Why do liberals keep going on about healthcare?

Question

Don't all americans already have access to healthcare?

Answer 1

It's not about acess to healthcare

that is just a ruse about the real issue

the democrats want the free riders to payup

white males in their teens and 20's and 30's and early 40's who don't go to doctors

and don't have insurance

are known as free riders to dems

that is why Hillary wanted to garnish their wages

this issue is about increasing taxes on males

it is a womans issue

they are always going to the doctor

for their abortions and birth control pills

and want the gov't to pay up

Answer 2

Yes, everyone has access.  Whimsy, I got mine free at the health clinic this summer.  

Answer 3

Many Americans DON'T have healthcare and are fighting an uphill battle to get some.

My foster cousin, who is in his late twenties, has been fighting the system for years and still doesn't have basic coverage. He had to fix an eye injury himself a few years ago because no clinic in his area will take him in for lack of insurance.

He has been fighting for many people, like himself, who have fallen through the cracks of American healthcare.

He's also not a liberal, dear.

Count your blessings before you try slamming others for something very needed.  

Answer 4

they want universal health care and that is different than having access to health care that you must pay for  

Answer 5

It is always easier to get votes when you tell people that their problems are not their fault. You get even more votes by telling people that you will make sure they do not have to take responsibility for themselves and their own well being.

Healthcare is one such issue. It takes personal discipline and responsibility to eat right, exercise, stop unhealthy habits like smoking, and get regular check ups. Only the last one really costs you anything at all and even then the cost is minimal. Yet these are the most important things you can do to secure a healthy life. No amount of government control, short of mustering every citizen outside for morning exercises on penalty of law, will make this happen. You have to take responsibility for you.

There is nothing wrong with healthcare in the US per se. In fact, we have some of the best healthcare in the world here. You can walk into any emergency room in the country and get treated with the latest drugs and most up to date technology. And if you cannot pay for it, the hospital still cannot refuse you care and they eat the expense. That is why so many hospitals, especially here in Southern California, are going bankrupt. Open a phone book and you can find page after page of doctors offering every conceivable specialty, make an appointment, and be seen promptly. The problem is the cost of delivering this care. There are several factors that drive this and frankly, I do not see how nationalizing healthcare will have a serious impact on it.

Nationalizing healthcare would dramatically increase government costs. Not just in the actual cost of service, but also in the national bureaucracy needed to maintain the federal program. You are talking about hundreds of billions of additional spending. Free healthcare is, as you would expect, not really “free”. Also, since it would be so widely available, it would be used so much that the system, without the financial limitation on personal behavior, would be quickly overwhelmed. This is what causes rationing of services and delays. There are only so many hours in a day and so many doctors to see patients. One of the major complaints in countries that have a nationalized healthcare system is rationing; having to wait months for knee replacements or over a year for a new heart valve, and that sort of thing.

There are things that can be done to reduce cost, and thus make healthcare more available to the public without the burden of a government bureaucracy. For example, limiting malpractice lawsuits to actual damages is one way. Punishments for gross malpractice should not go to making plaintiffs, and moreso the plaintiffs attorney, independently wealthy. This drives up the cost of insurance to the point that many doctors are simply closing their practices. By limiting lawsuits, you limit the cost of the service, which in turn allows the service to be provided as a lower cost to the consumer.

Another option, reduce drug costs by changing patient laws. Currently, a drug company will spend billions of dollars developing a drug. But the process of testing, documenting, and licensing drugs is so long they have only about 7 years to recoup that cost before the drug loses its protection and generic makers, who do not have a high research cost to recoup,  can make it at a fraction of the cost of the name brand. But, if we were to expand the patient protection, require a small royalty for the researching company, or a combination of the two, the financial pressure is eased. With more time to recoup costs, drug companies do not have to charge as high a price for their products.

A third option that can be done is to focus on the excessive costs of training and equipping a medical professional. Currently, a doctor takes out a gargantuan amount of debt in order to go through medical school. They have to pay this debt back and it takes years, even at their pay rates. Same thing with nurses and many technicians. And the costs of some of the equipment, ultrasounds, MRIs, etc, is astronomical. But, if we make changes in how we train and equip medical professionals, we can lower this burden. I do not have any particular proposals that really get my heart racing, but a creative approach like apprenticeships, programs to start students at lower level technician jobs and working up to a medical doctor, a federal teaching school modeled after Bethesda Naval Hospital or Walter Reed Army Hospital but for civilians, business tax credits for the manufacture or purchase of diagnostic equipment, or even direct government support for medical research tied to providing care to the public are all places to start. There is a lot that can be done that does not require the government taking over an industry.

