CE Week #14/#15: OPEN FORUM
This thread of discussion is to allow interested students to introduce any topic or article concerning matters related to the class.
Feel free to bring up ideas for discussion, website links, or embed complete articles.
These posts and responses will be accepted for post and response grades just like a regular post or response.
So I just wanted to bring this topic up for Kirk. I am in the same situation as him and was doing some research on selective services. The selective service act was supposed to end in 1947. America at this time thought that we would have enough volunteers for military purposes. The issue I wanted to bring up is this seem like it is against our constitution. The 13th amendment says something along the lines of there will be no involuntary services. Well the selective service seems to be non-optional. I also wanted to know why women don’t have to sign up. We are an equal society therefore they should have to sign up. This does not mean that they will go into combat at the time of a draft, but there are other things they can do for the army. Also they say that if you don’t sign up for the selective service then it is punishable of 5 years in prison and up to a 250,000 dollar fine. Well the thing about this rule is that hey have to prove that you knew about the service, which is hard to prove, so very unlikely. I also read a list of reason that you could be excluded from selective services. If you are a dual citizen the you are exempt from the draft which doesn’t make sense because the U.S. does not recognize dual citizen. If you are an illegal alien then you are still required to sign up for selective services. Well who’s going to go dye for a country they don’t belong to and who’s going to regulate it?
There is an issue that I want to discuss that is related to current events. I have certain beliefs on where I stand on some issues such as abortion, the war and gay rights, but one thing that is a very popular subject that I don’t know much about is universal health care. The only, and very few, things I know about it is that there are massive waiting lists, we would get taxed more and a lot of people aren’t for it because government run programs never go to well. Obviously all those things were said by people who were very much against universal heath care, but I want to know both sides to it. What would change if it was passed, what would happen to the people who already have their own health care? How much would the government tax us to be able to provide everyone with health care? What would it cover? These are many of the questions I have about this issue and I would really like it if some articles on candidates stance on it and if they are for it, what are the regulations and such. I feel like this is a very important matter and I feel that if I want to be a well informed voter, I should know more on this issue.
response to Jackie
Someone correct me if im wrong, but theoretically universal health care would lower the cost of providing the general public with a system of medical help as it currently is. In general, whenever anyone who can not afford health care hurts themself, they go to the emergency room. Instead of setting up an appointment like they would if they had health care insurance, they would clog the emergency rooms. When a patient goes to the emergency room, it costs way more than if they were to go to a doctor based on an appointment. The whole idea is that yea, providing universal health care would cost a lot to cover everyone, but it would also give all of the uninsured people reason to NOT go into the emergency rooms and drive up the bill even higher. This would be smart, but i doubt that it will be sucessful. In terms of people who already have health care, im guessing they would have an option. Because the universal health care plan probably won’t be that great, they could keep their better coverage, or they could cancel it and go with the universal health care. Also, I am not sure if we would really get taxed more with universal health care, but theoretically it would cost less than the current situation with emergency rooms. This is just my prediction, but it might actually cost us a bit less in taxes.
I think universal healthcare has the potential to be a great thing for our country. Maybe if we could learn that working together to achieve a greater whole isn’t such a bad idea after all then we could steer our country’s priorities in a new direction; one more suitable for working with other countries in the world. But back to the topic, in order to pass a universal healthcare plan it would take many people who do not fear a large, wide-spread government. The taxes necessary for a plan like this would seem high but in the long run sound worth it. Everybody benefits too. Like Jackie, I am also lacking much information about universal healthcare and have the exact same questions. I don’t really see any significant down sides to universal healthcare however. I think that the biggest issue people see when they hear about this plan is the large amount of money it will require. Personally I don’t see that as that big of a deal considering its helping people out and might bring our country together a bit more. Right now our country seems pretty divided on many issues and one thing that could help is a governmental program. Right off the top of my head I’m thinking about Roosevelt’s New Deal and how that aided millions during the Depression and got our country running again. Maybe taking a step similar to that would be beneficial.
