Why is America seemingly so opposed to a Universal Health Service?

[Joe Harker]

Why does America not want a "national health service" system, is it the costs and the taxes people think will get expontially higher? Or is it the belief you shouldn't have to pay for someone elses health treatment?

I have never understood why America, a rich country, wouldn't take it up. I can understand third world countries given the cost of medicines and treatments these days, but i see no real reason why this isn't the case in America, a health system would cut a lot of the stress out of getting ill. Here in Britain you just ring up your GP, see him/her, alright you have to pay for prescriptions (except in Wales and possibly Scotland) but at a discount price and all drugs are the same price under prescription, and not have to worry about health insurance and whether the diease you have will be actually treated, it does sound like a really unfair system because it's not really fair to make someone pay though the nose because they manged to get a diease or condition that requires expensive treatment.

 

[philippe]

some oppositions aren't backed by reason.

 

[Yoda Power]

For some odd reason the US spends insane on amounts on healthcare already, much more per capita than the UK as far as I understand.

 

[Princeps]

Why does America not want a "national health service" system

Well actually they do apparently. American support for nationalized healthcare scheme is pretty consistently 2/3 or higher.

For some odd reason the US spends insane on amounts on healthcare already, much more per capita than the UK as far as I understand.

That's because of pro-corporate legislation, not because of bad habits.

 

[Tycoon101]

That's because of pro-corporate legislation, not because of bad habits.

1/3 of Americans are obese.

Guess again.


National Health care in the USA would undoubtedly fail because the people don't know how to properly maintain their health. Putting their stupidity on the Federal budget would sink us even further into debt that we already are in.

 

[Princeps]

1/3 of Americans are obese.

Guess again.

No, that doesn't explain the staggering costs of US healthcare. Medicare is expensive because the money is going to the wall street.

Medicare is basically a pro-corporate "supersize me" program. It's the companies that are getting obese and they're rotting the system.

National Health care in the USA would undoubtedly fail because the people don't know how to properly maintain their health.

National healthcare program might actually help in fighting obsesity. And it would be much cheaper than the present arrangement.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Simple answer - it's socialist, and the cold war taught Americans to hate socialism!

Of course you can get far more into detail than that though. When I look at America, it does seem to have the 'every man/woman for themself' view embedded into public concious.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

National Health care in the USA would undoubtedly fail because the people don't know how to properly maintain their health. Putting their stupidity on the Federal budget would sink us even further into debt that we already are in.

Don't think that the British are any less stupid. We might not be as fat as the average American, yet, but we're damned close and we wreck our health in other ways (Poor Diet, Beer, Saturday Night Streetfighing, Breathing in Widnes).

 

[Princeps]

(Poor Diet, Beer, Saturday Night Streetfighing, Breathing in Widnes).

and British teeth...

 

[Perfection]

Dude, you've seen our government, haven't you?

Would you put your life in its hands? Would you?

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

and British teeth...

Which isn't dealt with via the NHS

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Because of propaganda, plain and simple.

 

[Agent Cooper]

There is enormus economical interests in keeping healthcare on private corporate hands.

If a universal healthcare system was introduced in the US, these corporate giants would see their profits diminish as the years pass by, so they are lobbying hard to convince politicians and the average citizens why universal healthcare is bad and why private mediacal insurance is good.

Problem is... the US system is way more expensive than any other nations universal healthcare system and it's the taxpayers who will pay in the end, whether it's universal or private. A large chunk of that money does not benefit the sick at all, but end up in corporate pockets. Add to that, a lot of people in the US who does have insurance are getting s@rewed by the insurance companies.

 

[Halcyon]

Davo guessed it. There's a reason UHC's detractors keep calling it socialised health care. Anything with 'sociali' in it is purest Soviet diablery.

It's probably worth noting that the medical insurance/private hospital sector is quite a major lobbier, too, whilst the 'poor and uninsured' lobby is not so influential.

and British teeth...

Tempted as I am to answer your stupid stereotype with some about Americans, I'll just point out that (a) blue teeth and an obsession with cosmetic dentistry is not the norm among any of the peoples of the world, and (b) that there are more toothless yokels in the US than the entirety of western Europe. So there.