In short, I think the benefits of a nationalized healthcare system, with its accompanying government bureaucracy, are more than outweighed by the negative impacts to patient care and cost. I think that there are plenty of other things that  

Answer 6

But there are old as well as young people dying in America by the hundreds from having no medical insurance and not enough money to buy prescription drugs.

Answer 7

They have been babbling about universal health care since the beginning of time. They use it as an issue with the poor even though nothing will change.

Ted Kennedy said it best last night when he said he has been fighting for universal health care his entire career. That is a long time with no change, lol

Answer 8

Yes, they do have access, but that means they have to PAY for it!  God forbid!!!

They want universal healthcare because they think it somehow becomes free if the govt handles it.  Wait until they see how much more it costs in taxes...

Answer 9

There are about 30 million Americans without proper health care.  Most notably the poor but you can always be denied health care insurance at the whim of an insurance company.  There are about 90 million Americans with insufficient health care which means if they get really sick they are only covered up to a certain point before the insurance quits paying.

Feb. 4, 2005 – A study published Wednesday in the policy journal Health Affairs found that approximately half of people in the US who file for bankruptcy cite medical costs as a significant reason for their financial troubles. Based on a survey of 1,771 personal bankruptcy filers, the researchers extrapolated that between 1.9 and 2.2 million people were driven into bankruptcy because of health care costs in 2001.

http://newstandardnews.net/content/?acti...

A new Harvard study of medical bankruptcies highlights the growing number of Americans with dangerously skimpy health insurance coverage and the need to address the problems of the insured as well as the uninsured, according to Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP). The study, published today as a Web Exclusive by the journal Health Affairs found that half of U.S. bankruptcies, affecting 2 million people annually, were attributable to illness or medical bills. (Copies of the article can be accessed at: http://www.pnhp.org/facts/bankruptcy_stu...

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2005/february/b...

Answer 10

Because we care about the middle class.  As in many situations, the poor can sometimes go to  clinics and be treated cheaply or free,  and the rich have no problem.

It's those in the middle that are having the hardest time.

As long as there are "big profit" interests in medicine, we're going to continue to be a shamefully unhealthy nation, considering the general wealth.  

I know a guy who had a staff infection, so he stayed 3 nights in the hospital, no surgery, just IV antibiotics, but he didn't have insurance, so when the bill came it was over $30,000 for 3 nights!  So yes we're concerned about healthcare for all because it's in no one's interest to have an unhealthy population.  On the opposite side, lots of right wingers keep going on about nothing but abortion.  But they only care about their own healthcare.  

Answer 11

Yes, all who want access can get it.  It is a wedge issue that they are blowing way out of proportion.  The system needs a little tinkering it needn't be thrown out and replaced by a system that is failing in other countries..

Answer 12

No, we don't all have access to health care. it costs my husband and I 125.00 a WEEK. And that's with employer assistance. Most people can't afford to pay for health care. When they can they are under covered. How can you think we all have coverage?

Answer 13

The U.S. is the only developed nation in the world that doesn't have some form of National Health System, forcing employers to pay for it diverts their funds from the research and development that would keep them competitive in the world market, it's also one of the reasons that overseas companies are less likely to invest here.  The whole point of Liberalist Philosophy is maximizing personal freedoms through free market capitalism along with the rights to property and the fruits of one's labor, if we force our workforce to pay something that their overseas competition is getting free we are not achieving that, and the Domestic economic problems we are now seeing are a direct result.  As any true liberal will tell you, businesses, and Governments, have to change with the times, if what your producing isn't cost competitive, or your National policies aren't working, you change or you fail, as a business or a country.    

Answer 14

No, not everyone has access to good healthcare or an ability to pay.

Example of what is wrong with US healthcare:

I needed a tetanus booster shot last weekend.  Price = $185

Answer 15

The system is Sick Care.  There is nothing about the US system which promotes preventive medicine and encourages fitness.  Obviously it's because there is much more Profit in keeping people very sick and  in the business of catastrophic procedures than in helping people to stay fit. The least expensive universal health care is to keep people healthy  strong and physically fit.  It's not rocket science!!!!!