Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pr0f3n
Reread the article, the only NHS proposal mentioned is to incentivize self-care. Hardly clear evidence of the government restricting freedom. The Federalist papers are an interesting insight into political thought at our nation's founding but things have changed to such an extent they're hardly the end point in a discussion about the role of government.
No one's doing that.
Yeah what's wrong with all those poor people choosing to have no money?
|
Yea, go visit the vast majority of those poor people and you'll see their injuries resulted from overstraining themselves carrying to much "bling".
Quote:
You have no idea what you're talking about, and doing so with authority!
Every other industrialized western nation has UHC and pay 60-120% less per capita than we do in the US. Preventative care decreases health expenditures over the long term. You're inventing problems that don't exist.
|
Just about every other industrialized nation with UHC, isn't comparable with the US on this issue. Number 1, most of them have better health to begin with than our obese, heart disease having, tv watching, non-exercising, diabetic population. The other issue, is our system is going to be the largest UHC system in the world.. by many times. The challenges in maintaining and implementing the medical system for a country as large as ours is going to be nearly impossible... especially when compared with a place like france.
I have no confidence in our federal government to uproot our entire medical system and make us all better off. Like I said in my first post on this thread, there's nothing stopping you from getting your state to provide health coverage. Get your state to do it. If it works as well as you think, then others will follow.
Its funny how so many people seem to mistrust the feds, claim 911 was in inside job, or go on and on about all the rights the government is continually taking away, but are ready to hand their lives right over in the form of UHC.