If the US healthcare system is the best and socialism is the worst

[The Rabbi]

Pure bullshit.

This is the grade school semantics game that socialists play, when they try to muddy the waters and claim that there really isn't any socialism anywhere.

You two schmucks will go a lot farther when you quit pretending that nobody has ever heard your vapid and intellectually bankrupt arguments before.

There is no pure form of socialism anywhere in the world. Just as there is no pure form of Capitalism anywhere in the world. There are only degrees of implementation.

And as an advocate of Universal Health Care for America, I will tell you this, pure socialism would never work, just as pure Capitalism can never work, because neither takes into account human nature, specifically human greed. Each expects everyone to just be on their best behavior. Not going to happen. Pure socialism starves human greed and pure capitalism over feeds it.

The answer is somewhere in between.

Monetary greed and power greed are huge forces trained into the human nature. Yet if people are never expected to be better we have just given up. Universal health care can and does work. Like any human invention there are flaws even in the best of them.
US medical costs are way beyond everyone who does have universal health care.
You have runaway prices for equipment and medicines. You have the high cost of doctors and no one denies them a decent living. The cost to run a hospital. It is expensive.
You add to that the profit for insurance executives and the cost gets higher. You add the cost of filing to twenty different insurance companies. You add in calls on every claim and it gets insane.
You look at Medicare and VA coverage. You are looking at two of the highest risk groups and the US covers them with no lower and healthier groups to ease the grading on costs. There is no buffer group.
The cost of medical care is all about profit. Universal health care would still have premiums and is not free as it isn't today. People would not stop paying for coverage. The government would get the premium money. Insurance companies survive on premium money. The government would do the same. Why would anyone think the government will not charge the premium. All the other nations have a premium.

Unicwersal health care does not work. Every system is beset by the same issues: runaway costs leading to high structural deficits. Why do you think the US will be different? States that have tried some version of Obamacare have all experienced exactly the same thing.
The gov't is incompetent to run a whorehouse. They cannot run health care. Private enterprise comes with incentives for efficiency and innovation. That is why virtually every advance in medicine has come from the US.
If we want to provide care c.1980 to everyone we can do that. I'd prefer people have access to state of the art care.

 

[Vidi]

As long as elected politicians, political appointees, and bureaucrats are able to increase their power, influence, prestige, and personal fortunes via partisanship, bipartisanship is not going to happen. Nor in the history of the entire world has any government voluntarily relinquished power once it obtained it.

The Founders intended for the central government to recognize--that is recognize and not assign--the rights of the people and then leave the people alone to govern themselves.

We the people do not need the federal government to fix anything.

We the people need to rise up and demand that the federal government get out of healthcare and every other program that the federal government was never intended to manage and return that responsibility back to the people in the states, in their local communities, on the farms, or whatever.

When that happens, we will have bipartisanship again, and things can get fixed.

Until then, I frankly think we are screwed.

I have to disagree.

I believe the Government must maintain some control in order to protect the rights of the people.

Health Care is a good example.

The first document of our country lists only three rights: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

And I believe that order of rights is important. Without Liberty, there can be no pursuit. Without Life, there can be no Liberty.

Without access to proper health care, all three of those rights are diminished if not completely removed.

Therefore, if it is the governments role to not only recognize but protect the rights of the people, then the government must find a way to provide health care for all citizens.

Man, what convoluted "logic" (for lack of a better term).

There's no lack of access to health care....None whatsoever.

And while we're talking about life and liberty, what of the lives and liberties of the people who enter the medical profession, to earn what the market will bear paying them?

First,

There are people in this country who die because the health insurance company they paid for years suddenly drops them when they get sick. They worked, paid their premiums and then were dropped. Then because they were gainfully employed and not lazy drains on the system, they made too much money to qualify for assistance from the state.

Or they end up so far in debt, that it takes a decade or more to dig themselves out of the whole or worse lose everything they've worked their entire lived for.

As far as those who enter the field to make money...you think doctors work for free in France or Germany?

You think people don't get rich in Europe?

 

[Katiegrrl0]

There is no pure form of socialism anywhere in the world. Just as there is no pure form of Capitalism anywhere in the world. There are only degrees of implementation.

