Why do some people think free healthcare is bad?

Recommended Videos

happysock

New member
Jul 26, 2009
2,565
0
0
I heard a comedian In the UK say it's cheaper as a British citizen for you to book a first class flight back to the UK then it would be for you to get treated in the US, although I know you get re-imbursed the funds.
 

SpAc3man

New member
Jul 26, 2009
1,197
0
0
Because some people are nazis. And communists. At the same time. Just like the people calling for better healthcare in the US. According to the people protesting against better healthcare in the US. God bless American logic and the communist nazi people that invented it.
 

fgdfgdgd

New member
May 9, 2009
692
0
0
ThrobbingEgo said:
As a Canadian, I'm glad I have it. Too bad we're all poverty stricken and crippled by taxes in this communist dystopia. /lol

Yeah. It's a good thing that the "no subsidized healthcare" policy kept America from being hit by the recession.
I know right?

Here in Oz we're just withering away in economic termoil because of our free health care, honestly, if it weren't for helth care we'd be out of this damn recession already, oh how i envy the great and powerful greenback that we're totally not equal with on the exchange rate for the first time ever. [/opposite day]
 

tehroc

New member
Jul 6, 2009
1,293
0
0
Pirate Kitty said:
Kortney said:
Also, what would be bad about everyone paying higher taxes? It's an irrational fear. Countries in Europe with 90% tax rates are some of the best places in the world to live.

As I said, if you want to give away money, go for it.

Considering how little the government does with it and how much they piss away, I'll keep mine, thanks.
I highly doubt your paying taxes.
 

Wicky_42

New member
Sep 15, 2008
2,468
0
0
Pirate Kitty said:
Wicky_42 said:
Pirate Kitty said:
Do you want to pay for it?

Money has to come from somewhere.
Guess who pays? Everyone! Through small taxes! Just like the roads, the police force, the army and all those politicians. You may not drive, but your taxes still go towards the roads. You may never crash, but your insurance money may still be used by the firm to cover someone disabled for life by a collision. You may never be robbed, but you still pay for the police to do their job.

Socialised/nationalised health is basically health insurance for everyone, paid in taxes. You're always covered, you never have to really worry about affording any treatment, and in the event that you get hit by some completely life-shattering disease or are permanently disabled for life, your treatment is subsidised by the entire country.

Such a civilised solution, I really can't understand the attitudes of people like you who seem to think that this is money from nowhere, or that ill people somehow are suddenly greedy bastards now that they can see the benefit of socialised healthcare in saving their life affordably. Imagine if it was your own family - have a little damn empathy!
Another of my comments:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.245628-Why-do-some-people-think-free-healthcare-is-bad?page=2#8984791

That's where the money comes from - your tax.

'Free' healthcare = everyone, regardless of if you ever use it, paying more in taxes.

And taxes are insane as it is; the more you earn, the more you pay for other people's healthcare.
The US is already one of the lowest-taxed first-world countries (if not the lowest), you've got the slack there to comfortably afford universal healthcare. I dunno where your doubling taxes thing comes from - source?

What I do know is that Sweden has the highest happiness rating of the Western world, and it's the most socialist, with almost 50% taxes (yes, that includes universal healthcare). Does that tell you anything?
 

10BIT

New member
Sep 14, 2008
349
0
0
Turing said:
10BIT said:
That's not what he's saying. He's saying if you don't earn enough, then you don't deserve healthcare, not if you brought the problem upon yourself (a statement I could sort of agree with). His statement is ultra-conservative, not libertarian.
So, what exactly? Who decides whether you brought on yourself? Imagine I was diagnosed with a severe depression through no fault of my own, am unable to work and don't have the money for or medicine.
Is it alright that I spiral into possible insane hobo-ism if I lived in America and couldn't get help?
Hence why I said 'sort of agree with'. While no one would want to give an alcoholic a new liver, especially if he is just going to wreck the new one, creating a system to judge whether it was brought upon by their own idiotic actions and thus punish them would likely cause more problems than just giving this alcoholic a new liver. The system would have to be well thought out and lenient before I'd consider it something worth implementing.

Also, what makes you believe that your depression would be considered self inflicted?
 

pauljefferson

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6
0
0
Pirate Kitty said:
And taxes are insane as it is; the more you earn, the more you pay for other people's healthcare.
Yes, but under a 'free' health system, you could end up paying less taxes and getting a better service than you currently do, as is shown in every other developed country. It would take time to get there, but it is certainly possible.
 