Pros and Cons on Universal Healthcare
Universal healthcare is so touchy. Here are some facts I found on other websites addressing the issue. Universal healthcare works efficiently for big events, births especially. In a single hospital in Canada, 4300 babies are delivered each year. Each are delivered in their own room reserved specifically for the family. In America, the same luxuries are readily available, as long as you have insurance. Otherwise, a birth costs about 4,000 dollars. As the price of healthcare fluctuates, Canada’s government battles with costs some years and comfortably handles the others. In order for the United States to pay fund universal healthcare, it would mean raising taxes or cutting back in other spending areas (defense, education, etc) to afford it. Waiting lists would be ridiculous. In Canada, a citizen must wait 6 months to see an orthopedic surgeon or 3 months to see and ear or eye specialist. In America, as long as you have the insurance to cover it, you are able to visit a specialist at your luxury. With universal healthcare, we could create a centralized government allowing for structure in our system allowing for easier diagnosis and treatment by doctors. On the other side of the argument, without the drive of competition and private practice opportunities for doctors, potential doctors will be dissuaded and this uniformity could lead to lazy practice. If we suddenly cut out health insurance, many people would be out a job and with imminent increase in taxes, our economy could also suffer. Where it would be great in theory for everyone to get the necessary care they need, with health care at no cost people would surely abuse the privilege.
Response to R Cipolla:
I agree with you on the fact that selective service sounds unconstitutional and that it’s strange that women cannot be drafted despite the fact that they are allowed to enlist. However, just to play devil’s advocate, not just because I am a woman and oppose a draft, there are many reasons why women are not included. The issue of women being excluded in the draft was decided by Rostker v, Goldberg in 1981. The official ruling is as follows: “The purpose of registration was to prepare for a draft of combat troops. Since women are excluded from combat, Congress concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft, and therefore decided not to register them.” The reasons behind excluding women from combat and draft varies with who you talk to but I’ve heard from quite a few men considering enlistment that having women around in combat would make the men increasingly unstable. Seeing a friend gunned down is bad enough, but image seeing someone you might be attracted to romantically being gunned down? Not to mention the fact that it has been proven scientifically that men are built to be stronger than women. No matter what all the feminists say, it is impossible to have total equality between men and women. Women just aren’t built for that kind of job. It’s evolution.
Response to Caitlin
At a glance, Universal Health care seems like a great idea. Anyone can get the help they need for medical problems. When you look at it more in depth though it is not as good as it seems. Canada has a universal health care system, and it doesn’t work. When they first started out it worked great. I know some people who used to work as doctors up in Canada. Now that the system is in place, they have a tough time getting paid by the government. I also have a friend from Canada whose wife was in need of medical treatment for cancer, but she could not get in to have her treatment for six months because the system works so slowly. She almost died. To me this is the type of system our government would have. Doesn’t everyone already complain about dealing with the government and that it is slow. What would make a health care system work any faster? In the New Deal coalition, our country was in great need of change, the economy was in the tank and people were out of jobs. Now, our economy is fine, we don’t need to go in a new direction, and Universal health care is definitely not that answer.
Hmph. Universal health care is not something I fancy, mostly because of the points you have laid out for us on your blog, Jackie. I’ll cover each of them to explain why and to help you understand it a little better, also including links and some pages for you to scan yourself.
From the websites and snippets, you can make your own deductions and hopefully this will leave room for others to comment.
The first point you brought up is the massive waiting list problem. We’ll use Canada for this example.
Canada has universal healthcare. According to wikipedia. com (This link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada), the waiting list is a big issue, as you presented. “Access to a waiting list is not access to health care,” wrote Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin. This is true. Just by submitting yourself to a list, this does not necessarily mean you will get attention quickly. How many times have you personally been put on a waiting list, and then not heard anything from the party in question for a lengthy period of time? It happens with colleges, it happens with doctors offices…and in this case, it happens with universal healthcare, and glory on high, it takes an awful lot longer than a 30 minute wait in the doctors office.
The second point you brought up was the tax problem. Now, Caitlin made this statement: “I think that the biggest issue people see when they hear about this plan is the large amount of money it will require. Personally I don’t see that as that big of a deal considering its helping people out and might bring our country together a bit more.”
