Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

So I found out today that the US is one of the few countries that do not have a universal health care plan. What do you think about this?

I found out today that Cuba, France, Canada, and London to name a few all have universal health care and that they look down on the US because we do not. What do you think about that?

 
LiLJeni

Asked by LiLJeni at 3:09 AM on Jul. 1, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 30 (44,491 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (41)
  • What do you think about that?

    It's easy to provide things like that when your entire population would fit in one of the smaller US states. Even easier if you're going bankrupt and about to cancel it (at least, for some of those countries you've listed - they are facing massive reforms because they can't afford their own tiny programs). When countries the size of Ohio can't afford it, why on earth do you think a country of 350 million people can - it's exponentially more bureaucracy, maintenance, physical holdings and employees required.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 3:18 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • Theyre not as large population wise, but as far as country size they're very similar.

    It's the population that matters.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 6:13 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • What do I think about it?  Nothing.  I don't care what other countries think about our system.  They don't have to live here so their opinion about it is irrelevant. 


    I am fine with other countries looking down on us for not having something they have. It's not like UHC is the only thing they look down on us for.

    QuinnMae

    Answer by QuinnMae at 10:12 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • I live in Australia. We have universal health care. I don't understand why a country would not have health care for all. It makes no sense to me at all. I've even lived in Developing countries, and had children there, and they have Universal health care!
    judimary

    Answer by judimary at 3:11 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • I agree with N.P, we can't afford it, we are already close to being bankrupt...  OP did you not hear about Baby Joseph, from Canada, a few months back?  


    http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/04/21/baby.joseph.goes.home/index.html


    (CNN) -- "Joseph Maraachli, the infant whose family refused to accept a recommendation by a Canadian hospital to remove the boy's breathing tube and allow him to die, is now breathing on his own without the aid of a mechanical ventilator."


    Very kind, aren't they?  Heck with that kind of health care, who needs a Dr. Kevorkian?


     

    agentwanda

    Answer by agentwanda at 7:30 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • I think if you think the grass is greener on the other side of the fence you should go there.

    The country is almost bankrupt. We have almost half of taxpayers not only paying NOTHING but it being a payday for many. There is no money for this. Besides if we were rolling in the dough I think money would be better spent by making sure food was on tables and people had a roof over their heads.

    People have got to stop using emotion in the decision making process.

    NP was right in both her answers.
    yourspecialkid

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 9:45 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • I think it's high time that we stop thinking we are entitled to something. You do realize that without food, we will die right? So why not have a universal grocery store? There are people that can't afford food, yet they don't qualify for food stamps. People on special diets they can't afford. So we should just go to the store or some governmental warehouse and pick out our groceries, because after all, the liberals think that we are entitled to it under life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Gotta eat to live so there's life. How about a housing department, when you turn 18, you get to pick out a house fully paid for by the government. You can't live healthy if you're homeless. Wait, a government mall, If you don't have the right clothes for the weather, you'll get sick. I'll make my own health decisions, after all if pro-choicers can have "my body" then I can too!
    attap5

    Answer by attap5 at 9:53 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • LONDON is a country? Who knew?


    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:48 PM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • There's no way it's "exponentially more bureaucracy, maintenance, ..." . It's just scaled up.

    When you have a business owner with 5 employees, they don't need a supervisor for every department, and they can outsource a lot. When you hire 15 more people, you need someone to supervise them so the owner doesn't have 20 different people asking questions. Add 15 more, add another supervisor. Saying it's not exponentially more is like saying you could run the entire country with the same sized staff as you can run Wyoming. An insurance company with 350 million customers needs more of everything than an insurance company with 8 million customers, and that's essentially what you're talking about - funding and inventing, out of whole cloth, an insurance company to handle claims for 350 million people with a far wider variety of conditions and problems than you'll find in any other region.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 3:44 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

  • I agree with NotPanicking on this one.

    And for the neighbor with gangrenous foot, he would have been treated at a hospital. The PP said he didn't know that. That's a problem of education or motivation, not opportunity.
    KateDinVA

    Answer by KateDinVA at 9:52 AM on Jul. 1, 2011

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN