 The government works for us, at
least in theory anyway. It
definitely is more efficient to
have one organization (the govt.)
to manage a critically important
service (medical service) than to
have hundreds of competing
businesses whose interest is their
own profitability.
The government is already doing a
decent job on a lot of services:
The highway system, air
transportation, space program...
Why not one more?
|
 12 Apr 2008 01:43
|
|
|
|
|
|
 The reason that people die,
sometimes, is because they don't
have enough money to get insurance
and they need the money for
everyday necessities. Everyone
needs insurance. Plus, we pay
taxes, so the government should be
nicer and stop spending money on
war and use it on medical insurance
and better things.
|
 02 Oct 2008 02:28
|
|
|
|
|
|
 They can give medical help to other
countries but not here!
|
 26 Apr 2008 22:20
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Yes they should because if they
paid for it they would do their
best to keep people healthy.
|
 21 Apr 2008 14:22
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Some people can't afford it, and
end up dying, it is a life and
death choice.
|
 16 Apr 2008 17:15
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I do think the government should
pay for insurance. There is no
reason why the USA should have
anyone without insurance. Perhaps
the government should take on the
medical field and subjugate them to
revising their costs.
|
 10 Apr 2008 15:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I believe that everyone should have
access to affordable medical care,
not just the rich and the very
poor.
|
 10 Apr 2008 12:37
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I think they should Canada has one
so why cant we
|
 27 May 2008 03:27
|
|
|
|
|
|
 As someone who has nothing much
good to say about being a British
citizen, i have to give credit
where its due. The national health
service was one of the best things
ever thought of. Everyone is
accepted and treated regardless of
race or creed or finances. However,
as a word of caution. Should you
ever get such a system, do not let
them start to privatise it. Since
they started bringing in the
cheapest contracts for cleaning
services etc, there have never been
so many outbreaks of deaths due to
hospital borne infections. :)
|
 02 May 2008 01:26
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I agree with everything everyone
that agreed has written we do need
at least affordable medical
insurance available for us too
|
 30 Apr 2008 05:53
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I agree. The government waste our
tax dollars for things we don't
want or need and health care is
very important.
|
 29 Apr 2008 19:10
|
|
|
|
|
|
 It works in other countries so i
think it would be great to have
free health care if we would keep
or nose out of everybody's business
we would have the money to cover
it.
|
 21 Apr 2008 06:05
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I so totally agree, that may save
the middle class, and it will give
the doctors a lot more supervision
they don't need to make $800 for 15
minutes of their time Health Care
should be a GROUP EFFORT Dah! Where
are the team players here
|
 19 Apr 2008 20:23
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Ok Pointweb I'm with you on this
one... "first time for everything"
.... Puerto Rico is a good example
of how the economy thrives well off
of paid medical insurance by the
government, as well as England... I
am totally for everyone having
medical, especially since all i see
is my money going to a dying Social
security fund and medicare that by
the time I'm old enough to use wont
exist.. In my book, the sooner the
better!
|
 16 Apr 2008 01:19
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Everyone deserves insurance. We
need to take care of our nation.
There shouldn't be a reason as to
why we have people who are
homeless, illiterate or without
medical insurance.
|
 14 Apr 2008 13:28
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I think that the US should provide
medical insurance because there are
people who can't afford it. Some
people chose to skip a doctor's
appointment that can save his/her
life so that he/she can put food on
the table for his/her family. That
is very sad.
|
 12 Apr 2008 22:08
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Yes, because is not a privilege
it`s a needs of all human
|
 10 Apr 2008 14:35
|
|
|
|
|
|
 It seems to be working well for
those whom reside in England.
Perhaps those with persistent
ailments will go to the doctor
hopefully avoiding a life
threatening issue. My only
question would be who is going to
pay for it...the usual...tax
payers?
|
 10 Apr 2008 05:43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 To all working Us citizens
|
 01 Oct 2008 07:42
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Too much government! That means the
government would be controlling our
healthcare. Would we be able to
choose our doctors? Probably not!
Our taxes would be much higher!
Longer waiting periods to see your
doctors! It would be a form of
Communism. The whole point of the
United States is freedom, isn't
it?!
|
 17 Apr 2008 02:35
|
|
|
|
|
|

 THIS IS A BIG FAT CAN OF WORMS!
THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT OWE US
ANYTHING AND CERTAINLY NOT
SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. However
medical insurance is a very flawed
system whereby the Insurance
Companies get very rich at the
expense of the doctors and the rest
of us. There need to be some
serious reforms. Poor people with
less than perfect credit have a
hard time getting affordable
insurance with any decent kind of
coverage. If the insurance
industry does not police itself
then big government at the
"Liberels" urging will step in and
push us into socialized medicine.
All you liberals think "HealthCare
for all" is so wonderful.
Countries that have it are the ones
with the highest tax rates and even
then you have to wait to get
treatment and you rarely get to
choose your doctor.
|
 04 Aug 2008 00:05
|
|
|
|
|
|

 I live near Canada & I can tell you
it doesn't work! There is a
horrendous waiting period to see a
doctor. Some medical conditions
they don't treat because by the
time they get the treatment it's
too late! Doctors are overworked &
underpaid so they go to the US.
Giving money to a government is the
worst way to solve a problem.
|
 01 May 2008 15:32
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I do think that we could use a
program for young adults getting
out on their own, but as far as
nationwide health care goes... No.
It's too much power to place into
the governments hands. Politicians
are corrupt. Why is it a good idea
to place essentially your body into
their hands? I already feel backed
into a corner as it is. Free health
care of course sounds wonderful,
but you pay with quite a large
chunk of your freedom.
|
 30 Apr 2008 05:47
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I agree with UMPLE, the social
security we pay in needs to be
taken out of the general fund and
not let any other government
program touch it. This should have
been fixed years ago.
|
 16 Apr 2008 14:58
|
|
|
|
|
|

 Socialized medical systems like
Canada stink. Why do you think so
many Canadians come to the U.S. If
they have something seriously wrong
with them. They are taxed through
the nose to pay for the medical
system (if you really believe it is
free, you are practically
braindead), and since everyone
treats it as if it is free,
everyone goes to a doctor for every
case of sniffles.
This results in unbelievable
waiting periods to see a doctor..
Often months. God help you if you
suffer from something that is
pretty fast acting. Hate to wait
six months to see a doctor, then
have him say "Gee, too bad we did
not catch this lump 4 months
ago".
You want to bring down medical
costs, and hence make medical care
more accessible to everyone? Put a
cap on awards given in malpractice
suits. Someone has something
relatively minor, say losing a toe
because a doctor messed up, should
not get $20,000 actual damages, and
$20 million punitive damages
awarded. Punitive damages do not
hurt the doctor, other than raise
his insurance rates, which get
passed on to future patient's
medical bills.
|
 16 Apr 2008 10:20
|
|
|
|
|
|

 Wait, doesn't the government
already do that? Isn't it called
medicaid or medicare? I mean
granite, you don't qualify if you
make over a certain amount of money
but generally speaking they do
provide insurance for people.
|
 14 Apr 2008 15:36
|
|
|
|
|
|
 It is not the governments
responsibility to provide our
health care it is ours.Plus it
would not be any less expensive.Who
will pay for it?Everyone who has a
paycheck. Remember the problem with
social security,being depleted
because it does not go into a
seperate fund it goes to the
general spending fund and is used
up as fast as it is collected.That
problem has yet to be fixed.Look at
your pay stub at what is taken for
ss which you will pay til your 67
and unless the government fixes the
problem the money will not be there
for you to collect when you
retire.Are you sure you want to
give them whats left of your check
and trust them to run health
care?Because that's where the money
will come from.
|
 12 Apr 2008 00:42
|
|
|
|
|
|

 Universal citizen-insurance might
be the death of alternative
medicine, typically supporting the
medical community and subsidizing
disease and ill-health by taxation.
There's more $-flow in treatment
than in cures.
Such taxes diminish individual
funds for heath maintenance
supplies: Food and any necessary
non-prescription supplements.
|
 11 Apr 2008 19:06
|
|
|
|
|
|
 No way. People should pay their own
way
|
 10 Apr 2008 15:19
|
|
|
|
|
|
 It would be nice to have my
insurance paid for, but if it was,
I and most everyone else will go to
the doctor whenever we have a cold,
causing long waiting lines and
eventually appointments may be
weeks or months away from when we
called the doctor.
|
 10 Apr 2008 04:07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|