I’m sorry, but I couldn’t disagree more. Money in this country IS a big deal, considering that the U.S. has a national debt of around $ 9,154,395,990,803, and the website I have here:(http://zfacts.com/p/461.html) has a constantly changing tracker that records how much the U.S. borrows and for what, exactly. If we continue to go further into debt, it’ll just get fatally worse. Who cares if it brings our country together? Yes, that would be nice, I think we all agree on that point, but with the way America is today I honestly don’t think that just through a universal health care plan, we’d all be sharing ice cream and letting a stranger borrow money for a cheeseburger at the local McDonalds. To top it off, our oil “addiction” is also causing problems, and the website I provided can show you that as well. ALSO, by “helping people out”, we are aiding and PAYING for illegal immigrants and just deluding them even more by providing another vital service besides a paying job. If you can’t register to be a citizen, why get a citizen’s rights?
But let’s get back to the original point. Universal health care and the tax issue are extreme. Health care costs, as reported by the New York Times, are rising twice as fast as inflation, and to top that with universal health care would spike prices up into a ridiculous height. Covering everyone else would just add another thing that rips money out of our paychecks.
If the average American can’t afford health care NOW, think of what universal health care would do to them. Another website may help you out. Check this one for more information on this: (www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2007-winter/moral-vs-universal-health-care.asp)
The other point Jackie brought up was the “government programs never go well” idea. There have been a few programs that have been successful over a long period of time, but, she is correct. Lately, things don’t seem to be going very well, do they? (As for a minor success example, think interstate highway system. If that didn’t work, we’d all be rather confused as to where we were supposed to drive.) However, even with a couple success stories, that doesn’t justify the government and how many times is has botched things.
Caitlin also, I think, inadvertently brought up a good example of something possibly good but turned out a mess, Roosevelt’s New Deal. This government program aided a great deal of people, BUT, it was a failure economically. Why? Because the policies concerning monopolies screwed things up, not to mention output of money remained between 25 and 30 percent below trend through the late 1930’s.
But, I’m getting off track again.
In short, universal health care is a horrid idea and could easily cause more harm than good, folks.
Anyway, feel free to use the websites I provided and also feel free to bash me around a bit, if you so choose. Though, I may bite back.
Reply to Jackie and Brynna about Universal Health Care.
Brynna-
How exactly did the New Deal fail? From all of my findings it actually brought us out of the
worst economic depression to ever occur in the history of our nation. Please do not post unsubstantiated claims as facts.
“Universal health care and the tax issue are extreme. Health care costs, as reported by the New York Times, are rising twice as fast as inflation, and to top that with universal health care would spike prices up into a ridiculous height. Covering everyone else would just add another thing that rips money out of our paychecks.
If the average American can’t afford health care NOW, think of what universal health care would do to them. ”
Universal health care wont cost Americans anything. It will be free. Yes there will be higher taxes true but, the money individuals would have spent on their health care would be replaced by the taxes. It depends on how the government implements universal health care. If they tax the rich significantly more a universal health care plan then it wont hurt the average citizen at all.
Brynna said,
“The second point you brought up was the tax problem. Now, Caitlin made this statement: “I think that the biggest issue people see when they hear about this plan is the large amount of money it will require. Personally I don’t see that as that big of a deal considering its helping people out and might bring our country together a bit more.”
I’m sorry, but I couldn’t disagree more. Money in this country IS a big deal, considering that the U.S. has a national debt of around $ 9,154,395,990,803, and the website I have here:(http://zfacts.com/p/461.html) has a constantly changing tracker that records how much the U.S. borrows and for what, exactly. If we continue to go further into debt, it’ll just get fatally worse. ”
Since deficit spending was created our country has been in debt for over the last 50 years [not counting the Clinton surplus.] How exactly is debt “fatal.” Especially since if we want to decrease debt their are two things we can do. Not grant “Tax cuts” and tax the rich more. We can also cut spending. Its about prioritizing. The basic health of the citizens should be protected. Should we be spending 500 billion dollars a year on our military plus the additional 500 billion or so on our two wars in two countries?
