Do you support universal health care? Why or why not?

[Deianeira]

Private health care is not as popular in the UK as elsewhere and as such provision is a bit limited I agree.

They should allow people like me to off-set their private health premiums against their taxable income as I effectively am paying twice to encourage growth in UK private healthcare.

One thing the Coronavirus has shown us is how awful the NHS/universal healthcare in practice actually is, I don't think it can survive in its current form long term after this shambles.

You are a medic I believe, you and many patients would benefit considerably from any expansion in UK private healthcare provision and the better service and options to customers/patients that would offer.

Its hilarious you think private healthcare would be better then universal healthcare have done. it would have been the same or even worse with the big difference that a very few owners of said private healthcare would have been rich on the taxpayers dime.

[Kallisto]

Dont most people in England have to pay for dental health care?

Yes, because NHS dentists aren't paid close to the level private practice gives.

[postman1782]

Its hilarious you think private healthcare would be better then universal healthcare have done. it would have been the same or even worse with the big difference that a very few owners of said private healthcare would have been rich on the taxpayers dime.

What is funny, is that I believe he is from the UK, with how much he is defending the Brexit bullshit that will probably screw him in the long run. Meanwhile he has universal healthcare, not knowing that if he had private health insurance he probably would be broke if he gets sick like most of the bankruptcies in the US.

[Nihilist74]

Dont most people in England have to pay for dental health care?

Not sure. I think it is part of their health care plan.

[Cæli]

only for those who cannot afford some required health services
why would wealthy people benefit from universal health care if they can afford it?
therefore I suppose that the answer is "No" I don't support it

[Themius]

only for those who cannot afford some required health services
why would wealthy people benefit from universal health care if they can afford it?
therefore I suppose that the answer is "No" I don't support it

This just reads like a pile of illogic.

[Zan15]

only for those who cannot afford some required health services
why would wealthy people benefit from universal health care if they can afford it?
therefore I suppose that the answer is "No" I don't support it

Yah cause they wouldn't save money over the long term
I'm sure even millionaires would love to save hundred's of thousands of dollars on a massive hospitalization stays.

Also wealthy people own businesses. Those businesses would save money. Have healthier workers. More productive workers. All helping their bottom line.
More money would be freed up to spend on things other than healthcare and insurance, to spend at their businesses.

etc etc

see the whole economic picture yet?

[Cæli]

Yah cause they wouldn't save money over the long term
I'm sure even millionaires would love to save hundred's of thousands of dollars on a massive hospitalization stays.

Also wealthy people own businesses. Those businesses would save money. Have healthier workers. More productive workers. All helping their bottom line.
More money would be freed up to spend on things other than healthcare and insurance, to spend at their businesses.

etc etc

see the whole economic picture yet?

it's not about allowing the wealthy to "save" money, it's about allowing those who can't afford it to pay
workers maybe, multi millionaires, no they don't need that, there is no need to tax people in order to give some of that money to multi millionaires

[Themius]

it's not about allowing the wealthy to "save" money, it's about allowing those who can't afford it to pay
workers maybe, multi millionaires, no they don't need that, there is no need to tax people in order to give some of that money to multi millionaires

Why shouldn't it be a right?

[Cæli]

Why shouldn't it be a right?

ask the taxpayers if they like having some of their tax going to people that can easily afford the cost without any "help" from the state
it all boils down to this
if they all love doing that, well, nevermind then

[Felya]

ask the taxpayers if they like having some of their tax going to people that can easily afford the cost without any "help" from the state

How much did Trump make fundraising? It seems like those people can be convinced exactly of what you are suggesting, as long as the argument was similar to Trump’s. What did Trump tap into, to make people willingly give a billionaire money? Let’s use that to get healthcare instead...

[Zan15]

it's not about allowing the wealthy to "save" money, it's about allowing those who can't afford it to pay
workers maybe, multi millionaires, no they don't need that, there is no need to tax people in order to give some of that money to multi millionaires

well shit then why do the rich get to use our highways for free!!! make them pay each time they use them!!!!
Why tax people in order to give them highways to use that they could easily afford to pay for themselves!!!


fact is they will benefit a lot less then everyone else but they will benefit.

[Cæli]

How much did Trump make fundraising? It seems like those people can be convinced exactly of what you are suggesting, as long as the argument was similar to Trump’s. What did Trump tap into, to make people willingly give a billionaire money? Let’s use that to get healthcare instead...

I'm afraid the issue is that the wealthy people that receive money from the other taxpayers are complete strangers to them, while trump was the opposite of that
maybe if you can select who gets your money the taxpayer would be more content, I dunno, just thinking about things randomly
the easier answer just feels that there's no need to take some money to the taxpayers to give to wealthy people for healthcare

[Felya]

fact is they will benefit a lot less then everyone else but they will benefit.

Technically, if the rich pay enough taxes, they won’t be benefiting at all... they would be losing... since their proportion of taxes should represent the proportion of wealth to everyone else.

[Cæli]

well shit then why do the rich get to use our highways for free!!! make them pay each time they use them!!!!
Why tax people in order to give them highways to use that they could easily afford to pay for themselves!!!


fact is they will benefit a lot less then everyone else but they will benefit.

same things apply for highways, why taxing more, when you can tax less and let people who can afford stuff, directly pay for the stuff they decide to use

[Felya]

I'm afraid the issue is that the wealthy people that receive money from the other taxpayers are complete strangers to them, while trump was the opposite of that

Yeah, we know he is a NYC oligarch billionaire that spent his entire career ripping off the tax payer... the fact that they knew Trump, doesn’t help your point.

maybe if you can select who gets your money the taxpayer would be more content, I dunno, just thinking about things randomly
the easier answer just feels that there's no need to take some money to the taxpayers to give to wealthy people for healthcare

Yeah, if these people could donate, they donate to a billionaire. How do we use the same rationale, for healthcare to everyone else?

[Zan15]

Technically, if the rich pay enough taxes, they won’t be benefiting at all... they would be losing... since their proportion of taxes should represent the proportion of wealth to everyone else.

But if they own a company that is giving 10,000 people health insurance that company will pay taxes to a universal system but in the end it will most likely be a savings to the company and to the 'rich' who own the majority of the company

Most plans i have seen that have gone through the financial analysis by different groups have them not "losing" much at all at then end of the day. Personally they might end up paying more taxes but they will make a lot of that back on the backend. Unless of course they own an insurance company :P

[Felya]

same things apply for highways, why taxing more, when you can tax less and let people who can afford stuff, directly pay for the stuff they decide to use

Because a truck hauling shit to wallmart is doing far more damage to said roads, than your Taurus...

[Zan15]

same things apply for highways, why taxing more, when you can tax less and let people who can afford stuff, directly pay for the stuff they decide to use

Wait so what happens with the 40 million people who can't get to work because they can't afford to use a highway?

No one said they shouldn't proportionality pay more taxes and under most universal plans they will pay more in taxes, but they will also benefit from the plans as well. You can't avoid this unless you plan on making it illegal for them to own businesses and stocks.

[Felya]

But if they own a company that is giving 10,000 people health insurance that company will pay taxes to a universal system but in the end it will most likely be a savings to the company and to the 'rich' who own the majority of the company

Most plans i have seen that have gone through the financial analysis by different groups have them not "losing" much at all at then end of the day. Personally they might end up paying more taxes but they will make a lot of that back on the backend. Unless of course they own an insurance company :P

I am going by individual tax contributions and their personal medical care. With employers it’s tricky, because of their subsidies... our subsidies... insurance subsidies... It’s too complicated, so I’ll take your word for it.