Which has proven worldwide to not only be better for its citizens but a sound financial decision as well.

A good portion of the waste under the current systems could cover the cost of health care for even the poor.

Every state has a form of welfare, medicaid, veterans hospitals and tax supported clinics and hospitals (we already paid for these). These can be used as a base for care for the poor.

I cannot see paying the insurance companies to mismanage our health care in order to sell their stocks and pay themselves to limit and deny coverage when it is needed.

On the other hand people have to become more responsible by working towards keeping themselves and those that they are around and in charge of from spreading diseases, cold and flu.

Textile workers suffer a high rate of cancer. In areas where there are high concentrates of nitrates in the water tables the citizens have high rates of cancer. In Idaho farmers built hugh cow lots and dairies over the aquifers. This added to the burden that was already there from farmers that were applying extra fertilizers for their hay, corn and sugar beets crops.

A simple test from a pet store can tell you how high nitrate concentrates are in your water. If it is at a dangerous level for your aquarium it obviously is also a danger to you and your family.

Enviromentally sound practices don't go out of style. If open sewage systems are utilized throughout the country. It should be obvious that a few critters are going to spread whatever is in these systems (parasites and disease).

When farmers use burndown practices, the excess chemicals go into the water tables and the water ways that are nearby the land that they have flooded with chemicals. Geez when there are dead birds & fish in the little streams or rivers that have areas that have that film of oily scum on them after the farmer sprayed it is obvious they have been poisened. That water moves on down stream for the next town, next county, next state, next country to deal with. I bet they don't realize what went into the water before it got to their municipal system. Wait, all that previous municipality had to do was get a permit to release their waste into the water ways also.

It's much better to let larger cities collect grants and use taxpayer dollars to build more economy minded projects (arenas, high dollar perk projects, etc) than systems that would improve the enviroment. Let those towns dump a bit of waste, what the heck it goes downstream.

When I can smell chlorine in the water it is not something I desire to drink. It makes my tummy ache.

Mold, chemicals, airborne particles, bacteria and all of our polluted water throughout can't be good for the human body. Yet so many want to bitch about anothers personal choice to drink or smoke. All the while caring less about all of the other dangers that are faced in their unhealthy enviroments.

Large buildings lacking air quality controls are distributing those little germies through the ventilation systems in schools and offices throughout the country. It would be just to difficult to add a few filtration systems in the heating and air systems that already exists or are being built??

Well, as someone who has great health insurance, and has used it extensively in the past 17 years, I hope "my" care doesn't suffer. There is no such thing as a cure-all and whenever you help one group, another is gonna lose something.

Your care won't suffer... but maybe everyone else can experience the same quality that you are pleased with, which I believe everyone deserves as a human being.

Well a few points here. First of all, which tax payer are we talking about? Are we talking about the top5% of of superrrich americans or are we talking about average joe taxpayer.

Average Joe Taxpayer already spends a large chunk of his earnings on insurance. Apart fromt he insurance he pays for himself and his family ( if he can afford it) there is of course the question of all the hidden costs as Gary mentioned.

Average Joe is already paying a crapload to stay healthy.. only it's not in the form of "taxes" on his tax returns.

The only segment of society that BENEFITS from the absence of Universal Healthcare are :

a) The more affluent segment of society ( which earns so much that 2% of their income FAR EXCEEDS what they would spend on healthcare - as opposed to average joe for whom insurance and medical expenses make up a substantial part of his monthly expenditure) Raising taxes to provide free healthcare would actually work out CHEAPER for average joe. But it would be a real kick in the nuts for the superrich - which is why they are so vehement in their opposition to it.

b) The Insurance Industry, for whom making a PROFIT supercedes the health and wellbeing of those they insure.

Average Joe would GAIN FINANCIALLY with universal healthcare. And since Average Joe makes up the majority of your population i would think that THEIR needs are the most important no? Unfortunately it is the superrich that lead your country, and control american ideology. All they have to do is condemn universal healthcare as INEFFICIENT ( because of course when you support a parrallel insurance industry, things are SO MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE ) and as "SOCIALISM" ( tantamount to COMMUNISM, and such an unspeakable "evil" that they do not even ehave to justify their condemnation).

See i would understand the opposition to universal healthcare if there was a shred of evidence to prove that it was detrimental to the average citizen, if there was ANY PROOF that universal healthcare was MORE Expensive for the average citizen ( as opposed to being more expensive only to the RICH) , if there was even the SHADOW of a doubt as to the advantages of PREVENTATIVE care from free consultation over curative care in an overloaded hospital. But there isn't.

Universal healthcare is a BRILLIANT idea for the US> It will boost productivity, engender faith in your government, it will create a happier nation, it will make society more egalitarian, and it will rid you of the vultures that make profits by gambling with your health.

For your own sake

I don't know about that. I have never had to wait in line for service, I always get a private room, and I have never had to worry about my insurer NOT covering a treatment. I just don't want MY or any of MY family's care to suffer.
I doubt the U.S. government handling health care will improve the system. They can't even keep the bridges from falling in, the borders secure, and drugs off the street. I'll rather keep health care private thank you.

You seem to be a very selfish person. Why not wish everyone had the service you are experiencing? Other countries have come up with solutions that work... so could we.

MY MY MY

I admit I am selfish about some things. This is one of them.

Our government has shown itself to be pretty inept about several things it has tried to control. I don't want to put the nation's health care in the hands of more bureaucrats.