Who cares if it brings our country together? Yes, that would be nice, I think we all agree on that point, but with the way America is today I honestly don’t think that just through a universal health care plan, we’d all be sharing ice cream and letting a stranger borrow money for a cheeseburger at the local McDonalds. To top it off, our oil “addiction” is also causing problems, and the website I provided can show you that as well. ALSO, by “helping people out”, we are aiding and PAYING for illegal immigrants and just deluding them even more by providing another vital service besides a paying job. If you can’t register to be a citizen, why get a citizen’s rights?”
This has nothing to do with the arguments of universal health care. Universal health care is a way of collecting resources and redistributing them. Its not going to lead to the government recollecting “food.” And what in the world does americans being addicted to oil have to do with universal health care.
As for the undocumented immigrants, the problem exists more so in the system we have set up right now. We provide illegals basic health care. Which Brynna, is not a bad thing. Do you think that if a illegal cant pay for health care but is in minor emergences and is losing blood we should help him/her, or let them die? This problem will exist whether or not we have a universal health care system.
“Canada has universal healthcare. According to wikipedia. com (This link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada), the waiting list is a big issue, as you presented. “Access to a waiting list is not access to health care,” wrote Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin. This is true. Just by submitting yourself to a list, this does not necessarily mean you will get attention quickly. How many times have you personally been put on a waiting list, and then not heard anything from the party in question for a lengthy period of time? It happens with colleges, it happens with doctors offices…and in this case, it happens with universal healthcare, and glory on high, it takes an awful lot longer than a 30 minute wait in the doctors office.”
Brynna, please do not cite wikipedia as a source. I have a account on wikipedia and I can edit whatever post I want. Wikipedia is not a source its a information collaboration. Regardless your example of the long waiting lists as a reason universal health care is wrong is a oversimplification. Remember when Mr. G taught us that. Nearly every industrialized democracy has universal health care. Just because Canada’s may have a problem doesn’t mean they are all inefficient
Here are some statistics and evidence I have gathered for debate.
-46.6 MILLION PEOPLE IN US WERE UNINSURED AND ITS GROWING this number amounts to more than 15 percent of the U.S. population, or approximately one in seven Americans, and the problem is growing. Over the past two decades, the number of uninsured Americans has increased by about one million people annually, and it shows no sign of slowing down.
-According to the Institute of Medicine, approximately 18,000 people die each year from diseases that are treatable and preventable, because they do not have health insurance.
BRITAIN HAS SOCAILIZED MEDICINE The National Health Service or NHS as it is more commonly known, was set up on July 5 1948 to “provide healthcare for all citizens, based on need, not the ability to pay.” It is funded by the taxpayer and managed by a government department, the Department of Health, which sets overall policy on health issues
EVEN THE CONSERVATIVE GROUP THE, British National Party says that “socialised medicine is not just a hallmark of a decent society, but economically rational as well. If one leaves behind capitalist-romantic theories about private-sector efficiency and looks at real-world privatized medicine, which may be observed in America, it is an obvious disaster. It is vastly more expensive and delivers mediocre results outside of luxury care. Britain spends about ⅓ the money per person and we have public health statistics roughly equivalent to America. Except for the fact that the bottom ¼ of our population is vastly healthier
THE PEOPLE ENJOY IT–The Health Care Commission undertakes regular surveys of patients’ opinions of the NHS. In its most recent survey, care in NHS hospitals in England was rated by those who responded to the surveys as follows: “excellent” (41%), “very good (36%)”, “good”(15%), Fair (6%) and “poor” (2%)
ITS MORE EFFICIANT- However, the U.S. (with a semi-socialized model) spends more per capita on health than any other nation and more than twice as much as the country with the next highest level of spending (which has a form of universal health care). UN Department of Health
ALL OF THIS IS By John R. Battista, M.D. and Justine McCabe, Ph.D.
ONLY OTHER COUNTRY The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee access to health care as a right of citizenship. 28 industrialized nations have single payer universal health care systems.
CHILD DEATHS-The United States ranks 23rd in infant mortality
LIFE EXPENTANCY
-The United States ranks 20th in life expectancy for women
-The United States ranks 21st in life expectancy for men
COST: United States citizens spend at least 40% more per capita on health care than any other industrialized country with universal health care
-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.
