CreateDebate


Debate Info

15
8
I'm prolife. No.
Debate Score:23
Arguments:21
Total Votes:25
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 I'm prolife. (12)
 
 No. (8)

Debate Creator

YLY1996(142) pic



Do you support Medicare For All?

I'm prolife.

Side Score: 15
VS.

No.

Side Score: 8

Yes, I support single payer healthcare.

Side: I'm prolife.
1 point

Me too. Whydo many prolife Christians oppose it, when it saves human lives.

Side: I'm prolife.
BurritoIunch(14) Disputed
0 points

It doesn't save lives. They tax you obscene amounts to pay for it, then ration you third world care.

Side: No.
1 point

No, because then they tax me more than I pay now to pay for me and everyone that doesn't work. I wind up with no money and worse quality of service and care.

It's not free. It's you paying more and getting less. They take the money from my pocket, then tell me it's free. You idiots.

Side: No.
YLY1996(142) Disputed
1 point

So you care more about money than people? How Christian of you........................................................

Side: I'm prolife.
seanB(936) Disputed
1 point

Actually, socialised healthcare will lead you to pay less, because costs will reduce as a result of it. Why would the government continue to buy equipment and medicine at current costs when socialised healthcare gives it a monopoly of buying power that EVERY pharmaceutical/medical company in the country is gonna want the contract for?

To go one further and assume the government also absorbs these companies, too, then why would it continue to pay the current costs of medicines when it has, by virtue of nationalising the medial industry, just acquired the investment power of the combined pharmaceutical sector, in one of the biggest markets on the planet? It could manufacture medicines and sell them to itself for the cost of making them, rather than purchasing them from private companies currently at grotesquely inflated costs. Meaning you pay less, your government pays less, and medicine becomes fantastically more accessible to everybody.

It's not pseudo-economics. It has worked this way in every country that has adopted it. Every other developed nation pays less, per capita, in government expenditure, for medicine and medical treatment costs, than the USA does. Yet the USA is to my knowledge the only developed that hasn't socialised the industry.

It's quite simple really. Without investors and board members seeking profits, the costs of medical treatments and pharmaceutical products drastically decline. For less than what you currently pay in your taxes towards medical costs, you could have a socialised system for everyone.

Side: I'm prolife.
1 point

I think that if the government wants to give everyone health care then it should be just like the veterans at government run hospitals where any citizen may use them for free. They should be protected against mal practice suits to keep the costs down. For all of the people who pay for insurance they can go to the regular hospitals.

Side: No.
Amarel(4984) Clarified
1 point

You’d have hospitals be death traps. You know about the VA waiting lists and deaths right?

Side: I'm prolife.
YLY1996(142) Disputed
1 point

Are you rpolife?...........................................................................................................................

Side: I'm prolife.
seanB(936) Disputed
1 point

They're badly funded, trying to buy medical equipment and medicine at vastly inflated costs. Any wonder they have long waiting lists. Socialised healthcare has to be "all-in" to work. It has to be the hospitals, the pharmaceutical companies, the medical manufacturers and medical engineering firms, the whole shabang, with a fixed percentage of each available for private investment.

Remove profit-seeking as the central drive of medicine and it becomes affordable and accessible, with the caveat that it remains well-funded with a consistent percentage of the national tax and other national income. It requires care to maintain but it is worth it. The per capita government expenditure on healthcare of highly advanced, world-class socialised health systems is less than the US per capita government expenditure on healthcare at present. Yet US citizens still have to pay insurance costs too.

I don't get it.

Side: I'm prolife.
YLY1996(142) Disputed
1 point

I disagree. If my doctor had malpracticed me when removing my tubes, I would have the right to sue............................................................

Side: I'm prolife.