality. When has anything ever run better because the government started controlling it? If you think the redtape is a hassle now, then just wait til the government takes over.
And the government would take over health care not as in using the current insurance companies or using practices that would even allow them to continue making money. So the private health insurance would disappear.
And why should rich people have to pay more for less coverage? And are you sure your job wasnt just a health care savings account? Thats what it sounds like.
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
11 Dec 09
My problem with Universal Health Insurance is where is it in the Constitution that gives the government the right to steal money from me (taking it without my permission in the form of taxes) and give it to some one else? I invested over $100,000 in myself to get to where I am now and I see a person who has not invested anything in themselves - no High School Education and they live as good as I do! Where is the justice in that? I work 40 to 60 hours a week (I was management) and pay over 1/3 of my income in taxes plus I pay for part of my health Insurance. A former student turned down a teaching job because the benefits were better on welfare. She had to take an entry level job that paid $35,000 or better to improve her 9and her daughter) life style. My daughter (a single mom) same age took a job as a teacher for $26,000 per year and drove 45 miles one way to the job.
If you want universal care move to a country that has it and a lower standard of health care and living.
1 person likes this
@ladybugmagic (3978)
• United States
12 Dec 09
Bobmnu -
You have to remember that some people fall prey to circumstance and location. Not everyone is in the position to invest $100,000 in themselves. Some people live in poorer circumstances, such as the loss of a parent, and having to work a job while in school age, to help around the house, and sometimes they can't even get to their studies because they have to look after their siblings.
If people can't even pay for school, or food on their table, they can not pay for preventative health care.
Not everyone is given the opportunity to invest 100 large into themeselves or their careers. But, here we have the opportunity, as a civilization to ease some of the struggles.
@poingly (605)
• United States
12 Dec 09
I also think it's sort of funny when people say "if you don't like [X] about America, get out!"
I mean, isn't that sort of un-American in a way? America is all about how this country was created in a way that we (as citizens) can change and better our own selves and country WITHOUT packing up and leaving! Many of our ancestors came here from countries where you simply COULDN'T do that!
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
23 Dec 09
If this government health insurance is so great why is congress and their families exempt from it and have a better plan paid for by taxpayers. Just like Social Security is good enough for us tax payers but congress has a better plan again [paid for by the Tax payers.
It was announced in the British Press that the government Healthy Ministry has imposed a 3 week ban on elective procedures to save money.
President Obama even said there would be panals to review the best and most cost effective treatments and that iws what the Dr wouold be allowed to do. I woulod suggest that your read some of the papers written by his advisors and Czars. They talk about such things a having an obligation to die, and that when it cost more to keep you alive than you can produce then you should not expect to get the best care. Several have written on what is driving the cost of Medical Care is the new medical devices that are being developed and may not be needed if they only keep people alive that can not be productive.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
10 Dec 09
I am all for some sort of suplimental healthcare coverage for those who can't afford it IF
a. It isn't forced on me
b. It genuinely doesn't add to the deficit
c. It doesn't add an unbalanced tax burden
d. it isn't run by the a government beurocrocy
e. it is done with in the framework of our constitution
So far, not a single thing proposed by our congressional clowns or the administration has met so much as one of the above mentioned criteria. Sorry guys...get thee back to the drawing board and try again.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
11 Dec 09
"a. No, it's not forced on you. It's like public school. It's just part of your taxes."
And I'm forced to pay those taxes, so yes, it's forced on me.
"e. I think there's a right to LIFE, liberty, and property in that ol' Constitution somewhere!"
Actually it's in the Declaration of Independence, and it says nothing about property. Either way, LIFE means living. Everyone has the right to live. That statement does not make any reference to the quality of life.
If you interpret it to be free healthcare, another may interpret it to be free food, water, clothing, and shelter. After all, those are the basic necessities of life. What it really means, is you have the right to live, be free, and work to pursue your dreams. This was not designed to be a cradle to grave government.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
11 Dec 09
[i]Not saying that the imperfect ideas presented by Congress are EXACTLY the same as my idea, but guaranteed Universal Health Care sounds like it would be!
a. No, it's not forced on you. It's like public school. It's just part of your taxes. [/i]
Actually yes, it will be forced on you, you will be forced to carry health insurance, something the federal government doesn't have the authority to do in the first place. And do not bring up auto insurance, it's a straw man argument, the federal government doesn't do that, that's state government and besides, my state (and your former state so you know this) does not in fact require me to have it.
[i]b. This is totally possible; it will require some increase of taxes.
c. It could be done by actually increasing the take home pay of most workers. It would actually balance taxes MORE than they currently are if they were made appropriately progressive, and more in line with traditional American values on taxation. [/i]
I too think it's possible, if done propperly. But tell me, how do you propose to raise everyone's wages?
d. I support regulation to guarantee care, but the current companies can be the administrators.
Not sure what you mean here, who is to guaranty the care?
e. I think there's a right to LIFE, liberty, and property in that ol' Constitution somewhere!
having one's healthcare paid for is a pretty loose interpretation of that.
1 person likes this
@poingly (605)
• United States
10 Dec 09
Not saying that the imperfect ideas presented by Congress are EXACTLY the same as my idea, but guaranteed Universal Health Care sounds like it would be!
a. No, it's not forced on you. It's like public school. It's just part of your taxes.
b. This is totally possible; it will require some increase of taxes.
c. It could be done by actually increasing the take home pay of most workers. It would actually balance taxes MORE than they currently are if they were made appropriately progressive, and more in line with traditional American values on taxation.
d. I support regulation to guarantee care, but the current companies can be the administrators.
e. I think there's a right to LIFE, liberty, and property in that ol' Constitution somewhere!
1 person likes this
@coolcoder (2018)
• United States
13 Dec 09
When your taxes go sky-high and the older members of your family get sick and can't get good health care--or they do, but it's delayed--don't come crying to those of us who don't want universal health care. This is what's going to happen. How else do you think this stuff is going to be paid for? Senior citizens are going to have Medicare benefits slashed in order to save money, everyone's going to have unbelievably high taxes.
I guess I can understand why the top 5% would oppose Universal Health Care, but the rest of you would be opposed to your own self-interest and your own wallet.
You're darn right we're concerned about our wallets! It would be middle-class America who'd be most affected by this, and that includes you. How are those working Americans, who are struggling just to get by in this economy, going to be able to handle tax hikes? It's not just the top 5% of American people.
@poingly (605)
• United States
13 Dec 09
Those "unbelievably" high taxes for 95% can and should be less than the current amount they are paying for health care. I'm damn concerned about my wallet too, which is why it's only reasonable to support universal health care, because it will help the middle class, and lower their current financial burden--if it is done CORRECTLY. If you are in the top 5% of American earners, and still living paycheck to paycheck, you have got some serious money management problems.
1 person likes this