And as an advocate of Universal Health Care for America, I will tell you this, pure socialism would never work, just as pure Capitalism can never work, because neither takes into account human nature, specifically human greed. Each expects everyone to just be on their best behavior. Not going to happen. Pure socialism starves human greed and pure capitalism over feeds it.

The answer is somewhere in between.

Monetary greed and power greed are huge forces trained into the human nature. Yet if people are never expected to be better we have just given up. Universal health care can and does work. Like any human invention there are flaws even in the best of them.
US medical costs are way beyond everyone who does have universal health care.
You have runaway prices for equipment and medicines. You have the high cost of doctors and no one denies them a decent living. The cost to run a hospital. It is expensive.
You add to that the profit for insurance executives and the cost gets higher. You add the cost of filing to twenty different insurance companies. You add in calls on every claim and it gets insane.
You look at Medicare and VA coverage. You are looking at two of the highest risk groups and the US covers them with no lower and healthier groups to ease the grading on costs. There is no buffer group.
The cost of medical care is all about profit. Universal health care would still have premiums and is not free as it isn't today. People would not stop paying for coverage. The government would get the premium money. Insurance companies survive on premium money. The government would do the same. Why would anyone think the government will not charge the premium. All the other nations have a premium.

When has the government been prudent with our money?
Please list all the success stories that the government has
accomplished on budget or under budget.
I'll be waiting for your answer.

Government has kept Social Security solvent and Medicare working. The nature of this money is for the healthcare of the nation. Think about the VA as well. They have decent care and lower costs. When you consider the added premium dollars to what is already received there would be plenty. The only people who would suffer are those that lost money from lost profits in the insurance industry.
It works and can work to lower everyone's costs.
The government has never been good with money nor has any other government. Yet the services provided to the people still function. Does your local government pick up your garbage? Do the streets, roads and highways fall completely apart? The military though wildly mismanaged still continues to operate.
Your food is tested. Drugs are tested. They have failing but in some areas they don't fall down so badly on the job.

 

[Vidi]

As long as elected politicians, political appointees, and bureaucrats are able to increase their power, influence, prestige, and personal fortunes via partisanship, bipartisanship is not going to happen. Nor in the history of the entire world has any government voluntarily relinquished power once it obtained it.

The Founders intended for the central government to recognize--that is recognize and not assign--the rights of the people and then leave the people alone to govern themselves.

We the people do not need the federal government to fix anything.

We the people need to rise up and demand that the federal government get out of healthcare and every other program that the federal government was never intended to manage and return that responsibility back to the people in the states, in their local communities, on the farms, or whatever.

When that happens, we will have bipartisanship again, and things can get fixed.

Until then, I frankly think we are screwed.

I have to disagree.

I believe the Government must maintain some control in order to protect the rights of the people.

Health Care is a good example.

The first document of our country lists only three rights: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

And I believe that order of rights is important. Without Liberty, there can be no pursuit. Without Life, there can be no Liberty.

Without access to proper health care, all three of those rights are diminished if not completely removed.

Therefore, if it is the governments role to not only recognize but protect the rights of the people, then the government must find a way to provide health care for all citizens.

No, because the government can never accomplish a competent sustainable healthcare system because it has to take property away from people in order to do that. There isn't enough money on the planet to sustain a universal healthcare system paid for only by taxes. The Preamble is very specific that the purpose of the federal government and the Constitution to which it is bound is to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty.

Welfare in this sense was not freebies or services that the government gives to people--even a cursory reading of the Founders makes that quite clear--but rather encourage the ability of the people to form the society they wanted--and the Blessings of Liberty of course referred to the Declaration's recognition of unalienable rights among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

American exceptionalism is built on the concept that the government cannot give rights but can only recognize, acknowledge, and defend them. That would assume the right of the people to have healthcare but no 'right' for the government to provide it. The intent was for the free market to accomplish and provide whatever the people wanted to have.

You're under some very ...wrong impressions.

First, nothing is free. Nothing. Everything has to be paid for.

In Germany, like here, universal health care is provided through a combination of taxes, employer and employee contributions.

In France, England and Canada, it's paid through taxes and price fixing.

In Japan, it's taxes and patient pocketbook ( patients pay 30%, government 90% )

In other words, the people still pay premiums but instead of going to a private insurance company that can deny you ( corporate death panel ) it goes to the government who can't deny you.

