• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Social Healthcare Myth.

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,717
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
So, I see on many threads here that a section of our country is concerned with the socialization of healthcare, some politicians are guilty of perpetuating a myth that this will be the miracle "salve"(sorry) to bring about the uplifting of the working and poor class. But there are problems with this idea, so here goes:
Myth 1 - there is little or no care available to the poor and lower middle class.
Truth - no state in the union will allow a hospital to turn away an emergency case, care facilities must at the very least stabalize a patient to insure a safe release, outside of that medicare is an option to those who can't afford insurance as well as private charity and other programs.
Myth 2 - Making healthcare a free for all, government sponsored program will relieve financial burdens on those who would otherwise have to spend much of their income on healthcare.
Truth - Not exactly, taxes would have to be increased on everyone to be able to make these programs readily available, the tax base is already pretty stretched, and to exempt classes outside of the wealthiest 10%(sorry Kerry, but you're wrong) would mean that funding would have to be grabbed from other spending programs, so actually, the burden would simply be shifted to a different area.
Myth 3 - Socialized healthcare is just as good as privatized.
Truth - Where to begin, firstly, every social healthcare system has an even longer wait than private systems(which have hours long waits as is), secondly, when you take out the competitive aspect of medicine, like anything else, you will naturally take out a built in intitiative for the doctor to improve his skills or even care about his success rate or appropriate diagnosis, some would say this already happens now under the private sector, so imagine medicine without the need to perform at one's best.
Myth 4 - Health insurance rates are high because of a combination of insurance companies gouging customers for higher profits and doctors milking their craft for fees.
Truth - not even close, there is currently a trend towards most health companies closing doors because of a lack of profitability, there exists less than a fraction of companies as opposed to the seventies and eighties because it is so hard to give a reasonable rate and pay the bills at the same time. The last information I had on this there were maybe one or two companies out of all the one's left that are actually in the black, the rest are all heavily in the red.

Finally, there is one final problem (that I know of) with socializing health care, under this system, there will be NO health insurance companies left, even though most don't show a profit, ALL insurance companies invest in the market to produce more funds for payouts, with a massive loss in these investments, the market will dip and other companies will suffer as a result, this trend would of course, trickle down to workers everywhere.
 
Such a long post, and not a single shred of evidence.
 
Naughty Nurse said:
Such a long post, and not a single shred of evidence.
Fine then, prove me wrong.
 
social healthcare system from what I here from other Europeans and Canadians seems to work well for them. They trade low taxes in for less financial stress at the point in time where such stress is not healthy.
 
nkgupta80 said:
social healthcare system from what I here from other Europeans and Canadians seems to work well for them. They trade low taxes in for less financial stress at the point in time where such stress is not healthy.
I don't know, I speak to quite a few Canadians down here(tourism, we have a connection from colonial days) and for every one I talk to that likes the system two don't. Honestly, when the government takes something over you lose the right to choose, just look at the options for people currently on governmental medical assistance.
 
I agree somewhat with this article. The socialized systems are understaffed. Long waits can be a problem. (although some of the people I talked to didn't have this problem in Canada).

However I do like the idea of paying higher taxes, rather than risk getting seriosuly sick and then in that moment end up under enormous financial strain. Yes if I don't get sick the higher taxes will take away from me. However, if I do get sick, I don't have to worry about bills as I undergo my medical care.
 
nkgupta80 said:
I agree somewhat with this article. The socialized systems are understaffed. Long waits can be a problem. (although some of the people I talked to didn't have this problem in Canada).
It sounds cliche, but sometimes you really do get what you pay for.

However I do like the idea of paying higher taxes, rather than risk getting seriosuly sick and then in that moment end up under enormous financial strain. Yes if I don't get sick the higher taxes will take away from me. However, if I do get sick, I don't have to worry about bills as I undergo my medical care.
I see where your logic comes from to be honest, but the way I see it, instead of paying that much extra in taxes, why not get health insurance at a cheaper price while you're healthy(taxes like group insurance would have to pro-rate for the weaker links in the chain) I think people who take their coverage seriously would come out ahead through the private sector if they plan well.
 
nkgupta80 said:
I agree somewhat with this article. The socialized systems are understaffed. Long waits can be a problem. (although some of the people I talked to didn't have this problem in Canada).

However I do like the idea of paying higher taxes, rather than risk getting seriosuly sick and then in that moment end up under enormous financial strain. Yes if I don't get sick the higher taxes will take away from me. However, if I do get sick, I don't have to worry about bills as I undergo my medical care.

You like the idea of paying higher taxes?

As suggested, how about getting yourself some insurance instead of dumping the cash into the government and hoping they make things better?

If someone can't take care of themselves and gets overweight eating fast food, why should I be stuck with the bill when their heart attack inevitably rolls along? Same with smoking, gang shootings, etc.; why am I footing the bill for people who can't take care of themselves?

I don't want to get stuck in a tight spot. So I BUY INSURANCE. I don't continue being stupid and hope someone else will save me at the last second. thats the idea behind capitalism.

if everyones getting the same coverage no matter how much they pay or how hard they work, that's communism.
 
nkgupta80 said:
social healthcare system from what I here from other Europeans and Canadians seems to work well for them. They trade low taxes in for less financial stress at the point in time where such stress is not healthy.

Is that why thousands of Canadians cross the border every year, get medical care at US hospitals and then skip the country and the bills?
 
oh they got their share of problems, but the amount of epople who have medical coverage there signicantly higher than of those in the US.
 
Back
Top Bottom