The Instigator
wjmelements
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points
The Contender
Plato
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points

A Canadian-style National Healthcare system would be a good thing for the United States to have.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
wjmelements
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/10/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,681 times Debate No: 5930
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (6)

 

wjmelements

Con

Life is perhaps the most important thing in society.

good- of a favorable character or tendency http://www.merriam-webster.com...
In order to be voted for, I must prove that a Canadian-style Universal Healthcare system would not be good for the United States.

To be polite to my friend, a new member, I will let her present her points first.
Plato

Pro

I would like to thank 'wjmelements' for challenging me to this debate.

To prove why a Canadian-style Health System would be more beneficial to The United States, I must begin by pointing out the overly costly health care bills most Americans have to Pay compared to those in other countries. In Canada, for example, an average of $917 is spent annually by individuals or private insurance companies for health care, in the United States, an average of $3,372.

As a result of the increasingly high health care prices, 50% personal bankruptcy in America is due to medical bills. It is believed that less than 1/2 of all the medical care in the U.S. is supported by concrete evidence that it works accordingly to its price according to the Congressional Budget office, in other words, it is not proven for a fact that its efficiency meets its price. Due to the high prices, health insurance coverage is extremely high, so about 40% of Americans do not have health insurance. 1/4 of those who are uninsured, claim that such high hospital bills changed their lives in a negative way, violently increasing their debt.

Also...talking about bankruptcy, a study in Harvard shows that the average debt for those who filed for bankruptcy was $12,000, and 68% of those who filed for bankruptcy had health insurance...yeah.

But YET, life expectancy in Canada (who as I mentioned earlier spends a significantly less that the U.S.) is still higher! And infant mortality rate is still lower!
Debate Round No. 1
wjmelements

Con

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate.
First, I will refute my opponent's case, then I will create my own.

My opponent's case is this:
1. More is spent on medical bills in America than Canada.
2. Often, bankruptcy is caused by health costs.
3. Canada's health care is currently better.

However,
A Universal Healthcare system would force a health insurance cost on every american. A universal healthcare system would not lower health costs. The government would pick up the tab on the american health spending. Taxes would go through the roof. As a result, instead of filing for bankruptcy due to health costs, one is imprisoned and/or stripped of their home, car, etc. http://money.howstuffworks.com...

Canadian Life expectancy: 81.16 http://www.indexmundi.com...
United States life expectancy: 78.14 https://www.cia.gov...
The United States is fourty-first in life expectancy, and the fourty countries leading it have smaller populations (in population, U. S. is third) and not all have universal healthcare systems. https://www.cia.gov... https://www.cia.gov...

Now, to my points.

1. National Healthcare kills people.
2. National Healthcare stints medical innovation.

1. In particular, Canadian Universal Healthcare kills people.
Many people do not even get treatment, and over two-fifths don't die in a hospitiol.

http://www.city-journal.org... This source is written by a Canadian who was fond of his country's healthcare system until he became face to face with it. The doctor writes: "...to contain rising costs, government-run health-care systems invariably restrict the health-care supply. Thus, at a time when Canada's population was aging and needed more care, not less, cost-crunching bureaucrats had reduced the size of medical school classes, shuttered hospitals, and capped physician fees, resulting in hundreds of thousands of patients waiting for needed treatment—patients who suffered and, in some cases, died from the delays. The only solution, I concluded, was to move away from government command-and-control structures and toward a more market-oriented system."

This article also details a few examples of people whose health is postponed unreasonably by a bureaucrat.
I will expand on this point in a later argument.

2. National Healthcare systems hault develpment of new medicines. This also kills people indirectly.
Competition between societies, companies, people, and families inspire innovation. http://www.amd.com... People want to have things done easier and better than others. However, a national healthcare system would eliminate this competition and so eliminate progress in the medical fields.

I will elaborate in other rounds.
Good luck to my opponent.
Plato

Pro

"Round 2...yay!"

In round one I talked about the increasingly high medical bills in the US. My opponent says that a universal health care system would force every American to pay a health insurance, but my question is, is: Does my opponent think it is reasonable for the US to be so heavily invested in international affairs such as Iraq (and every American pays for it), but neglects the important issues back in the home front? Shouldn't every American have the right to live a healthy life and be attended by a reliable doctor regardless of their income, medical history or standard of living?

Yes, it is true that Canadians pay higher taxes that Americans but in my opinion their money is more wisely spent. Also, low income Canadian families and those in assistance can be exempted.

Canadian's pay about 55% of of what Americans play for health insurance, and still have higher life expectancy, and lower infant mortality rate, and of course, everyone is covered. Many Americans have access to quality health care while ALL Canadians have access to similar practices at a considerably lower cost. Also, Canadian's pay 9% of National GDP to insure 100% of citizens, while Americans pay 14% GDP to insure 85% of citizens.

