1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Socialized Health Care - Good or Bad?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by kadesmith, Mar 20, 2009.

  1. #1
    I have heard a lot of talk in America over the past couple years about socializing the health care system. I'd like to hear from some of you why this would possibly be a good thing and why this would be a bad thing.

    Basically I'm looking for the pro's and con's of socialized medicine. I'd most like to hear from those of you who live in countries who have socialized medicine because you are the one who have experienced it.
     
    kadesmith, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  2. myp

    myp Active Member

    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    71
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #2
    You don't have to live in a country with socialized healthcare to know how it works and how it turns out. Socialized health care is very bad because it is way too costly, it is not sustainable in the long run, and the quality of the system goes down. What we need in the States is a more free market system because our current system has way too many regulations and restrictions which end up favoring certain parts of the market such as the insurance companies at the sake of hurting the consumer. Easing up regulations would bring down costs and increase competition, meaning healthcare would be a lot cheaper.
     
    myp, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  3. ncz_nate

    ncz_nate Peon

    Messages:
    3,104
    Likes Received:
    153
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #3
    I can't believe you're suggesting people take responsibility for themselves.. must be an evil hate monger.
     
    ncz_nate, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  4. myp

    myp Active Member

    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    71
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #4
    Lol, sadly that's how these big government liberals and socialists want the people to think.
     
    myp, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  5. effektz

    effektz Active Member

    Messages:
    474
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #5
    I'm not in favor of "socialized" healthcare but you have to admit the system is messed up terribly in America right now. I believe Obama's plan would be good, creating a public healthcare option so private insurers are forced to bring down prices to compete. And let us make up our minds where we'd rather go.
     
    effektz, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  6. myp

    myp Active Member

    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    71
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #6
    Lol, Obama's plan is essentially universal healthcare. The current system is broken because there are too many regulations on the industry that in fact end up hurting the consumer, instead of helping them.
     
    myp, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  7. effektz

    effektz Active Member

    Messages:
    474
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #7
    Not really. It will just insure people who don't have it. Universal healthcare would strip you of your private insurance and doctor, and hes not doing that. He's simply giving people the chance to see a doctor and not spend the rest of their lives paying off bills.

    Plus weren't republicans arguing that there is too much regulation on the banks, and look where that led us. I know this is a different situation but regulation isn't always bad. De-regulation this industry wouldn't solve our problems though.
     
    effektz, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  8. myp

    myp Active Member

    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    71
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #8
    Um, that is basically universal healthcare because anyone who wants it gets it. As for the cost of healthcare, as I said we need to cut regulations and taxes and it will become affordable itself.
    First of all, it is not about republican or democrat, it is about policy. Second, government intervention played a HUGE part in this mess- without it the crisis wouldn't be nearly as bad. Fannie and Freddie essentially backed 50% of mortgages regardless of the quality of the loans that were made and Greenspan's low rates are what drove the bubble to become as big as it did.

    For those of you who are blindly listening to the left wing, who claims that this crisis was caused by deregulation, don't you owe it to yourselves and your kids to actually find out for yourself?
     
    myp, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  9. ncz_nate

    ncz_nate Peon

    Messages:
    3,104
    Likes Received:
    153
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #9
    I'm all for regulation, let's start regulating the government and audit the Federal Reserve.
     
    ncz_nate, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  10. smatts9

    smatts9 Peon

    Messages:
    1,089
    Likes Received:
    71
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    Universal health care is retarded. The health care system we have now is retarded, too.
     
    smatts9, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  11. Bushranger

    Bushranger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    58
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    115
    #11
    America seems to take capitalism to the extreme at the expense of its own people. When someone is seriously ill, everything becomes a chore. Simple things suddenly become irrelevant & one simply can't be bothered, or is unable to do many things considered 'normal'. Fighting the 'system' then is just too hard.

    In Australia we have a 'semi' socialized health care (Medicare). All working people are slugged a 1% Medicare levy automatically taken from their wages and every citizen is entitled to basic health care.

    One can also acquire private health insurance which offers a much better (quicker & more selective) service.

    If one is sick you go to your doctor and will be slugged $50 to see them, or you can go to a 'public' hospital and see a doctor there for free.

    If you visit a doctor and pay the $50 you then visit a Medicare office and get a $40 rebate so in fact it would normally cost you around $10.

    Seeing your own doctor is often quicker, you make an appointment and are seen close to your appointment time.

    Visiting the hospital costs you nothing but you can't make an appointment and often have to wait for four hours to see a doctor. The hospital system has more 'trainee' doctors and is pretty much only for the simplest of problems. Anything tricky they will send you to your doctor who will refer you to a specialist if needed.

    You Americans seem to take advantage of the sick by slugging them with over-charges and must think it's great to make money on the sick and disabled.

    A bottle of water with a fraction of salt (saline) which would normally cost all of 20c suddenly becomes a $12 item. Medicines that taxpayers have already paid for (via research grants) suddenly become owned by the research company and priced exhorbitantly to please the shareholders. Making a profit is fine but slugging the sick with 2000 to 4000% profit margins is criminal.

    The lobbyists wanting to keep this system in place scream communist and socialist anytime anyone talks about making a fairer system and you gullible taxpayers fall back into line.

    Fight for your rights whilst you are well as you don't have any when you're sick!
     
