CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
The new estimated cost of Obamacare is $1.76 trillion, after the original advertised plan was $900 billion, so I can't wait until how much socialized health care will cost while in implementation.
"According to the Obama administration, new taxes, bureaucracies, regulations and entitlement obligations are the keys to making health care less expensive. Such a premise - like other big-government machinations - is illogical on its face. Honestly, are we to believe that a country that is already struggling to afford these costs will be magically able to manage them once the weight of this Orwellian nightmare has been placed on our health care system?" Obamacare
It should no surprise that the lie of the original cost was low, and the new lie is twice as the first lie, so it will be interesting to see what the real cost will be in 2014 unless it is overturned by the Supreme Court.
You mean "Nixon Care" or "Bush Sr. Care" or any other number of presidents who have tried to do something similar?
It's called the affordable care act, and will cost the country, and individuals, less over time through catching diseases earlier, covering more people to help avoid outbreaks, and decreasing health insurance ability to gouge individuals, monopolize the system, and drop paying customers they simply don't want to pay to make healthy. http://www.healthcare.gov/blog/2011/08/bringingdowncosts082911.html
More importantly it will increase the quality of life for the average citizen of the U.S., which for the richest country in the world is currently an embarrassment, behind dozens of European countries and others, all of which not by coincidence have some form of universal health care.
Beyond the fear mongering of the far right and guesses of what might happen, there are actual facts to look at like:
And we currently spend almost twice as much as any other country on the 23rd ranked health care in the world.
Something needs to change when this is the case. Universal health care systems have worked brilliantly for every single country that has implemented it as both of the links show clearly. The closer to truly Universal, the better that country's health care in almost every case.
Next, the cost is horribly misrepresented in the article and in nearly all right wing pieces about this bill.
It is not a one time injection of 900 billion or even 1.7 trillion (what are the chances a right wing article is truly being honest about that number?) it's over a period of time and in increments, decades in this case. Most of the cost is coming from cuts, taxes are a small percent. However even the tax increases do not equate the saving on insurance, so individuals will be paying less money, not more, even should they happen to be in a tax bracket that pays more.
At the end of the day, per capita we will be spending less than have of what we spend per capita on the Military for example. And out of the deal the bottom line is individually we save money due to lower health care costs and collectively live longer and healthier lives.
What a bunch of BS to support useless expensive regulation and the mandates...First, you know what competition regulations really do? They block out competition, just look at what they did to railroads and airlines in the 20th century. And consumer are already protected by civil laws, all these new regulations will do is add an expensive layer of beaurocracy to the system. And no one should ever be forced to buy anything for any reason. Lastly the Government can't manage the health system to make it cheaper, the best people to do that are the companies...if something makes health costs cheaper they will do it, if the Gov. thinks otherwise, they are idiots.
The reason our health system is so monopolised and expensive is because of the restraints the Government has already put on the industry, if you want a real solution, that would be to eliminate those restraints.
You think the reason health care is so expensive in this country is because of the government? Meanwhile the innocent health industry isn't ripping people off at all?
The reason it is so expensive now is because it is a free-for-all and health care is a necessity not a privelege. The biggest companies can monopolize the system, give care as they see fit not as any insurance is supposed to mandate, and meanwhile taxpayers pick up the tab for the uninsured anyway because these companies say "fuck you, die asshole" and society isn't going to let that happen (in most cases anyway)
You already are "forced" to pay for healthcare, that's not going to change unless you want to be the douche to let little kids with cancer die because some company is trying to save a dime.
With the new system it is paid for earlier, cheaper, for more people, and for less money.
Government isn't running healthcare, they are doing what they should have been doing all along, making sure monopolies don't rip off the public, let people die for no good reason, all while ripping off tax payers anyway.
Whether you are Bill Gates or making minimum wage, the bottom line at the end of the year less of your money will go toward healtcare, plus you'll have better healthcare. The only ones out a penny is the health insurance industry. And if they didn't want this to happen they should have thought about human life instead of how to rob people once or twice during these last 5 or so decades.
Really, it's pathetic listening to how easily manipulated people are by big money PR. Government has not done shit to stop health insurance companies from doing anything thus far. The industry has operated as the second most profitable industry in the world only after oil decade after decade. Even in the worst economy since the great depression they've increased profits by billions every year,
and what do we get out of it? We still pick up the tab for the uninsured, and we're still ranked the worst healthcare of any industrialized nation.
Seriously. Get off their dick. Health insurance failed through their own greed, now they're going to have to accept maybe only being the third most profitable industry in the world. Awe, poor them.
