The Instigator
WilliamsP
Pro (for)
Winning
18 Points
The Contender
ViceRegent
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Single-Payer Healthcare

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 4 votes the winner is...
WilliamsP
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/22/2016 Category: Health
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 487 times Debate No: 90064
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (10)
Votes (4)

 

WilliamsP

Pro

Anyone who opposes single-payer healthcare (a system where government handles most or all medical costs) and has sincere arguments and intends to make coherent points in this debate will be welcome. I will be arguing in favour of the proposition, while my opponent will argue against it. Each side will have 72 hours to construct and complete an argument before it is counted as a forfeiture. The argument length maximum if 10,000 characters, and I chose this one so we can flesh out our arguments properly. The voting period after the last argumetn has been posted will be a month long and will be open. All sources should be cited, either by simply posting the link or in the MLA format. Let us be courteous and not digress too much from the central argument. Single-payer is an aspect of Social Democracy. Let us not go into the other aspects of that system. Just healthcare. I will be discussing the positive achievements of the Canadian and European healthcare systems and will make a proposition for the implentation of single-payer in the United States.
ViceRegent

Con

Theft is immoral and the fascist healthcare as advocated by con cannot work without theft.
Debate Round No. 1
WilliamsP

Pro

INTRODUCTION

ViceRegent has not assigned the act of thievery to any specific item, and he has also misused the term “Fascist.” Let me define it both for him and for the viewers and voters. Fascism, from the Latin fasce, is “a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition,” [1]. I would not classify single-payer as Communism, which I believe ViceRegent has Fascism confused with, which is “a way of organizing a society in which the government owns the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil, factories, ships, etc.) and there is no privately owned property,” [2]. And believe me, I am no Communist. It would only work in a perfect world, which this is clearly not.



Anyway, now that we have that out of the way, let me proceed with my arguments. I will first name examples of foreign nations that have implemented single-payer and benefitted from it, and then I will go into the arguments for why and how the United States should adopt a similar system.



ARGUMENTS

Single-payer, universal healthcare is the jewel of Social Democracy and the developed world. Most nations have some form of this system. Let me cite a map for this [3].



Dark green nations include Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Canada, and the light green is virtually everyone else—excluding a few nations in Latin America, the majority of Africa, and Pacific island nations. But just because the other kids get a lollipop, does that mean you need one too? Sugar, we all know, can be dangerous in high amounts. And simply put, it is not the healthiest thing. Do you need to indulge in McDonald’s fries when your friends are smacking them right in front of you, or will you reach for an apple instead?



In another debate of mine, which discusses the possibilities of a Bernie Sanders presidency, I discussed extensively the effect of free trade agreements all around the world. Just because everyone is indulging in them does not mean we should get into them. In fact, I have made arguments as to why we should outright back out of these agreements. But as more and more people start to like apples, which are healthy, why not join them and grab one too?



Let me point to the United Kingdom as a prime example of this system.



In 2013, the UK spent as a percentage of their gross domestic product 9.1% on healthcare alone [4]. Respectively, the United States spent 17.1% in 2013 [5]. Comparatively, the life expectancy of the United States is 76 for males and 81 for females; in the United Kingdom, 79 and 83; and per capita, in 2013, the UK spent 3311/9146ths as much as we did on healthcare per capita. (Please forgive that the fraction is so large. It could not be reduced to simpler terms. But as a decimal, that would be about 0.362. And here is something shocking, and you can do the math yourself using sources four and five to verify it yourself: People aged 15 to 60 years in the US have a probability of dying one and a half as much as those in the UK.



I believe single-payer is not only the European model or the Canadian model or the Australian model… it is the all-star American model too. People are afraid of what they do not understand, but once they understand, they will come around. Yes, every policy has pros and cons. Even the best of social programs or regulatory codes or laws have unintended side effects. I will be 100% about some of single-payer’s flaws.