And in ALL of the countries I just mentioned Private Health Insurance companies still exist and make a profit.

Lastly, American Exceptionslism is propaganda. We pat ourselves on the back and say," Look at how awesome we are " All the while ignoring the fact, that we ONLY became a superpower after our completion had been bombed to rubble. And once they rebuilt, we lost our Exceptionslism and have been struggling ever since.

Only when we are truly honest about how we got here will we be able to set a course for the future.

 

[The Rabbi]

Monetary greed and power greed are huge forces trained into the human nature. Yet if people are never expected to be better we have just given up. Universal health care can and does work. Like any human invention there are flaws even in the best of them.
US medical costs are way beyond everyone who does have universal health care.
You have runaway prices for equipment and medicines. You have the high cost of doctors and no one denies them a decent living. The cost to run a hospital. It is expensive.
You add to that the profit for insurance executives and the cost gets higher. You add the cost of filing to twenty different insurance companies. You add in calls on every claim and it gets insane.
You look at Medicare and VA coverage. You are looking at two of the highest risk groups and the US covers them with no lower and healthier groups to ease the grading on costs. There is no buffer group.
The cost of medical care is all about profit. Universal health care would still have premiums and is not free as it isn't today. People would not stop paying for coverage. The government would get the premium money. Insurance companies survive on premium money. The government would do the same. Why would anyone think the government will not charge the premium. All the other nations have a premium.

When has the government been prudent with our money?
Please list all the success stories that the government has
accomplished on budget or under budget.
I'll be waiting for your answer.

Government has kept Social Security solvent and Medicare working. The nature of this money is for the healthcare of the nation. Think about the VA as well. They have decent care and lower costs. When you consider the added premium dollars to what is already received there would be plenty. The only people who would suffer are those that lost money from lost profits in the insurance industry.
It works and can work to lower everyone's costs.
The government has never been good with money nor has any other government. Yet the services provided to the people still function. Does your local government pick up your garbage? Do the streets, roads and highways fall completely apart? The military though wildly mismanaged still continues to operate.
Your food is tested. Drugs are tested. They have failing but in some areas they don't fall down so badly on the job.

Social security--bankrupt
Medicare--bankrupt.
VA care--horrible.
They are inept at everything they run.

 

[taichiliberal]

"....then you should be able to prove it."

Actually, that is not the case.
Attention to the posts such as yours will yield the following conclusion to those of us who apply a scholarly approach:

1. Not facts, nor data, nor experience, nor rational debate will convince individuals such as you....

2. Inveterate Liberals have long ago achieved, even perfected, the willing suspension of disbelief, and the refusal to use experience and judgment....

3. It is my hope that those on my side of the argument will operate on the basis of "triage," consigning you the the category of those who cannot be saved....and will concentrate on those whose minds have not been warped, and wills sapped.

a. Present the facts, make the righteous argument. Hope for the best.

either you slept through that class in High School regarding argumentation and debate, or you are totally full of it!


Oddball made several statements as if they are fact. I asked him to provide proof BEYOND HIS OPINION that supports his statements. To date, neither him (or YOU) can meet that simple burden of proof.

That means Oddball and you lose the argument.....just ask any high school or college debate team instructor.

Now grow the fuck up and deal with reality, will ya please?

They are facts and I later linked to sources backing them, fool.

Not according to the chronology of the posts with relation to our discussion, bunky. You and your cohorts need to get your shit together.

 

[Vidi]

There is no pure form of socialism anywhere in the world. Just as there is no pure form of Capitalism anywhere in the world. There are only degrees of implementation.

And as an advocate of Universal Health Care for America, I will tell you this, pure socialism would never work, just as pure Capitalism can never work, because neither takes into account human nature, specifically human greed. Each expects everyone to just be on their best behavior. Not going to happen. Pure socialism starves human greed and pure capitalism over feeds it.

The answer is somewhere in between.

