Why should america consider a national health plan?

8 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    We should consider it because our current system is a miserable failure. We rate 37th in the world in quality of health care and spend more money on it than any other nation. The reason for this is that the medical system is driven only by greed instead of the desire to heal. We have to take greed out of the equation. If we had a national health care system, they would actually be looking for cures because it is more cost effective than treating symptoms for the rest of your life.

  • Bryan
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    America should not consider a national health. Examine countries with national health and you will find that there are issues with waiting periods, quality of care, ability to pick your own doctor, and high taxes. If the United States wishes to reform the insurance and medical industries, and in turn make health insurance more accessible to all, that I could support. I have always thought it was criminal that an insurance company can basically pay a doctor what they think is fair, but any average person off the street without insurance must pay whatever the doctor demands.

    dryheatdave: I agree with some of your contentions, but as usual with the "we need a national health set" , what you fail to mention when speaking of Britain and Canada is how high their taxes are in order to support those national health systems. You may be okay with giving up large portions of your income to support that type of system, I am not. We definitely need reform in the current systems, but we do not need national health.

  • 1 decade ago

    In th USA, we live in a free market economy. That means that everyone is free to run a business - why isn't the government entitled to set up a self-financing healthcare system, run at cost - rather than providing profits to shareholders ? Same goes for prescription drugs - why can't the federal government R&D & sell prescription drugs in competition with the commerical organisations making profits for their shareholders.

    If the government has a responsibility when something is "in the public interest" (an admittedly dangerous phrase) - isn't healthcare in the public interest ?

    BTW - both Canada & the UK have pretty fine healthcare systems & spend far less. US healthcare costs are the highest in the world (see link). Cutting out the profit could help reduce them

  • 1 decade ago

    In my opinion, they shouldn't. The government has enough to deal with as it is. Health care should be left to the health professionals. I hear mostly bad reviews of the Canadian national health plan. Having to wait long periods of time for what we'd consider emergency care. Any Canadians care to give their opinion?

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    All we hear about in the US is how the Canadian system is teetering on the brink of failure and that people have to wait forever for basic medical care. I can only tell you that when my grandfather required bypass surgery, he was in for it right away because it was an emergency. Here in the States I have known two people who were highly educated and gainfully employed with insurance benefits and ended up declaring bankruptcy because cancer maxed out their insurance. If the US wants to go on calling itself the greatest country in the world, it needs to figure out how to deal with the shameful lack of proper insurance for a huge percentage of its people.

  • 1 decade ago

    i personally think we should.. my husband and i arent elligible for health care through work and we make too much for state ins.. so we are stuck if we get sick

  • 1 decade ago

    So everyone is covered.

  • 1 decade ago


Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.