The Instigator
left_wing_mormon
Pro (for)
Winning
30 Points
The Contender
DucoNihilum
Con (against)
Losing
26 Points

Universal Health Care

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/24/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,537 times Debate No: 4169
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (15)

 

left_wing_mormon

Pro

America is the greatest nation in the World. As I am disappointed by the why our "leaders" have handle this country the past 8 years, and even beyond that, I can still say I love my country.

That being said, why doesn't America provide free health care to all of it's citizens? My point here that will be debated is that Health Care is a human right, and America should not have profits leading our health system.

We are the only westeren civilized nation that uses profits as the main motivation for health. America should provide health care to all citizens without a bill attached. Health care is a human right, and it is time Americans shouldn't feel scared to go to the doctor because they might not be able to afford it. No more HMOs, because like I said before, it is not only immoral, but it is ineffective to have a money making institution running our health coverage.

Thank you, and good luck to my opponet.
DucoNihilum

Con

While when examined immediately, it might seem like a very good idea to make health care free for all. It's a very important part of all of our lives, and it might seem immediately cruel to leave this for private enterprise. However, when carefully and logically examined there is no question that the only option is a free market solution.

I will save most of my main arguments for round 2 after my opponent has posted the bulk of his arguments. I will however, do some initial refutation of my opponents arguments.

Firstly, my opponent claims that health care is a human right. However, it is impossible for health care to be a human right, as human rights do not interfere with others. The right for you to speak harms nobody else. The right for you to live does not require anybody else to make you live, and the right to your property does not disadvantage anybody else. However, the right to 'free health' requires an infrastructure of people to support you. Meaning that some sector of the population, be it small or large must be slaves to the rest of society. Slavery is unjust, so health care being a 'right' in fact takes away, to some extent, the fundamental rights of Life, Liberty, and Property.

Secondly, my opponent claims that we are the only industrial nation that does not have a system of socialization. This argument is empirically wrong, as it is logically fallacious. This is based on the logical fallacy, argumentum ad populum.

I await my opponents main reply.
Debate Round No. 1
left_wing_mormon

Pro

I will acknowledge my opponets deffinition for a Human right, but I will respectfully disagree. In my opinion, everyone should have access to medicine, and to a further degree, good health. I believe that everyone has the right to go to the doctors/hospital without fearing a bill.

And the U.S. does remain the only Westeren Industialized nation that does not have universal health care for all of its' citizens.

A couple of things that make this debate:
*Cost Concerns
*Socialism/Communism
*Stripping Freedom of Choice
*Wait Times for Medical Attention

Cost Concern:
My opponet breifly brought up the term free market solution. Remeber, this isn't a discussion about Price Chopper vs. Hanaford in the free market. This is not a free market issue. When someone in the middle to low ecconomic class gets hurt or ill, they are hesitant to go to the hospital because the "Free" market put a price on medical help. Now, how do we pay for Universal Health care, before I get carried away with the evils of HMOs.
The fact is Federal studies by the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting office show that single payer universal health care would save 100 to 200 Billion dollars per year despite covering all the uninsured and increasing health care benefits. The costs of health care in Canada as a % of GNP, which were identical to the United States when Canada changed to a single payer, universal health care system in 1971, have increased at a rate much lower than the United States, despite the US economy being much stronger than Canada's.
Universal Health Coverage is achievable, espically with the war ending, we could ensure the entire country, and have cash left over.

HMOs are the current way of Health care in this country. These are corporations out to make and save money by dening people of medical care. This is the Free Market solution.

Yeah but isn't this the first step to Socialism? Well, I don't hear any complaining about our Police Departments, Fire Departments, Public Schools, and Libraies. All socialized fractions of our great and free society. So if public schools and police departments are ok, than I guess medicine should be too.

Stripping the freedom to choose what kind of plan you want. The...Free Market system, or a government run system. I think Obamas plan makes the most sense here. People can choose (under his health care plan) either to stick to their HMO or buy into the Governmentas universal coverage.

Wait Times for Medical Attention. Americans alrewady wait for emergancy service in America. The ERs are full!!

Sorry but I left this up for a little bit to go eat, and now I must get off the computer so I know this was short a sweet but...yeah. Thanks.
DucoNihilum

Con

DucoNihilum forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
left_wing_mormon

Pro

I was hoping my opponent would respond only because this is my closing statements. But since I'm not going to be mean, my opponent may respond to my arguments in round 2 to conclude the debate.
Thanks for reading.
DucoNihilum

Con

Firstly, I must apologize for dropping a round in this debate. I've been having some time management issues lately, especially now that I'm at school and working again full time.

The first thing I must emphasis is that my opponent is still using the 'only western industrialized nation' argument. This argument is entirely irrelevant and invalid as per the rules of logic. Argument from popularity. This argument is inherently fallacious. A policy being more popular than others means absolutely nothing whatsoever.

The largest fallacy with your argument is that you consider our current system to be a "Free market" system. This is simply not true, the system we have right now is not at all free market, rather it's heavily regulated and controlled. Over the years, it has gone to the point where insurance companies are government propped up monopolies. These monopolies might not be much better, and in some cases they can be even worse than socialized systems. When I speak of a free market system I do not speak of a pseudo-free American system, I speak of a true free market. A truly free market would rely on insurance far less, and paying for the goods far more. Just as with food, and other essential things people might end up spending alot of money. My family spent about 100 dollars a week, at the least on food. This seems like quite a lot, that could be 5200 a year! Should the government step in and take control over the food industry? Well, you might think so if the food industry was run like the medical industry is run in America today. You would go into the grocery store with your "FOODCORP" card, buy hundreds of dollars worth of steak, eat in excess, your food would be far less quality and it would "cost" alot, especially if you didn't have an 'insurance' card. One solution might to be to radically socialize the food system, sure this would be incredibly inefficient as most socialized systems are, but it would be cheaper for the individual..... This would be problematic though, as simply moving to the free market, the system we resemeble now so far as food goes, would not only solve most problems regarding cost (for the vast majority of individuals) but it would also prevent all of the inefficiencies caused by socialism.

Freedom of choice exists only in a free market system, and that is what makes a free market system so much more productive than a socialized one. YOu may choose which hospital to go to, and how much money to spend. This competition naturally brings prices down, while socialism naturally makes prices sporadic, as bureaucrats are far less efficient at determining prices than the market. Americans do wait some time in ER's. Americans complaining about wait times should visit a hospital ran by the NHS, or other socialist systems. Often, people will have serious medical conditions and die waiting in the waiting rooms. Even for cancer care, the time it takes to actually even get in for an MRI is enough to kill the patient.

Socializing the system, even if it would be cost effective is unacceptable. Doing so, would require the slavery of everybody to somebody else. While you claim health service is a "Human right", to say that it must be a human right is to say that slavery is a "human right". The only true human right is one that which does not require the labor of others to achieve, otherwise one person is a slave to another. My opponent has not brought up any rebuttal to my earlier point on how this is slavery, so I must assume that he is at least, in part, in favor of slavery. Is slavery of one man to another really a human right? All people who pay for other peoples care are effectively slaves. Socialism is hardly ever acceptable, however at times it is a necessary evil. I would say that it is required to some extent, for the courts, fire, and police services. I would not say that education should be public. If we implemented this socialist policy, even if it saved us money, we would all lose out in the long run. We would lose out with our freedom, and with the efficiencies that capitalism provides.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by LR4N6FTW4EVA 8 years ago
LR4N6FTW4EVA
Frankly the most important point against universal health care is that only 10% of Americans need it. There is no need to pay for the 90% who can pay. See my debate with gahbage.
Posted by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
The further back in time you go, the easier it was to be proud of our country. This country wasn't built on handouts. Hard work and undbridled capitalism took this country to the greatest in history in a fraction of the time it took european countries to blend in with the rest. Rugged self reliance and entreprenuerism is now scoffed at as selfish and beneath us. Our county is no longer judged by the industriousness of its citizens, but on many dependents it can create and care for. Sickening.
Posted by SnoopyDaniels 8 years ago
SnoopyDaniels
Left Wing, I'm glad you can say you're proud of your country.

I think everyone deserves health care, but it does not follow from that that the government should provide it. To begin with, when the government provides anything, the reality is that WE THE PEOPLE are ultimately paying for it. Thus, whether health care insurance is private or socialized, it can't possibly be free. The question, then, is who can do it better, the private sector or the government? The answer should be obvious. Allowing the government to take over health care insurance will eliminate all competition, which is NEVER advantageous.

The fact that Hillary and Obama can't come to these very obvious conclusions based on some pretty elementary reasoning demonstrates one of two possibilities. Either they're both complete morons (which I consider highly likely) or they're so concerned with getting elected that they don't care how the policies they advocate will ACTUALLY affect the country.

No doubt health care in this country is expensive, but nationalizing it won't solve the problem. Just like depression isn't the result of a Prozac deficiency, high health care costs aren't the result of a lack of government interference. We need to treat the cause, not the symptoms. I'm not qualified to comment on what constitutes those causes, but I believe at least one of them is frivolous law suits.

Remember, too, that there are alternative health methods which are far less expensive and far more effective in the long term. If the FDA wasn't such a pawn of the drug companies we could see more competition in this area and lower health care costs as a result.

In other words, there are any number of steps we could take to ACTUALLY lower health care costs without creating the illusion of lowering them by nationalizing.
Posted by DucoNihilum 8 years ago
DucoNihilum
Debating on that sounds fine to me. We should agree to a topic here, then you can challenge me.
Posted by qwarkinator 8 years ago
qwarkinator
I thought about it and if you do not mind I would be willing to debate you on universal health care. It would seem the most obvious choice since this is the debate that sparked the initial comment.
Posted by qwarkinator 8 years ago
qwarkinator
I really doubt the flawlessness of your arguments but I will save that for another time. I will respond to request for a topic in just one second seeing as I must think it over. I feel my biggest problem with debates is trying to cover to much information in one debate.
Posted by DucoNihilum 8 years ago
DucoNihilum
If any of my arguments have holes it's due to fatigue. The arguments themselves, when thoroughly applied are flawless. What do you want to debate on?
Posted by qwarkinator 8 years ago
qwarkinator
Well, I do not agree with the points that you make. That is all do not get upset. I just feel like most of your arguments have holes in them and i would like to debate you on them, as stated early. Do not worry about the other debate.
Posted by DucoNihilum 8 years ago
DucoNihilum
What about my debates pisses you off?

OH sorry about the forfeit. I thought I had another full day.
Posted by qwarkinator 8 years ago
qwarkinator
Every time i read one of your debates Duco you piss me off even more, it is about time we strap on the gloves again and debate.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by left_wing_mormon 6 years ago
left_wing_mormon
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 tmhustler 7 years ago
tmhustler
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Vote Placed by Agnostic 7 years ago
Agnostic
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 pcmbrown 7 years ago
pcmbrown
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Vote Placed by Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by s0m31john 8 years ago
s0m31john
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by HandsOff 8 years ago
HandsOff
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by scr3amofr3ak 8 years ago
scr3amofr3ak
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by jordyz 8 years ago
jordyz
left_wing_mormonDucoNihilumTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03