Thread in which pro-lifers explain why they're not hypocrits for being anti-universal healthcare

[SlowwHand]

A few thousand dollars? Do you know how much a heart attack or any other serious condition costs?
Put in a flat tax of 10%, do away with most deductions and legalize & tax pot. In the black, here's your totally free and fully optional health care.

[Felch]

That's why it rolls over. By the time you're old enough to have a heart attack you should have plenty saved up. Unless you blew it all on penis enlargement surgery.

[SlowwHand]

You're delusional if you think heart attacks recognize age. Step outside the heart attack box though. What if someone drops a brick on your head by accident from 10 stories up? That's a little out there, but **** happens.

[Felch]

Well then you ****ing die. We can't afford to give everybody everything they want, and this is one way that makes sense. What's your idea? More of the insane, inefficient, and unsustainable system that's destroying America?

[SlowwHand]

Put in a flat tax of 10%, do away with most deductions and legalize & tax pot. In the black, here's your totally free and fully optional health care.

This is what I think. Try reading.

[notyoueither]

Because universal healthcare is really just rationing such that everyone gets lower quality care to ensure that no one gets better care than anyone else?

Many systems in the world have privately delivered care and those who can afford to pay for more get more.

Canada is the ****ed up step-child where there is a wide-spread idea that private care and allowing people to pay for more or extra is wrong.

[Felch]

This is what I think. Try reading.

But that does nothing to limit the growing costs of health care. Only when people actually have to pay for things will the market respond.



This is a problem, and it needs to be addressed. Throwing more money at it will only further distort the economy.

[Ben Kenobi]

Because Obamacare and Canada's health care fund abortion?

Question asked, question answered.

[Egbert]

STFU, DaShi. You're brain dead. No one wants to listen to your ignorance.

Oy Slowwy. I trust you will have the courtesy to apologise to me for implicitly comparing DaShi to Braindead.

[Asher]

Because Obamacare and Canada's health care fund abortion?

Question asked, question answered.

That was not the question.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'll take prolifers, for 200, alex.

[MikeH]

Because universal healthcare is really just rationing such that everyone gets lower quality care to ensure that no one gets better care than anyone else?

This shows how little experience you have of universal healthcare.

[MikeH]

Many systems in the world have privately delivered care and those who can afford to pay for more get more.

Exactly.

And in the UK private care is often carried out in NHS hospitals by staff who also work for the NHS. Just can happen faster, especially for non-emergency procedures.

If you have a broken leg or something NHS A&E is still your best bet even if you have private care.

[MikeH]

It's bad enough being stressed about being sick, without having to be stressed about how you will pay for treatment.

And I can't imagine living somewhere where you can't just go and see a doctor whenever you need to, without worrying about the cost or exceeding your number of free visits or whatever.

And it costs us much less per person.

US system is just a waste of money, and causes people stress. It's really horrible and the main reason I'd never live in the states.

[Jon Miller]

I support universal health care, but I think it should be based on a simple market principle. Give everybody a few thousand dollars a year to spend on medical needs, let a percentage of unspent money roll over, and allow them to pay for doctors or whatever they need with that.

That way you provide a basic level of care to everybody, while encouraging them to get the best deals and not squander the money in their accounts. And the super rich would still be able to go to Mayo and get the best care in the world.

The problem with that is that everyone would need to have insurance (for the reasons cited).

It might be better than what we have now, but unless our insurance system got fixed it wouldn't really constrain our costs I think.

I guess if it was high enough so that many people didn't think they needed insurance.... maybe it would be OK then?

Say
$3000 per year (and rolls over) and people can get additional (100k/etc) insurance on top of that? (But the insurance is like life insurance/etc, it isn't subsidized by the employers/state like it is currently).

JM