Does Universal healthcare make sense? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Does Universal healthcare make sense?
in Politics

By linatelinate 35 Pts edited April 12

it can be cheaper with shorter wait times. every other developed country spends half as much as we do, and covers everyone. according to the commonwealth study, the usa is worse than almost all of them except canada in their wait times to see a doctor. 
AlofRICYDdhartaPlaffelvohfenApplesauceZombieguy1987piloteer



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
22%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • AlofRIAlofRI 247 Pts
    Hmmm. I'm in the USA, I'm waiting to get a tooth pulled. I have to wait until next month. My niece lives in Canada, she doesn't know about these "wait times". Once in a while, she says.

    Here, in the USA, we have 60 of the largest corps paying ZERO taxes. We fix their roads where they transport their goods, WE fix their airports where they transport their goods. WE pay for the education of their workers, WE pay for the fire protection for their plants and offices, WE pay for their police protection. WE pay for the hospitals that keep their workers healthy …. and they pay NO taxes! A pittance "donation" to some of these … that they use to help pay no taxes NEXT year. I don't PLAN to vote for Elizabeth Warren, but I haven't decided, actually. She calculates that a 7% tax paid on their PROFITS "OVER $100M" could bring in about $1 1/2TRILLION. 
    Every other industrialized nation has universal health care, but, WE, the "richest nation in the world", cannot afford it. If the corps would pay their fair share, we could, easily! Not "free", We'd have to pay like we do SS, but it would be a HELL OF A LOT cheaper if we didn't have to cover a hundred or so CEO's "bonus" or "retirement package" or a couple of HUGE, expensive "junkets" each year to figure out how they're going to make more money NEXT year!

    Yeah, universal health care makes sense … making $Billions and paying zero taxes does NOT! And don't try to tell me about ruining our "great health care". Last I knew, it was THEE most expensive and only 37th best … well below ALL the other "socialized medicine" countries. Please, don't believe a liar that say's he'll "make it great"! He hasn't a clue! 
    Plaffelvohfen
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1792 Pts
    The longest wait time I have ever had in the US was 2 hours, and that was on a very busy day and due to emergency - the dentistry had not even known who I was before I contacted them, and still they found the time to accommodate me.
    Later in the year, I had another emergency and called up the same dentistry. Their response? "You said it will take you 15 minutes to get here? Well, we'll set everything up by then. See you soon!"

    I have never had this quality of service anywhere outside the US, with both private and public healthcare providers. On the other hand, my relatives living in Canada and Australia all say the same thing: as long as you have anything other than life-threatening emergency, prepare to wait for the whole day.

    In Canada, I had tooth issues and tried contacting various clinics. Everything was booked up for the ~2 weeks I had before going back home, and that was not in some backwards village - that was in Toronto.

    You say "almost all of them except Canada"? I will spare you the story of my aunt in Australia who waited the whole day in the lobby just so the doctor could examine her flu and say, "You will be fine, just relax and enjoy the weekend".

    I have never had anything like these experiences anywhere in the US. Every private clinic I contacted worked hard to accommodate my needs, just as long as I was willing to pay. And I do not mind paying for a quality service.
    Zombieguy1987
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
    @AlofRI

    you give a lot of anecdotes. but the commonwealth study gives more than just anecdotes. also, we have fewer doctors than the average developed country, so it makes sense that we would have wait time problems. canada is worse than we are with doctors. i dont know about australia. all we would need to do is increase our doctor and healthcare worker population and it makes sense that we wouldn't have a problem. also, we only have ten percent of people uninsured, so it makes sense that giving only ten percent more people healthcare wouldn't drive up waits all that long, at the very least if we let the free market work more and get more doctors. also, is that your idea of justice, to deny other people healthcare to improve your own? 
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
    i hit reply to the wrong person sorry
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1792 Pts
    edited April 12
    @linate

    What study are you referring to? The only result from The Commonwealth Fund I could find is this:
    https://www.commonwealthfund.org/chart/2013/wait-times-specialist-appointment
    There is no methodology explained, no source provided, nothing, just a lone graph with no explanation. It refers to a sample of 11 countries and puts the US as number 3 on both counts, with a very marginal differences from the two leaders.
    Seems pretty good to me.

    I pay for my own healthcare; I do not deny anyone else's healthcare. Everyone can pay for their healthcare just as much as I pay for mine. I do not expect others to pay for my healthcare, and I surely do not expect to have to pay for others' healthcare.

    I also do not care about "justice". I care about freedom and quality of life.
    Zombieguy1987
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    here is an article that refers to the commonwealth study, that says we are way below average when it comes to wait times
    https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/11/universal-healthcare-doesnt-mean-waiting-longer-to-see-a-doctor/281614/

    here is an overview of some issues providing universal care to the usa. it refers to the common wealth study, all the statistics ive been referring to, and a whole lot more
    https://affordableuniversalcareinformation.weebly.com

    one thing i should have conceded, is that access to dentistry might be better in the usa. that's because medicare and a lot of private insurance don't cover it. same with eye doctors. all that means, though, is we either get more of those doctors, or if we expand medicare we keep it the way it is now and not cover those things. 

    another point i can partially concede, is that access to specialty care is generally better in the usa. the thing is, there are other universal care countries that are better than us, which shows it can be done and still better. another point, specialty care isn't going to suddenly suffer or go to hell just because we expand healthcare to the remaining ten eprcent of people who are uninsured. 

    and yes that's another point you ignored. other countries have thirty three percent more doctors than we do, so if we improved that situation, giving only ten percent more people healthcare, logic dictates, isn't giong to suddently ruin everything.

    i imagine that you are still fundamentally opposed to people subsidzing each other's helathcare through taxes. if there are no good practical reasons why we wouldn't do it, which you've not shown, you have to ask yourself how moral it is to let people die because they can't afford healthcare. 

    you should just face the truth that your ideology is immoral, and that for practical purposes, you have no good reason to resist giving people healthcare. 
  • how do the wait times for treatment of things like cancer?  How about outcomes and survivor rates?
    don't post some b.s. study that shows how they meet their self imposed criteria.  here I'll start it out
    "Two recent papers examined the reasons for the UK’s relatively poor ovarian and lung cancer survival. They suggested that the differences between countries – and the UK’s poorer statistics – were caused more by differences in access to treatment than by being diagnosed at a late stage."he new research, which drew on data from more than 250,000 breast cancer patients, paints a similar picture. It shows that survival rates for women diagnosed in the UK are lower than those in Australia, Canada, Norway, Denmark or Sweden"
    https://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2013/03/01/breast-cancer-in-the-uk-can-we-do-even-better/

    Why The US Has Better Cancer Survival Rates Than The Rest Of The World


    and go.
    "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good
    Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood"
    The Animals
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
    the article by forbes says that there's still plenty of other countries that have just as good cancer treatment than the usa. such as europe. i'd guess a lot of countries that are poorer have a harder time affording the technology needed to match. we're a wealthy country.... even if we cover everyone, we will be able to afford it. 

    if other countries show specialty care like cancer can be just as good as here, why not cover everyone?
    if we give a mere ten percent more people, the uninsured in the usa, insurance, do you really think it would ruin cancer treatment for instance?
    can we just get more doctors so we're in line with the rest of the world? 
    Plaffelvohfen
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
    also is it a clear advantage living in the usa when cancer treatment is high quality, but overall access to doctors is low?
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
  • linate said:
    also is it a clear advantage living in the usa when cancer treatment is high quality, but overall access to doctors is low?
    access to what kind of doctors?  where in the U.S. because some places don't have much of a access issue right?  

    the U.K. is considered a poor country?

    the population of the U.S. is unique compared to most countries which is why these type of comparisons can't really be made.

    regardless, this doesn't have to be done on the federal level, nor should it, if a state wishes to increase or modify it's medicaid programs then they should, simple.  I wish they would it should be income based to cover those who work 2 part time minimum wage jobs and strongly limit what is paid for to needs only, which also goes for those who live off the system.  Guess that's a different topic.  You are barking up the wrong tree.  What already exists could and should be made to work better and more efficiently.  What isn't being realized here is these entitlements are used to buy votes which is why these things never get fixed or made better.  Unfortunately you are feeding the swamp creatures by promoting this universal healthcare fallacy.
    "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good
    Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood"
    The Animals
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
    @Applesauce

    some states are too poor to give their people healthcare.

    you still haven't answered if you think giving only ten percent more people healthcare would ruin cancer treatment.

    the article nor you has shown cancer treatment is better because there are wait times in other countries. 

    access in the usa is worse for primary care doctors than other countries, almost all of them. is this system better than other countries just because cancer treatment and some specialty treatment is generally better here? why can't we be like the countries where specialty treatment is just as good as here and yet they cover everyone?

    if every other country can cover everyone at half the cost, why shouldn't we? you haven't given a good or clear reason. 
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1792 Pts
    edited April 12
    @linate

    The results of this study do not support your assertion. They simply compare the fractions of people who receive services on the same day or the next day between various countries. They do not compare the wait times for any given service, and do not correct for different service distributions between different countries. It is comparing apples to oranges as far as the quantity you have in mind goes.

