Yes and in every other developed nation, health care is one of them. The difference is that it doesn't just serve the poor, but rich and middle classes alike.
Yea but why should it service the rich and the middle class?
I mean they can already pay for those things. Thats like going around your elbow to get to your ass. Its a wasted motion.
Only if you qualify. Not everyone does. Not everyone who applies for a loan gets one. Not everyone who asks for food stamps gets them. A minimum wage job is meaningless when you have a long-term illness that requires treatment and an insurance company won't give you a plan because of your pre-existing condition.
Not everyone should get a loan. If someone can't manage their finances they should not get any loans.
Most people who want food stamps can get them. Its not hard unless your an achiever.
Planning for sickness is part of being an adult and if you can't get past minimum wage as an adult something is seriously wrong with you.
I disagree, but this is another debate altogether.
I've had the luxury of living in and around many people of many different backgrounds.
Now there is some racial prejudice from people but I'd like you to entertain the thought that it isn't just from white people.
People of other ethnic back grounds are just as prejudice as some white folks are.
Depends on the rich person. A small percentage of Americans hold most of American wealth... my guess would be that a lot of it is old money passed down.
I disagree. The faces of new millionaires changes all the time.
Some once the earn their magic number stop working because they have all they need others still go at it and loose what they earned.
Some keep earning and earning. Remember rich people get richer because they keep doing the things that made them rich in the first place.
The same can be said for poor people.
I'm not clear on your meaning here. UHC gives you treatment regardless if it's a new condition or not. It might not cover every little thing, but it will at least cover specialists and clinical/hospital procedures. That saves people a lot of hardship.
UHC gives power to government officials who don't know you or your particular circumstances.
It can be used against you if they do know you.
The real practical reason I don't like it is because it does not provide more access to health care.
It's the three stooges effect. Everyone trying to run through the door at the same time, which causes a delay in services not seen in America.
I can go to my doctor tomorrow and get a referrel to see a specialist the day after I see my primary care doctor.
Can you do that with the UHC systems in place now?
I even mean subscribers of UHC. You keep putting the blame on them... it's their fault they are sick, it's their fault they don't have insurance, it's their fault they don't have a job and can't afford insurance, etc etc. It's not so cut and dry.
Its not that they are sick that I'm upset about its the facts that they don't plan for its possibility.
It is their fault they don't have a job though and it is their fault they aren't trying harder to get insurance for themselves.
You have to plan ahead.
A bet is unnecessary, just a link to prove your assumption.
I can't provide a link because there has probably never been a study done.
All I have is anecdotal evidence.
I've been to many, many project homes and one thing is a constant all the homes had cable and satellite and a huge number of them had at least a big screen tv.
How much of their money is really being used to support UHC? A lot of the funds going to UHC are a result of reallocated government spending.
I'm not sure the exact funds but it doesn't really matter.
No one should be forced to pay for someone else's terrible planning decisions
I guess because I come from a country that is comparatively socialists, I don't understand your viewpoint at all. I don't support universal socialism with everything, but with health care I do. Health and education are the most important factors to a developed society, and if 40 million don't have access, something needs to change.
It's not our difference in countries but our difference in thinking.
I believe that most social services are reverse Darwinism.
I believe that the individual is more important than the whole and makes the best decisions for themselves.
You should also understand that what people learn in U.S. government schools is not about education. Government schools were founded to manage citizens and to provide basic working skills to the populace.
It is not about educating people.
I don't think it's a crappy decision, but a wise one. The only thing I'm worried about is how it will be implemented. Since America has never had socialized health care before, it will be an uphill battle to get it started. I think it is worth giving a chance.
It is not wise option in my opinion because there is simply not enough services to cover the whole population like people pretend.
I'm sorry that I get a bit derogatory but I'm very impassioned about these things.