The administrator of Medcohlth.com wrote on 23 May, 2012, “Since everything is paid for by the taxes in this system, many people hate the idea that their money will be paying and supporting the unhealthy decisions of others. The government bureaucratic procedures & budget issues will rationalize the health care resulting in selection of the medical procedures which will be deemed necessary which will be catered for, while the others will not be catered for” [6]. The problem: Many folks do not want their taxpayer dollars to go to the reckless or the incompetent.



Where will the funds come from? Well, let it be clear that the United States has the highest military spending in the world. The United States spends a bit more than China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, the UK, India, France, and Japan… combined [7]. I am no lawmaker, but common sense tells me we can afford single-payer.




SOURCES

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...

[2] http://www.merriam-webster.com...

[3] http://chartsbin.com...

[4] http://www.who.int...

[5] http://www.who.int...

[6] http://www.medcohlth.com...

[7] http://www.pgpf.org...


ViceRegent

Con

Actually, no, fascism is an economic system in which the means of production are controlled by the state while ownership remains in private hands, which is what you advocate. And theft is simple: it is the taking of my property without my consent, which you advocate in stealing my money to pay for your healthcare. You advocate the immoral. That is all we need to know to oppose your tyranny.
Debate Round No. 2
WilliamsP

Pro

ViceRegent, Fascism is by its very definition a political philosophy. What you are trying to allude to is a form of Communism. You have your definitions mixed up, and you are not providing sources to defend your claims. As to your comments on "theft," do you oppose taxation in every single case? Militaries, roads and bridges, schools... Taxation is only theft when it is without our consent. This is a major reason for the American Revolution against Britain. The problem was taxation without representation. Now that we live in a new political order, the United States, we are able to influence public policy. One person, one vote. European countries elected their Social Democratic leaders and approved of the tax plans. The Canadians Justin Trudeau as prime minister because of his liberal positions. Ours is taxation with repesentation. ViceRegent, could you please make a coherent case against single-payer healthcare?
ViceRegent

Con

Listen, tyrant, I understand your ignorance of basic economics which leads you to misunderstand what fascism is, but you still advocate theft, making you and your system immoral. I have an idea, you pay for your health care and I will pay for mine. How does that sound?
Debate Round No. 3
WilliamsP

Pro

ViceRegent, I do not understand why you have to be so vile and ungenteel about this matter. This is a debate, my friend, and not philosophical mudslinging. I understand if you have a legitimate concern about tax increases and personally would like to see a different system. That is why we debate. Please provide some sources and make your case.

By the way, I was born in Germany and lived there most of my life. I know Europe like I know the back of my own hand. There is no way you can call Canada, Europe, Australia, and regions like that fascist. No way. Adolf Hitler, for example, was a political Fascist, as the whole party and Reich revolved about him, a god-like saviour figure. The state is the justiication for any heinous act in Fascism. Censorship, strict policing, and the banning of other parties and limits on free speech are characteristics of Fascism. But econonomically, Hitler was more of a Socialist. A pure one, too.

I, on the other hand, am a Social Democrat. Social Democracy incorporates the basic tenets of Capitalism with a strong social safety net. I am seriously confused as to why we now digressed to this discussion. The debate was initially about single-payer healthcare alone. When you accepted it, I would have expected you to take it seriously.
ViceRegent

Con

Amazing that a tyrant would not understand why someone would not be happy with his desire to steal his money and enslave him to the state? We should execute freedom-haters like this fool.

We have not digressed. You have you to deal with the fact that you are nothing but a tyrant thief. Until you can justify your desire to steal from me and enslave me to the state, there is nothing else to talk about.
Debate Round No. 4
WilliamsP

Pro

INTRODUCTION

Though I intended to have this debate follow an entirely different format, I will provide some additional arguments in favour of single-payer, and I hope my opponent will consider them and rationally refute them.


ARGUMENTS

The National Economic and Social Rights Initiative provides some key statistics about healthcare here in the United States [1]. Here they are copied and pasted.


