If America were to have free universal healthcare, how much would it cost the government?

[HelloWorld]

I've looked a little online and I can't seem to find anything.

[musicman812]

It wouldn't cost the government anything -- it'd cost the American taxpayers billions per year and it'd get exponentially more expensive as the program becomes more inefficient and buried in government bureaucracy. When's the last time you got prompt service from a government run agency/program?

Did you you know Medicare/medicaid is 40 billion dollars in debt? That's bankrupt by any standard.

What about Social Security? Bankrupt by any standard.

The problem is people have never looked into UHC -- they think it'll be better than the system is right now -- just as it has been MARKETED. It couldn't be further from the truth and we're running desperately close to wrapping this noose around our neck.

The cold-hard truth -- it's free to many people...that's reason enough for them. I encourage all everyone to speak w/ countries who have UHC -- ask about the cost/tax to the individual, the service provided and the time-frame in which that service is provided.

There are people waiting months for surgeries needed in hours.

I'm not trying to TELL you anything. I'm asking you to look into it for yourself. After the first 30 minutes of your search -- you're going to begin to change your mind.

All of the current insurance figures spouted by UHC advocates are insanely inflated -- my plan is $113/month and I've seen plans @ $44/month.

The U.S.has the most effective and best health care services in the world. People fly here and pay out of pocket for health care. People from Canada drive down and pay out of pocket. Do your research. Don't be another lamb amongst sheep.
==================
Edit:
In the long run it'd cost us less?
Our population is going to continue to grow...how do you think that with more people walking the earth that it's going to get cheaper?
Break it down for me in terms of economics -- or numbers.

Again -- more junk info. spouted by UHC advocates.

Long run costs for the poor will be less -- that I agree with. Do you know why? Because people who work and receive a salary are going to pay for them. Use your head.
-------------------------------
Susan: you write:
Scott is right. We cover everyone in Canada and we don't pay any more per capita than you do. And yes, it is tax payer funded, but think of it like other kinds of insurance - the more people you have participating the better the rates you can offer. It just makes sense.

That's a brilliant idea. We'll treat our extra taxes like insurance...wait a second. Why don't you let me decide and I CAN buy health insurance. I don't want a turd shaped like a chocolate bar, I'd rather just get the chocolate bar on my own. The free-market provides insurance -- I buy it -- they take care of me. Want rates to go down? Mandate people have health insurance like we have w/ car insurance. EVERYONE MUST HAVE INSURANCE -- problem solved. Premiums come down.

And as for Canada not paying anymore per capita? Even if that's true (which it's not), the quality of care in Canada has fallen off according to thousands of Canadians coming to America for health care -- and they're paying out of pocket -- COST! That speaks volumes for how good UHC is when you really need it.
______________________
TIme Will Tell -- a lot of liars eh? Medicare efficient?
In 75 years it'll be 12 trillion dollars in debt. Stop spreading crappy information. It's okay to say you don't know. UHC is not the answer.
"The value in today’s dollars of the HI deficit over the next 75 years is $12 trillion. Eliminating this deficit
would require an immediate 122 percent increase in payroll taxes or an immediate 51 percent reduction in
benefits, or some combination of the two. Delaying action would require more drastic tax increases or benefit
reductions."
http://www.actuary.org/pdf/medicare/trustees_07.pdf

you wrote:
If we extend it to everyone universally and cut out the middle man, it should cost about the same as individuals and businesses are spending now on private insurance and red tape."

You think there's red tape now -- wait until the government stakes their claim. Look no further than trying to build a simple storage shed on your property -- how many permits do you need -- and a lawyer's advice -- and fees added costs?

You clearly haven't thought this thing through.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Brett: "you ask how much it will cost but I am suggesting that with the increased work force productivity and increase tax base I think it would be theoretically possible to pull some kind of a profit."

Does that mean the guys and gals who actually pay for this thing will get a return on their tax dollars? Or will the government pork barrel that "profit" for some other program(s)?

[scottso360]

in the long run it would cost us less.

[IceT]

Well just to give you an idea the SCHIP bill (gives free medical coverage to children) that the Democrats want to pass is estimated to cost $30 billion a year. So you can imagine how much universal health care would cost.

A few of the things in the SCHIP bill are:

Available to families that make up to $78 K a year.

It will cover the children of illegal aliens.

It covers children to age 30?????!!!!!

Universal health care wouldn't cost the government nothing because the government gets it's money from taxpayers. You and I get to pay for it.

If you think healtcare is expensive now wait until it is free!

[TheMom]

A lot less than we spend on it now. Just look up the WHO studies on how much each country spends, and their quality rating. The US spends the most per capita by far, yet was ranked 37th in quality.

[DAR]

Us you mean? The government does not produce money -- except by devaluing our own (as in counterfeiting.)

[susan m]

Scott is right. We cover everyone in Canada and we don't pay any more per capita than you do. And yes, it is tax payer funded, but think of it like other kinds of insurance - the more people you have participating the better the rates you can offer. It just makes sense.

That stuff about the quality of Canadian healthcare - wrong. Delivering good quality affordable health care is always a challenge. The canadian system is looking for ways to get more bang for our buck,as is every other universal system in other nations. But listen to this - I live in Toronto. Last year I had a major health scare, a bad mammogram. I live on a disability pension and have a small income. And yet, I ended up going to a breast cancer clinic which is a world leader in the field. My doctor offered me three choices- all top notch. I got an appointment for further testing and a biopsy quickly and received the best of treartment. I return to this clinic every six months for further testing and have no difficulty getting an appointment. I could never afford this kind of treatment through any private scheme so I would just have to live in fear, as many Americans do. Canadian health care- a life saver for the poor and fair to all Canadians

[Time Will Tell]

If we extend it to everyone universally and cut out the middle man, it should cost about the same as individuals and businesses are spending now on private insurance and red tape.

Funny thing is you will find a lot of liars. You see, Medicare (a governemnt program) is already run more efficiently than private insurance.

But they don't want you to know that because it blows their main argument against govt. management out of the water.

[Jimmy C]

Many other countries do it successfully. US doctors and hospitals are the most expensive in the world as far as I know, so under a universal system they would not be able to charge such exhorbitant fees.

[Brett D]

--neat question---
-- knowledge growth and research is apparently an upside down geometric pyramid -- discover one new fact leads to two more new ones these two new ones give four each 2-4 -16 -32 etc.
-- I don't know if people have wondered about it but if your proposed question was instituted over a long time I think the "experts " would be suprised.
-- I think some kind of geometric pyramid would be involved
-- that society against the test society without health care
-- I would speculate that the one with universal health care would in general have a more enjoyeable healthier life
-- also since the youngsters would be getting check ups and preemtive care. many serious diseases and health concerns would be caught and treated early -- leading to a healthier and more productive work force - which in turn could probably result in a large tax base revenue.
--- might not happen any time soon though because I think it would make some people sick just thinking about such a possibility.