    Numbers of doctors do not mean much in themselves, if the doctors end up doing different amounts of work. The US doctors arguably work much harder than, say, the French doctors, as the former need to perform well to keep their job, while the latter are supported by the government and unions and are hard to fire no matter what they do.
    I would expect N doctors in a free market economy to perform better than 1.3N doctors in a more socialised economy, and the statistical comparisons I can find around support that expectation.

    Indeed, the best healthcare services around the globe seem to be found in Singapore, Hong-Kong and Switzerland. And incidentally these 3 countries are the most business-friendly countries in the world. The US is not too far behind either, despite our heavy federal regulations, which I consider pretty impressive.
    That said, other developed nations also do very well in this department, when compared to the rest of the world. In the end, a German citizen who needs healthcare will be just as fine as an American citizen, and the differences will be mostly in minor details.

    Morals are inherently subjective. My "ideology" values freedom and devalues violence. I am not opposed to people helping each other fund the healthcare they need; in fact, I encourage voluntary charity and, myself, regularly partake in it. I am opposed to taking people's money against their will, however.
    Your ideology, on the other hand, seems to follow the usual "the end justifies the means". That is deeply immoral in my eyes, but then, again, it is all subjective.

    Zombieguy1987
  • linate said:
    @Applesauce

    some states are too poor to give their people healthcare.

    you still haven't answered if you think giving only ten percent more people healthcare would ruin cancer treatment.

    the article nor you has shown cancer treatment is better because there are wait times in other countries. 

    access in the usa is worse for primary care doctors than other countries, almost all of them. is this system better than other countries just because cancer treatment and some specialty treatment is generally better here? why can't we be like the countries where specialty treatment is just as good as here and yet they cover everyone?

    if every other country can cover everyone at half the cost, why shouldn't we? you haven't given a good or clear reason. 
    a state being poor is a problem, their problem.

    I gave you an article that showed cancer care in the U.K. was bad BECAUSE of wait times.

    if access to primary care doctors is an issue, what is the cause of that issue?  lack of insurance or lack of doctors?  It's lack of doctors actually and at one time i believe you advocated for paying them less, perhaps it was on the other site but never the less that will not increase their numbers.

    the costs are effected by a multitude of things, waste and abuse being major factors.

    you can have the best insurance but if the demand is far greater than the supply, you are going to wait.  I know I've told you this before, but you can often find family practices or specialist for that matter who are NOT taking new patients.  That right there is an access and wait issue isn't it.  Has nothing to do with insurance but the demand exceeds the supply.  So what's your answer to that?  make them work more?  take more patients than they want or could handle?

    imagine if doctors had to compete with other doctors for patients, why they would have to charge less to entice patients to use them, seems capitalism could work very well in that regard.
    Zombieguy1987
    "I'm just a soul whose intentions are good
    Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood"
    The Animals
  • The passion for destruction is also a creative passion. Mikhail Bakunin

  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts

    I wonder how many thousands of people in Britain's model of socialized medicine can't watch that video because they're being denied routine cataract surgery.


  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    edited April 13
    .
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1127 Pts
    edited April 13
    .
  • linatelinate 35 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    we have only ten percent of people without insurance in the usa. so, you think giving only ten percent more people insurance is gonna wreck the market? you don't think we can improve that situation by getting our number of doctors higher? as i said, the average developed country has around a third more doctors than we do. 
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1792 Pts
    @linate

    No, I do not think so. I simply prefer it where the market is, compared to where you want it to be. You are welcome to give those 10% insurance out of your pocket, if you care about them so much.

    You are assuming that those 10% even want insurance. I do not want mine; I would prefer it if my employer put those $200 a month on my bank account, rather than on the insurance I have not used a single time in my life. But because of you precious universal healthcare advocates, my employer would be penalised for having uninsured employees due to receiving governmental endowment, so here we go.

    The market decides how many doctors are employed, not me or you. "Getting the number of doctors higher" is something that you can do in a socialist planned economy, not in a free market economy. This is not Cuba or North Korea where you can produce doctors on a factory by not giving people any other choice after high school.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch