National Healthcare.Follow

Would you pay 5 percent higher taxes for national healthcare for all Americans?

I most defintley would seeing as it cost 300+ every 2 wks just to cover myself an my wife an 1 child. Yep my office health plan sucks.

Although I'm not 100% convinced a national healthcare plan is the ultimate solution to our woes. I think a little price regulation is definatly in line. Or possibly offering more tuition assistance to put more doctors in the field.

There is also something to be said for putting a cap on lawsuit awards. Doctor assed up your surgery, yup you deserve some compensation at least what you would have been expected to make in your lifetime with expected economical growth. $25,000,000 I don't f'ing thing so...

Considering some of the problems I have right now are not covered under my healthcare (and why the F*ing hell not? If I get breast cancer, do you think I can really afford to get chemotherapy myself? a$$holes...), I'd pay some more in taxes in order for me to have the assurance that if I did get sick, I'd be taken care of.

I have to agree. Malpractice suits are a bunch of crap, it coincides with many ppls longing to sue someone just to make a quick buck. I am not saying that doctors are perfect but a cap on malpractice would be nice.

Well, seeing as I am one of those unfortunate Americans without health insurance, this may just have gotten my attention!

Survival of the fittest.

It would depend on a lot of factors:

What is that 5% in relation to? The tax I already pay? Or is this an overall 5% increase in the total "personal" taxes collected, and we'll scale the amounts in some way? Or some other method?

It's easy to say "would you pay X amount more", but since this is a national healthcare plan, I have to assume this will increase taxes for everyone. If I and only I had to pay 5% more taxes and that would somehow magically pay for everyone in the US to get healthcare, then I'd be willing to bite that bullet for the good of mankind. I'm relatively certain you didn't mean it that way though.


Additionally, where's the future impact report? IE: Where did that 5% increase figure come from? Is that based on current health care costs? Some kind of projected need? Does it include all care that people might want? Or is it restricted to only proceedures currently being performed by HMOs and such? What guarantees do we have that once we institute a national healthcare plan that the actual cost per person for care wont skyrocket? If you don't think the mere fact that people are given "free" health care wont result in an increase in total health care costs per-person, you are very naive.

Can you guarantee me that in 10 years, we wont be paying closer to 20 or 15 percent of our income on average to pay for this?


I'd say that if you could guarantee all of that, I might go for it. However, I'm pretty much certain that those costs will go up, and the program will get larger and consume more of the "income" across the board over time. But then, that's why I'm an advocate for a free market instead of a socialist. It's not that I don't think free medical care for everyone wouldn't be a great idea. I just know that in the long run, the costs of the program, and the reductions in the quality of the medical care provided wont make it worthwhile.

Free health care is the r0xx0r so to speak.

Though im sure the transistion from private to public would be a pain in the *** of monumental proportions.

Canada's healthcare system isn't exactly perfect.

Google something like "healthcare problems in canada" and you'll find a lot of info on it. I don't have the energy or interest to research it myself, but as with any socialist program, it has its flaws.

I can't really say whether I'm for or against it, maybe a middle-ground compromise between our current system and national free healthcare would be a good option.

Only you would be unable to answer a simple yes or no question without 300 words of random dross.



It's irrelevant. 5% more in taxes. If you pay 1000 in taxes per year from all sources, you'd pay 1050.


Edited, Fri Jun 18 07:26:23 2004 by Smasharoo

Most, if not all industrialized nations have some form of national health care system.

Except the United States.

If it's 5% more total out of my pocket, then yes. However, you also didn't mention if businesses would be dinged 5% more. Keep in mind, those businesses would increase their prices to cover the added 5%. Or would they be exempt from this?

I use to be co-owner in a sausage and cheese distributorship. We paid the manufacture $2.35 a pound for mild cheddar cheese. We sold it to the stores for $3.05 a pound. Most stores sold it for $3.95 a pound.

If I get your meaning correctly, the manufacturer would have sold us the cheese for $2.47 to cover the added 5% to their cost of added taxes. In order to make up for the added 5% and the cost we purchased it for, we would then sell the cheese to the stores for $3.42 a pound. The grocery store takes their typical mark-up on cheese, calculates things out and decides to sell it for $4.37 a pound plus an added 5% sales tax.

Or would you take that example and say the manufacture, middleman and retailer wouldn't pay the 5% but the consumer would pay an additional 5% sales tax on top of the origional $3.95 a pound?

Last question for you Smasharoo. Although you and a lot of other people might have a pretty decent grasp on what's taxed out there, do you think everybody on these boards knows how much they pay in taxes - both directly and indirectly? I know about a nice handful of them but I'll bet there's a lot more out there that I don't know about.

To everybody a little less, about the same or more slightly more enlightened as me when it comes to taxes. Do you think sales tax, income tax and property tax are the only taxes that impact you?