A rich persons life is better because they have the get up and go. A poor person should stop complaining and get rich.
Answered By: ihatelilac - 4/9/2008 |
|
No, I do not agree.
Universal healthcare would be a big mistake. Making healthcare more affordable is the route that should be taken.
Answered By: Kalissa - 4/9/2008 |
|
First, do some research on what 'human rights' really are.
Second, if the healthcare system was 'set up' as a for profit industry, the bad practices would automatically go out of business instead of being constantly propped up with medicare cash.
Answered By: Pancakes - 4/9/2008 |
|
You are 100?ight. Health care is a RIGHT, not a privilege.
Answered By: EclecticNuance - 4/9/2008 |
|
Eliminate profit, and nobody's going to provide all that care. You can't force anyone to be a doctor or nurse or technician, or to do research and find cures or treatments, or to manufacture the drugs, or to run the hospitals...
Answered By: schazjmd - 4/9/2008 |
|
Health care is a limited commodity, to be bought and sold.
Answered By: stung4ever - 4/9/2008 |
|
It should be a basic Human RIGHT I have insurance good insurance but I lived in Germany and everyone there gets the same health care they never have to choose between health or dinner on the table our system is set up to make the rich richer
its ridiculous My neighbor is a nurse that has seen those without it be sent home and those with good plans have every test ran on them until they find something even though they came in with the same symptoms it s sad
Answered By: jay c - 4/9/2008 |
|
The government health care system is just about like the welfare system. Abe Lincoln said America can't afford a welfare system and never will. And it doesn't take much to see how it has raised taxes. And it's not really a question of can you afford it,the question is can it afford you.
Answered By: Roger S - 4/9/2008 |
|
Rights derive from the Constitution and there is nothing in the Constitution that would support healthcare as a right. I think you mean you would like to create a legislated entitlement for you to have healthcare at someone else's expense.
Answered By: SDD - 4/9/2008 |
|
Should be for everyone! why shouldn't everyone get the chance to be healthy??
Answered By: Paige - 4/9/2008 |
|
Do you have a RIGHT to a house? Do you have a RIGHT to clothes? Do you have a RIGHT to a car? Do you have a RIGHT to a toothbrush?? etc....
NO YOU DO NOT...
You buy things... and that includes health insurance. If you can not afford it, thank this blessed country and MY TAXES that you can at least get some decent care...
Answered By: Short3Gears - 4/9/2008 |
|
Let free market capitalism have a go at this. "No employer, no insurance company, no politician or government bureaucrat knows better than you about your family's health needs. You should have the right to purchase health care and health insurance as you see fit, without governmental restrictions or penalties, and you should not be of the mind that your neighbors have to buy it for you."
Source(s):
Ok, thumbsdowners, let's let politicians decide. That always works. Or, in the words of Jon Edwards, "You don't get that choice." You want to be forced to pay for health insurance whether you want it or not? What about the individual?
Answered By: Capitalist Baron - 4/9/2008 |
|
Ok, and just what kind of care will we have when brilliant Doctors no longer are enticed when the economic incentive is stripped away.
I do not agree, sorry. And if you are out there working your behind off, you deserve the luxuries that you have earned.
Answered By: rack em up - 4/9/2008 |
|
How is it a human right? If it was then ALL countries would do it and not try to force it on people.
Do I think people show have health care that they can afford? A big YES to that.
I do not believe in socialism and that is what we were told that we need in order to have health care in this country!
Answered By: fatboysdaddy - 4/9/2008 |
|
Why does society even exist? Is it to make life and the world a better place for all, or just to provide a labor force for the wealthy? This seems to be the major schools of thought when the arguments are broken down. Does anyone think that retarded or handicapped people shouldn't get free healthcare? Why can't people understand that intelligence or ability to make more money than thy neighbor, which usually correlates to intelligence, comes in all degrees and any degree of which should not be a criteria for qualifying for health insurance? If it is then who decides at what intelligence level one would be "over the limit" to qualify? How do we even measure that? Sometimes a question is best answered with another!
Answered By: kinder12u - 4/9/2008 |
|
For a Person that HAS A JOB !!!! ... ANY JOB !!!
