why exactly is socialized health care good, again?

[snorkel]

I've never really thought it was a good idea, but now with all this talk about a proposed VAT (nation-wide sales tax) to cover Obama's magnificent deficit, I must criticize plans like social health care.

Why is social health care a priority above social services like scientific institutions, education, public libraries, transportation, infrastructure, and green energy? What exactly is the benefit to society as a whole when a majority of the population is not in need of social health care?

My arguments against social health care are as follows:

- One of the most basic economic principles is that competition drives improvement. Socialized health care eliminates any incentives, since the business practice of medical insurance will be mostly gone. That said, the way insurance companies operate is also horrible, and should be retooled.

- It's socialism. I don't object to this principally, but I believe our general betterment would be much more aptly achieved through self-determination. Yes, there are lots of families suffering from economic downturn who simply can't afford health care, and I don't really subscribe to the philosophy that the poor are poor because of their own actions and that it's their responsibility to just try harder, which is why I think some intense governmental regulation is needed to ensure equal access to multiple forms of insurance for all income brackets... this is how every economic market works -- with the proper balance of free trade and regulation, everyone wins.

- Like I said, it should just not be a priority. A minority is without health care. A majority is without a respectable public education system (which, by the way, should also be entirely privatized). A majority is without easy access to green energy and, oh, loans. Our dedication to technology and science has declined in the past decades, although I give Obama credit for realizing that and doing something about it.

Finally, I hate to go into generic red-blue banter, but I sincerely believe that simply cutting taxes and getting rid of frivolous spending (read: most government programs) is a better idea than devising tax refund schemes and multiple taxes to cover initiatives that may or may not help anyone.

[Feynman]

Maybe health care shouldn't be a business? And a minority may be without health care, but that minority is still a significant amount of people—not to mention the amount of Americans having to go bankrupt because they can't pay their medical bills.

The health care system in this country sucks, any health care system based on profit is shitty.

[snorkel]

Maybe health care shouldn't be a business? And a minority may be without health care, but that minority is still a significant amount of peopleââ,¬â€�not to mention the amount of Americans having to go bankrupt because they can't pay their medical bills.

The health care system in this country sucks, any health care system based on profit is shitty.

Maybe a better solution, then, would be to attack the system that enslaves low-income Americans from the ground up -- fix the disease, not the symptom. Establish the highest educational standards in the world. Rebuild urban centers to accommodate the newest technology and development. Make homes and necessary amenities more affordable. And all this through private incentive, not social services.

[strongbad]

The health care system in this country sucks, any health care system based on profit is shitty.

Isn't that what makes our medical personal so advanced? It's so damn competitive that we only get the best.

Also this should be in discussion.

[Zach]

The health care system in this country sucks, any health care system based on profit is shitty.

Any health care system with no incentive to improve the quality of care is shitty. Competition will always improve a market compared to what socialism will do to it.

[guff]

- It's socialism.

god damn stop listening to the yelling people on tv, snork 
"socialized medicine" and its cousins are just weasel words constantly tossed around by opponents of the idea

...like scientific institutions, education, public libraries, transportation, infrastructure, and green energy?

i oppose these because they are socialisms 

[superclucky]

Isn't that what makes our medical personal so advanced? It's so damn competitive that we only get the best.

Also this should be in discussion.

Other countries charge less for the same shit. <3

[snorkel]

god damn stop listening to the yelling people on tv, snork 
"socialized medicine" and its cousins are just weasel words constantly tossed around by opponents of the ideai oppose these because they are socialisms 

I said directly after "It's socialism" that I don't oppose socialism on principal, and I don't see how my defense of the point is unreasonably misinformed.

Actually, yes, social health care is more "socialist" than the other things I mentioned, because it has for a very long time been operated privately and now faces socialization, while all those other things are, for the most part, done by private entities coordinated by the state.

Other countries charge less for the same shit. <3

That's another issue entirely, mainly of pharmaceutical companies holding ridiculous copyrights so they can capitalize on medicine. I think some hefty regulation in this field would also be beneficial.

[Zach]

Other countries charge less for the same shit. <3

And you pay through it out the teeth in taxes, plus there is no expediency in receiving the care that you require.

[hotlikesauce.]

I agree

[snorkel]

boyah needs more threads like this