    Bushranger, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  12. myp

    myp Active Member

    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    71
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #12
    You are quite mistaken. First of all, you pay for the healthcare through massive taxes, so it isn't free after all. What we need in the States is less regulation, less taxes, and less ties with the lobbyists. That is what will bring costs down and in the end healthcare will be a lot cheaper, yet of a lot better quality than socialized nations have.
     
    myp, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  13. Bushranger

    Bushranger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    58
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    115
    #13
    I am not mistaken, I have just lived it and it's not nice, even in a so-called 'socialist' healthcare system. I can't understand how your nation can allow a no-care policy and even get to the stage where you fight to keep it the way it is. Why anyone pays any tax there at all is beyond me. Obviously most of you can't afford to get sick!

    Take all healthcare out of the shareholders hands where currently 'by law' the 'profits' come first and that will be a great step to begin with. The cost of healthcare won't be so expensive to start with.

    The primary concern of any government should be the health of its population. You can find 600 billion to fight a war to 'liberate' another country but can't afford to save yourselves.... surely only in America!
     
    Bushranger, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  14. myp

    myp Active Member

    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    71
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #14
    Who wants it to stay the same? I think almost everyone agrees it needs to change. What I want is less regulation and less taxes, which will automatically bring costs down.

    Actually, in a free market competition automatically drives down prices and brings up quality until it reaches market equilibrium.


    Now you are just bringing in irrelevant arguments. The Iraq War has nothing to do with our healthcare system. For the record, I don't support the war in Iraq and I don't think we should have ever gone.
     
    myp, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  15. Bushranger

    Bushranger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    58
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    115
    #15
    You're joking, where do costs go down when people can make more money? Regulation is very important when you're playing with peoples lives.

    Name ONE instance of this happening. Medicine recipes are owned exclusively by a company. How does this bring about competition?

    Our government once owned all its utilities, the liberals sold them off to private enterprise. Electricity, phone, trains, trams, gas & water has all dramatically increased in price, not lowered. All profits used to go back to the government, now all they get is the taxes earned by these companies, which is of course as little as they can pay, helped out by their smart accountants.

    Not irrelevant at all. It was brought up only to say that you can find money for much less important issues when you want, why can't you find it when your own people are dying.
     
    Bushranger, Mar 20, 2009 IP
  16. echo_unlimited

    echo_unlimited Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,193
    Likes Received:
    30
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    190
    #16
    In the UK - everyone is treated and that is the pro for "socialized" health care or government health care, no one is left behind worrying about paying huge bills to get your leg fixed, back fixed or to have a checkup on your health. I remember when I broke my leg and the hospital I went to was efficient and my leg is perfect now - they even call up now and then to see if my leg is still ok. The point is, "socialized" health care is not bad if managed well. There ARE cons to socialized health care, as when I went on checkups to the hospitals, I had to wait in lines and that ranged at around waiting 40 minutes. However the more serious cases were brought up first, so I didn't mind waiting and the fact of the matter is I don't have to wait, I could have gone private; but the free option was good enough for me.


    My second point I would like to make: The UK spends £90 billion pounds per year on the NHS, which is a hell of a lot of money, but it's worth it for the good that it does saving lives & making lives better. Now, I have no toy with the US, but the US spends over $500 billion on it's army PER year, surely some of that money can be cut and diverted into a system where everyone can be treated? Surely there is something WRONG when most of your money is going toward war and killing, when it could be simply spent at home CARING for the people who live in your own country? And don't worry, this isn't me having a go at the US, I could have huge rants over my own country, but I just felt like bringing this up in this thread.
     
    echo_unlimited, Mar 22, 2009 IP
  17. hostlonestar

    hostlonestar Peon

    Messages:
    1,516
    Likes Received:
    50
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #17
    The US is spending that much on the military because, we don't force people to join. The US has to provide incentives for people to stay in. A 20k reenlistment bonus is one of those incentives. They have to compete with company's offering 100k/year to someone, where that person was making maybe 20k. Not only that, war's cost money. Peacetime armies don't spend near that much money. But, it is a small price to pay for National Defense.

    We would be able to find the money to do it without having to raise taxes if the freaking congress woudl stop earmarking a few hundred bill to their buddy. That is the problem.

    But, bigger government is not the answer. I can give you an example of where less regulation has caused what was stated. Look at the hosting industry, there is hardly any regulation here. Do you know how much it used to cost to have a website? It was VERY expensive. Now, you can get decent specs for a 10 dollar domain name, and a 5 dollar package.

    It is because in a free market, you have to undercut your competition's prices in order to gain customers (for the most part) until you reach a balanced are where you can't undercut anymore.

    But, cutting budgets from places is not the answer. Neither is raising taxes. We could do just fine if we would just stop funneling money to our friends. And hey, I can think of other places that money can come from. Foreign Aid.
     
    hostlonestar, Mar 22, 2009 IP
  18. echo_unlimited

    echo_unlimited Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,193
    Likes Received:
    30
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    190
    #18
    I agree with you, however I still think $500 billion is too much to spend on any military; especially of tax payers money. Not matter how you look at it, that is a huge sum of money or "deficit", though I guess you can say "you can't put a price on freedom", though it literally doesn't have to be that way.
     
    echo_unlimited, Mar 22, 2009 IP
  19. hostlonestar

    hostlonestar Peon

    Messages:
    1,516
    Likes Received:
    50
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #19
    It's because of how large and technologically advanced our military is. That is the biggest reason. That, and training.
     
    hostlonestar, Mar 22, 2009 IP
  20. echo_unlimited

    echo_unlimited Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,193
    Likes Received:
    30
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    190
    #20
    I know the reason for it, but again, it doesn't have to be that way. IMHO the US spends to much on its military, it's just not economical to be running a military costing $500 billion per year. If you are going to spend anything toward that amount, at least do it for good reasons such as for health care.
     
    echo_unlimited, Mar 22, 2009 IP