Ok I guess no one is. Good to know!

National healthcare service WILL TAKE AWAY OUR FREEDOMS!

>>4569051
that's right.
no one is really against it.
the only ones that voice an opposing view are doing so only out of habit. they don't have any real reason for no liking it other than 'lol its demokrat and im repubelikan'

>>4569070
That's what I thought. Every other country survives fine with a national health service.

I'm against it because it's a "nice thing" that we can't afford. Buying things we can't afford is the reason why our economy toppled. The US has a national debt of 11 trillion dollars, so in my mind it doesn't really make sense to begin a program that would accelerate the rate at which our debt is growing. And of course most people support national health care and say that it's a "right", which makes absolutely no sense. The "right" to health care isn't written anywhere in our constitution. Really I think it's more of the same entitlement mentality. "I deserve this because I'm a good citizen who eats, shits and breathes".

>>4569146
But the problem with this spending argument is that the US spends more than any other country in the world and is still 37th.

Because insurance companies are very powerful and rich.

It's already required in some states to own some kind of insurance, the state is requiring the public to own a private service. That just goes to show how powerful these companies are.

And the whole 'Haliburton' thing also went to show just how deep in the pockets of big business the neocons are.

That's socialist talk boy!
And socialism is just one step away from COMMUNISM!
Hell, aint'cha heard of dem socialist nightmares in northern yurop?

>>4569146 Thats right you can afford to wage war around the globe and then rebuild their countries, but not look after your own people. Get you priorities right America

>>4569146
Well, in a way, it pays for itself. Free healthcare means you have less disabled people clogging up the system, and less middle-class families going bankrupt.

Imagine Joe worker, who has an eye condition. The treatment is expensive, so there's no way he's going to afford it. He'll either turn to crime to pay for it, or go blind. If he goes blind he's a drain on the economy, if he goes crimminal, he's a similar drain.

I like the idea of it being optional because then everyone who can't afford what exists already would be covered to an extent at least. Forcing everyone into it would be retarded. Definitely a good option to have available though.

That's not true, there are many reasons your statement is incorrect.

Comparing the Health care a poor American gets to the equivalent in Eaurope may seem to support the idea of national healthcare, but when you compare the health that rich people get, it breaks down. The government has no real incentive to provide good healthcare, because you're not going to take your money elsewhere over it.

>>4569146
no faggot, spending infinity dollars on your military is a pretty big factor as well.

Wouldn't the government raise the taxes then?

>>4569199
>there are many reasons your statement is incorrect.
Go on...

>>4569213
Or cut spending elsewhere. Either way, you won't be affected, it'll be the billionaires.

American is too unhealthy, i dont want to pay for 50% of the futfucks and their fucking addiction to sugar and fat.

Sick? Congratulations. What's that, you want to take my hard-earned money to pay for treatment? Eat a dick.

>>4569205
>it breaks down
These people can afford to be taxed to fund the public care and get private coverage.

>>4569186
>>4569209
FTR the Iraq War is yet another example of nanny government forcing something down our throats for our own good. National health care is another.

I am and if you want proof just look to the situation in Quebec;

http://www.cantfindadoctor.com/

When a government takes over something bureaucracy comes with it and this is the result of such bureaucracy. If I get sick I NEED the ability to get the tests done immediately so that I can get treatment. Not be told that it will be 6 months before the tests are run, by which time I may be dead.

>>4569219
Yeah, that's why most of Europe has like 30% taxes, right? Everyone will be effected.

>>4569232
I wish them luck finding it when the industry is gone. You ever wonder why everyone comes to the US for their (legal) operations and shit?

Sure, maybe we should pay to prevent orphans being thrown out into the snow and shit but why the fuck does all the tax I pay in a year have to pay for 1/5 of one of some fat fuck's 3 heart bypasses who was going to be dead within a year regardless? Seriously, all the laws, ethics and morals of god and man indicate that the fucker should just hurry up and die.

There are people who need that money more than ghetto/trailer trash and they never get it because they drown out their cries of agony by screaming "I'M AN OPPRESSED VICTIM GIVE ME YOUR FUCKING MONEY".

There should also be a policy of fining people who inflict injuries on others and only if they cannot fully pay (i mean pay, crack out the bailiffs) for the injuries they caused should taxpayer money fill the void and they will have to pay off a loan to the state.

>>4569258
If you're paying taxes for medical care instead of insurance, you won't notice a difference at all.

>>4569259
i agree, but most of the ghetto trash shooting others on the streets don't exactly have full time jobs.

hatetherobotquoteblock
>Who is actually against a national healthcare service?

Did someone call?

But I seriously am against one, because of course the several problems it creates:

-Waiting lists for much needed surgeries
-Emergency room waiting problems
-Increase in enroachment of the federal government on personal liberties
-Fiscal drain on the government that taxation won't be able to fix
-Wiping out of the private healthcare industry in America, destroying hundreds of thousands of jobs

Then there's still the illegal immigration problem, which would have 12+ million people who don't pay income taxes getting free healthcare, with the bill footed by hard working Americans.

But I guess some type of healthcare reform is inevitable considering the numbers Democrats have in the Congress, so I suppose I'd support one that acts as an option with decreases in other mandates and regulations on private insurance companies, as well as restrictions against malpractice lawsuits.

>>4569251

You'd rather deal with an insurance company beureaucrat who's primary job is to refuse to pay for your healthcare than a government employee who has no dog in that fight?

Profit has no place in healthcare.

The government already has too much power and control over things.

>>4569251
That problem with shortages has more to do with how much of a pain it is to become a doctor in the west. Medical associations do everything they can to make it look like doctors from abroad are nothing more than voodoo doctors who reject germ theory when the reality is a doctor from India has the same training as a doctor from Canada. The only difference comes in certain surgical techniques which of course would require retraining, but shaves years off the total training time nonetheless.

If you really believe in solving the situation in Canad I hope you support allowing those doctors from Iran and India immigrate over and setup shop.

That would solve any doctor shortage rather quickly....oh but I bet you don't like the idea of brown people being given equal opportunity to compete with our white collar jobs.

>Profit has no place in healthcare.

You better believe it does, when it provides for a better service overall.

How do you deal with millions of illegals who don't pay tax?

AMerica is backwards. Sure your constitution was revolutionary but now its just outdated.

>>4569315
This is another issue with American style health care. We already regulate the fuck out of medicine, driving up the cost, the idea that there is anything close to a free market is a joke. If you really believe in markets you will let me choose between an American doctor and an Iranian doctor.

I would have no problems seeing an Iranian doctor just to get some antibiotics or do 99.9% of the shit doctors do.

>>4569214

Medicare and medicaid should ring some alarms in most people.

>>4569346
They wouldn't be registered in the system and wouldn't get care. Problem solved.

>>4569354

The cost of medicine is driven up by the 30% profit margin that shareholders in insurance companies demand they make.

>>4569367

If only if politicians have the spines to do that. There's a reason why illegals in the US can go to school and drive, La Raza would go apeshit if anything happened to their precious burrito people.

>>4569346
national health care != insurance
if you don't pay taxes, then you still get care. if health care is truly a right, then illegals should get care as well.

Sure Scandanavian countries have universal health care, and the quality of life is pretty good, nobody complains. But things are also expensive as fuck there. Its not a coincidence, youre tax $$ have to pay for every homeless asshole's drinking problem. Oslo, stockholm are the most expensive cities in the world.

