• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support single-payer health care?

Do you support single-payer health care?

  • Yes

    Votes: 31 43.7%

  • No

    Votes: 36 50.7%

  • Maybe, if

    Votes: 4 5.6%
  • Total voters
    71
molten_dragon said:
Exactly, that's what I want to change.
Click to expand...
And then, without the profit motive, the compnay (and then, the service it provides) doesnt exist.

Profit isnt a bad word. It creates competition, which lowers costs and improves quality.
 
Goobieman said:
Profit isnt a bad word.
Click to expand...

When profits are more important to a company than (a) providing the service it is supposed to provide and (b) the lives of its customers, it sure as hell is a bad word.
 
Glinda said:
When profits are more important to a company than (a) providing the service it is supposed to provide and (b) the lives of its customers, it sure as hell is a bad word.
Click to expand...
Can you show that either of these things are the case?
 
Goobieman said:
And then, without the profit motive, the compnay (and then, the service it provides) doesnt exist.
Click to expand...

Obviously, this isn't true. We've already discussed non-profit organizations and the fact that they continue to provide services despite not having a profit motive.

Goobieman said:
Profit isnt a bad word. It creates competition, which lowers costs and improves quality.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a bad word, and I fully support a profit-based health-care industry. I just don't think there needs to be a profit-based insurance industry as well. It seems like a needless middleman.
 
molten_dragon said:
Obviously, this isn't true. We've already discussed non-profit organizations and the fact that they continue to provide services despite not having a profit motive.
Click to expand...
Yes. How many of them provide health insurance?

I don't think it's a bad word, and I fully support a profit-based health-care industry. I just don't think there needs to be a profit-based insurance industry as well. It seems like a needless middleman.
Click to expand...
I have long been a proponent of eliminating -all- third-party plans and have people directly pay for the health care goods and services they receive, so I would argue that there doesnt -need- to be an insurance industry at all.
 
Glinda said:
When profits are more important to a company than (a) providing the service it is supposed to provide and (b) the lives of its customers, it sure as hell is a bad word.
Click to expand...

Really? Let's think about this for a moment. Let's think about coastal guards. We may say that coastal guards shouldn't concern themselves about profits, they should care about saving people.

Still the profit coastal guards are providing a much better service than the non-profit guards. Why? Because the non-profit guards don't really care that much about getting new customers. This means that they drop inspections and fire bad employees. However, a profit organization do concern about it, because more customers means better profits. Therefore they will fire bad employees, and they will inspect their employees to check that they are doing their job.

The reality is, people work hardest for themselves.
 
Goobieman said:
I have long been a proponent of eliminating -all- third-party plans and have people directly pay for the health care goods and services they receive, so I would argue that there doesnt -need- to be an insurance industry at all.
Click to expand...

My only problem with this is that I don't think that people who can't afford to pay should be denied care (nor should they receive sub-standard care). Even if you treat everyone and require those that can't pay right away to pay it off later, some won't be able to. To me, a single-payer system (with the single payer being a non-profit entity) is a good compromise.
 
molten_dragon said:
My only problem with this is that I don't think that people who can't afford to pay should be denied care (nor should they receive sub-standard care).
Click to expand...
Then you have two choices:
-Force the health care providers to provide their goods and services for free
-Force everyone to pay for the health care of everyone else.

I oppose both, equally, and for the same reason.
 
disneydude said:
No one's talking about "stealing" anyones money.
Click to expand...

You're suddenly claiming that my taxes aren't going to be raised to finance an unconstitutional health care scam?

Since it is unconstitutional, the government isn't allowed to do it.

If the government does do it, it's do it in violation of the law.

Since it will "tax" me in violation of the law, that money is being stolen.

Unlike many around here, I use words correctly.

disneydude said:
..any more than government exists to provide police and fire protection.
Click to expand...

The police are a legitimate arm of government.

Fire departments are a different matter and should be privatized.

disneydude said:
Do you view that as "stealing" your money.
Click to expand...

Figure it out.

disneydude said:
Would you advocate for a system where people don't get fire protection or police response unless they buy-into that protection?
Click to expand...

Property owners would be required to carry fire insurance for properties, they should be able to pick their own carriers.

Police are a function of government.

It's not hard to understand freedom, honestly.
 
Glinda said:
When profits are more important to a company than (a) providing the service it is supposed to provide and (b) the lives of its customers, it sure as hell is a bad word.
Click to expand...

ALL companies recognize that profits are essential providing the services being sold.

No profit equals no growth equals no investors equals no company.

But you must be really really proud of General Motors for losing ONLY a billion and a half last quarter, right?
 
molten_dragon said:
My only problem with this is that I don't think that people who can't afford to pay should be denied care (nor should they receive sub-standard care).
Click to expand...

If you feel that way, there's an obvious solution.

YOU send money to a charity for destitute hospitalization.

If there's enough generous people like you, there's no need for an unconstitutional economy busting health care scam, and there's no need to rob people to make people pay for what they don't want.

Everyone's happy all the way around, that way.
 
Glinda said:
:confused: When has our government ever operated a national healthcare system?
Click to expand...

What, you've never heard of Medicare? The system that the government will have completely bankrupted in less than a decade?