KushinLos

New member
Jun 28, 2008
60
0
0
What I like is that everyone jumps in on subjects like this as if they know enough to make an educated opinion on the matter. I know enough about it to know that I couldn't explain to anyone what I was sure about and I shouldn't try on the parts I'm not sure about. Mostly it has to do with the politicization effect from the "Left" and the "Right", the use of government to functionally establish monopolizes and the facts concerning cost of new drugs and procedures being higher in places that are freer marketwise because the companies providing innovation in medicine and medical practices have to make up loses is less free markets.

The world would be better off with a completely free market though and such a market would include free clinics, though of course not guarantee them.
 

KushinLos

New member
Jun 28, 2008
60
0
0
Kortney said:
Pirate Kitty said:
Kortney said:
Pirate Kitty said:
Do you want to pay for it?
Yes, actually. That's why I am pro-taxes. In fact, I do pay for it - we all do in this country. Same happens in your country, Australia, as far as I'm aware.
That isn't free healthcare - you still pay an amount when you use health services.

Free healthcare would need to be covered completely by taxes.

You may want to double your taxes, but I do not.
Situations like the one described in that thread don't happen in the UK. Nor Australia as far as I'm aware.

Also, what would be bad about everyone paying higher taxes? It's an irrational fear. Countries in Europe with 90% tax rates are some of the best places in the world to live.
Do you live in one of those countries?
 

PhiMed

New member
Nov 26, 2008
1,483
0
0
It's not bad. It's just not economically viable. Every country that has it (except Canada) is either re-examining its implementation or has a nonviable economy.

People freeze to death. Free housing would save them. Is being against free housing robbing people of life?

People starve to death. Is being against free food for everyone robbing people of life?

It'd be great if single payer health care would work everywhere, but it just won't.
 

tehroc

New member
Jul 6, 2009
1,293
0
0
Roganwilson said:
I have a question: Is the average amount that an American spends on health insurance annually less than the taxes they would have to pay if there was a universal health-care system? I think that this would be a good thing to look at.

To me, a universal health-care system would be a great thing. I'm more than happy to pay for someone to get help, just as they are happy to help me. And if it means helping someone who can't help me, so be it. There is no reason we can't share. Also, what we are spending about half our money on is the military. Do we really need F-22 Raptors to fight insurgents with weapons made 30 years ago? I don't think so. If we scaled down our military spending (one smart bomb costs about $25,000, and a Raptor costs $150 million), think of the money that would then be able to be put into other programs.
No Health Insurance is good 30% of the working class's paycheck ($10-15 here is average for blue collars in FL, especially during this economy), that's after taxes. On top of that most employers pay half of that cost, which works out to a total of 60% on ones income. It's bad enough to the point where every painting company I have worked for required me to get license as independent contractor (hell one boss made me 1% owner of company so he could dodge offering me health insurance) so I would have to pay for it myself without assistance.

Health Insurance CEOs make millions of dollars an hour, why is that when a computer could handle all claims? 80% of insurance payments go to administration costs.

One of my favorite articles is about a new Representative who ran against government healthcare complaining about having to wait 28 days after he sworn in for his government provided healthcare benefits kicks in.
http://www.alternet.org/rss/1/336385/anti-healthcare_gop_freshman_whines_about_having_to_wait_28_days_to_get_govt_healthcare/
 

Wintermoot

New member
Aug 20, 2009
6,563
0
0
because most americans dont want to pay the tax too support it free health care isnt exactly free its payed from the government wich pays it from tax money AKA want health? pay for it
 

Dogmeat T Dingo

New member
Sep 4, 2008
115
0
0
Australia has a SORT OF working healthcare system, basically you pay 1% of your income in a medicare tax (if you are above a certain income threshold, if you're under it it's free) and that gives you access to the public option. However, you can waive the tax and the public option by taking out private insurance, which actually works out cheaper for people on higher incomes. That way there's a functional public healthcare option while allowing the private insurers to stay competitive.

However, you have to keep a pretty sketchy view of the word "functional". Most public hospitals are underfunded, and you can expect a long wait in the ER if you don't happen to be injured in the early morning or another slow time. Also some hospitals have closed their ERs because they don't have the staff to operate them, and if you live in a regional community you're likely to have the local one closed down entirely and be told that you need to go to the new, overloaded "super hospital" two towns over that now services the whole region. Still, better than nothing I guess.
 

mrF00bar

New member
Mar 17, 2009
591
0
0
MortisLegio said:
Pirate Kitty said:
Do you want to pay for it?

Money has to come from somewhere.

