It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
We're already paying the costs of universal healthcare, but we don't have it. Instead 50 million people are uninsured...
i fail to see how this helps your argument. =) if we're paying the costs of UHC but don't have it, doesn't that tell you that the government shouldn't be in charge of it?! THAT is the type of thing ron paul votes "no" for. it's not that he doesn't care about the people's health. he doesn't think the government should be involved. he wants to get the government under control by getting rid of extraneous agencies and departments. by doing so the budget is restored to a healthier state, the people have less nannying in their lives, and there won't be a bunch of ill-conceived programs (that we all pay for anyway) shoved down our throats that could be better provided by private companies.
Originally posted by Raoul Duke
The government is involved in that it regulates HMO's, but it's private currently. It would actually cost less to have a universal single payer system, as compared to what people are paying for healthcare now...
Most if not all countries with universal healthcare have longer lifespans than Americans do...
Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
Do you even understand the implications of having a universal healthcare program coupled with the heavy taxing we face already? Really, do you? Do you understand how much money we'd be giving our government that already blatantly abuses our current tax systems everyday of our life? You want to put more money and trust into the same institutions that have been raping the American people for the last 90 years?
Originally posted by Raoul Duke
i fail to see how this helps your argument. =) if we're paying the costs of UHC but don't have it, doesn't that tell you that the government shouldn't be in charge of it?! THAT is the type of thing ron paul votes "no" for. it's not that he doesn't care about the people's health. he doesn't think the government should be involved. he wants to get the government under control by getting rid of extraneous agencies and departments. by doing so the budget is restored to a healthier state, the people have less nannying in their lives, and there won't be a bunch of ill-conceived programs (that we all pay for anyway) shoved down our throats that could be better provided by private companies.
The government is involved in that it regulates HMO's, but it's private currently. It would actually cost less to have a universal single payer system, as compared to what people are paying for healthcare now...
Most if not all countries with universal healthcare have longer lifespans than Americans do...