I would also like to say that I'm sure we could find stories (good and bad) about each system but to accurately compare the two systems it is more reasonable to compare service levels than to trade anecdotes.

My opponent also believes that competition inspires innovation,which is true, but in such a delicate subject which deals with people's lives, I would say that it would be more human to give each person the same opportunity. By saying that a market-oriented medical system, my opponent is saying that getting medical treatment is the same as buying a luxury car.
Debate Round No. 2
wjmelements

Con

Note: This debate is not over the Iraq war, which costs one 6 thousandth of a Canadian Healthcare plan anyways. Therefore, my opponent should not bring it up.

This being the last round, we will wrap this up.

My opponent has agreed that life is the most important thing in any debate it is involved in.

My source (regarding the reason Canadian Healtchare cost so much less than American Healthcare) from R2 states that the Canadian Healthcare system does not give its patients quality healthcare or timely healthcare. Therefore, the money is not more wisely spent. Doctors know more about healthcare than government officials.

As for competition, my opponent's argument assumes that all health treatments have already been invented. However, they haven't. Canadians who can't get treatment in Canada often resort to getting healthcare in America, because Canada doesn't offer these treatments.
Elaboration:
"Expenses for dental care, prescriptions, ambulance service, private hospital rooms, and eyeglasses are not covered by the Canadian government, although these expenses are included in the figure for U.S. health expenditures"
In addition, "Canada has a younger population than the U.S., with 11% of its citizen over the age of 65 compared to 12.2% in the U.S., and a much smaller population of inner-city poor (who tend to have higher incidence of drug abuse and teen pregnancy). Both factors add disproportionately to the U.S. health-care bill."
Further, "The Canadian health system covers only part of expenses incurred by citizens who, fed-up with either the waiting lists or inadequate service under the government's "rationed" system, seek treatment in the United States or in private Canadian clinics."
http://www.nationalcenter.org...

My opponent has also conceded that adopting the Canadian Healthcare system would stop all innovations in the healthcare industry. This includes cheaper medicine and equipment as well as the cures for the many types of cancers, HIV, diabetes, hearth disease, and heart attack.
Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that:
1) Canada does not provide many health benefits that are freely experienced in the U. S.
2) Canada's higher life expectency has little or nothing to do with their healthcare system.
3) Canada's healthcare system gives a lower quality of healthcare than in the U. S.
4) If the U. S., which produces more new medicine than any other country, were to adopt this plan, then an overwhelming majority of new healthcare discoveries would be stopped.
5) Canada often denies or postpones treatment to its patients, who are forced to get medicine from America.
6) America has a better healthcare system than Canada.

Knowing this, the voter, on the basis of life as the most important thing in any debate concerning it, should vote against the Canadian Healthcare System and against the resolution.

I thank my opponent for this debate.
Plato

Pro

Plato forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
I guess Cons 3rd round left Pro speechless. Con all the way, better sources better arguments. Pro forfeited a round.
Posted by Urisma_Ska-Kharib 8 years ago
Urisma_Ska-Kharib
Who had better conduct:
Con - Pro forfeited round 3

Spelling Grammar:
Tie, didn't notice many mistakes on either side

Arguments:
Con, better interpretation, Pro had too much speculation and went off topic

Sources:
Con, Pro offered no sources
Posted by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
The mere act of keeping people alive is what is bankrupting the health care system. They try to snuff it out any chance they get to save money.
Posted by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
But life is not the most important thing as you say, otherwise it would be preserved at all levels of health care. From inception to your final years. So life is not important, it is a inconvenience to the health care system.
Posted by wjmelements 8 years ago
wjmelements
We aren't debating abortion. We are debating the Canadian Healthcare system. Health relates to life, and lie is the primary value in this debate.
Posted by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
"Life is perhaps the most important thing in society." Not this society, have you checked out the US abortion rate lately!!
Posted by wjmelements 8 years ago
wjmelements
Apologize in R2
Posted by Plato 8 years ago
Plato
Sorry if I wasnt' clear, but what I tried to say is that if doctors had better information on which treatments work best for each patient, they would save a lot of unnecessary pricey practices.
Posted by kimba 8 years ago
kimba
"It is believed that less than 1/2 of all the medical care in the U.S. is supported by concrete evidence that it works accordingly to its price according to the Congressional Budget office, in other words, it is not proven for a fact that its efficiency meets its price." So, are you basically saying that less then half of care given to patients here in the US is based on evidence? What do you define as concrete evidence? And, who believes this?
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 8 years ago
rougeagent21
wjmelementsPlatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
wjmelementsPlatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by kimba 8 years ago
kimba
wjmelementsPlatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
wjmelementsPlatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
wjmelementsPlatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Urisma_Ska-Kharib 8 years ago
Urisma_Ska-Kharib
wjmelementsPlatoTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60