Can universal healthcare actually be good?
The left brings up the issue of national healthcare supposedly to improve the lives of those who cant afford it. Yet, no one has actually studied what the effects will be on our economy. Let us compare the stats between Canada, Europe, and the U.S.
- For Leukemia, American survival rate is 50% while European is 35%
- Survival rate for prostate cancer 81.2% but is 61.7% in France and 44% in England
- Waiting time for an MRI or Breast cancer screening will be four times longer
-Even in Canda, many are turning to private sectors and rejecting universal healthcare
It is clear that universal healthcare will only hurt Americans and it won't help at all the working class. Universal healthcare isn't feasible and trying to implement it will only bring about calamities we won't imagine. Can't we all agree is bad?
Stop- According to other sources, there aren't even 47 million uninsured! The numbers are way lower than what government documents decree. Also, do you think universal healthcare would actually help those people?
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
There are issues with our current system- primarily with the insurance end and government involvement. Having said that the answer is not government run health care which would bbe far worse just like everything a government touches. Insurance premiums vary greatly from one state to another because each state has its own rules and mandates they place on insurance policies. In one state you can get coverage for one person for $100/mth and in another it could be $400/mth. Government mandates on isurance policies make these differences occur. Also ridiculous malpractice awards drive up malpractice insurance rates which nearlt cripple doctors. We can fix these problems but the left has no interest in looking at the actual problems because they simply want government control.
Also there are not 47 million uninsured- there are far less. The number looks to be more like less than 9 million who cannot afford insurance but also do not qualify for government insurance programs. The 47 million is a red herring used to distract from the real issues and to get more people to blindly follow into government run health care.
- 5 years ago
Gosh I don't know... but as someone who has a father out of work (laid off a year ago, not able to find a job, no one willing to insure him with diabetes, high blood pressure, and failed back surgery), it is truly heartbreaking for me to watch him struggle and not have the opportunity to see a doctor or get help with his medication costs. And I know plenty of other people laid off from work, that (thankfully) are healthy now, but living without health insurance. Everyone who worries about what will happen to the "middle class" (which I AM part of), would not be so worried if they had close friends and family who were affected by this issue. Human life is ALWAYS more important than money. So I have a question for you - if you don't think having a public Healthcare option is a good idea, than what do you suggest as an alternative? So that people who are struggling &can't get health insurance, can still get healthcare when needed? What would YOU plan to do to help these people? Or is it just "tough cookies" for them, since it's not a right, it's a priviledge?
- Jim CLv 51 decade ago
The left will say whatever you want to hear, just to gain a vote, then drop you like a hot rock when they're done with you, just like they did to Cindy Sheehan.
First of all, Univ. Healthcare is NOT free. It's paid for by HUGE taxes. Just ask anyone that lives outside of this country. That's a proven fact.
Second, if the Govt. was responsible for paying the doctors, what quality of Dr. do you think we'd have? Like anyone else, Dr.'s are in it for the money, and the Govt won't pay them what they're worth, or what they make now in the FREE ENTERPRISE SOCIETY that is the United States. Therefore, if there is no incentive for the Dr.'s to learn more or become better at what they do, who would want to become a Dr., and what kind of quality care would we have? You get what you pay for.
Third, in all of those country's that have Univ. Healthcare, how long do you think they wait for knee replacements, organ transplants, etc? Ask a Canadian. Why do you think they come down here for that sort of stuff?
Fourth, have you ever gone to motor vehicles to renew your license? Doesn't that suck? Imagine the Dr. office being like that. In fact, it would be like going to a free clinic where you take a number and wait all day for your turn.
Believe me, there is NOTHING good about Universal Healthcare, no matter what the Dems & Libs want you to hear.
- Honest OpinionLv 51 decade ago
As a person over 65, I enjoy the benefits of medicare (free health care). People on welfare get good service too. That's one reason they don't get jobs...they would lose the free health care.
Israel seems to enjoy their program and American tax payers foot the bill.
As far as your statistics go, they are bogus. According to our own government's statistics go, America ranks just below Cuba in heath care.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Agreed. Our current system sucks, but the government taking it over would only make it worse.
Another point to this argument is things that people knowingly do to themselves. Namely smoking and overeating. If someone smokes or eats too much and gets sick from it, why should I have to pay? The utter notion that I am somehow responsible for something that someone else does to themself is ridiculous.
- Darth VaderLv 61 decade ago
It is clear that if 1 child dies for the lack of their being able to afford health care, that it is worth it.
Why do you want children to die?
Politicians all receive health care free at the expense of the government, why are they the only ones?
- ErinyesLv 61 decade ago
I agree it is bad...even going past economics, the health care proposed by The Dems, are a blatant invasions of privacy as well. They want to dictate WHEN we go to the doctor as well and call it preventative...I am an adult and will make those decisions myself.
- macaroniLv 41 decade ago
No it cannot. We have the best health care in the world. While there are issues and problems, they will never be solved by letting the government get their greedy incompetents hands on it. In fact, it should be avoided at all costs.
- 1 decade ago
Maybe we can put Mayor Ray Nagin in charge of the system.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
I am one of the uninsured and I would rather see it stay private. Anyone that thinks service and prices will drop if it is government controlled needs to stop going to Disneyland so much. lol. Thanks for the question and have a great day!