-State studies by Massachusetts and Connecticut have shown that single payer universal health care would save 1 to 2 Billion dollars per year from the total medical expenses in those states 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.
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS Single payer universal health care costs would be lower than the current US system due to lower administrative costs. The United States spends 50 to 100% more on administration than single payer systems. By lowering these administrative costs the United States would have the ability to provide universal health care, without managed care, increase benefits and still save money
PEOPLE CANT ACCES Fact Two: Around 30% of Americans have problem accessing health care due to payment problems or access to care, far more than any other industrialized country. About 17% of our population is without health insurance. About 75% of ill uninsured people have trouble accessing/paying for health care.
RACISM- Access to health care is directly related to income and race in the United States. As a result the poor and minorities have poorer health than the wealthy and the whites.
OVER FLOODED HOSPITALES A MYTH There would be no lines under a universal health care system in the United States because we have about a 30% oversupply of medical equipment and surgeons, whereas demand would increase about 15%
The US denies access to health care based on the ability to pay. Under a universal health care system all would access care. There would be no lines as in other industrialized countries due to the oversupply in our providers and infrastructure, and the willingness/ability of the United States to spend more on health care than other industrialized nations.
MORE CHOICE’S- There would be free choice of health care providers under a single payer universal health care system, unlike our current managed care system in which people are forced to see providers on the insurer’s panel to obtain medical benefits
POPULATION WANTS IT The Harris Poll #, October 20, 2005 have 75% of Americans would like a universal health care system
ADMINISTRATION COSTS Private for profit corporation are the least efficient deliverer of health care. They spend between 20 and 30% of premiums on administration and profits. The public sector is the most efficient. Medicare spends 3% on administration.
• Fact Two: The same procedure in the same hospital the year after conversion from not-for profit to for-profit costs in between 20 to 35% more
• Fact Three: Health care costs in the United States grew more in the United States under managed care in 1990 to 1996 than any other industrialized nation with single payer universal health care
• Fact Four: The quality of health care in the US has deteriorated under managed care. Access problems have increased. The number of uninsured has dramatically increased (increase of 10 million to 43.4 million from 1989 to 1996, increase of 2.4% from 1989 to 1996- 16% in 1996 and increasing each year).
• Fact Five: The level of satisfaction with the US health care system is the lowest of any industrialized nation.
• Fact Six: 80% of citizens and 71% of doctors believe that managed care has caused quality of care to be compromised
Current estimates put US healthcare spending at approximately 15% of GDP, which is the highest in the world.[22] Despite this, only an estimated 85% of citizens have some form of health insurance coverage
Hey, I understand your points here, but I have to say this.
Please don’t act like you are my teacher. I could’ve done without the “Don’t do this” “don’t say that” crap.
It would’ve been fine without it.
Thanks, that’s all.
Response to derrick
Wherever you got your information about the New Deal, it couldn’t be more wrong. “From all of my findings it actually brought us out of the worst economic depression to ever occur in the history of our nation.” As we learned in U.S history last the New Deal is not what got us out of the Great depression. When Roosevelt started to take away the New deal programs, the economy started to fail again. What got us out of the Great depression was World War two. Two years ago I had to ask my grandparents this question, and they said without a doubt it was WWII that got us out of the great depression. I also interviewed my great uncle last year, he is 88, and he told me the same thing. Yes the new deal did help withstand the Great depression, but it was WWII that jump-started the economy. The fact that our debt is so large is really not that big of a deal because there is no way that we will ever be out of debt. The more government programs that we provide make us more of a socialist nation. If you ask any poor person if they want something for free they will take it. The government should not play the role of Robin Hood, taking from the rich to give to the poor. That is what will make us a socialist country. Anyway, universal health care will not be a problem. At least I don’t foresee that it will be because it will never pass as a bill (a proposed law). As we learned in the reading from chapter 12, to become law a bill must pass through ten different committees and subcommittees. There are too many people who disagree with universal health care for it to become a reality in our country.
