Would you pay extra taxes so that all can get health care?
3
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
38 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.Yes. Without a doubt. Further, if a well-designed universal health care system would be developed, actual health care costs would actually go down, as it would cut out the excess profits of health insurance companies, drug companies, and for profit hospitals and physicians.
wordywalt
Level 9
Feb 2, 2019
3
When I had to have emergency medical treatment in Canada the first question I was asked was, "What's wrong?". In the US it is, "Who is your insurance provider?".
MizJ
Level 8
Feb 2, 2019
6
When I got sick in Europe the same thing happened. Nothing about who was going to pay.
We need that. But they'll tell you it's not perfect there either.
We already do here. I may have to wait slightly longer for some treatments but it's better than paying incredulous amounts out of pocket (even with insurance). We don't pay provincial health care premiums here so it's doable for everyone. Some pay additional insurance privately or through their employer for things not covered by provincial health care.
graceylou
Level 8
Feb 2, 2019
6
in what universe would that be considered extra? does anyone ask this about wars? road repair? is healthcare less important than road repair? it's not extra... and it would be cheaper per person than paying for health care out of pocket. by the way, america is not asking kamala harris how she would pay for health care. republicans who want more tax cuts for the super-rich (not for US, just THEM) are asking. they never ask this about, oh, the WALL, or a war, or their tax cuts.
g
genessa
Level 8
Feb 2, 2019
6
Of all the things something like this could be asked about, none would really matter without healthy citizens.
@IAJO163 indeed! life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. if your life is in danger or impaired, if your liberty is impaired by your health, how the hell do you pursue happiness? if you have to choose between feeding your kids and making sure they get lifesaving medical care, how is that liberty?
g
Taking the profit out of health care will cut the costs dramatically. We get worse out comes for more money than any country with universal health care. Our system is profit driven.
sewchick57
Level 7
Feb 2, 2019
5
Agreed
I would. Healthcare is almost unattainable for too many, and I’ve seen elderly retired folks choosing between medical care and heat/food.
CarolinaGirl60
Level 8
Feb 2, 2019
5
The one area of single payer not talked about is that it would be great for small businesses. I run a small business (20 employees) remove the cost of insuring our employees and I can pay them more. Also, small companies that can't afford insurance for their employees would be able to retain good employees as they wouldn't change jobs just for the benefits......
Dhiltong
Level 8
Feb 2, 2019
4
Insurance is why I stay with an otherwise unfulfilling job. I could take a bit of a pay cut but as a cancer survivor, I do not dare leave my employer until or unless I can be assured of treatment should I get it again.
Excellent point!
It is getting more and more difficult for small businesses to provide health care as the prices go up and the deductibles go up...we want to keep our employees but have to make hard decisions...most stay because we are trying to be fair...they forego large raises for their benefits, but eventually, we are going to have to have them contribute to the cost as well...something has to be done soon...
Everybody paying i profit driven nsurance companies monthly premium are already paying. If prefer my premiums go towards a Canadian style plan that helps everybody. By the way. It's not free healthcare. It's paid through taxes. Nobody calls them free roads or free military.
Count_Viceroy
Level 7
Feb 2, 2019
4
Yes! We NEED a universal, single-payer health care system! Health care should be a fundamental right.
BestWithoutGods
Level 8
Feb 2, 2019
4
MizJ:
This is about haves and have-nots as well as corporate profits. The haves and corporations pay billions in lobbying to keep the status quo.
@MizJ If only those billions were funneled into health care instead!
MizJ:
@BestWithoutGods Yes! Single payer would also lower costs for healthcare providers as it would simplify their claims process, lowering costs.
Considering my insurance is already $1200 a month, I’m positive it would be a savings in the long run.
Take back the 1.5 trillion dollars trumpski gave to his fat cat friends and that’ll be a great starting point.
Green_eyes
Level 8
Feb 2, 2019
3
Wow. My last wage I paid £246 in NI (national insurance) that pays for the health service, schools, social services, municipal buildings and services, courts. We pay £158 council tax which pays for local services (like rubbish pick ups) and the police. We have sales tax and road tax. The health service is worth it
I was in the top 3.5% last year. Yes, tax me more.
greyeyed123
Level 7
Feb 2, 2019
3
In the Democratic Socialist countries in Europe, they have higher taxes, but they get free healthcare and education up through a full Phd. However, although they pay higher taxes, after their basic living expenses are paid, they still have more discretionary money left over than the average American does. People in these countries are rated as the happiest in the world.
So, yes, I'd be willing to pay higher taxes for single payer health care. However, the minimum wage must also be rai9sed to a level where it is considered to be a "living wage", which means if you work full time, you couls afford to meet the cost of living and be able to support yourself.
snytiger6
Level 9
Feb 2, 2019
4
We pay taxes for food stamps to keep people alive on a nutritional standpoint. The same would apply on a mediclal standpoint.
MrDMC
Level 7
Feb 2, 2019
3
actually food stamps pay for themselves. for every buck paid into food stamps, a food-stamp recipient puts more than a buck back into the economy. the snap program is highly economical... unlike the "give huge tax breaks to the people who need them least (the super rich}" program. free health care isn't charity. free health care would be 1. cheaper per person and 2. put healthy workers back into the economy. think about this one tiny isolated example: darden (olive garden, red lobster) doesn't pay its workers enough that an unpaid day off is tenable, and also doesn't give paid sick leave. this means restaurant workers are coming to work sick and touching YOUR food if you eat there, and then YOU get sick. just fixing that one thing alone would help so many workplaces, not to mention individuals, increase productivity and thus profit. that's just one teeny tiny example, too.
g
I could come out ahead to pay more in taxes for it if my premiums, deductible, or direct medical costs went down as a result (without reducing the quality of coverage even more).
Currently, my monthly premiums cost more than twice my mortgage and I still get to pay in full for doctor's visits because my deductible is in the thousands of dollars range. None of my siblings (by blood or marriage) are insured at all. Their health is horrible. This is likely to be literally killing them all.
Zster
Level 8
Feb 2, 2019
3
your quality of care would go UP because you wouldn't have insurance companies telling the doctors what procedure or drug to use for you. cutting out the middle man (in this case the insurance companies) cuts costs. premiums wouldn't exist; any tax increase would be nowhere NEAR the cost the premiums were, not to mention copays and deductibles.
g
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.