Monetary greed and power greed are huge forces trained into the human nature. Yet if people are never expected to be better we have just given up. Universal health care can and does work. Like any human invention there are flaws even in the best of them.
US medical costs are way beyond everyone who does have universal health care.
You have runaway prices for equipment and medicines. You have the high cost of doctors and no one denies them a decent living. The cost to run a hospital. It is expensive.
You add to that the profit for insurance executives and the cost gets higher. You add the cost of filing to twenty different insurance companies. You add in calls on every claim and it gets insane.
You look at Medicare and VA coverage. You are looking at two of the highest risk groups and the US covers them with no lower and healthier groups to ease the grading on costs. There is no buffer group.
The cost of medical care is all about profit. Universal health care would still have premiums and is not free as it isn't today. People would not stop paying for coverage. The government would get the premium money. Insurance companies survive on premium money. The government would do the same. Why would anyone think the government will not charge the premium. All the other nations have a premium.

Unicwersal health care does not work. Every system is beset by the same issues: runaway costs leading to high structural deficits. Why do you think the US will be different? States that have tried some version of Obamacare have all experienced exactly the same thing.
The gov't is incompetent to run a whorehouse. They cannot run health care. Private enterprise comes with incentives for efficiency and innovation. That is why virtually every advance in medicine has come from the US.
If we want to provide care c.1980 to everyone we can do that. I'd prefer people have access to state of the art care.

There's that statement about medical advanced coming from the US only.

First off, not true.

And second, the vast majority of medical advances in the US are government financed.

I covered this in another thread - with links.


Additionally, Health Care and Medical Research are two completely different things. You're making an apples and oranges argument.

 

[taichiliberal]

I know the facts and you are a liar.

1) I'm not only implying it, it's a fact.

PROVE IT, bunky! You're mind fart does not automatically equate to facts based in reality. If you can't prove it, don't waste everyone time...just go blow that smoke up some other neocon/teabagger's ass who'll appreciate it.

2) People here illegally and not citizens of this country are being used by useful idiots like you to inflate the number of "uninsured"....Why not just extend Obolshevikcare to all of Mexico while we're at it?

Another claim that YOU have yet to prove...and you compound it to the previous incredible leap from the REALITY of American middle class and working class citizens who CANNOT afford health care. Come, come you Odd little person, PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

3) I'm implying nothing...There are millions of people who can afford to pay for their medical care out of pocket and do so....That's not gaming the system in any way.

What you state here is a moot point that no one disputed.
The chronology of the posts shows YOU ORIGINALLY stating that those people who can pay are NOT doing so, and therefore are "CHEATING" the system. I asked you to provide proof of this, and it's obvious that you can't.

The "X million of uninsured" number has been jimmied and inflated for no less than 20 years now.

You keep stating that but yet you can't prove it beyond your worthless opinion. The chronology of the post makes YOU out to be a LIAR, Oddball. Carry on.

Heere are the links again, lazy ass.

Can you give a link to "Canada is backpedaling on their mandate that there be no for-hire medicine"?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/28/international/americas/28canada.html?pagewanted=all
Timely Medical Services
Find Private Clinics in Canada for Walk in Clinics in Montreal, Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver
MMS: Error
Canada Sees Boom In Private Health Care Business | Fox News
Private Insurance In Canada | In Canada, a move toward a private healthcare option - Los Angeles Times
The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care by David Gratzer, City Journal Summer 2007
CIMCA | ACMIC
Private health care company to open five clinics with 50 doctors in Windsor-Essex
Canadian Doctors for Medicare | Private clinics continue explosive growth
Private & Executive Healthcare Clinic | Medcan Clinic Toronto
Private health clinics remain unregulated in most of Canada
The rise of private care in Canada | Macleans.ca - Canada - Features

Your response to OTHER posters is NOT a response to me, you blithering idiot! But I'll cut you some slack in leiu of the humiliation you suffer on these boards.

As for your "proof".... More myopic and biased reporting from right wing-nut think tanks and bloggers. Here stupid, for your education:

The U.S. Census Bureau said in September that the number of people without coverage rose to 50.7 million in 2009 from 46.3 million in 2008.


The health insurance law signed by Obama in March 2010 will make medical insurance and care more affordable by providing small business tax credits, banning lifetime benefit caps and requiring a package of essential benefits, Collins said. Creation of statewide insurance exchanges may also allow insurers to better spread the risk across a larger and healthier population, she said.

The law will add as many as 32 million Americans to ranks of the insured in 2014, according to an estimate last year by the Congressional Budget Office.