  • The U.S. has a higher infant mortality rate and lower life expectancy than comparable countries. (WHO 2007, Commonwealth Fund 2007)

  • The U.S. has the highest rate of maternal mortality among high-income countries (13 in 100,000), and also the highest rate of C-Sections (32%, as opposed to a WHO recommended 5-15%)

  • 45,000 people die each year simply because they have no health insurance (American Journal of Public Health 2009)

  • Around 50 million people do not have health insurance. (Center for American Progress 2009)

  • Of those who are insured, at least 25 million are underinsured. They often forgo care because of high deductibles and co-pays. (Commonwealth Fund 2008)

  • 700,000 families go bankrupt each year just by trying to pay for their health care – even though three quarters of them are insured. (Health Affairs 2006). In comparison, the five largest insurance companies made a combined profit of around $12 billion in 2009. (Department of Health and Human Services 2010)

  • U.S. has fewer doctors and nurses than other high-income countries. (WHO 2007)

  • Hospitals and doctors are disproportionately located in wealthier areas. Public hospitals are closing in areas where they are most needed.

  • The U.S. ranks lowest among high-income countries in its primary care infrastructure. There is a projected shortage of 44,000 primary care doctors within the next 15 years. (WHO, Health Affairs 2008)

  • The rights of people of color are violated: e.g., the 10-year survival rate for Black people of people with cancer is 60% for Whites and 48% for African Americans. (SEER cancer statistics, also Office of Minority Health)

  • The quality of care given to people of color is generally lower, including in the treatment of cancer, heart failure, and pneumonia. (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2009)

  • While immigrants are generally healthier than the average citizen upon arrival in the United States, their health tends to deteriorate the longer they remain in the country. (“Unhealthy assimilation", Demography, May 2006)

  • Women are more likely than men to forgo needed health care due to cost-related access barriers. (Commonwealth Fund 2007)

  • Women’s right to non-discrimination is violated through increasingly restricting those services only women use, reproductive health care.


Let us also look at the Huffington Post for more support.


Kavitha A. Davidson wrote in 2013, “It’s remarkable how low America places in health care efficiency: among the 48 countries included in the Bloomberg study, the U.S. ranks 46th, outpacing just Serbia and Brazil. Once that sinks in, try this one on for size: the U.S. ranks worse than China, Algeria, and Iran,” [2]. Her article, The Most Efficient Health Care Systems In The World, provides some additional infographics that I urge my opponent to look at.


This, though it does not exactly defend single-payer or support it, is a curious source to examine in terms of healthcare statistics: http://www.cdc.gov...


Davidson continues, “But the sheer numbers are really what’s humbling about this list: the U.S. ranks second in health care cost per capita ($8,608), only to be outspent by Switzerland ($9,121) — which, for the record, boasts a top-10 health care system in terms of efficiency. Furthermore, the U.S. is tops in terms of health care cost relative to GDP, with 17.2 percent of the country’s wealth spent on medical care for every American. In other words, the world’s richest country spends more of its money on health care while getting less than almost every other nation in return.”


Now, ViceRegent, let me utilize the Merriam-Webster definition of theft. It is either “the act of stealing; specifically: the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it,” or “an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property.” Both of these definitions mean virtually the same thing.


What is taxation? It is the government mandate on citizens paying a sum of their wealth to them, either in the form of sales tax, income tax, property tax, payroll tax, or corporate tax. Never—unless you rig an election—will you have 100% of the electorate choose one and the same candidate or party. To the population of the country that did not consent to a certain tax rate or system—whether it is a third of the electorate, or 45%, or whatever number—okay, I can see how they see it as theft, but legally speaking, it is not theft, for it does not fit the second definition. It fits the first part of the first definition, the “act of stealing.”


As society will always have thievery, what kind of theft is preferable to you? Insurance companies ripping you off and bankrupting you with hospital bills and corporations taking from you your prosperity, or government mandating a certain payment of your wealth or income or purchase so that not only you but the entire nation can enjoy some sense of financial and social security?


I was not intending to get into a broader conversation with ViceRegent about the merits of taxation and the role of government. But now that he insists on discussing it, let me say this: Do you want a standing army? Neocons take such pride in their military, I thought you would too. Funded by taxpayer dollars. Do you want and need roads? How about schools? A people’s government?


The effect of private healthcare? Without government interference and a Progressive movement, this: http://www.usatoday.com...


Without government interference and a Progressive movement, this: http://www.washingtonpost.com...


The universal healthcare programs of all these industrialized nations do have their unique differences. Canada operates a bit differently than Denmark, which operates a bit differently than Germany, which operates a bit differently than Portugal… point made. Here, it is a debate of whether we should do it and what the morality and merits of this system are. If either of us were to post a full budget and calculate specific tax revenue requirements, well, we would either have to be economists, members of the Ways and Means Committee, or just really, really good at math.


Can we do it? Oh yes, we can.


Should we do it. My moral code says yes. And the numbers say it too.



SOURCES
[1] http://www.nesri.org...

[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

[3] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
ViceRegent

Con

Your moral code says theft and slavery are acceptable. Your moral code needs to be rejected by every freedom love.
Debate Round No. 5
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ViceRegent 7 months ago
ViceRegent
Perhaps that is part of the problem. Why not man up and start brings thinker, not a feeler.
Posted by armoredcat 7 months ago
armoredcat
I feel as if Con didn't even put up an argument. He was simply disrespectful and aggressive.
Posted by armoredcat 7 months ago
armoredcat
I feel as if Con didn't even put up an argument. He was simply disrespectful and aggressive.
Posted by Youdontknowjeff 7 months ago
Youdontknowjeff
What's your excuse?
Posted by ViceRegent 7 months ago
ViceRegent
These fools cannot even imagine that others may not consider their opinions to not have any value. This is why they are deluded narcissists.
Posted by Youdontknowjeff 7 months ago
Youdontknowjeff
ViceRegent why not stay debating on youtube or facebook?
I'm always amazed for some reason when I come across someone like you. It's strange to me how someone can conduct themselves in such a dishonest manner.
Posted by ViceRegent 7 months ago
ViceRegent
I guess exposing this fool as a faker is not "rational". LOL
Posted by Conspiracyrisk 7 months ago
Conspiracyrisk
See what I mean? It's impossible to have a rational discussion with him.
Posted by ViceRegent 7 months ago
ViceRegent
How Christian. With each word, this dude proves he is a liar without the truth in him.
Posted by Conspiracyrisk 7 months ago
Conspiracyrisk
ViceRegent may be the biggest troll on DDO. If you want a real, actual discussion, then you should start a new debate entirely.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by CAHAL101 7 months ago
CAHAL101
WilliamsPViceRegentTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: pro used the most reliable sources in his rounds con did put up a good fight but my points go for pro
Vote Placed by jamccartney 7 months ago
jamccartney
WilliamsPViceRegentTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made no arguments and just basically just ranted. Conduct, argument, and source points go to Pro. S&P are tied.
Vote Placed by RainbowDash52 7 months ago
RainbowDash52
WilliamsPViceRegentTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro shows that people live longer in the UK, which has single payer healthcare, than in the US, which doesn't. But pro didn't explain why this single example of correlation implies a causation. Con calls Pro's plan fascism, but doesn't explain how it is fascism or why fascism is bad. Con claims Pro's plan is bad because it is theft, which makes sense because in a way taxation is theft. Pro responds to Con's theft argument by claiming taxation is not theft when you have representation from voting. Pro's rebuttal is weak because Pro didn't explain how representation equals consent. Because Pro's arguments were weak, and Con ignored Pro's rebuttal, neither side deserves to win.
Vote Placed by Conspiracyrisk 7 months ago
Conspiracyrisk
WilliamsPViceRegentTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's main argument was that America has an alarmingly low quality of health for a developed nation, and that the single-payer healthcare system would improve this. Con's main point was that Pro's system is fascism and that tax is thievery. Con refused to adequately rebut Pro's arguments, instead insisting Pro's ideology was bad. Therefore, I find Pro's arguments to be more convincing. I give sources to Pro because they came from reliable sources and helped prove his points true, whereas Con did not use any sources.