And im not one to be completely opposed to it, I'm just saying thats the reason most people give to oppose it.

>when it provides for a better service
Health Insurance maximizes profit by restricting service. They follow the simple revenue minus cost model like all business. This is contrary to the moral goal where we should maximize health care per dollar. If you think the two derivate equations for these are the same I have a excellent timeshare for you to invest in.

Additionally people who enter the healthcare system do so when they are sick and vulnerable, the idea that you can leave it to markets when people are in a condition where an irrational and time restricted playing field exists is beyond dumb, it is inhumane.

>>4569401
>Oslo, stockholm are the most expensive cities in the world.
Not quite, but they are up there.

nationalized healthcare only works in low population countries

>>4569405
government care would do the exact opposite. the smallest possible amount would be given to the provider, and the law would mandate that the provider accept this amount. the provider is then forced to respond by making sacrifices in order to sustain his practice, which translates to inferior and ineffective care.

>>4569405

Government employees maximizes income and job security by removing liability and decreasing competition.

People who have the sense to choose the best health care provider before they're sick are being robbed of their freedom of choice and given government care that may or may not be worse than private healthcare.

Providing healthcare costs money, and lowers profits.


One of you faggots explain to me how a profit motive can reconcile with providing affordable and high quality care.

when the UN compares national health care systems it takes into account how "fair" they are. don't let anyone tell you America has less than the best system on the planet

the BC health service is cuttin' back a bit recently but its still better than any experience I've had in the American one. :3

>>4569418
it isn't population per se, but doctors per population. And there is also the issue proper allocation of the various types of doctors i.e. too many heart specialists and not enough neurosurgeons.

The greatest problem lies in getting people to stop graduating with MBAs and start graduating with Medical degrees. Too many Americans entered the Wall Street bubble in the last twenty years but immigration and licensing laws prevent us from accepting the surplus of competent doctors because they don't come from white people countries.

>>4569418
Nice argument there fucker. Because what passes for free market in health care in the US sure has lead to a cost-effective system. Sounds good on paper, doesn't work in practice. The EU on the other hand has four times the population, national health care in most countries and much better health care for less public investment. Don't give me any crap about the EU being composed of member states either, you have regional governments over there too.

>>4569456
no, its population.

>>4569354
>>4569379
>>4569315
I love you, so much. You have no idea.


<3

Apparently in the US, all you'd guys have to do is remove the restrictions on who can apply for Medicare to get single payer UHC

lol.

>>4569457
nearly 70% of americans are overweight. 30% of americans are obese. where your europe comparison now?

If you want to know why I don't want socialized healthcare take a look at the financial track record of the United States Postal Service.

A federal business that is supposed to make money but requires tax dollars to support itself.

>>4569456

The problem isn't people choosing business degrees, it's the American Medical Association, a lobbyist group whose primary objective is to keep the number of MD's in the US at a premium to keep the pay scale of the doctors it represents as high as possible.

>>4569301
>Then there's still the illegal immigration problem, which would have 12+ million people who don't pay income taxes getting free healthcare, with the bill footed by hard working Americans.

It's already illegal for an emergency room to refuse service to anyone, even an illegal immigrant. You already pay their bills. Also, no one said illegal immigrants are going to be getting healthcare.

>Wiping out of the private healthcare industry in America, destroying hundreds of thousands of jobs

Who said the government is going to fire every doctor, surgeon, nurse, and janitor in hospitals that already exist? The government oversight of healthcare would create jobs similar to those in insurance agencies anyway.

>Increase in enroachment of the federal government on personal liberties

When, exactly, did it become a personal liberty to pay an insurance company to pay for your medical bills but require you to pay a rate based on their expenses? If you didn't notice, they're pretty much taxing you. The difference is you'll pay less with National Healthcare.

>Fiscal drain on the government that taxation won't be able to fix
Your argument is also based on taxation paying for this. I'll let you contemplate the obvious contradiction here.

>>4569435
>removing liability

and yet you republican faggots complain that liability insurance is why healthcare is so expensive.

also lol @ freedom of choice, I would choose not to be sick in a free market. Your arguments are hardly worth fighting over since they've been debated to death and there is no proof that private insurance reduces cost of care per dollar.

The final argument against retards like you is that health is a public issue not a private one since diseases can spread quickly if you do not implement public health initiatives. I bet a moron like you would have preferred we kept small pox around so some vaccine company could inoculate generation after generation instead of just wiping out the damn virus.

>>4569482

Only recently has it been in the red, and not through any fault of their own, the advent of the internet has severely reduced the number of letters sent through the mail.

And so what if it needs taxpayer support? Do you want to live without it? Do you want to hand it over to a private company that'll quadruple the rates?

>>4569481
Fat cheetos eating Americans only further shows how inferior you are to Europe.

Maybe if Americans stopped buying nukes and going to war with countries that piss them off they'd have the money to get a decent healthcare system like every other first world country

>>4569485
>they're pretty much taxing you
Can you go to jail for telling your employer to remove your insurance plan?

basically if you rub sum stem cells on any part of your body its an immediate cure. Once stuff like this gets into the mainstream it will completely change health care and costs. all you have to do is pull some junk out of a baby and rub it on yourself and your cured you dont even need doctors anymore

>>4569503
That inferiority is why universal health care wouldn't work in America.

>>4569526
they still have to figure out how to tell the stem cells to not become cancer

It is funny how just a few years ago you Amerifags were talking about being the richest and most powerful country in the world and now all of a sudden you can't even afford to treat a few poor people with dignity.

>>4569528
Different person here but that's total bullshit. You're paying more for the same care under a different system. Don't see what the incidence of disease has to do with that. You'd pay less for the treatment of all those diabetics if your system was more efficient.

National healthcare is a terrible idea. Hospitals will not be making the money they are now, which means they wouldn't be able to buy the best and newest equipment. Go look up the top hospitals in the world, USA has the majority.

I was in Canada a few years ago and broke my arm. I waited in the waiting room for hours without any sort of help. They gave me a cast, whatever. Went back to America and got it checked out, turns out the "fracture that they couldn't heal" was easily fixable in America.

I don't know why we waste our time trying to convince these fags. When they inevitably need treatment and it makes a huge dent in their finances they'll see the joke's on them.

>>4569576
do they not have x-rays in canada?

>>4569580
nope. i have a job and health insurance.

>>4569592
They do, but I needed a pin inserted and they weren't able to do it.

>>4569576
>I was in Canada a few years ago and broke my arm. I waited in the waiting room for hours without any sort of help. They gave me a cast, whatever. Went back to America and got it checked out, turns out the "fracture that they couldn't heal" was easily fixable in America.
This is what's known in the industry as a "lie"

>>4569576

Fractures aren't fixed, idiot. The only thing we can do is set the bone and wait for it to heal by itself >_>.

I support some form of nationalized healthcare, but just to explain the opposing side: by making healthcare more accessible to the poor, you're making the state of poorness more cushy. The poor are then less likely to escape their own state by getting a better job or acting on more preventative health measures. Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile, is the reasoning. Europe has many more socialized services, which is why it has higher unemployment. People are freaking out in the US about 10% unemployment here, but that's par for the course in western europe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union#Unemployment. The deal is that because of their socialized services, unemployment isn't so unpleasant. It also means they're getting a free ride while not contributing to the economy. So there's a happy medium somewhere in providing a safety net while encouraging people to work.