Americans Without Health Insurance Rise to 52 Million on Job Loss, Expense - Bloomberg

Bloomberg ain't no liberal, my Odd little friend...and I'll take the straight numbers from the CBO and the Census Bureau over the interpretations and one sided reporting of your sites any day of the week.

Like I said before, if anyone doubts just how screwed up our Healthcare system is prior to the Reform Act, just ask Wendell Potter and Dr. Peelo. YOU WON'T, Oddball, and neither will your like minded compadres....so much more to pity. Carry on.

 

[taichiliberal]

Here's a little tidbit: It costs $125 out of pocket to pay to have excessive ear wax removed......it takes place in the doctor's office and takes less than 15 minutes from examination to removal to chit chat to see ya next year and pay at the door. Now in my town, the doctor that does this does NOT take personal checks UNLESS you have insurance. He does take cash and credit cards.

A pain in the ass for the unemployed and/or uninsured, or working folk on a tight budget, n'est-ce pas?

 

[The Rabbi]

Monetary greed and power greed are huge forces trained into the human nature. Yet if people are never expected to be better we have just given up. Universal health care can and does work. Like any human invention there are flaws even in the best of them.
US medical costs are way beyond everyone who does have universal health care.
You have runaway prices for equipment and medicines. You have the high cost of doctors and no one denies them a decent living. The cost to run a hospital. It is expensive.
You add to that the profit for insurance executives and the cost gets higher. You add the cost of filing to twenty different insurance companies. You add in calls on every claim and it gets insane.
You look at Medicare and VA coverage. You are looking at two of the highest risk groups and the US covers them with no lower and healthier groups to ease the grading on costs. There is no buffer group.
The cost of medical care is all about profit. Universal health care would still have premiums and is not free as it isn't today. People would not stop paying for coverage. The government would get the premium money. Insurance companies survive on premium money. The government would do the same. Why would anyone think the government will not charge the premium. All the other nations have a premium.

Unicwersal health care does not work. Every system is beset by the same issues: runaway costs leading to high structural deficits. Why do you think the US will be different? States that have tried some version of Obamacare have all experienced exactly the same thing.
The gov't is incompetent to run a whorehouse. They cannot run health care. Private enterprise comes with incentives for efficiency and innovation. That is why virtually every advance in medicine has come from the US.
If we want to provide care c.1980 to everyone we can do that. I'd prefer people have access to state of the art care.

There's that statement about medical advanced coming from the US only.

First off, not true.

And second, the vast majority of medical advances in the US are government financed.

I covered this in another thread - with links.


Additionally, Health Care and Medical Research are two completely different things. You're making an apples and oranges argument.

It is true.
It depends on what you want to call "medical advances." I dont think your statement is supportable as is.
Health care and medical research are intricately linked. Except in socialist countries where there is little clinical reseatch.

 

[Vidi]

When has the government been prudent with our money?
Please list all the success stories that the government has
accomplished on budget or under budget.
I'll be waiting for your answer.

Government has kept Social Security solvent and Medicare working. The nature of this money is for the healthcare of the nation. Think about the VA as well. They have decent care and lower costs. When you consider the added premium dollars to what is already received there would be plenty. The only people who would suffer are those that lost money from lost profits in the insurance industry.
It works and can work to lower everyone's costs.
The government has never been good with money nor has any other government. Yet the services provided to the people still function. Does your local government pick up your garbage? Do the streets, roads and highways fall completely apart? The military though wildly mismanaged still continues to operate.
Your food is tested. Drugs are tested. They have failing but in some areas they don't fall down so badly on the job.

Social security--bankrupt
Medicare--bankrupt.
VA care--horrible.
They are inept at everything they run.

Yes they are bankrupt...24 YEARS from now.

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs...12/social-security-medicare-busts-move-closer

Seriously, try not to fall for the propaganda

 

[Vidi]

Unicwersal health care does not work. Every system is beset by the same issues: runaway costs leading to high structural deficits. Why do you think the US will be different? States that have tried some version of Obamacare have all experienced exactly the same thing.
The gov't is incompetent to run a whorehouse. They cannot run health care. Private enterprise comes with incentives for efficiency and innovation. That is why virtually every advance in medicine has come from the US.
If we want to provide care c.1980 to everyone we can do that. I'd prefer people have access to state of the art care.

