-Virgil
Universal health care is an option from the new Democratic Congress, part of the "Six for '06" plan, or as I like to call it, "like Contract With America but no one has ever heard of it."
I'm going to do this all unbiased-like:
ARGUMENTS FOR:
1.) It's the job of the government to provide for its people, and that includes health care. That's why we have Medicare and Medicaid(for the old and the poor, respectively), and why no one can get turned away at emergency rooms.
2.) It benefits the country economically if businesses don't have to give health benefits, and it's also more beneficial economically if the average person takes less sick days. The Big Three of U.S. car manufacturers cite health-care provision as a reason for their ongoing financial travails. The cost of health insurance to U.S. car manufacturers adds between USD 900 and USD 1,400 to each car made in the U.S.A.
3.) A centralized national database makes diagnosis and treatment easier for doctors.
4.) Profit-driven care leads to
more deaths and is
more expensive.5.) The profit motive adversely affects the cost and quality of health care (opposite of what the other list said, so there are opposing opinions).
6.) Providing treatment for those who cannot afford it assists in the breaking down of epidemics.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST:
1.) Increased waiting times, which can result in unnecessary deaths.
2.) Poorer quality of care. (opposite of what the other list said, so there are opposing opinions)
3.) Government agencies are sometimes less efficient due to bureaucracy.
4.) Citizens do not curb their drug costs and doctor visits; thus increasing costs, and healthy people who take care of themselves have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, etc.
5.) Must be funded with higher taxes and/or spending cuts in other areas.
(All links provided by Wikipedia.)
So what about you? Should we do it? To what extent?