And if you do, them go to a hospital and start handing out cash.
ninja'd

but yeah and there are a few problems with it

Who gets it?
Whats it cover?
How much will it cost(in taxes)?
will it actually fix anything?
Here is England everyone is entitled to free health care, in theory it is great but the NHS has been under a lot of strain considering the huge and unneeded funding cuts under the new governments. The bottom line is everyone at least is covered and if you don't want to be covered, just buy your own health insurance.
 

chiefohara

New member
Sep 4, 2009
985
0
0
Guitarmasterx7 said:
The reasons I can see against it are

1. Because it isn't actually FREE it's just that it comes out of taxes now

2. Have you ever been to an emergancy room? You know how you can be missing a face and you'll still have to wait 3 hours to get it sewn back on? That's WITH people "not being able to afford healthcare."

Though the reason most idiots give is "It's like communism"
Socialised medicine does include Triage you know.... If your standing there missing half your face its a pretty safe bet you'll be brought to the front of the Queue and seen immediately.
 

Seneschal

Blessed are the righteous
Jun 27, 2009
561
0
0
Wicky_42 said:
Pirate Kitty said:
Wicky_42 said:
Pirate Kitty said:
Do you want to pay for it?

Money has to come from somewhere.
Guess who pays? Everyone! Through small taxes! Just like the roads, the police force, the army and all those politicians. You may not drive, but your taxes still go towards the roads. You may never crash, but your insurance money may still be used by the firm to cover someone disabled for life by a collision. You may never be robbed, but you still pay for the police to do their job.

Socialised/nationalised health is basically health insurance for everyone, paid in taxes. You're always covered, you never have to really worry about affording any treatment, and in the event that you get hit by some completely life-shattering disease or are permanently disabled for life, your treatment is subsidised by the entire country.

Such a civilised solution, I really can't understand the attitudes of people like you who seem to think that this is money from nowhere, or that ill people somehow are suddenly greedy bastards now that they can see the benefit of socialised healthcare in saving their life affordably. Imagine if it was your own family - have a little damn empathy!
Another of my comments:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.245628-Why-do-some-people-think-free-healthcare-is-bad?page=2#8984791

That's where the money comes from - your tax.

'Free' healthcare = everyone, regardless of if you ever use it, paying more in taxes.

And taxes are insane as it is; the more you earn, the more you pay for other people's healthcare.
The US is already one of the lowest-taxed first-world countries (if not the lowest), you've got the slack there to comfortably afford universal healthcare. I dunno where your doubling taxes thing comes from - source?

What I do know is that Sweden has the highest happiness rating of the Western world, and it's the most socialist, with almost 50% taxes (yes, that includes universal healthcare). Does that tell you anything?
I have a feeling that cultural attitudes are the problem here. Sweden is a different kind of first-world country than the US, where taxes work to distribute the wealth so that everyone has extremely comfortable lives, and even if they earn very little, every essential is provided for them.

On the other hand, Americans, as seen from the posts in this thread, run the gamut from obscenely rich to dirt-poor because America is the land of enterpreneurs, which results in a small minority holding the vas majority of wealth. This is true of most countries, but it's especially obvious in the USA, and the population is extremely resistant to anything that would upset this (because those with vested interests, the rich, also have the most say in it).

It's ironic that the loudest, most obnoxious flag-waving country in the world also has this "I don't care for my fellow countrymen" attitude, and that for Americans, poor = unworthy/lazy.

And it's also completely ridiculous saying that public healthcare cannot be implemented since pretty much every other developed nation already has it in some form or another, and most of them aren't nearly as wealthy as the USA. It's just that the population is unwilling.

True, it would be a dictatorship if the government implemented an unpopular system. I guess the Americans deserve their misery-exploitation industry.
 

matt87_50

New member
Apr 3, 2009
435
0
0
I'm one of the least 'bleeding heart' type people around.

I think people should make lemonade...

I don't like pensions, I don't like hand outs for the out of work. I HATE compensation for people having babies! (seriously: we have an over population problem...)

but I think free health care is a necessity. heath care is something so critical, something you really, really, really can't live without, and yet, it is unavoidably one of the most expensive things in the world too.

there is no getting around this. it is just a real nasty issue. that is why in this case I do support a communist approach. just take a bit extra in tax, so I won't really notice, and we can all just not have to worry about this MAJOR worry in life.


I'm from Australia.

from what I can calculate, roughly, we are taxed TWICE as much as those in the US (GDP:public revenue). our gov gives handouts for everything! I hate it soo much! but Medicare (our 'universal free health care') is something I wouldn't trade for anything.

unlike other handouts: its not the 'dole bludgers' fault if they get sick. you can't say "well, if they'd worked harder they wouldn't need heath care" (the opposite would be closer to the truth).