What are the pros and cons of Universal Health Care in the U.S.?

Question

I'm just trying to find out what kind of difference Universal health care would make.

Answer 1

umm dunno i live in australia

Answer 2

1. With health coverage:

Get sick --> go to doctor or hospital--> get treated.

2. Without health coverage:

Get sick --> freak out --> don't get treated --> maybe get better on your own, maybe get worse --> worry about both your health and going bankrupt if you are seriously ill --> maybe eventually get really sick and show up at emergency room.....  etc. etc.

Universal health care: Everyone has scenario #1

Cons:  If everyone can get treated, there may be longer waits for some procedures until the system adjusts to taking care of everyone who gets sick. However, as long as the delivery of health care is private rather than public, it should adjust.  When government has too much control over the delivery of health care (rather than just ensuring that everyone has access to insurance) you get the usual problems of central control bureaucratic systems.

Answer 3

depends on which side you listen to. The conservatives are against it, the liberals are for it. Problem is most people don't understand how it works, they are under the impression that the government will pay for eveyone for anything. Actually are tax money will pay. The number one and main pro of universal health-care is everyone will have coverage. The largest con depending on how the system operates will be how much money insurance companies stand to lose.  

Answer 4

First of all, no one is proposing universal healthcare.  Obama's proposals can be seen on the two links here.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/629/...

Second, I do not think that the ideas of either of the two main candidates go far enough.

Third, to answer your question, universal healthcare takes away your right to have no insurance.  It will result in a rise in taxes.  On the plus side, the increase in taxes will be less than the money you save if you pay for health insurance, so the only people who would lose out in a financial sense are those with no health coverage, or those who choose to have a private plan in addition to the universal health system.

Did you know that despite spending more on healthcare PER PERSON than any other nation on the planet, the USA has one of the industrialised worlds highest death rates for KIDS aged under five?

p.s. I live and work in the health care system of the UK.

Answer 5

Take 2 identical parcels; try sending one by US Post and the other by FedEx.

Take a person who needs 3 stitches to:

A) a privately run hospital, then

B) a govt-run hospital. [Hint: They'll bleed to death in the waiting room of B]

Take your personal info and resume to a private employment service & see how long before you're makin' a buck or two...then;

Take the same info to your local welfare office and see how long before you're sleeping under a bridge (or studying Spanish).

...

Answer 6

First I should say that it probably won't happen.  Too many people have too much to lose. But, if somehow we did create a stable working system of Universal health then it will be much like public schools.

Before universal public education some people couldn't afford an education but those who could received a fine one.  After public education everyone could receive an education but usually not of the same quality as their grandparents had.

Universal health care will probably reduce the quality of overall health care but everyone will receive some degree of health care.  It will either require a higher taxation which will cost more from paychecks or more public debt which will decrease the value of our currency further and raise prices.

On the other hand many people cannot afford health care now so the quality they receive can only be better then whats available to them now. Lower income people will benefit, people with a very high income will still use private health care.  I doubt if we will eliminate private health care but if we do then higher income people will suffer a lower quality of medicine.

If we use the insurance companies to cover it then its really much the same.  The insurance companies will drive the quality down to save money and we will still pay for health care whether we pay a private insurance company or the government through tax.  They will drive the quality down by refusing to pay for expensive procedures so doctors use cheaper ones.