Universal Health Care?

With nearly 47 million Americans, or 16 percent of the population without health insurance and that number continuing to rise every year as health care becomes more expensive, what are your issues against universal health care?

Countries that do have universal health care like Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, and the UK all have higher life exectancies and lower infant mortality rates. As well, they all have lower per capita expenditures on health care (several thousand dollars less per person), lower healthcare costs as a percent of GDP, and less money as a % or government revenuse spent on health care.

My feelings is that universal health care will be very hard to implement in the US as Insurance Companies and the Pharmaceutical Industry all have a great influence on our politcal parties.
There may be a wait list for some procedures but statistically they still have higher life expectancies and lower infant mortality rates.

To the other person, these countries listed as an example have never been communist countries.

The numbers of those without health care is from the US Census Bureau. As well, I don’t consider it much of a choice to have to choose between health care and food for my family.

The ‘Healthcare has gotten expensive because of technology’ is an economically unfeasable argument. Technology should provide efficiencies to make procedures cheaper. If an advancement in technology means that it now become more expensive then it is not much of an advancement.

As for the socialism comment; welfare, unemployment insurance, and Government subsidized drugs are all forms of socialism. The funny thing is that our President pushed for the subsidized drugs that greatly benifits the drug companies. How many Canadian sneak over to the US to buy pharma drugs?


  • sarge927

    Let’s look at the reasons against universal health care:

    (1) If universal health care is implemented, the government will have 100% control over the health care of every American citizen. Freedom of choice for health care will be gone, and once the government takes over health care we’re stuck with whatever system they come up with. And as we all know, the only two things the Federal Government is good at are wasting taxpayer dollars and miring every program they administer in miles of red tape.

    (2) We already have a picture of what universal health care would look like in America. Do you remember the uproar over the atrocious conditions at Walter Reed Medical Center in DC? That health care facility is run by the government and operates under the same model of socialized medicine that is advocated by universal health care supporters. So we can expect the same standard (substandard at best) level of health care from a system of universal health care.

    (3) Michael Moore would have Americans believe universal health care would be the best thing to come along since sliced bread. Nothing could be further from the truth. We need look no further than Canada to see that universal health care is not the answer. Canadians come across the border into the U.S. by the hundreds every day because they can’t get the medication or treatment they need from their health care system, so they come here and pay for care out of their own pockets. The wait time for an MRI at Windsor Memorial Hospital right now (and their MRI unit runs 24/7) is six to eight weeks, and you can’t get a routine colonoscopy in Canada because the health care system won’t authorize the procedure unless you’re showing symptoms of a problem. Um, excuse me, but don’t these idiots know that by the time you start showing symptoms of colon cancer you’re terminal 90% of the time or better? And did I mention that Canadian health care only covers you in the province in which you reside? So if you live in Ontario and take a weekend trip to Montreal and end up needing to see a doctor or go to the ER that comes out of YOUR pocket.

    P.S.: I don’t buy your assertion that these countries have less per capita expenditures on health care for one second. Their income taxes are at least 10% higher (and as much as 30% higher) than ours, and you can’t tell me that all that money is being directed somewhere other than universal health care.

  • vtjames7433

    The 47 million number has been proven to be inflated and also that a large portion of the uninsured are already eligible for government insurance but have not signed up and another large percentage can easily afford to buy insurance but CHOOSES not to. The number of people who cannot afford it and dont qualify for government aid is very low comparitively.
    I do NOT want the government running my health care. Besides where will the people from those other countries go when they need operations in a hurry but are on a waiting list at home???

  • regerugged

    You have been duped. The 47 million figure is bogus. For one thing, the government counts a person as uninsured for the year even if he is without insurance for one day. Millions of people can buy health insurance and choose not to. It is a basic freedom; insure or not insure as you wish. There are millions who are eligible for Medicare or Medicaid, who do not apply for it.
    Countries with universal health care all have failing systems. The US has the best health care system in the world, regardless of the cost. If you are dying and want to live, you won’t worry about the cost.
    Universal health care is socialism. It will not be implemented because people in the US value their freedom to choose. The lobbyists have no influence on Mrs. Clinton. She has been advocating socialized medicine Ever since her husband was governor.

  • jvwatson4

    You sorely misunderstand the Universal Health in these countries…Waiting to see a doctor for months to find out that you have a disease, then having to wait a few more months to see a specialists..THis is the true Universal Health..

  • Golden

    i agree with your summation. in many places those who sell "protection" are considered gangsters. how did this change so radically in america?

    i support national health care. many argue that they don’t want the government involved. the government has been involved for a long, long time. the big problem we’re having is simply paying for standardized health care for all.

  • Fairness, why

    If you’re rich you don’t care because you can go anywhere for healthcare.

    If you’re middle class or poor you better be prepared for a huge tax increase with National Healthcare.

    The countries you mentioned have very high tax rates to pay for their blotted healthscare systems. Not to mention the wait times for routine surgeries and problems. Being from an ex-communist country I saw first hand the "efficiency" of social medicine.

    In my country healthcare was free but you had to be willing to wait several months for an appointment with a doctor. And when I was in hospital one time I heard a nurse in the next room apologizing to a patient in great pain because her allotment of anesthesia had run out during surgery.


    You paint a rosy picture but ask the folks who are coming from Canada to the US for treatment what their feelings are. The waiting time to see a doctor is getting longer and longer. I know a doctor who moved from Canada to the US to get away from their health care system. These countries charge enormous taxes and I would like to see your data on ‘several thousand dollars less per person’ as I don’t believe it!

  • Flyboy

    Before I answer your question I’ll ask one of you: Why do you think so many Canadians come to the United States for elective surgical procedures?

    Comment on your Additional Information:

    A bunch of people can stand barefooted with one foot in a pot of boiling water and the other in a pot of ice water and you can say that statistically all are comfortable since the mean temperature for each person is in the warm range. Statistics don’t mean squat when it is your daughter who needs an elective and possibly life saving treatment and some faceless bureaucrat declines to approve your request for treatment.

  • joe s

    1st of all the number of 47 million is suspicious. It includes people who were between jobs but got healthcare, people who can afford healthcare but would rather spend their money on BMW leases and others.

    2nd universal healthcare is no panacea.

    3rd the health care discussion is BS. Nobody wants to discuss the real issues.

    Healthcare has gotten expensive because of technology. Over 50% of your lifetime healthcare dollars are spent in the last 6 months of your life. Whether you have a government sponsored system like the UK, France or Canada, or a market sponsored one like in the US, health care is rationed.

    In 1950 there was no chemo therapy, cardio bypass, MRI, CT’s, etc.

    The average person could afford it.

    The question that should be debated and will never be is when is enough — enough. No politician will win on the platform Grandma doesn’t get chemo and Grandpa doesn’t get the bypass.

    Untill then the lines will get longer in France, the UK and Canada and Health Insurance will get more expensive in the US.

  • information_police

    I agree with what you say. Universal Health care is the way to go.

    But my biggest fear is the conservative attitude towards entitlements in this country, which is not a big factor in the countries that have successful universal care. I worry that IF universal heath care is instituted in the USA, conservatives would make sure it is always underfunded. Thus they will make their warnings about shortages in service into a self-fulfilling prophesy.

  • netmorale_admin

    As things stand, I would not support our government getting too deeply involved in health care. The feds just are not capable of running anything in an efficient manner!

  • fangtaiyang

    The main objection that I hear to universal health care is that the"hard working taxpayer will be paying for the lazy good for nothing bums of the world". The fallacy of that particular objection is that one of the reasons our health care costs are so high is that we are already paying foir the healtcare of those who cannot afford to pay for it themselves. Universal health care has proven to be a much more efficient and a much cheaper way to go than our current systems.

  • Krista

    The first response asked:
    "Besides where will the people from those other countries go when they need operations in a hurry but are on a waiting list at home???"

    I would ask in return… Why do you think there Are waiting lists in some countries? Is it because _all_ of the people who need the procedure are actually getting access to it, rather than just those who can afford to pay?

    There are three basic necessities in life that no-one should have to be without. Food, shelter and health care. I find it atrocious that we can spend billions of dollars a month on war infrastructure but balk at spending money on a health care system.

    Yes, the lobbying of the health care industry would be fierce, but our health care system is broken. The longer we wait to fix it, the worse it’ll get.

  • Sahara

    I am for universal coverage. It’s a necessity. NO ONE should be able to determine who lives and who dies. That is what our system does. It seems very unamerican to me. We are spending future generations money on a war that was wrong from the beginning. Why is that ok? People are making money from this!!!! Is that sick or what?
    I spent some time working in a pharmacy (more than 3 years) and I can tell you that the pharmacists I worked with hating dealing with insurance companies and just wanted to provide good and proper care to patients. They didn’t like the business aspect because they felt it interfered with their ability to do their job with too much red tape. (prior authorizations for one) It just seemed getting more complex as time went on. We did have to deny medication to people because of insurance and the person couldn’t afford to pay out of pocket. No, they were not on Medicare or Medicaid. They had private insurance. It makes you want to cry, to see someone who is sick and needs the medicine. They can’t have it because the insurance company needs more paperwork from the doctor. Try getting that paperwork from the doctor’s office in a timely fashion? It wasn’t happening.
    I don’t think we need to go the way of Europe. I think we need to find a system that works for us. The government should pay and we should pay the government for it. Take out the profit and administrative costs. It costs 30% to justify denying coverage. I read that somewhere. I don’t know how accurate it is but from what I know, it does sound at least close to it.
    The lazy and incompetent are already covered. We are talking about covering the working poor which could include a lot of us on here. More people are struggling at making ends meet. It’s a fact. It costs more to live and our wages are not increasing at even close to the same rate. It’s a matter of when we see a jump in the homeless population. It could happen. Wait and see or start looking for the truth and coming up with possible solutions? I’m voting for Dennis Kucinich because he has a plan that makes sense. I think we have done great with medicine and drugs. We need to improve access to it and that will get more money into it.
    More products and service to more people = more revenue
    The government is already funding it.

  • jeeper_peeper321

    Well three reasons.

    1. the 47 million number, includes people who were without health insurance for just a single day.

    2. It is not 47 million americans, it is 47 million people in america, 16 million of those 47 million, are not american citizens.

    3. The proponets of universial health care, are great at citing various reasons we should have it,

    But they can never seem to tell people, what it would cost and specificly how it would be funded or implimented.

  • Jeancommunicates

    That 16% that doesn’t have health insurance can go to any emergency room in this country and get the very best of health care. Medicaid takes care of children whose families do not have money for health care insurance. In this country we take care of our sick. Often people are too proud to ask for help, but help is there for those who need it.

    The pharmaceutical companies need to take care of the senior citizens. The Insurance companies need to take care of the children or the government needs to regulate them. I believe the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical companies know this and they can do more than what they are doing or throw America into universal health care.

    America has the best of everything. Greed must listen to need and take care of it or go under.

  • dschroeder2k

    Oh please no. Socialism is a proven broken system.

  • Yohan V

    I don’t think that ANY health Care program should cover Senators who pick up soiled toilet paper while straddling bowls in airport bathrooms. That lad should be labeled " HIGH RISK " .

Leave a Reply