There's that statement about medical advanced coming from the US only.

First off, not true.

And second, the vast majority of medical advances in the US are government financed.

I covered this in another thread - with links.


Additionally, Health Care and Medical Research are two completely different things. You're making an apples and oranges argument.

It is true.
It depends on what you want to call "medical advances." I dont think your statement is supportable as is.
Health care and medical research are intricately linked. Except in socialist countries where there is little clinical reseatch.

http://m.jsonline.com/news/opinion/nih-funds-help-lead-to-medical-advances-sl3up1t-138235984.html

There's the link.

Taxpayer money funds most advances in this country, not private companies.

So is that socialism?

 

[The Rabbi]

Here's a little tidbit: It costs $125 out of pocket to pay to have excessive ear wax removed......it takes place in the doctor's office and takes less than 15 minutes from examination to removal to chit chat to see ya next year and pay at the door. Now in my town, the doctor that does this does NOT take personal checks UNLESS you have insurance. He does take cash and credit cards.

A pain in the ass for the unemployed and/or uninsured, or working folk on a tight budget, n'est-ce pas?

Hey, life is tough. It is not the gov'ts job to subsidize the unemployed, uninsured or working folks who have blown their budget on cigs and beer.

 

[The Rabbi]

There's that statement about medical advanced coming from the US only.

First off, not true.

And second, the vast majority of medical advances in the US are government financed.

I covered this in another thread - with links.


Additionally, Health Care and Medical Research are two completely different things. You're making an apples and oranges argument.

It is true.
It depends on what you want to call "medical advances." I dont think your statement is supportable as is.
Health care and medical research are intricately linked. Except in socialist countries where there is little clinical reseatch.

NIH funds help lead to medical advances - m.JSOnline.com

There's the link.

Taxpayer money funds most advances in this country, not private companies.

So is that socialism?

The linkl is not proof of anything, other than you cannot analyze evidence. It is plea for continued funding. Nothing more.
Again, your statement is unsupported.
And incorrect:

ndustry was the largest contributor to biomedical research, accounting for 58 percent of all 2007 spending, the team at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York found.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/01/12/us-research-usa-idUSTRE60B5FL20100112

 

[The Rabbi]

Government has kept Social Security solvent and Medicare working. The nature of this money is for the healthcare of the nation. Think about the VA as well. They have decent care and lower costs. When you consider the added premium dollars to what is already received there would be plenty. The only people who would suffer are those that lost money from lost profits in the insurance industry.
It works and can work to lower everyone's costs.
The government has never been good with money nor has any other government. Yet the services provided to the people still function. Does your local government pick up your garbage? Do the streets, roads and highways fall completely apart? The military though wildly mismanaged still continues to operate.
Your food is tested. Drugs are tested. They have failing but in some areas they don't fall down so badly on the job.

Social security--bankrupt
Medicare--bankrupt.
VA care--horrible.
They are inept at everything they run.

Yes they are bankrupt...24 YEARS from now.

Social Security, Medicare Busts Move Closer - The Best Life (usnews.com)

Seriously, try not to fall for the propaganda

They are supported by continued taxpayer infusions. If they were private enterprises they would be filing for Chapter 11.

 

[dblack]

can you define socialism with using a dictionary then?

Sure! So can you. It's easy on the world wide web. Here ya go:

Socialism | Define Socialism at Dictionary.com

"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."

wow, now that you know what it actually means you can educate yourself and learn that Obama is actually not a socialist...... yay for you

Pull your head out. Have a look around. Read some of the things I post. I've never said he was.

 

[Katiegrrl0]

There is no pure form of socialism anywhere in the world. Just as there is no pure form of Capitalism anywhere in the world. There are only degrees of implementation.

And as an advocate of Universal Health Care for America, I will tell you this, pure socialism would never work, just as pure Capitalism can never work, because neither takes into account human nature, specifically human greed. Each expects everyone to just be on their best behavior. Not going to happen. Pure socialism starves human greed and pure capitalism over feeds it.

The answer is somewhere in between.

