The Instigator
Osiris
Pro (for)
Winning
46 Points
The Contender
gonovice
Con (against)
Losing
14 Points

Implementing some form of Universal Healthcare in the United States would be beneficial

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 9 votes the winner is...
Osiris
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/16/2009 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,462 times Debate No: 8983
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (19)
Votes (9)

 

Osiris

Pro

I assert that implementing some form of universal healthcare would be beneficial for the U.S. government and citizens. Universal healthcare in the United States would encourage citizens to take preventative measures towards ailments, save our country trillions of dollars on healthcare, reduce mortality rates, and create a national database of citizens' medical records for easier access by health providers to medical history across the country (Messerli). I will let my opponent begin this debate.

References:

1. Joe Messerli, BalancedPolitics.org , http://balancedpolitics.org...
gonovice

Con

First of all, thanks for creating this debate.

I disagree, the US should not implement ANY form of universal health care.

In my opinion the last thing this country needs are more people that are dependent on our government.

As humans we should be able to take care of ourselves, and not rely on others, to take care of us.

Having universal health care isn't going to make people prevent ailments, it's going to make people want to get all out of system that they possibly can.

Also, having a medical record available around the country will not help anything. It only allows more room for problems to happen. There are more opportunities for computers to break down with an overload of information, and there is also more room for information to be stolen.

~Nikki
Debate Round No. 1
Osiris

Pro

-- First I would like address your statement that, "As humans we should be able to take care of ourselves, and not rely on others, to take care of us". However true this may be, some humans need assistance in taking care of themselves. It is not their fault that they have limited means, are handicap, etc. For those of working age and can work, universal healthcare would not be a "free ride" so to speak. They would pay into the system through taxes and in return receive healthcare provided by the government. They would NOT "rely on others" to take care of them. I never said free universal healthcare. As far as those who are not of working age ( well past the average retirement age and children) or people who can't work for whatever reason they too would be and should be entitled to healthcare whether they can afford it or not. There would be a sense of camaraderie. Citizens would pay taxes for healthcare to help themselves AND others because it is the right thing to do.

-- As far as universal healthcare preventing ailments, I'm going to have to agree with what you said, but for the record, I did not say this in my opening argument. The statement I made was, "Universal healthcare in the United States would ENCOURAGE CITIZENS TO TAKE PREVENTATIVE MEASURES TOWARDS AILMENTS". I agree with my statement because if people had access to a healthcare system where there were no co-pays during doctor visits, no lab fees, and no monetary worries they would probably be more inclined to seek specialists for minor health concerns (like being overweight, depression, and smoking) that could lead to bigger more serious ones (like hypertension, diabetes, postpartum psychosis, and lung cancer).

-- Having a national database would link hospitals across the country and enable them to access the patient's medical records quickly and efficiently (Messerli). There would be no need to fill out your entire medical history every time you move or visit a new doctor. All medical information would be kept in a computer database and updated by medical professionals (SiCKO). I think that eliminating all of the paperwork from medical history, patient update, and billing forms by incorporating universal healthcare would also be a major stride for the Green Movement. The federal government already keeps computer database of records, so this would be nothing new. For example, our past year's tax information, social security numbers, criminal databases, FAFSA, etc. We are an advanced technological society. Keeping a simple database of medical history would not be difficult I'm sure. As far as stealing information goes, if our other personal and private information is kept under lock and key like what I mentioned above, I don't see theft as an issue.

I am going to assume that you agree with my other two points:
1. Universal healthcare would save our country trillions of dollars per capita on healthcare.
2. Universal healthcare would reduce mortality rates.

Argument negated

References:
1. Joe Messerli, BalancedPolitics.org , http://balancedpolitics.org...
2. SiCKO. Dir. Michael Moore. Dog Eat Dog Films, 2007.
gonovice

Con

Obviously I agree that people with a handicap can't take care of themselves. However, not every person in the country has a handicap.

You said that people would pay through taxes for the health care for themselves, and others because it's the right thing to do. I hate to be the one to point this out, but not everyone in this country is that nice.

No one should be "entitled" to anything. We should ALL work to achieve what's best for us individually.

As for the preventing ailments, I stick by what I said. Even with what you just said. With having there be no lab fees, no co-pay, no monetary worries, people will still take advantage. They will be more inclined to see what they can get out of the system.

I still find the always available records are dangerous. I will agree that they would be handy for patients and doctors. However, having a "lock and key" doesn't guarantee safety of records. I can tell you that if I was a patient, I wouldn't allow my information to be posted on these records. I don't trust the security that you are suggesting.

