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 thing about people who believe that healthcare is an inalienable right don't understand how much of a hit the economy would take if that were the case.
First of all, we're devaluing Doctors and the amount of time and finance they have put into earning their degree and becoming adept at medical science. If healthcare is a public good and does not cost anything to the individual, where is the money supposed to come from to pay the care providers? Are they supposed to be paid from the "bottomless Government fund" that exists solely to pay doctors? Well, no.
Are doctors supposed to work for free? They won't. Humans rarely work toward things on a mass scale without an incentive, usually financial. The medical fields of study will take a massive blow, and eventually there won't be enough care providers to tend to those seeking care.
And once again, capitalism is the only way to move the country forward. Any and all examples of socialism being successful are not pure examples of socialism, but rather corporatism; and often, with a much larger emphasis on capitalism than the defenders of socialism will admit.
Socialism will only ever work for the social and political elite, because they can afford it.
We CANNOT consider healthcare an inalienable human right. Can we make it more affordable, better quality, and/or more universal? Absolutely. That's the goal. But not working together to finance it as a country is the equivalent of everyone saying "Well, I want it, but I don't want to work for it. So I'm just going to say that I deserve it so that it will happen".
Socialism will only ever work for the social and political elite, because they can afford it.
Oh, of course. Capitalism is working for everybody, clearly. That's why there are 13 million hungry children in the United States. Socialism, a system specifically designed to take power and wealth away from the elite and give it back to the people, only works for the elite. And capitalism, a system specifically designed to create a socio-economic elite at the expense of everybody else, works for everybody.
You have wasted the time it took me to read through your indefensibly stupid and self-contradictory nonsense and I am not amused by that. Socialism appears to be working absolutely fine and dandy in Europe, and it was America which almost bankrupted the entire global economy in 2008. Millions of people lost their jobs and their homes because of the the mass failure of capitalism and you think you can just sweep that under the rug and pretend it never happened?
And the biggest irony of all is that capitalism was saved by the socialist taxation system which idiotic cretins like you are always trying to avoid by hiding your money abroad.
You honestly make me physically sick. Your argument is logically indefensible, you are a cretin, and everything you have written is a complete aberration of the facts.
Public goods should be those that are consumable without reducing their availability to others and those which no one can be excluded from using. Examples would be roads, street lights, and other openly available infrastructure.
Serious problems arise in the supply of a commodity when the government mandates that no one can be excluded while its use diminishes availability to others. This leads to other necessary government mandates such as alternative criteria to qualify to use the given commodity and the implementation of regulations to manage supply shortages.
Government management of naturally non-public commodities is never as efficient at meeting demand as the market.
Government management of naturally non-public commodities is never as efficient at meeting demand as the market.
Hello A:
If only that was so.. Like you, I'm a fan of the free market. But, we don't HAVE that. Government writes a lot of checks. Government COULD enter the free market to negotiate prices. But, they don't. I'm thinking the reason WHY they don't, is to help their friends in the pharmaceutical and medical device business.. There's a reason why an MRI costs $1,000 here, and only $90 in Canada.. That's not the free market.. It's the opposite of the free market.. What it IS, is price control, which is an anathema to the free market.
I'm a fan of the free market. But, we don't HAVE that.
No, we don’t. Prior government meddling has lead to everyone being tied to insurance companies for even their mundane medical needs. The current situation puts a giant middle man with giant costs between the producer and the consumer. The answer is not to make the middle man bigger with more government overhead.
Government COULD enter the free market to negotiate prices.
But they shouldn’t. The reason is they have no skin in the game. A government loss is simply a tax payer loss which is why they are so willing to lose and keep losing your money. They shouldn’t be given more of it to lose in more ways while having no incentive to deliver more of the product to more of the public.
There's a reason why an MRI costs $1,000 here, and only $90 in Canada..
There’s a number of reasons. One of those reasons is BECAUSE an MRI is $90 in Canada. Price ceilings in other countries cause shortages that cannot be covered by accurate prices within those same countries. In other words, other countries’ price ceilings cause higher than equilibrium prices in the US, a problem that cannot be corrected by the market so long as government middlemen with massive overhead stand in the way.
The current system needs more free market, not less.
The answer is not to make the middle man bigger with more government overhead.
Hello again, A:
The current middleman takes about 25% of our health care dollar.. Medicare takes about 5%.. Look.. They're gonna write checks.. That's ALL they're gonna do.. It's gonna be SOOO much cheaper than what we pay now, that we'll be able to retire some college debt with what's left over..
Look.. I don't wanna get rid of an entire industry.. But, the industry itself priced itself out of reach for the average guy.. My uncle was a doctor.. He did well for himself.. He did NOT become obscenely rich like doctors do today..