Beyond this, if you believe our government is so astoundingly incompetent, it must follow that you support disbanding our military, tearing up our interstate highway and rail systems, removing ourselves from international trade/monetary systems, etc.
Click to expand...

To be honest, some of that might not be bad ideas. We spend more on our military than the next 13 countries on the list combined. We have an absurd amount of waste and our infrastructure is falling apart due to mismanagement. I'm sure the private sector could do much of it much better than the government has.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Police are a function of government.
Click to expand...

The police exist to help protect people's rights. Health care does the same, specifically their right to life (as in 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'). Ergo, health care is a valid function of the government as well.
 
molten_dragon said:
The police exist to help protect people's rights. Health care does the same, specifically their right to life (as in 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'). Ergo, health care is a valid function of the government as well.
Click to expand...
The police exist to enforce the law, not protect your rights.
 
Last edited:
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
ALL companies recognize that profits are essential providing the services being sold.
Click to expand...

There's this newfangled thing called "a non-profit organization." You might consider doing a little research...

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
No profit equals no growth equals no investors equals no company.
Click to expand...

There's this newfangled thing called "a non-profit organization." You might consider doing a little research...

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
But you must be really really proud of General Motors for losing ONLY a billion and a half last quarter, right?
Click to expand...

A. GM doesn't sell health insurance, nor deny people the option to buy a car if they have a pre-existing condition.

B.
The problem for GM was that when the sales slowed down, they had trouble cutting costs because most of their costs were fixed. In other words, a lot of their costs did not go down as their sales went down. In most manufacturing companies, when sales go down, some of the bigger costs go down as well (if you aren't selling as much of your product, then you cut back on manufacturing through layoffs, through reductions in material purchases, and so on). GM has tremendous fixed costs related to their union contract. Closing a plant, for example, did not necessarily mean the workers lost their jobs. Company pensions and legacy health care costs were fixed as well. So when sales went down, many costs stayed fairly constant. And that led to losses. --Why GM Failed
Click to expand...

C. You might consider doing a little research... :roll:
 
Glinda said:
There's this newfangled thing called "a non-profit organization." You might consider doing a little research...



There's this newfangled thing called "a non-profit organization." You might consider doing a little research...
Click to expand...

"Non profit" groups actually do profit, they just don't allow OTHERS to profit from their labors.

Non-profit organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

you might consider doing a lit.....oh never mind.
 
I say no this would screw up medicare and make healthcare rationed and cause more people to die needlessly
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Police are a function of government.

It's not hard to understand freedom, honestly.
Click to expand...

Absolutely...its not difficult at all. Police are a function of government because we decided that they were. Same as with Fire Departments, Roads/public works etc. Healthcare is no different if we decide that it should be a function of the government. There is nothing inherent about any of these examples.
 
Cephus said:
What, you've never heard of Medicare?
Click to expand...

Why yes, I have. Here's a little shocking information for you: Medicare is not a universal health system - it's for people over 65 years of age. :doh

Cephus said:
The system that the government will have completely bankrupted in less than a decade?
Click to expand...

Medicare's financial issues are not the result of government mismanagement:

Financial viability - Aging of the Population
The fundamental problem is that the ratio of workers paying Medicare taxes to retirees drawing benefits is shrinking, and at the same time, the price of health care services per person is increasing.
Click to expand...

And what is causing the increase in the cost of providing health care services?

OUR PROFIT-DRIVEN HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY.




Ye gods. Do you really need this spelled out for you? :roll:
 
Phoenix said:
"Non profit" groups actually do profit, they just don't allow OTHERS to profit from their labors.

Non-profit organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

you might consider doing a lit.....oh never mind.
Click to expand...

well, 'profit' in a non-profit organization is a little bit of a different beast than 'profit' in a normal company.

Wikipedia said:
Whereas for-profit corporations exist to earn and distribute taxable business earnings to shareholders, the nonprofit corporation exists solely to provide programs and services that are of public benefit. Often these programs and services are not otherwise provided by local, state, or federal entities. While they are able to earn a profit, more accurately called a surplus, such earnings must be retained by the organization for its future provision of programs and services.
Click to expand...

I would say that yes, others do indeed profit from their labors.

You might want to actually read the articles you link to.
 
Redress said:
I am not against it in theory, but I do not think now is the time to do it.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is either. Dennis Kucinich, perhaps one of the biggest, if not the biggest, supporters of single-payer not for profit health care is saying now is not the time. One wonders when it will be though.
 
Goobieman said:
Absolutely not.

First, insulating the consumer from the cost of the goods/services he receives only raises those costs.

Second, I have absolutely no responsibility to cover the health care costs of others.
Click to expand...

Aren't you already paying for all the uninsured people who go to emergency rooms without insurance?
 
Glinda said:
There's this newfangled thing called "a non-profit organization." You might consider doing a little research...
Click to expand...

You might consider that if non-profits are so wonderful why you're demanding the government nationalize the nation's health care industry.

Glinda said:
A. GM doesn't sell health insurance, nor deny people the option to buy a car if they have a pre-existing condition.
Click to expand...

GM doesn't sell much of anything any more. It's run by the government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom