Let’s talk Issues – Should we have Universal Healthcare?
KSprad asked:
If you think we should, do you know how that gets paid for and how it may or may not affect your personal choices as a patient?
This entry was posted
on Sunday, March 29th, 2009 at 12:28 am and is filed under Health Care.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
If you think we should, do you know how that gets paid for and how it may or may not affect your personal choices as a patient?
For 10 pts, which candidate agrees with you?
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.healthcare.html
When I was fired form my last job, (the first time in 25 years of working I’ve ever been fired), I lost my healthcare and rcvd paperwork for COBRA healthcare. It cost almost a weeks pay! Thank goodness I had another job in less than a week. But who can realistically afford that? It was cheaper to just buy my meds out of pocket.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:08 am
Depends on what you mean by universal?
March 31st, 2009 at 5:46 am
Sure, if every American wants to buy coverage on their own. Insurance of all types must be handled within the private sector.
Government runs nothing well, efficiently, or cost effectively. See the DMV, roads, schools, anything.
April 2nd, 2009 at 2:47 pm
No, we should remove capitalism from the health sector except for employees.
April 4th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
the purpose of Universal Health care is to provide “affordable” health care to every American…. YES, we should have it.
April 5th, 2009 at 9:17 am
I want some reform for private health insurance. They should not be able to deny kidneys, drop cancer patients, or deny you coverage on a whim. Meanwhile, their CEOs are raking in $$$$
April 6th, 2009 at 6:18 am
No. The notorious example is Canada, which does, except that it doesn’t: if you need a medical procedure, you cannot get it in Canada in a timely manner — you have to come to the States. If the US had the Canadian system, where would Americans go?
April 7th, 2009 at 9:41 am
First of all, no one is offering universal care… they are offering to pass legislation that REQUIRES you to carry coverage… and if you are not “coverable” they will provide the coverage, at your cost… But no one has said anything about how they will handle the issue of ACCESS to care… Which is the real problem. The government can’t simply swoop in and tell doctors what they can and can’t charge! They are private businesses! What will they do, federalize medical practice? Do doctors no longer have the right to make a living?
And by the way, the plan that Clinton is proposing already exists… go sit in any community hospital and you can experience it first hand!
COVERAGE isn’t the issue! Access to quality care is!
April 8th, 2009 at 7:18 am
Absolutely not. Health care ain’t cheap, and rightly so. I want the best. I’m sorry if you can’t afford it. That’s why we have health insurance.
You want it. You pay for it. You don’t pay for it. You obviously don’t value it. So, stop complaining.
McCain.
April 10th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
I was thinking you would pay for it.
April 12th, 2009 at 12:22 am
social Darwinism is not an American Value as envisaged by BFrankliin or T Jefferson, sans the slaves. They developed socialist systems, the commons, for the improvement of the people. ie fire dept., police dept, public Libraries. Jeff opened UVirgina as a free school as did B Franklin with UPennsylvania. It wasn’t until the Neo-cons brainwashed all the sheeple into believing that “Bare-knuckles” capitalism was a good thing that we started getting this kind of thinking as spouted by “angyguy”.
Is America a “WE” society or a ME society where we throw our “poor and huddled masses” on the scrap heap. I for one don’t want my health provider to be someone who has a profit motive behind the choices they make with my care!!!!!
April 14th, 2009 at 7:11 am
Basically yes. Just like doctors that accept medicare insurance as payment, it is a choice. Some do not take medicare patients. And some do not take other kinds of insurance. Universal coverage would in essence guarantee payments to the doctors and health care facilities. It would have to be supported by individual contributions, employer contributions and government contributions, by way of tax credits to employed people and subsidies to the poor. All things would have to have caps, and doctors would have to determine if they would get more than the cap from their patients. There would have to be caps on mal practice suits so the doctor’s premiums could be capped. The hospitals and doctors that now have to write off bills that they cannot collect would be able to justify the caps. That would do away with the need for medical collectors that typically get to keep the money they collect.