Jackie-
Universal health care is going to prove to be a bigger and bigger issue in the upcoming years and so it’s good you’re trying to become informed (unlike most of the populous as we’ve been learning about).
You’re right that there would be longer lines to wait in and more taxes, there’s a couple other things as well that will change with the addition of a completely universal health care system. For one, surgeries will be pushed back and ruled as “elective”that would otherwise be covered by private insurance and done without problems. Such surgeries would be elective surgeries for conditions ruled as non-life threatening like those at risk for appendicitis because of family history, gastric bypass, other cosmetic types of surgeries etc. Those without insurance would now have it but as you said we’d pay lots of taxes and service wouldn’t be the best it could be. Private insurance would cease to exist and those who wanted elective surgeries would have to go to other countries to get them done (as people in countries with universal health care come to America to do now).
As far as the candidates are concerned Obama said this in a speech to Families USA:
“In the 2008 campaign, affordable, universal health care for every single American must not be a question of whether, it must be a question of how. We have the ideas, we have the resources, and we will have universal health care in this country by the end of the next president’s first term.”
And Hillary said this on her website:
“Hillary’s American Health Choices Plan covers all Americans and improves health care by lowering costs and improving quality…
Affordable: Unlike the current health system where insurance premiums send people into bankruptcy, the plan provides tax credits for working families to help them cover their costs. The tax credits will ensure that working families never have to pay more than a limited percentage of their income for health care.
Available: No discrimination. The insurance companies can’t deny you coverage if you have a pre-existing condition.
Reliable: It’s portable. If you change or lose your job, you keep your health care.”
This goes into our learning of the Democrats preferring a more socialist system of government when dealing with public service issues as opposed to the Republican view that people can take care of themselves.
I say no to universal health care. Derrick brought up some interesting points that should be looked into, but it sounds a little like crazy left winger information especially when you consider that it’s all from the same source. I can’t let myself buy into something so one-sided my first time around hearing it. Not to mention some of it is just stupid. For example, “RACISM- Access to health care is directly related to income and race in the United States. As a result the poor and minorities have poorer health than the wealthy and the whites.” Is it just me, or is it not the system, but the statement that’s racist? I don’t remember who said what on this, but I definitely think money’s an issue, and I find it hard to believe that universal health care would cost less than our current system. And I don’t think paying for poor people’s health care would bring the nation together. My personal belief on this is that it’s the struggle for unity that has the ultimate power to rip us apart. We complain about government let-downs and failures in the same breath that we ask for more help, more favors, and more federally funded programs. We have spread our government too thin by expecting too much. Our dissatisfaction has only bred more of it. If we don’t take care of ourselves more, and rely less on the federal government, we will continually be let down. Universal health care can only worsen government’s bad eating habit of biting off more than can possibly be chewed.
Stefanie,
When you start labeling me thats when you lose all chance of understanding me. You call me a “crazy left winger” or my sources crazy left wingers? Either way I find that truly a oversimplification of the situation. Yes I tend to be more liberal. That doesn’t mean I am crazy or am not willing to see the other side. As a debater I am challenged to argue both sides of nearly every issue. Eventually I have come to realize that there is not always two equal and fair sides to every story. In my case most of the issues I have argued I preferred the New York Times spin on a event rather than FOX news. Call me crazy or my sources crazy for that and so be it. But its attitudes like yours that divide this country into blue states and red states. 70% of the population wants universal health care according to a Pew Research Center poll. Are they all left wing liberals too?
As far as my sources go,
You brought up three contentions.
1. Its one sided
Of course it is. I research the issue and found many sources that supported my cause. This isn’t some book I got up… All the STUFF IN CAPS. Is labels for the evidence I found. This isn’t one article our source.
2. Its all from one source. If you had actually read them you would notice there are at least four sources there.
3. Its racist? Are you unaware that in the country we live in there is a large economic disparity between whites and blacks? Its not racist its a fact. When we consider that minorities suffer the worst because of the health care crisis how is that racist.
Ian, as far as the new deal is concerned. Are your grandparents and great uncles experts in economics? Otherwise why should there opinion be held in any regard on this forum?