Monetary greed and power greed are huge forces trained into the human nature. Yet if people are never expected to be better we have just given up. Universal health care can and does work. Like any human invention there are flaws even in the best of them.
US medical costs are way beyond everyone who does have universal health care.
You have runaway prices for equipment and medicines. You have the high cost of doctors and no one denies them a decent living. The cost to run a hospital. It is expensive.
You add to that the profit for insurance executives and the cost gets higher. You add the cost of filing to twenty different insurance companies. You add in calls on every claim and it gets insane.
You look at Medicare and VA coverage. You are looking at two of the highest risk groups and the US covers them with no lower and healthier groups to ease the grading on costs. There is no buffer group.
The cost of medical care is all about profit. Universal health care would still have premiums and is not free as it isn't today. People would not stop paying for coverage. The government would get the premium money. Insurance companies survive on premium money. The government would do the same. Why would anyone think the government will not charge the premium. All the other nations have a premium.

Unicwersal health care does not work. Every system is beset by the same issues: runaway costs leading to high structural deficits. Why do you think the US will be different? States that have tried some version of Obamacare have all experienced exactly the same thing.
The gov't is incompetent to run a whorehouse. They cannot run health care. Private enterprise comes with incentives for efficiency and innovation. That is why virtually every advance in medicine has come from the US.
If we want to provide care c.1980 to everyone we can do that. I'd prefer people have access to state of the art care.

You would have to leave the US to get state of the art care. You may get a few cures here but prevention and care comes from many other nations. Medical advancements don't only come from the US. They come from all around the world in an equivalent number. But state of the art care all you get in the US is state of the art costs.

 

[Katiegrrl0]

When has the government been prudent with our money?
Please list all the success stories that the government has
accomplished on budget or under budget.
I'll be waiting for your answer.

Government has kept Social Security solvent and Medicare working. The nature of this money is for the healthcare of the nation. Think about the VA as well. They have decent care and lower costs. When you consider the added premium dollars to what is already received there would be plenty. The only people who would suffer are those that lost money from lost profits in the insurance industry.
It works and can work to lower everyone's costs.
The government has never been good with money nor has any other government. Yet the services provided to the people still function. Does your local government pick up your garbage? Do the streets, roads and highways fall completely apart? The military though wildly mismanaged still continues to operate.
Your food is tested. Drugs are tested. They have failing but in some areas they don't fall down so badly on the job.

Social security--bankrupt
Medicare--bankrupt.
VA care--horrible.
They are inept at everything they run.

Social Security still makes it's payments as does Medicare. The Va care is good I know a few people with VA coverage in four different states and they all say the care is adequate and meets their needs. Your statement may be your opinion.
So you have so many beefs with the way the government runs things why are you still here? Obviously you don't like the government.
Back to health care. The US does little with preventative measures. In many European nations you are required to have an annual physical and if you do not your premiums go up. In the US you are lucky to even get one covered by insurance.

 

[Vidi]

Social security--bankrupt
Medicare--bankrupt.
VA care--horrible.
They are inept at everything they run.

Yes they are bankrupt...24 YEARS from now.

Social Security, Medicare Busts Move Closer - The Best Life (usnews.com)

Seriously, try not to fall for the propaganda

They are supported by continued taxpayer infusions. If they were private enterprises they would be filing for Chapter 11.

Are you serious?

That's the entire plan from day one.

We pay into it today do the elderly can take out of it today.

It's always been a monetary revolving door. It functions EXACTLY as it should.

 

[Vidi]

It is true.
It depends on what you want to call "medical advances." I dont think your statement is supportable as is.
Health care and medical research are intricately linked. Except in socialist countries where there is little clinical reseatch.

NIH funds help lead to medical advances - m.JSOnline.com

There's the link.

Taxpayer money funds most advances in this country, not private companies.

So is that socialism?

The linkl is not proof of anything, other than you cannot analyze evidence. It is plea for continued funding. Nothing more.
Again, your statement is unsupported.
And incorrect:

ndustry was the largest contributor to biomedical research, accounting for 58 percent of all 2007 spending, the team at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York found.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/01/12/us-research-usa-idUSTRE60B5FL20100112

Ahem maybe you should have read the article

NIH is the largest single funder of basic medical research in the United States; the research it supports provides the foundation of knowledge that drives innovation and improves health.

For the past five years the NIH budget has been flat or reduced. As a result NIH has been forced to fund a diminishing percentage of grants submitted. Researchers are being forced to close their laboratories.

In other words, you're still wrong.