>>4569615
I needed a pin too. They just gave me a cast. If I just had the cast my bone wouldn't have healed correctly.

I support universal single-payer healthcare. My father, who is an S-Class King Medicfag (Chief of General Surgery at his hospital), supports a universal single-payer healthcare plan.

It is good for physicians - there will be a single point to lobby for compensation instead of the many headed hydra of insurance companies. Ideally, the new system should have a board of physician compensation built in, which will be filled with randomly selected physicians from across the country as well as government financial experts, to set rates. It will reconvene every two years.

It will be good for patients. Right now the leading cause of bankruptcy in this country is medical emergency.

Forget "waiting lists" and whatnot - countries that have a complete universal system instead of some abortion of public and private (outside of boutique health plans - if you're rich enough you can surely pay a physician to come to your house) don't have this system. Canada and the UK has imperfect systems with the UK being the better of the two since Harper's privatization changes, but we should really be looking at Scandinavian countries instead.

The provider-patient relationship has been eroded and relegated to a tiny aspect of medicine, thanks to profit-maximizing insurance and drug companies. There is absolutely no reason why Mepron, an excellent malarial treatment drug which was sold for $30 to African pharmacies years ago, now retails for $2000, since drug companies found out that it was used for treating secondary infections in many AIDS patients.

Business is ruining your health and medicine. People say that innovation cannot come without profit, but that isn't accurate. Moving to a "bounty" system for new drugs and treatments, and performing more in house research, which will be freely available without patent, will greatly increase the standard of care we can provide, rather then let insurance and drug companies hold patients and physicians hostage.

Using Canada as an example is fucking stupid since Conservatives are working so damn hard to dismantle public care.

Hopefully when UHC comes to the US Harper and his cronies will stop.

>>4569489

I would rather decide for my self than hand my health to the same people that run the DMV, FEMA, and DOE. Maybe you should contribute to society instead of being butthurt if you want someone to keep you alive when you're sick.

Sounds good in theory. In practice, it will be monumentally expensive to implement in America and will reduce the quality (though while increasing the quantity) of healthcare across the nation.

The current system is flawed as hell, so I'm not saying "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I'm saying "If it is broke, don't break it some more."

>>4569620
Somewhat uninformed European rebuttal: at least where I live, unless you accept a job (which the social services will find you ASAP if possible when you're on unemployment) or training (if not), you lose all unemployment benefits, and then life can become very unpleasant. I'm not a political scientist but I'd assume the difference in unemployment is more due to structural reasons rather than better social services.

>>4569653
>reduce the quality

You are now aware that countries with universal healthcare have higher life expectancies and lower infant mortality rates than the US.

>>4569670
B-B-BUT DO THEY HAVE CHEAP VIAGRA PRESCRIPTIONS!...they do? Oh man.

In theory, I'd like UHC.

In practice
1) government being the government will probably screw it up

2) Fuck mandates (illegal not to buy insurance, what the current plans in congress contain). FUCK MANDATES FUCK MANDATES. If the only way we can get uhc is by forcing everyone to buy insurance, the middle class will get assraped (inevitable high cost of health care will eventually mean only poor and old people will be allowed to use gov system, yay politics, and insurance companies will use this to rape everyone else up the ass because its illegal NOT to buy from them). Finally, mandates have been tried in Massachusetts, and the system their turned out poorly because of it; they also wrecked the New Jersey car insurance markets. Everything mandates touch turns to shit.

3) thanks to politics we'll get a system that benefits politicaly powerful interest groups (insurers, large employers, unions, retired people) and fucks over everyone else.

If we could get a simple single-payer system for everyone that cut out the insurers and treated everyone equally, and was well executed, I'd be down for that. However, healthcare reform isn''t one of the things where the perfect is the enemy of the good: anything less than perfect (single-payer) is going to be ever worse than the terrible system we have now, especially if it has forced insurance buying in it.

>>4569190
Not true that it would be less expensive because of the reasons you gave. Let's say Joe can't afford eye surgery at the moment, the way to get him to be able to receive the treatment is by making it affordable to him. There are two ways to do this: one is by making tax payers cover it, the other is to get the price down to a level that he can afford. Either way someone pays for it, be it Joe or taxpayers.

But by having a national system there is no competition and no incentive to cut prices. The reason eye surgery is so expensive is precisely because nationalizing and over-regulating health care drives up the price of treatments to ridiculous levels. I remember a part of Michael Moore's Sicko documentary where he talks to some guy who can't afford surgery for his hand to have his fingers reattached (he could only afford 2 out of the 3 fingers or something). The bill was a crazy high price, but it's so ridiculously high because of national regulation of health care. If it was privatized middle-class families and Joe would not be unable to afford health care, they would be far more likely to be able to afford it since the price would go down, their taxes down as well leaving them with more income, and costs of things like health insurance would also go down as the price of health care dropped making it even easier to get covered.

The problem with nationalization is that it slowly but surely causes prices to creep up year after year after year until everything really is unaffordable, and even if Joe was able to get tax-payer covered health care to pay for it in a decade he would have lost a substantial amount of income to taxes to support it, which would continue to rise, as would his children and so on.

When health care is free, people don't have an incentive to look after themselves, by not paying or not speeding, because they don't have to worry about the bill, but that's a negative affect of nationalized health care that is often overlooked.

The fact that Americans think their government will lead to health care that is worse than the shitty service they have now says more about the competence of Americans in general than your government.

In Europe there is a sufficient number of people working in related fields to properly staff government agencies with the right kind of worker.

I guess America's apprehension towards higher education (except MBAs lol) is coming to bite them back on their ass finally.

>>4569489
the problem isn't the insurance cost (except in some limited fields where insurance costs have driven doctors out of business // to states with less fucked insurance laws, even doctors cant afford to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, and for some areas/specialties I'm not exaggerating), its that doctors give every test/treatment vaguely applicable, even if its a bad idea (of dubious medical value, or not worth the cost) so they can avoid malpractice suites. This is even worse in the private medical system than public hospitals and absorbs a huge amount of money.

Of course, stopping that won't pay to insure 40million people many of whom have bad pre-existing conditions just like savings from preventative medicine and cutting administrators won't, but that's a whole other can of worms.

>>4569639
Arguing that the patent system is fucked isn't an argument against nationalization of health care but an argument against patents, but I agree that intellectual property rights are very harmful in many cases and a bounty system is superior in those cases, but that doesn't mean the government is the one who has to place the bounty.

Universal health care is an unsustainable pipe dream, and saying that bankruptcy is a serious problem and can be fixed by nationalization is a flawed argument since it will just make it worse as the years pass. See: >>4569738

Sup guys, i'm from Canada.

Healthcare here is fucking awesome.

/argument

>>4569746
Governments... are composed... of... people...

>>4569738
The problem with your argument is, while it sounds fine in theory, that's just not how it works in practice. Notice that once health care is socialized, free market theory no longer applies. You're instead dealing with a controlled market. This:

> The problem with nationalization is that it slowly but surely causes prices to creep up year after year after year until everything really is unaffordable

has not happened in countries with socialized health care.