Nice try with all that knee-jerking anti free market stuff...but those monopolies have that much power because of barriers to competition...added, I hate to say it, but it isn't right to expect to be able to get health insurance if you wait until you get sick...how would it be fair for me to give nothing to no one - not pay in at all, then expect othes to pay for me when I have problems? Also civil protections have worked to prevent abuses. Also your presumtions about profitability are wrong: http://www.healthinsurancecolorado.net/blog1/2009/06/08/profitability-and-the-health-insurance-industry/ - Not that 10.6 isn't high, it would be lower if the health market was competitive...also 25-33% of that is invested or put in reserves
You're in fantasy land. Name one thing government has ever done to stop competition in the health industry. Government didn't mess up health care, insurance companies did.
And this is a prime example of why this libertarian mindset will never work in a society. The majority of people aren't complete dicks and don't believe little kids whose parents can't afford insurance should be left to die, or anyone else.
There is absolutely no reason we cannot afford to insure everyone, and doing so would save both lives and money.
Again, that's a fact. Look at the links.
I realize joing a prayerfails debate only means downvotes, but someone has to talk sense to this faulty and harmful world view.
Name one thing government has ever done to stop competition in the health industry.
AMA was granted monopoly for the healthcare system for over 100 years. This monopoly restricts the number of doctors allowed to practice, which raises physician incomes intentionally. AMA also restricts the number of medical facilities in operation.
Government didn't mess up health care, insurance companies did.
Wrong, government passed and implemented Medicare and Medicaid, these programs are the sole reason for the increase. Not to forget the endless mandates and regulations.
The majority of people aren't complete dicks and don't believe little kids whose parents can't afford insurance should be left to die, or anyone else
Charities have always been there to help. We need more St. Jude Hospitals in America.
There is absolutely no reason we cannot afford to insure everyone, and doing so would save both lives and money.
What is it about that you don't understand about markets and government intervention?
How can an entity that has no assets or equity and only liabilities save money? Government only spends, so it would spend less.
Sure, government could insure everyone with European universal care, but it is very expensive based on per capita. Per Capita
If markets were allowed to function, health care would be much cheaper because insurance would be less needed. Insurance is so expensive because government mandates. These mandates force companies to cover everything under the sun, so there are no price controls on the actual health care. There is no competition between health care providers because consumers have no buying power. Prices are determined by insurance and health care providers, this is not consumer based driven market.
Markets work, the cell phone business is a good example. Over 90% of the country uses a cell phone not because of government mandates, but market forces. Even the poorest own cell phones.
First, their parents could barrow money for the medical costs. And second, you know about the state lines rules don't you? Also it would be affordable in a free market health system so you wouldn't have the problem of parents not being able to afford it.
First credit is hard to get for many and impossible for some.
Second, it is a free market system already, to think otherwise is dillusional. And it is the level of freedom these insurance companies have had which has allowed them to manipulate the system in their favor.
You've shown me nothing that shows this not to be the case, and for the third time I think now, it's not a cosmic coincidence the countries with better health care have adapted systems similar to the affordable care act.
Because it shouldn't be payed for on anothers dime. This goes back to what I said before. How would it be fair for me to give nothing to no one - not pay in at all, then expect othes to pay for me when I have problems? Added yes they could, the interest could go as high as 33% if it had to.
That's what insurance is. It is paying for other people's health care, then, should it happen that you need health care which you cannot pay for, other people pay for your health care.
Perhaps you have an income of around 7 figures and could afford cancer treatment for instance (this would beg the question why you even need insurance however) for those who do not have a 7 figure income, we get insurance as a shared cost because it is the only way to afford health care.
Maybe the word insurance confused you to start with. I may be seeing the problem now.
• H.R. 2355, the “Health Care Choice Act of 2005” introduced by Representative Shadegg in 2005
would allow insurers to sell policies regulated by one state across state lines. A companion bill was
introduced in the Senate by Senator DeMint (S. 1015).
You're talking about the regional monopolization (in large part) of the health industry. This isn't government mandated, though most states do have regulations which in some instances make monopolization easier.
I'm all for breaking up monopolies, it is the money and power of insurance which makes monopolies possible, and to a great extent the norm, not the government.
Here is a PDF of actual laws (not the made up ones the health insurance wants you to think exist so you'll continue blaming government while they're ripping you off) concerning various regulations in different states and federally.
I'm all for changing bad laws, but there is 0 evidence the innocent health insurance industry is the victim of some government conspiracy, nor that rates would decrease should they be allowed to do whatever they like. The exact opposite in fact.
So regulations don't drive up costs at all? really? common sense says otherwise. Added competition regulations don't keep cost down, they block out competition.
The only competition regulations are ones created by the health industry to ensure other companies don't take their place. If there are actual government laws regulating this than they are wrong. The regulations, what few there are, are imposed to help make sure insurance companies actually insure people when they pay premiums... idealy
I didn't think there were competition regulations either...but in your originail argument I thought you were talking about anti-trust regulations, so I just assumed it was something I didn't know about the health bill.