I don’t believe your percentages are correct. I expect your source is a Sanders campaign promise (whose estimates are refuted by Left and right sources alike), but I’m willing to wait until you provide citation.
Have you heard of Direct Primary Care? It’s basically a doctor who will not accept any insurance. They are able to serve the least wealthy market segments by cutting out all the government mandated overhead.
It’s nice that an opinion writer and her editor agree with you, but they don’t know what they are talking about.
I’ll provide a piece from politifact that looks at a few aspects of the cost of healthcare.
While you read it consider the non-monetary costs that they all always overlook. Costs such as the waiting lists that inevitably increase with single payer style systems, such as the VA whose waiting lists killed Vets. Their only incentive is to look good on paper.
It’s nice that an opinion writer and her editor agree with you, but they don’t know what they are talking about.
Hello again, A:
Ok, you don't believe their numbers.. Let's just look at it practically..
I suggest that if your overhead is simply writing checks, it's gonna be a LOT lower than if you hired underwriters to evaluate each and every claim that comes across your desk, and if you pay your executives millions of dollars a year.
If we do no more math than that, Medicare for all is gonna be cheaper by the boatloads..
That’s not free healthcare, that’s free health insurance. The problem in this case is similar to the middle man problem, it even worse. That’s because there is no mechanism to suppress inflated and arbitrary costs on the part of hospitals (are current problem made worse by single payer). It is why a lot of major hospitals were for Obamacare (hint: they don’t stop seeking profit under Obamacare).
Similarly, guaranteed student loans saw a massive inflation in tuition over the years, and the creation of bullshit degrees made up to give otherwise useless acedemics something to teach for their guaranteed check.
Your DNA tells you you're from poland. It's SOCIETY that told you you're a Jew because you are a special type of white person who's ancestors decided to follow the religion of the Hebrew Israelites, who no longer exist as an ethnic group.
I've shown you that actual result done by actual scientists..
Science didn't name your ethnic group Jews, The actual Jews you are descended from who practiced Judaism named it Jews.
By the way.. We agree, of course, that DNA cannot test for religion.
Then shut up.
It tests for ETHNICITY/RACE..
Then why do you call yourself a Jew just because your ancestors unscientifically named their ethnic group after the RELIGION they converted to. RACIALLY you are mostly POLISH and the actual HEBREWS would have considered the vast majority of your ancestry to be INFIDELS and SAVAGES.
Why are you afraid to admit that Jews are a race??
You are not a fucking Hebrew, you are a European atheist associating yourself with the religious cult of an extinct group of semitic tribes.
I guess science just isn't your thing..
Science says excon is mostly polish
Excon says excon is a Hebrew because his ancestors converted to a religion.
Ok, you don't believe their numbers.. Let's just look at it practically..
I suggest that if your overhead is simply writing checks, it's gonna be a LOT lower than if you hired underwriters to evaluate each and every claim that comes across your desk, and if you pay your executives millions of dollars a year.
If we do no more math than that, Medicare for all is gonna be cheaper by the boatloads..
excon
Give the dollar figure STUPOR STUPID !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Your DNA tells you you're from poland. It's SOCIETY that told you you're a Jew because you are a special type of white person who's ancestors decided to follow the religion of the Hebrew Israelites, who no longer exist as an ethnic group.
I've shown you that actual result done by actual scientists..
Science didn't name your ethnic group Jews, The actual Jews you are descended from who practiced Judaism named it Jews.
By the way.. We agree, of course, that DNA cannot test for religion.
Then shut up.
It tests for ETHNICITY/RACE..
Then why do you call yourself a Jew just because your ancestors unscientifically named their ethnic group after the RELIGION they converted to. RACIALLY you are mostly POLISH and the actual HEBREWS would have considered the vast majority of your ancestry to be INFIDELS and SAVAGES.
Why are you afraid to admit that Jews are a race??
You are not a fucking Hebrew, you are a European atheist associating yourself with the religious cult of an extinct group of semitic tribes.
I guess science just isn't your thing..
Science says excon is mostly polish
Excon says excon is a Hebrew because his ancestors converted to a religion.
I don't deny that he's part of an ethnic group that are called Jews, I deny that he is technically a Jew just because his ancestors consist largely of converts to a religion. The Jew part is not science, the Jew part is an arbitrary label that he associates himself with because his ethnic group was named after a RELIGION. If I was an Ashkenazi Jew, I would not call myself a Jew, because I wouldn't want to associate myself with a religion just because my ancestors practiced it. Judaism is the religion of the HEBREWS and claims that Hebrews are essentially the master race. Hebrews don't exist anymore, modern Jews are people who associate with a tribal race cult that considers the majority of their ancestors to be savage animals.