This

> If it was privatized middle-class families and Joe would not be unable to afford health care, they would be far more likely to be able to afford it since the price would go down, their taxes down as well leaving them with more income,

has not happened in countries with private sector health care. Instead, health care in the USA is less cost efficient. Let's face it, the public sector will have to interfere to ensure the quality of treatment even in private clinics. It's not going to be a free market, ever. Acknowledging that you might as well do it right and adopt the European controlled market model.

canada also has 1 person for every ~11 americans

not counting illegal immigrants

Here's an idea, the government can have its own opt-in system along with private healthcare. Let them compete so people can choose the one they want.

>>4569746
There are a ton of people who would love to be doctors who can't because its hard as hell to earn a medical school slot.

If we really want to bring down long-term costs, we need to open more medical schools to get more doctors, and allow drug reimportation so that we don't pay higher drug costs than the rest of the world (what happens now is we bear almost the entire cost of developing new medicines and drugs), if we allowed reimportation, it would force up costs in other places and down here, a large part of why the European system works is because we pick up a large part of the tab indirectly.

Whether the system is public or private, if we don't do that we'll have to accept ever-rising costs or less care. Socializing or privatizing doesn't magically lower costs, reducing demand (having worse care) or increasing supply (more doctors and the rest of the world not freeloading off us on drug R&D) does that.

Libertarians and socialists are both retarded in their own ways. Changing political systems doesn't magically create more or less doctors and doesn't magically discover new drugs.

>>4569910
Oversimplification. There are three factors of cost here: supply, demand, and transactional costs and ineffectiveness. The latter can be affected by administration directly.

lol at the grand troll thread... etcblox

i am against all things national.It only provides a breeding ground for parasites to reap the success of men without working

>>4569910
When you allow reimportation of drugs you allow contamination of drugs. I worked in a pharmacy and generic drugs are allowed to be manufactured in other countries and imported, but the problem is now is that those factories in foreign countries are failing FDA/DEA inspections. We just went through a bunch of recalls, and an entire generic drug producer had all of their drugs (ALL) pulled from the shelves and as far as I can tell, they shut down, because they have no longer produced any drugs. When you take that and apply it to all drugs in America, you'll be fucking over a lot of quality control.

i'm against it because i'm for less government period.

>>4569947
Conceded, however, our higher transactional costs are nowhere near the sheer scale of our higher costs in terms of doctor-time or medicine. So yeah, its an oversimplification, but, the American supply problem has to be addressed to get costs under control without degrading care, and fixing transactional cost issues would be like putting a bandage on an ax wound.

>>4570001
I must refine my statement. The factories failed inspections for cleanliness, maintenence, etc. They did not fail quality control inspections, as in, the drugs they produced created the intended effects, just that the factories were not maintained up to par.

>>4569910
mooterblox252532?
>There are a ton of people who would love to be doctors who can't because its hard as hell to earn a medical school slot.

1 in 10 people in Tehran are Doctors. Your country really really sucks.

Medical insurance corporations that are only interested in profit, and fucktards.

Canadiafag here, Medicare is so cash.

>>4570001
Canada and Europe don't have those kinds of problems to any large scale.

If you're talking China and the like, well, when you buy Chinese products you get what you pay for.

>>4570013
The lack of doctors is not all. Modern medical treatments are incredibly expensive. For example, a simple MRI like they order dozens of in House costs approx $700 when produced by the state here in Scandinavia, and probably much much more in your system. That's about 5-10% of a doctor's monthly salary. I also have the impression that in the US, a lot of exotic procedures of questionable benefit are done in general, such as e.g. insertion of cultured pigment producing cells in areas of pigment loss, an insanely expensive treatment I imagine, to correct a cosmetic flaw much more easily, but adequately in my opinion, treatable by wearing an item of clothing on top. Correcting this inefficiency and addressing issues of treatment - for example, how much more information a very expensive MRI can provide compared to a much more routine CT, and setting standards, for example directing most patients to the latter kind of imaging, might also be a sizeable source of savings.

I'm tempted to say that kind of regulation is probably much easier in a system of socialized health care.

>>4569485
quoteblock
>It's already illegal for an emergency room to refuse service to anyone, even an illegal immigrant. You already pay their bills.

Thus I support the exemption of non-citizens from protection of that law.

>Also, no one said illegal immigrants are going to be getting healthcare.

Oh come on, like the Democrats are suddenly going to stop pandering to illegals for political support. If no one is going to restrict access away from non-citizens, then they are going to get the free health service at the cost of people who work and pay income tax to the federal government that's supposed to serve them.

>Who said the government is going to fire every doctor, surgeon, nurse, and janitor in hospitals that already exist?

Although that's not the biggest part of the job-loss point I had, I will state that IMO the government will not be able to net all the jobs lost as the result of the inevitable collapse of several health insurance giants as people will switch in the masses (because the government will be able to heavily subsidize the cost to make it impossible for companies to compete).

Another example: one of the provisions that's very expected in whatever healthcare change comes out of Congress is a mandate on employers to either provide health insurance to their employees or pay a tax to subsidize government coverage. Employers would sensibly then have to lay off workers in order to make their business stay profitable. Using the economic model of the Whitehouse's own economic advisors, a mandate like that would cost 4.7 million jobs.

>>4570155
(cont)
>The government oversight of healthcare would create jobs similar to those in insurance agencies anyway.

Except that the government workers would have to work less and get paid more, and receive very expensive benefits as a result of unionization. Also, how do you think the government "creates" these jobs? They're going to have to find some way to pay the salaries of new workers that are now under a tax-funded payroll instead of a private payroll.

>When, exactly, did it become a personal liberty to pay an insurance company to pay for your medical bills but require you to pay a rate based on their expenses?

It's a very precious personal liberty to make a contract with a service provider for them to.....get this.....provide you with a service that you pay for on laid out terms. I currently have a plan through Aetna that I only pay ~$14/week for ($5,000 deductable, coinsurance fee of 20%, and a $40 for office visits) which, since I'm healthy and young and rarely visit the doctor, fits me quite well. I mainly have it in case of emergency care and to cover any prescriptions. It'd probably be much cheaper for me and for everyone else if you had the ability to buy insurance across state lines, but alas, another good idea is being shot down by the Statists.

>If you didn't notice, they're pretty much taxing you.
No. Also this - >>4569519


>The difference is you'll pay less with National Healthcare.

If I do somehow end up paying less than $14 a week for this new public option, it'll probably be at the expense of my descendants and the people who had the misfortune of making it in life.

>Your argument is also based on taxation paying for this.

You can only tax so much until the burden on the economy becomes counterproductive (take a look at the Laffer Curve), the rest will definitely have to be covered by borrowing money unless we can overall cut spending in other areas.

>>4570155
And yet 1 in 10 people in Tehran are doctors.

Americans just suck at realizing how much they suck.

>>4570139
More students in currently existing medical schools = lower standard of medical education

more medical schools = lower standard of medical education

>>4570176
the people saying NO to nationalized healthcare are the people who realize how much america sucks

>>4570215

Frankly, this is total crap. Many excellent students that want to become doctors and want to become doctors get turned away by med schools.

>>4570245
Even if that is true, there's also the limitations of teaching staff and equipment. Medical training currently requires a lot of material, ranging from bodies for autopsy and dissection to training defibrillators and resuscitation dolls.

Pittsburgh has more MRI machines than all of Canada.

Let that sink in for a second.

If you have decent health insurance in America, you have the best care in the world. There are zero waiting periods here. I could call my doctor and get a full body scan or an MRI before the end of the week. Without any compelling medical reason.

When people decry the US "system" they aren't attacking the quality of care. They are bitching about "inequality" and "unfair" funding.

Yes there are horror stories about insurance companies failing to live up to their side of a contract. That's why the courts are for, breach of contract.

>>4570352
blocks
>Pittsburgh has more MRI machines than all of Canada.
That's awesome. The system you have now has already placed the equipment you'll need for national healthcare to work.

I am against it, because I want to make fucking money.

I can pay for my own healthcare/health insurance. I don't want to pay for anyone else's.

>>4573268
You fucking jews are all that is wrong with America.

The countries with the highest level of healthcare also rate the highest on happiness in surveys

might be a coincidence

>>4570352
>I could call my doctor and get a full body scan or an MRI before the end of the week. Without any compelling medical reason.

you get that in the UK as well bro

>>4570352
Yeah and what if you aren't rich? What if you are only average? Then you most likely don't even have dental insurance. If I would live in the states as a student, I would be afraid as fuck of getting sick.
What if you get cancer and you are poor and/or unemployed? Then you are going to die in pain just because you're poor, since no insurance company will insure you. Awesome system, really.
In Germany, even private insurance companies can't deny a customer because of pre-existing conditions. This is new though, but the public insurance companies always had to accept everyone.

>>4573287
And you think that's right? Unnecessary medical tests that cost a shitload of money? They should say "fuck you" and save that money to avoid having people in the fucking emergency room that are screaming in pain because they have to wait 3 hours until a doctor is finally taking a look at them.

This would be a total shitmess because of how much in debt our government already is.

>>4573305
Your health system IS a shitmess

Doctors' salaries (My salary) decreases a shit-ton. That is all.

>>4573318
So the number of teethless people, bankrupt sick people and deaths increases because of greedy doctors (you). That is all.

>>4573305

Do you have ANY evidence to support the idea that the government would spend more on health care than it already does?

Right now, every country which has adopted a nationalized healthcare system has turned out much better than those with a private system. So there is nothing to support the idea and only thing to support the opposite.

>>4573348
What are the taxes like?

The best system would be one where people are allowed to compete with the governmental options, i.e. run their own hospitals.

This way rich people can get the treatment they can pay for and doctors can make a shit load of money scamming said rich people for overtreatment.

Just to give you an idea: A few years age patients had to pay 10 Euro each quarter once if they would go to the doctor. This caused a huge outrage among the population because everyone was used to get everything for ZIP. And I mean EVERYONE. In the states I had to pay 20 bucks just to talk to a fucking doctor that told me total bullshit and couldn't treat my simple condition.
Germany has one of the oldest universal health care system and it works perfectly. Why wouldn't it work in the USA?

So is it really that great? Could I still get a super-expensive operation to save my life? Could I get something unnecessary like laser eye surgery and get my girlfriend bigger tits?

>>4573365
In Germany people who have a private insurance are always slightly preferred (less waiting time etc) although it shouldn't be like that, but getting their money is apparently much easier for the doctors if the patient has private insurance. So if you want you can always pay more and get benefits.

>>4573370
I heard that Germany's health care got devalued when the Eastern Germans crowded the system/couldn't pay into the care

>>4573381
I don't believe any insurance in the world will pay you your girlfriends boob-job unless she had breast cancer or something.

>>4573391

I know, but what I don't understand is, since it's "free," what kind of things would I have to pay for? Would operations such as boob jobs and laser eye surgery become nonexistent because they take away doctor's time to treat other patients with pressing health problems, making them a waste of resources?

>>4573427

Elective shit, like having your teeth whitened.

>>4573458

Okay, sweet, I'm perfectly fine with that.

>>4573364

So if I, as a Swedish citizen pays 200 dollar* every month on paying for other peoples health care then the us citizen pays 400 dollars* every month to pay for other peoples health care.

Sure because the US borrows a shit load of money every year the amount of taxes the government collects to pay for health care is less. Basically you may pay perhaps 250* dollars directly, but because of the borrowing you pay 400 dollar indirectly, since you had to pay back the loan some day, and add intrest to that over several years.

Also the reason why Sweden and other places have high taxes is not because of nationalized health care, it is because government is simply bigger all over.

*Example numbers, not the actual cost

Also what you see in the US, the run away debt and such could be both attributed to high government spending but can also be attributed to low taxes, meaning that instead of taxing the population, which is very unpopular in the US. The government puts a "loan tax" on the population. In fact that "loan tax" is much higher than the taxes would be if you simply raised the visible taxes. However that is a very debatable issue on what is correct.

>>4573381

Cosmetic surgery is not free.

We borrow sop much money at this point who gives a fuck. It not like we are ever gonna pay it back.

>>4573427
Non-necessary surgery is not free under the NHS of the UK. Also dentistry is not free either. It's subsidised but you still pay a bit for check-ups and stuff. Teeth-whitening costs 250 GBP. Not that much but still not cheap enough for the dentists to be wasting time doing it for everyone.

>>4573487
America, as a European citizen I congratulate you on your strategy. There's no way in hell anybody's ever going to get that money back from you, because you're the only nation on this planet with credible overseas force projection capability and also you have the most advanced defense systems. Never mind you did all this with China's and Europe's money, it's really all yours now - I see no way how we can get it back unless you want to pay us back.

>>4573514
You do realise that if the US doesn't pay it back, no one will trust them again, right? The US needs to keep borrowing money just so their system stays afloat. There's no way they can just say "lol we're not paying it back" because it will be followed up by "lol we need some more money".

Out of curiosity, are procedures for sexual reassignment considered "necessary" enough to be provided for free?

YAY! THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO DONT WANT IT ARE REPUBLIFAGS! AWWW

How about it'll create a fuckload of problems which have been said numerous times before in this thread? Just scroll up.

It's not something like - we hate our fellow man and dont want them to have healthcare! ever! muahahahah!

You cant afford it dude - American liberals seem to be more intrested in creating a preety image then in seeing some practical results.

>>4573514
Furthermore, although I truly am certain you've run this round, we're probably not going to lend any more money to America, people or government.

>>4569146
>Buying things we can't afford is the reason why our economy toppled
A bunch of people had the nerve to put houses over their heads and couldn't pay thus bringing down the entire world banking system. Yeah right.

>>4573531
Well, I see one logical way: conquer and exploit a continent or other. Africa should be pretty easy, Europe on the other hand is the largest economical zone. Maybe conquering and/or destroying your debtors would be best after you've milked a few trillion $ more. I mean, you're getting started already with the overseas acquisitions, obviously your political leadership agrees with me.

Look you fucking morons. The US debt isn't that fucking high. Sure it's high in terms of total dollars, but it's only 35% of the GDP, meaning that you can easily pay it off if you JUST INCREASED TAXES AND DECREASED GOVERNMENT SPENDING.

http://www.indexmundi.com/map.aspx?v=Public+debt(%25+of+GDP)&lesson=y

put the government in charge of my health? I don't think so tim

>>4573547
more like a shitload of people - also comes from giving credit cards to your 16 year old daughter who doesnt really understand it's not her money to begin with - because you are a shit parent

>>4573560

but mostly it was wallstreet who thought it was a good plan to make people get loans easily because they knew that would drive up the prices of houses which ment they could speculate the shit out of the market. :)

if america wants healthcare it'll need to cut military spending or raise taxes (a lot)

whether you feel this is worth it or not is a matter up for debate, but what isnt is how fucking retarded people are about it.

There's no free lunches people, you will pay for this directly and indirectly everyday
but seeing how everyone seems to have forgotten how the gov funded the irak war I'm sure this post wont mean jack shit.

>>4573575
no dickhead, it was guys getting commissions selling shit to anybody

you can have an arrogant smirk if you have some idea what you are talking about, turn off the ABC and read some decent news

>>4573575
thats right, it wasn't a combination of unrelated forces, it was all a conspiracy executed by wall street to ... destroy... wall... street...

>>4573579
also that obama's gotten the country into deeper debt - but his hardline supporters are like "hurr no he's not" etc

They always claim that government care is worse and more expensive, so why are they so afraid of competing against it? It's because they know they can't compete. The government would be more efficient and better care for more people.

>>4573547
>>4573560
>>4573575
I thought the idea was that investment companies' PhD traders had come up with investment tools that are something like trading investments into investments into investments into futures of investments and so on and so on, to the point that pretty much nobody else could tell how much anything was worth anymore but damn if these new tools and funds didn't seem profitable, and a bubble formed.

COMMUNISM! ITS A PARTY!

>>4573589
He has not, if anything he has improved things A LOT.

>>4573585
I move Wall Street finally realized the futility, hollowness and cultural void that is America in its collective subconscious, and in a moment of collective existential angst and realization decided to commit suicide.

>>4573550
>INCREASED TAXES AND DECREASED GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Man, I'm not sure what kind of eurofag you are, but here in the good old USA we don't believe in raising taxes (unless it's on the poor and middle class) and we don't believe in government spending (unless it's on war) because we're OK with things being cheap and crappy (did you know that they're returning to gravel roads in Michigan?) and besides, free markets always yield the best outcome (except in the case of health care, where even private insurance firm CEOs argue that government would do it better and cheaper, putting them out of business, and that's why we shouldn't do it).

>>4570139

While I agree with the idea of limiting less necessary treatments (either subsidising them or charging a nominal fee), MRIs are really expensive. You want to be using those things all day, every day, just to get your money's worth.

And CT scans give you cancer, dude. You want to use them as little as possible.

because our government is afraid of communism and the gigantic nanny state it could/is becoming. when everyone can have everything handed to them they wont work for anything. there is no reason to go to college,study hard,or work hard.

>>4573533
Can anyone answer this question?

>>4573623
I'm not an expert, just a student, but I'm under the impression that MRI doesn't provide, in most cases, any significant information over CT. Furthermore, you're probably not going to get enough CT scans in your lifetime to measurably increase cancer risk. There's absolutely no reason why hospitals should be ready to put every patient that comes in into an MRI machine in 5 minutes, and yes, they are massively expensive and also require their own trained staff with them.

There's many similar examples. For example, in the US you use leukocyte counts instead of C-reactive protein as the measure of inflammation, which is a much, much more expensive measurement and in most cases of no added diagnostic value as I understand it.

>>4573633
Not necessarily. If you don't work, your life will be dull, uncomfortable, and unfulfilling. Some might be all right with that, but I don't think that'd be the majority of people.

>>4573647
Scandinavia, yes, provided a diagnosis of transsexualism is made and confirmed.

>>4573633

Government health care =! government pays for food, rent, internet, car, 50 inch LCD TV, etc.

Fucking retard.

I'm against America having a National Healthcare service, as it means us Europeans with National Healthcare Services won't be able to benefit from the research of American medical companies.

...of course, that implies that these companies have any interest in keeping people alive, and that's...unlikely.

>>4573623

>And CT scans give you cancer, dude. You want to use them as little as possible.

Sure, if you perhaps use them several time a week for like a year.

I came from a poor family. I bettered myself and now have a great job with amazing benefits. Why should I pay for the lazy fucks who don't bother to care properly for themselves, get an education, and make a decent living.

I like the health care I have now, it cost me about 200 $ a month, I get to go to any doctor I want, even specialist without a referal. I have full dental and vision, and prescriptions only cost me $10.

If we switch to universal my taxes, which already take 40% right off the top of my paycheck, will go up and my free access to quality health care will go down.

Is there anyone here who already has a decent job and health insurance that wants universal care or is it just a bunch of pie in the sky 17 year old liberals who think the government will take as good care of them as their parents have?

I may be a cold fucker but I think that if you are too dumb or too lazy to afford your own health care, you and your offspring should probably die from a lack of care, ridding the world of your uselessness.

I lol at the amount of dumbfuck Americans who assume there won't be private healthcare after a nationalisation.

If you're so fucking WORRIED about waiting lists or how comfy your beds are, go to a private healthcare service, where they will be perfectly happy to overcharge you.

So what, you'll be paying taxes? If your friend breaks his arm or gets a horrible disease, he can actually get help relatively easily. Why are you pessimistic faggot-ass americans always so worried about "HERPDERP PEOPLE GETTING MAH HARD-EARNED MONIES" as if everyone in your country apart from you are horrible lazy people who do not deserve healthcare and should instead lay down and die. And of course, there's the assumption that you earn anything with "hard work" - i've been to America, it's a great place, cheap food, cheap goods, etc. Why don't you man the fuck up and realise that you can probably spare a bit of cash for the great society you live in. What is with your shitty "take take take take take take" attitude?

>>4573696

No you fucking idiot, most of it is people in countries WITH healthcare who have most assuredly told you that they're doing fine.

You obviously can't resist ejaculating a kneejerk "HERPDERP LIBERAL KIDDIES DON'T UNDERSTAND DAH WORLD" comment, so let me ask you what Right-wing propoganda you have been fed?

>>4573696
You have to prove citizenship for health care.

Premiums go DOWN.

>>4573778
small countries can handle nationalization of healthcare.

big countries cannot.

>>4573759
You obviously have no idea how much we already pay for our society...

My tax burden as percentages of my yearly income:
Income tax federal and state: 24.5%
FICA: 13.6%
Property tax: 6.49%
School tax: 4.8%
Sales tax: ~5%

Right there im at 49.59% of my income going to the government, and on top of that there is all the bs stuff they slip in there like all the DMV fees, tolls, luxury taxes, gas taxes, road usage taxes, energy fees and taxes, etc etc etc....

The government already takes more than half my money, how much more do you expect people to pay?!

>>4573815
Enough to pay for my health care so I can afford an xbox

>>4573807
What the fuck's kind of dogma is that that you keep parroting? First of all, the population of Germany is about one third of yours, and they could do it, so shut the fuck up. Secondly, pretty much the whole EU has done it, and it is an area subdivided into regional governments under a central authority, exactly like the US, but something like five times more populous, so shut the fuck up.

>>4573759
Yes, I will support UHC so that I'll be forced to pay higher taxes for everyone else's UHC, while I STILL have to pay my monthly insurance premiums. Wait, no.

>>4573837
83 million is a third of 304 million?

ah... hah...

>>4573853
Yeah, congrats on discovering I couldn't be bothered to look up the exact demographics and firing up the calculator. My point stands.

>>4573815

Maybe instead of bitching about this, you should take a few moments and consider what those tax dollars are getting you.

Here's a tip - the countries with the highest qualities of life are those with the highest tax rates. Low tax rate countries are typically shitholes.

>>4573837
lol comparing the EU to the USA

>>4573841

You're already paying for other people's health care (both insured and uninsured) anyway. It's just that right now, you're paying way more than you have to, for both your insurance and other people's.

One question that really needs to be answered here...

Why do the foreign rich and dignitaries come to America to get the same care I get with my own private insurance instead of relying on their own wonderful fully functioning universal health care systems whenever they need more than a flu shot?

>>4573864
I have an idea, why not tax everyone 95%? We'd have such an awesome quality of life!

>>4573858
land mass and population dispersion is also a big factor.

not to mention you're pretty much saying that if you can do one thing, you can do over three times as much.

Quick question.
Do you people honestly think that liberals AND conservatives won't be behind a UHC system? Do you think that all of the bullshit dogma spewed by either side will make people not want to get "free" healthcare?
No. I think it will be voted in by the people for the people. No amount of "DEM FOLKS GONE GET MAH MONEY" rhetoric is going to dissuade them from it.
If they really want to put themselves above "those lazy parasites" who by the way are in the same boat as them then they can get the so called superior private health insurance. The very well off and wealthy will still have their own private health care hospitals and doctors catering to their every whim.
If you told people that they can walk into a hospital and get their bad knee or that cough looked at by a doctor for nothing up front and no bill later and the only thing they will have to do is pay an extra 25 cents at the gas pump or 5 dollars extra on a video game how many people would think that's a bad idea?

>>4573807

Then just bring it down to a state level function. problem solved.

>>4573879

Don't play dense. The point is that you get what you pay for, in taxes / public spending as well as other things.

>>4573875
Because you're willing to do insanely expensive procedures that yield marginally better results thanks to your crooked system of health care. Also, let's hear some European politicians and dignitarians who did that instead of being treated in their own countries shall we, because I can't think of any.

>>4573886

actually an overwhelming majority of the population is for UHC.

>>4573889
Yea, thats right. Add another hundred million dollars to state spending.

that'll be awesome.

also, low/high pop states will have dogshit for healthcare.

>>4573900
mostly because its being marketed as "free healthcare"

people like free

people don't/can't look beyond themselves.

>>4573875

1) They don't.

2) If they do, it's because we have more specialized doctors than other countries do. The reason for this is that such doctors get way overpaid here.

3) Don't kid yourself. They get way way better care than you do, regardless of whether they stay in their own countries or not.

why stop at health care?

food and shelter are basic human rights. why do i see homeless people on the streets? the government should provide food and shelter to everyone, and if you don't have either, then you should pay a fine.

america is the fattest country in the world. everyone should have a gym membership and it should be paid for by the government. we could electronically track the number of times people go in. if it's less than 3 times a week, you should get a fine. we could also track the number of calories burned. we'd make a quick calculation based on your bmi, and if you burn less than this number, then you get a fine.

unless you live in a big city, you really need a car to get by in america. the government should provide cars too. if you don't have one, you get a fine.

i don't know about you, but i think that this nanny government stuff sounds awesome! we'll be europe in no time!!!

>>4573864
Yea they get me some 1/2 way decent roads to drive on and it keeps the country from spiraling into a lawless mess, aside from the massive waste and corruption I don't mind pitching in for stuff that everyone benefits from. But I don't give a fuck about the poor sick people and don't want to pay for their bypass surgery because they are 300lbs overweight and eat cheesburgers every day for lunch, or pay for the cancer treatment for the guy who has smoked for the past 45 years, or pay for the abortion for the local whore who gets knocked up every other month. I want the fatty to die, I want the smoker to pay for smoking his entire life, and I want the whore to throw the baby in the dumpster or have a coat hanger shoved inside her.
My grandfather should have died 10 years ago but he has had over 3 million dollars in treatment over the past 5 years to keep him alive. He has private insurance that has payed for nearly every cent of it, but I don't want to pay for that shit and I certainly don't want to pay for it for your grandfather.

>>4573875
America has the best health care RESOURCES, but not the best COVERAGE. A person in America with shitty insurance could live directly across the street from Sloan-Kettering and still be allowed to die of cancer because his insurance refuses to pay for treatments. Other countries include the cost of flight to medical centers in their coverage.

Your insurance may be terrific, but not everyone in America is so lucky. Most of us have shitty insurance if we have any insurance at all.

$11,389,401,986,838
Our country owes this much money. Obama wants to give everyone health care. Where's the money going to come from?

Sounds familiar doesn't it? A couple has $100,000 in total debt. They have jobs and make ok money. They want to buy a nice house that they obviously can't afford. The bank recognizes them as a high risk, but says "fuck it" and gives them a $350,000 loan anyway. The couple ends up going broke and they lose their house.

Buying things we can't afford has worked out so wonderfully for our country, hasn't it? Let's continue the trend!

>>4573864
Those tax dollars get him nothing. His taxes are going to the poor (most of which are just lazy) and the old (who didn't have the responsibility to take care of themselves). Failing programs like Medicare and Social Security are leeching up his money, and will give him nothing in return in the future. He is getting nothing, ESPECIALLY if he's not one of those "95% of Americans".

>>4573927
You mean you'll have the lowest infant and child mortality and highest literacy, highest level of population education, lowest corruption and highest freedom of speech indices, and we'll be the second best?

I'm with this anon, you keep doing your thing, we don't need another Europe to compete with.

>>4573961
subprime loans operate under the assumption you'll make 3-4 times as much money in 5 or 10 years.

that only happens if you get the loan on minimum wage.

>>4573875

Mostly because queues are shorter in the US.

>>4573969
i love europeans. the world has to be just like you.

you're no better than americans.

>>4573967

You have no idea where your tax dollars go, and have just slurped up the cum out of Limbaugh's cock.

The vast, vast majority of tax dollars in this country go to fund the military in one form or the other, or to subsidize large corporate interests. Then the elderly (Medicare and Social Security). The poor barely get anything.

Only the dirt poor wins with one.
It does not matter to the rich.
Kill the profit motive behind medicine and you will kill the R&D. Beyond fanatic erections there is way cool (and horribly expensive) equipment being developed that won't be deployed widely with national health care.
Before penicillin's use in people (~1940) all medicine could really do is provide comfort to the dying. In the past 70 years look how far we have come under a for profit system.
If there are problems, fix them, but don't throw the whole thing in the toilet.
Ultimately all people except the hyper wealthy will be denied the treatment that they need to live because of cost (No one wants to die, and there is almost always something that can be done to prolong life). Let the point at which that happens remain in the hands of the sick individual, not a faceless bureaucracy.

>>4573973
obama's bailout operates under the assumption that it will magically pay for itself.

>>4573927

YES! but why not just dissemble government as a whole!? I mean what gives other people the right to tax me? I've made earned the right to my dollar, if anyone wants it they can pry from my cold dead bank account,.

>>4573984
Well, yeah, isn't that the natural sentiment about one's own country?

>>4573987
>Kill the profit motive behind medicine and you will kill the R&D.

So, how do you explain the fact that most people and companies doing the R&D are doing it using taxpayer dollars?

>>4573986
Nice spin, bro. The money spent on defense is roughly the same as the money spent on Social Security. It's not "vastly" more.

>>4573987
>a faceless bureaucracy

We have faceless bureaucracies now. They're called 'insurance providers'.

>>4573987

You're right now using both the internet and a computer, pentagon funded invention.

R&D will go on simply because developers will compete for grants and jobs.

>>4569219
Yeah, tax the billionaires that start and run the companies that employ you to the point they say fuck it.

I'm not sure I would take the risk to start a company if I knew I was going to be covered by leaches the moment I achieved anything worthwhile.