I have NOTHING against helping the elderly and the young.
I DO have a problem SUPPORTING the able-bodied people that do NOT want to get off of their butts and EARN an honest living - instead of "FEEDING" off of hard working citizens.
AND they teach their children, and their children's children HOW to FEED off of government programs !!
Just realize ... that those of us that ACTUALLY have to work for a living, are getting tired of PAYING for the Democrats idea of HELPING.
Shouldn't MANDATORY Urine Tests be REQUIRED of people that are requesting "government handouts"?
IF you are on LEGAL prescription drugs, then you will not have a problem proving it !!
.
Answered By: Troll Hunter Too - 4/9/2008 |
|
No, sorry I like the idea; however it 1- makes all of us dependent on our Government, 2- rewards or actually encourages laziness, and 3- puts the burden of delivering it or paying for it only on those who are willing to work.
I do agree with the who it is controlled by part.
Answered By: BK - 4/9/2008 |
|
You said, "As soon as we can eliminate profit..."
Good lord you are insane.
Go to North Korea, China, or Cuba...they are the Socialist utopias that left-wing people like you are looking for.
Eliminate profit...and you will have NO MORE pharmaceutical research and NO MORE doctors.
Brilliant!
Answered By: GarrettS - 4/9/2008 |
|
I do not think it necesarily should be either.
I just argue that it should be an objective for a nation with the resources to do it to ensure that it's population are given every opportunity to be healthy.
There are no plans to eliminate the profit motive - and I do not believe we want to.
The plans are to make healthcare accessible. This will reduce its cost. Because most Americans are either uninisured or underinsured we wind up relying heavily on emergency care, not taking advantage of the cheaper and more effective early care and preventetive care.
The USA spends twice per capita what most developed countries do on health care.
The USA government spends more per capita than many governments that do offer universal healthcare.
And yet we still have millions uninsured and the worst health statistics in the developed world.
The debate is not about whether our system would be damaged by universal healthcare, or even whether we can afford it. It is about replacing a system that is a miserable failure, has astronomical costs and simply does not deliver to the average American.
That should be an issue we can all agree on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare#Economics
Source(s):
Electra - you are the one who is off from reality.
Only the Netherlands comes anywhere near $7/gallon. But since in most of Europe government subsidized public transport is provided (at an excellent quality) this is the destination of most fuel taxes, not universal healthcare.
http://www.aaroadwatch.ie/eupetrolprices/
As for 50?ncome taxation. Only Belgium and Germany have mean income tax rates of 50?
Ireland, South Korea, Japan, Iceland, Australia and New Zealand all have universal health insurance with lower mean income tax rates than the USA. The USA government actually spends more on healthcare per capita than many countries with unversal health insurance.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Income_Taxes_By_Country.svg
Answered By: Sageandscholar - 4/9/2008 |
|
Universal Healthcare is paid for by income taxes or gas taxes like in Europe. Do you want over 50 per cent of your check to go to income taxes, or pay 7 dollars a gallon for gas. Sorry to rain in your beautiful world but just a little reality to end your evening.
Answered By: electra_glide_069 - 4/9/2008 |
|
I think ,like most people ,that the insurance and the drug companies benefit most from our health system . I think every child should have all the opportunities the seniors have , and should not be ignored because of the fact that they can't vote. Thinking about it , in a good Christian or any other compassionate way , I wouldn't mind having a good health care instead of the best and most expensive , so my neighbors and their families can have health care also. I don't need to live forever , hooked up to tubes and wired , costing everyone an arm and leg . All I need is a good compassionate doctor who cares about my health and well being more than my insurance card .
Answered By: majdilou - 4/9/2008 |
|
Eliminate profit and you eliminate motivation. Equal shares for all means equal shares for those who work and those who shirk, those who save and those who squander, and no rewards for the industrious, the creative, or the innovative. To this add the fact that medical care requires expended resources and someone has to pay for them, if not the patient then the taxpayers. This country is in a major economic crisis, we cannot afford to provide free medical care to everyone who makes it across our borders.
Answered By: rich k - 4/9/2008 |
|