 

[JerichoHill]

America has this whole "independent" vibe that is part of its cultural history. That's why there's opposition, it takes time to tear down the wall of things that are collective-ist. Look at Social Security, Medicare, etc.

Blanket statements like the OP's don't help the matter. It's fairly common knowledge that American public opinion is pretty split. Guess what? Public opinion in European countries is split too, on many things.

 

[downtown]

There are a lot of reasons why a lot of americans are against it, some of which have been touched on here in somewhat glib answers.

1) Americans have been reluctant to expand social services for hundreds of years (cue conservatives quoting this post and going BUT OUR GOVT IS HUUUUGE). Compared to other advanced democracies, we don't provide as much social services, because we tend to value indepdence much more than equality. Given a choice, people will chose the small government option in a poll.

2) There are very powerful, entenched interests at stake that will lose a lot of money if we have universial health care. There are some big businesses that would also *make* a ton of money (like say, Wal-Mart), but they aren't lobbying as hard.

3) Conservatives have used the "socialist" tag very well.

At any rate, our status-quo is going to change very soon, because everybody is sick of it, and they won't stop complaining to their representatives. We aren't likely to have a European model system, but I think the state will eventually play more of a role than it does now. We pay too damn much for what we get.

 

[Sidhe]

Because its communism socialism and things that are socialist in nature are bad by default. When you examine such systems on a case by case or state by state implementation basis without centralisation it sounds like a good idea. But since the proof of the pudding is in the eating?

That said the top 15 health providers are all nationalised&private. The US before it tried to wangle its way out of the pokey was in 28th, now it's 18th as apparently over eating smoking and all self inflicted stuff is not allowed to be included. If you can't win cheat.

I saw a recent study that showed 59% of all doctors in the US were in favourite of nationalisation. Of those psychiatrists or psychological doctors were the most in favour at a little over 75% for. This due mainly to the crap hole of paperwork bureaucracy and difficulties that the insurance companies throw up. Apparently life is cheap when your in business. Never run medical care in the hands of businessmen, they have no souls.

15.4% GDP and half of that is the insurance and legal budget of simply implementing the system.

Highest in the world and more than twice ours at 7%, you're paying probably the same as other people, it's just you don't notice it, as they are stealthily removing it in taxes.

 

[bhsup]

I'd rather see it instituted at the State level. Let each State decide how much they want or don't want to institute universal health care. Of course, this would first require the federal government to knock off their insane tax rate and only tax for things actually mentioned in the Constitution for the Federal government.

The States should actually have the higher tax rate and the Federal government the smaller.

As it stands right now, I pay $188/mo for medical and $33/mo for dental insurance (medical rates increased this year). That is for self-employed with no employer co-pay. I really, truly, fail to see how the majority of working people could not afford that.

 

[Sidhe]

The problem is you'd pay a little bit more, so that those who weren't earning could still be treated. So you may have to pay say an extra $30 or so, or 5% or whatever. That said of course you're probably paying that in taxes on the bureaucratic crap heap that is insurance anyway. So it probably wont be alot different. As mentioned though I suspect one or two large companies have very successful lobbyists against it. Despite it being the more sensible option and the more moral option, business has never nor will ever have any regard for human life, over profit. That's just the way it is, life is cheap.

In this country you pay about 11% of your wage in NI contributions. Also anyone who earns over £34,000 pays a flat 1% in NI contributions, as the rest is covered by the higher tax bracket. It actually works out a bit more expensive than private health care. But the benefit is, healthcare whenever and not according to whether you can afford it, any operation that isn't cosmetic will be paid for. All prescriptions are heavily subsidised. My meds cost about $1200 per year. I pay about $100. Oh and mental health care is free too, psychiatry, clinical psychologists etc. And you can get dental on the NHS if you're lucky enough to live an area that still has NHS dentists.

 

[Aegis]

As it stands right now, I pay $188/mo for medical and $33/mo for dental insurance (medical rates increased this year). That is for self-employed with no employer co-pay. I really, truly, fail to see how the majority of working people could not afford that.

Health insurance is dirt cheap where you live. Our company offers coverage to our employees and the cheapest monthly rate for an individual is $330.32. A family would be $990.96. That is without dental and without vision and it is the cheapest. Our company covers half the premium, but that's still a pretty hefty monthly premium.