>>4573986
Yes, we do also pay a lot for the war/s in the Middle East, but that's not something we're paying into now, where others benefit now, and later on we get nothing.

I have a picture that shows where our tax dollars go, but I got the "File too large" message. I will post it on /hr/ upon request.

>>4574014

Haha no. Lots of the money that gets spent on defense is off the books (Bush's appropriations), and comes from other agencies (e.g. NSF / DOE). That stuff doesn't get included in the totals, but is defense nonetheless.

And, as I suggested, it's both defense AND corporate subsidies (like Medicare drug provision, which is a massive subsidy to private drug manufacturers). But really, the point stands - the Republican saw about taxes going to fund welfare queens is completely untrue. The only welfare queens are the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, and the Fortune 500.

>>4569303
Yeah I'd rather fight an insurance company bureaucrat over a govt bureaucrat. You can sue an insurance company (with a good enough suit the lawyer will just take 30% and nothing up front). You can't sue the govt. You will just be fucked.

>>4574083
Of course you can sue the government. It's been done like a bajillion times and people have won. The judiciary authority is separate from the rest of the government you know.

What the fuck is wrong with returning to what made America the most powerful and influential country in the world in just a little over 200 years?! The government was formed to allow maximum freedom to individuals and states. The only thing the government did was defend the country, enforce laws, provide a currency. The more and more control the government takes for itself, the more stuff turns to shit. They keep poking their fingers into everything the can to the point where we are about to collapse because of it. I seriously do not see health care being any different from the huge bloat and waste that is every other government run organization.

Sure, as a theory, universal health care may be a good idea, but absolute communism also looks amazing on paper, and we all know how well that has turned out for every country that has tried to implement it.

>>4574070
>The only welfare queens are the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, and the Fortune 500.

You left out agribusiness! Watch what happens to a dyed-in-the-wool welfare-hating Republican farmer when you try to take his subsidies away.

Money is bullshit. We should get rid of it completely.

"The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity."

Doctors and nurses are the true welfare queens. They get rich off of others getting sick.

>>4574109
b-b-but uhc has worked so flawlessly in europe, it HAS to work here!!!

ITT: europe's health care systems work fine, and WHO's ranking of the US at 37 is legitimate.

>>4574119
sure, and anarchy is the only government that'd work...

So we should go back to trade women for cows?

>>4574145
I don't know, Denmark has a pretty fucked up health care i think.

They've found blood in the ice-cube-machine, several times

>>4574136
If shitty Euro countries can have better healthcare with us using UHC, then obviously it does work.
The richest country on earth can't make a free market health care system efficient? Then discard it and find a new way.

>>4574119
Don't side track you zeitgeist watchin' mother fucker!

>>4569441
The profit motive gives you quality low cost health care because you can look down a list of providers and policies and read reviews, etc picking the one that gives the best benefits and fits your lifestyle best.
If a provider is shit, you are not going to give them your money are you?

>>4574171
Sorry to burst your bubble though but the EU as a whole has both a higher GDP and less debt than the US.

>>4574110
LOL Most of that money if not all of it goes to good old fashioned republican farmers and business owners who own farms simply to get said money.

>>4574171
US health care in it's current state works just fine for me. The only people it doesn't work for is the poor, and you know what, if you can't pay for something you shouldn't get it.

>>4574148
Money encourages greed and unfairness in society. People kill and harm others for money. If we went to work to improve ourselves instead of for the accumulation of material wealth, then society would be much better.

>>4574200
But you completely ignore human nature. Most people are already so fat an lazy they only do enough to just survive. If everyone had everything they needed handed to them even the industrious people would stop working.

>>4574193
If people can't afford books then they shouldn't be able to get them from libraries. If people can't afford pre college education then they shouldn't go to school. If people can't afford to repair the roads then they shouldn't be able to use them. etc. etc. etc.

>>4574178
Probably? What's this probably? Europe definitely has a higher GDP and has less debt than the US.
The US and Europe are *about* the same size. The US is divided into states and Europe is divided into states (real definition).

You can picture the EU like the US federal government and the government of an individual country like that of a US state.
That's where Europe is awesome. Each subdivision of the entire unit does whatever it wants.
*That* is the old state's-rights view of Republicans over here, and as a southern Republican (Often referred
to as Rednecks) I believe that it should be left up to the individual state to decide how they want to deal with health care.
With that, the federal government should also have very little power; most power should be held by the states.

Now, if the states decided what they wanted with little interference from the federal government, there would be
a pretty sharp difference in the views of the conservative south and the liberal north. Hmmm, last time
we had clashing views like that, we had ourselves a nice Civil War.

tl;dr - Europe's smaller countries = win and I wish America was like that.

I'm against it because PEOPLE SHOULD PAY FOR THEIR OWN SHIT.

I should pay for my & my family's healthcare, everyone else should pay for theirs.

>If you're paying taxes for medical care instead of insurance, you won't notice a difference at all.

Well yeah that would be true if I had insurance. But I don't because insurance is stupid. I just save the money I would otherwise be paying for insurance and then when I need healthcare I pay for it. Why would I pay $50+ a month for insurance when I go to the doctor maybe once a year (although really not even tat much) and it cost like $200 to go? Even if an emergency were to happen, it would be cheaper to pay for it than to pay for insurance all the years that an emergency didn't happen.


I don't want other people paying for my healthcare because I don't want to pay for theirs. Even if my taxes stayed the same, it's not all about the money, it's partially about the morals of it. Not that I agree with everything that taxes goes towards already, but that's another conversation.

>>4574193
9/10 good job trolling there.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-613.pdf
for the few people in this thread who eat up knowledge like it's no one's business.
i dont expect the rest of you fags to read this, though.

>>4574193
>The only people it doesn't work for is the poor

So what about all the middle-class people with health insurance who lost it because they developed severe illness?

>>4574228
Libraries have been a fucking waste of space and money for at least the past 15 years. Pre college education is another area of waste that would be better off replaced by private institutions. Your roads one doesn't even make sense.

our country is already 11 trillion dollars in debt, what's another few trillion?

>>4574193
actually the poor ALREADY get healthcare payed for by taxes (medicaid)

>>4574255
well if they would have saved all that money they spent on insurance, they'd have money to pay for their illness now

A big reason I'm against it is, combined with everything already mentioned, the idea that the government has of putting a national sales tax, as high as 25%, on all items bought in the US to pay for the national healthcare. (This is [on top] of state sales tax, income tax, etc)

Want that cool new $20,000 car? Hope you like paying $25,000 for it. Enjoy groceries for $100 a week? You'll like $125 a week even more.

Not that I'm a fat cat or anything, but if that tax get placed on our goods, the highest tax bracket will be paying 75% of everything they make back to the government. Something about that just doesn't seem right...

>>4573655
LOL. my dog was sick & I took it to the vet & I got blood word done for the dog immediately (while I waited) that included C counts (that were way out of wack). My dog gets better care than you eurofags.

>>4574258
Libraries have never been a waste of space. Private schools would shit all over education in the majority of cases and the roads one?
I'll admit that it wasn't that good.

>>4574283

Again, the government would most likely spend LESS if they used a nationalized system. Right now you are paying a lot of money for funding various programs which simply doesn't do what they should be doing. A purely governmental program would simply reduce costs for the tax payer. Like that 20 000 dollar car? Well with UCH it now costs 18 000!