The Instigator
the_unknown_debator
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
socratits
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Privatize Medicare

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 2 votes the winner is...
socratits
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/25/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,165 times Debate No: 57154
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (2)

 

the_unknown_debator

Pro

I will be debating in favor of privatizing Medicare. The first round is just for acceptance. I await my challenger!
socratits

Con

Oh hai. I like topics on healthcare. I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
the_unknown_debator

Pro

I'm glad you accept and now I will begin.
Medicare and Medicaid has been around for nearly 50 years. It was originally signed onto law by Lyndon Johnson in 1965 and began in 1966. While it had opponents, in the end, it remained popular and is a big part of American life to this very day. However, in recent years this program has caused us problems.
Spending for this program has gotten way out of control. Medicare and Medicaid alone account for 25% of all our spending. With Social Security spending at 23%, almost half of all our money goes to these programs which is more than we use to. In fact because of rising medical costs, spending for Medicare and Medicaid is expected to increase drastically over the next few decades. We cannot continue to support this frivolous spending and simply trying to cut spending from these programs will not do us any good. If we were to privatize Medicare, the government will not have to spend any money on this at all. I believe the private sector almost always provides things more effectively and efficiently than the federal government. Society can take care of itself, it is just that we as a society expect the government to do it.
socratits

Con

To make things clear, PRO has the BOP to demonstrate why privatization of medicare would be beneficial. I hold the negative proof to deny that any of his assertions are accurate to win this debate.

So Pro's only argument is the last two sentences: If we were to privatize Medicare, the government will not have to spend any money on this at all. I believe the private sector almost always provides things more effectively and efficiently than the federal government. Society can take care of itself, it is just that we as a society expect the government to do it.

The problem with Pro's argument is that he refuses to use any supporting details for his assertions. Seeing how Romney's campaign in 2011 delt with medicare privitaiztion, we have evidence proving that complete privatiztion will harm the poor and the elderly. For support, please look at these articles:

http://www.cbsnews.com...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...;

In summary, we have to realize that insurance companies are not healthcare practitioners. Insurance companies are businesses. Their main objective is to make money off of selling commodities. In this case, healthcare coverage. How would insurance companies make a profit? By selling better coverage at higher preminums. If we were to completely privatize medicare, then healthcare would be completely based off of social economic status. Which means, over 50%** of the population would be recieving little to no care when we take into consideration the cost of medical procedures.
**The 50% is an estimation by considering that the average household income is 35K/year. Seeing how it costs 8 grand for an xray w/o insurance. 50% seems more than likely as a statistical number.
http://en.wikipedia.org...;

While it is true that complete privatiztion might reduce government spending, one has to realize the health tradeoff as a result. Please see previous pragraph. If one is more concerned with government debt, then one should consider killing off part of the population instead of letting the population suffer through inadeaquate care. If we consider both scenarios in form a utiltairian view, then my proposed strategy would be more efficient because it would elminate uncessary suffering.

Your beliefs about the private sector is irrelevent when you cannot support your arguments with evidence.

Why do we have a govenrment if society can take care of itself?
Debate Round No. 2
the_unknown_debator

Pro

the_unknown_debator forfeited this round.
socratits

Con

extended...again.
Debate Round No. 3
the_unknown_debator

Pro

the_unknown_debator forfeited this round.
socratits

Con

extended.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by socratits 2 years ago
socratits
I don't own a FB lol.
Posted by Dilara 2 years ago
Dilara
Socrates you sick b@stard stop trolling on my Facebook page.
Posted by socratits 2 years ago
socratits
yeah i think PRO realized this already hence, the FF for the rest of the rounds and deactivating his DDO account lol.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
I still don't get the OP. Medicare can't be privatized. It is a government run social program. That's like saying we'll privatize welfare. No corporations will hand out social stimulus for free.
Posted by socratits 2 years ago
socratits
Oh wait, he deactivated his account...
Posted by socratits 2 years ago
socratits
10 bucks that PRO is gonna forfeit.
Posted by socratits 2 years ago
socratits
I dont see where I implied that free health insurance would be given out. All I'm doing for this debate is to argue that privatization doesnt work. I don't need to come up with my own solution cause thats not the resolution of the debate.
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
Your argument brings this up as well. Good luck trying to explain this.....
Posted by ChosenWolff 2 years ago
ChosenWolff
As in free health insurance would be given by corporations? How would you oblige a for profit corporation to give free stuff?
Posted by socratits 2 years ago
socratits
I think he meant complete privatization.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by MrJosh 2 years ago
MrJosh
the_unknown_debatorsocratitsTied
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:16 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to CON because PRO forfeited; S&G to PRO because it isn't spelled "hai;" Arguments to CON because PRO failed to meet his BoP by not supporting his arguments, while CON actually showed how privatization would be harmful; sources to CON because his actually cited sources.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
the_unknown_debatorsocratitsTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture