Do you support it or not? Please say why.
Do you support it or not? Please say why.
I do not support it for several reasons:
- You are not entitled to free stuff
- It leads to poorer quality of care: Longer waits, difficulty seeing specialists, and inadequate outpatient services
- I dont like people stealing money from me
The most cost effective and highest quality systems include a combination of universal care provided by the state, and care though private insurance providers/clinics for those who choose to pay for their treatment directly.
So yes I am in support of the policy, but within a mixed system tolerating private enterprise and competition.
Yes to tax payers and their families. May be outside the realm of "universal" but at least people wouldn't get what they don't pay for.
I voted yes. I think that it is a basic human right to have basic health coverage, and this country's lack of universal coverage should be seen as a disgrace.
A combination of private and government sponsored minimum and emergency coverage is necessary.
No, of course not.
Because it's inefficient, and because I've no desire to compound the damage done already to US health care by doing more of the same.
What happens when socialized medicine is enacted, with provisions for private care?
The best doctors don't work for the government, that's certain.
And no one but the richest can afford private (the best) doctors.
So I'll be stuck with second rate doctors, I'll be stuck rubbing elbows with the unwashed masses when I've got to go to the doctor, and service will be DMV Deja-vu all over again.
No, anyone that wants create a nationwide voluntary membership medical co-op, you all go right ahead. But give everyone, including doctors, nurses, and hospitals, as well as patients, the freedom to say "no".
Bookmarks