I don't think that universal health care would reduce mortality rates. Having unlimited access to doctor's won't do anything. It isn't going to cure cancer patients, or any other incurable disease.
Debate Round No. 2
Osiris

Pro

First, I will argue against my opponent's remarks and then make my closing statement.

** Of course not everyone in this country is handicap. I never implied that. I just used that as an example of who cannot "take care of themselves" as you put it, without a little assistance.

** As far as people being "nice" in this country, that is not at all important. If faced with a crisis I would like to think that we would all pull together for the greater good of our country. I really don't think people would be opposed to paying more in taxes to help the elderly, children, and handicapped (those who probably wouldn't be working).

** One of our basic inalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence is life. We have the right to protect our lives and not harm others. I see universal healthcare as a means of protecting life, our inalienable right, by making sure that our health concerns are ALWAYS being met.

** I think the fear of medical records among all other things, being stolen is quite ludicrous. As I mentioned above so much of our personal information is already stored in databases without any problems.

** Other remarks by my opponent will be addressed in the following closing statement:

-- In 2007 Director Michael Moore made a documentary called "SiCKO" about the United States failing healthcare system. In SiCKO, Michael Moore reports that the homeless population in Great Britain can expect to live up to three years longer than some of the wealthiest Americans simply because they do not suffer any health problems. The fact that Great Britain has the National Health Service to provide all citizens with free preventative medicine, full prescriptions, surgeries, hospital lodging, and outpatient care has enabled them to live longer than Americans regardless of social class. Michael Moore also discovered that doctors in Great Britain are able to focus on getting patients to stop unhealthy habits like smoking and poor eating because there are incentives for doing so. If we modeled, our system after Great Britain's we too could have those needed benefits and reduce our mortality rates. According to a 2007 CRS (Congressional Research Service) report, "The average life expectancy for a person in the United States is 77 � years — slightly below the OECD average, and 4� years less than Japan. Life expectancy is nearly 2� years longer in Canada than in the United States. The United States is ranked 22nd out of 30 countries on life expectancy at birth, but once people reach the age of 65, U.S. life expectancy improves to a rank of 11th for men and 13th for women out of 30 countries reporting. Between 1960 and 2004, the United States gained 7.6 years of life expectancy — 2years less than the OECD average of 9.7 years of additional life expectancy. Life expectancy tends to increase as countries spend more on health care per capita, except at very high levels of spending, as in the United States". Another feature unique to universal healthcare is a national database of patient medical records (Messerli). Having a national database would link hospitals across the country and enable them to access the patient's medical records quickly and efficiently. There would be no need to fill out your entire medical history every time you move or visit a new doctor. All medical information would be kept in a computer database and updated by medical professionals (SiCKO). I think that eliminating all of the paperwork from medical history, patient update, and billing forms by incorporating universal healthcare would also be a major stride for the Green Movement.

-- When it comes to U.S. spending it is a definite fact that the United States spends more than any other industrialized country and gets significantly less. "In 2006, U.S. health care spending exceeded 16% of the nation's GDP. To put U.S. spending into perspective: the United States spent 15.3% of GDP on health care in 2004, while Canada spent 9.9%, France 10.7%, Germany 10.9%, Sweden 9.1%, and the United Kingdom 8.7%. Or consider per capita spending: the United States spent $6,037 per person in 2004, compared to Canada at $3,161, France at $3,191, Germany at $3,169, and the U.K. at $2,560" (Harrison). May I also mention that in France and Canada everyone has healthcare and in the United States there are almost 46 million people under 65 who are uninsured.

-- Overall, implementing some form of universal healthcare would be beneficial to the United States both economically and physically. Like the British system, we would have doctors who are able to practice preventative medicine or unhealthy habits, lower per capita spending on health care, and ultimately live longer healthier lives. Although paying more taxes may be a burden at first, the long term benefits for our nation must be considered. Living a life where you do not have to forgo medical treatment because of cost or bankrupt yourself to pay medical bills would be ideal. I believe that a slight tax increase to provide free healthcare to myself to and millions who don't have it is a small sacrifice to make for the greater good of everyone.

Resolution Affirmed.

References:

1. Joe Messerli. BalancedPolitics.org, http://balancedpolitics.org...
2. SiCKO.Dir. Michael Moore. Dog Eat Dog Films,2007.
3. 2007 CRS Report. http://assets.opencrs.com...
4. Joel Harrison. DollarsandSense.org. http://tinyurl.com...
5. National Coalition on Healthcare. http://tinyurl.com...
gonovice

Con

Obviously not every person in the US is handicap. I understand that they can't take care of themselves, I do think they should get help with healthcare.

Next, are you that oblivious to how people act in this country. What about racists? Do you think they will agree to raise their taxes in order to pay for a race they are against? I think it's terrible, but this country isn't as honorable as we would all like. I'm sorry to say this so bluntly, but you are very naive if you believe that people are that nice.

I don't think that having the government and it's citizens raise their taxes is the right thing to do. I don't want to pay for the rest of America to use me. It's just how I want to spend my money. I realize it sounds terrible, but I just don't think that every single person in the country deserves free healthcare, or reduced price healthcare.

Maybe you think it's ludicrous, but I don't. I will refuse to have my medical records broadcasted to the rest of the country, just in case i break a bone in Colorado.

As for your paragraph about Michael Moore, are you kidding me? First, this isn't Britain. Second, you're going to trust a lazy director that feels he knows everything? That's really not smart.

About the spending, I don't care about the rest of the world, I care about our country. I don't think you should be comparing us to France and Canada, you should be ending the comparisons, and focusing on us.
~ I don't think that Universal Healthcare is the right solution for America. I believe that we should all be focusing on getting people jobs so they can afford healthcare on their own.

Thanks for the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by SirAntonyP 7 years ago
SirAntonyP
Off course it would be beneficial, kinda stupid to think otherwise, the only people who are against it are the people making money from the system thats already in place.

Governments spend more money on new ways to kill, rather than to heal people, this backwards thinking needs to stop.
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
That's not meant as a criticism, by the way, just an observation and I know that healthcare systems in some other countries are expensive and leave a lot to desired - I'm just talking about moral principals, that's all.
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
Actually, from an outsider's point of view, it seems incredible that the richest, most powerful, most influential nation the world has ever known would not make the physical welfare of its citizens its primary concern.

It amazes most people from Western European countries and other developed nations that the provision of universal healthcare in America is even considered a matter for debate!
Posted by Osiris 7 years ago
Osiris
wjmelements- "Garbage"? Thanks for such insightful and intelligent feedback on a very serious debate.
0_o
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Both cases are garbage.
Posted by TombLikeBomb 7 years ago
TombLikeBomb
And yet NEG didn't refute it. Less importantly, nor did you.
Posted by brian_eggleston 7 years ago
brian_eggleston
f/a/o RayLatham - Yes, there is a lot of truth in what you say. Here in Europe it's the same. People in Glasgow have a life expectancy of 56 because they tend to drink and smoke heavily and eat lots of fried, stodgy food. Meanwhile in Italy and Greece people eat lots of fruit and vegetables and drink and smoke in moderation and, as a consequence, live to ripe old ages.

f/a/o Osiris - I'm not allowed to vote because I'm British. (British cellphone numbers are longer than American ones and this means I can't confirm my identity, it's not that the webmaster is a racist!)
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
Brian, The World Health Organization rates the health care system of Costa Rica as better than that of the US. Costa Rica has no health care system to speak of, with health expenditures around $350 per person. So if international comparisons are valid, we should immediately move to having no health care system, right? I don't think so. If the Japanese didn't smoke and drink, they would live forever. Lifestyle dominates the stats, not the health care system. The "official" comparisons are totally useless, because they don't every consider the systems at all. One interesting stat is that if one makes it to 55 in the US, avoiding early departure due to drugs, traffic accidents, suicide, and violence, life expectancy is then the longest in the world, despite clogged arteries, etc.
Posted by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
I had problems with both arguments, but Pro fared better in the end.
Con has problems with the electronic medical records but Pro showed how we have similiar systems without the problems Con presented. Also, I saw no need for Con to refer to Osiris as naive, this lost the conduct point for Con. My biggest issue with Pro was the use of a Michael Moore film. As a democrat, I recommend his movies be avoided as they are dishonest. He is no better than Ann Coulter. Con should have lit Pro up on this one, but only made a weak response. Pro with points in conduct, convincing arguments and sources as Con did not provide any so that overshadows the Moore reference.
Posted by Osiris 7 years ago
Osiris
Roy: It's true that in emergency rooms they cannot turn you away because of lack of health insurance, but you are billed for the services you receive there. It is not free. I know this from experience.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Mimo1991 7 years ago
Mimo1991
OsirisgonoviceTied
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 RagingDonkey 7 years ago
RagingDonkey
OsirisgonoviceTied
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 prov1s 7 years ago
prov1s
OsirisgonoviceTied
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 sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
OsirisgonoviceTied
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 
Vote Placed by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
OsirisgonoviceTied
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 RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
OsirisgonoviceTied
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 gonovice 7 years ago
gonovice
OsirisgonoviceTied
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 Osiris 7 years ago
Osiris
OsirisgonoviceTied
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 rimshot515 7 years ago
rimshot515
OsirisgonoviceTied
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