The U.S. should privatize health insurance.

Secondly, I would like to congratulate my opponent, @Greg4586, for reaching the finals. It has been a long run, and let’s make this debate as memorable as possible. Framework: Con must argue that the U. S. should fully privatize health insurance. The resolution states that, “The U. S. should privatize Health Insurance. ” As long as there is public health insurance (medicaid, medicare), U. S. health insurance is not privatized. To fulfil my role in the debate, I must argue that privatization is a bad thing. This is sufficient to negate the truth of the resolution. A Market Driven System: A good health insurance is not based upon profit generation and stock improving, but the health care for the citizens of a nation. Privatization, by definition, means, “The transfer of ownership, property or business from the government to the private sector is termed privatization. ” Dr. Shah states that, “[T]he five largest health insurance companies--WellPoint, UnitedHealth, Aetna, Humana, and Cigna. .. earned over $3.3 billion in profits. .. It’s no surprise these enormous earnings are not going towards improving access to health care for the families they cover. Instead, they go towards protecting the narrow self-interests of their stockholders, board members, and top executives. WellPoint alone spent $67 million on lobbying over the last 3 years and paid their CEO, Angela Braly, $13 million in 2010. They also spent $21.6 billion dollars of patient premiums to buy back its own stock from 2003 through 2010, pushing the price of the stock options their executives and board members own still higher. ” (1) The clear goal of corporations is to generate money and please the shareholders. Governments, however, do not have the same profit-seeking goals as corporations. When health insurance is turned over to private companies in full, health insurance payment becomes a series of rate hikes to increase the net worth of the company. As a result of profit-seeking, not everyone is able to afford health insurance. Note that the #1 leading cause of bankruptcy is an inability to afford medical bills. (2) People often have to change their entire way of life to acclimate to the costs of health insurance. According to Shah, “A 2007 survey by the Commonwealth Fund found that. ..10 percent changed their way of life to pay medical bills. .. an estimated 28 million adults reported they used up all their savings, 21 million incurred large credit card debt, and another 21 million were unable to pay for basic necessities. And yet sixty-one percent of those with medical debt or bill problems were insured at the time care was provided. ” (1) Public Health Insurance: The most successful healthcare systems in the world are not private systems. According to (3), of the top 50 health care systems in the world, only 10 are not universal systems that heavily involve government funding. The most success (France) is extremely public. What France has that we don’t, is a system largely reliant on government funding, and an almost full reimbursement system on all medical expenses. Public health insurance works, considering the fact that the #1 rated system in the world is 77% public (4). Private Healthcare, as I have previously stated, relies heavily on payments from the insured. The main motives of corporations is to generate profit, even if it means forgoing quality. As the rates continue to increase (because it makes the company more money), a lesser percentage of the general populous can afford healthcare. When the rate of health insured citizens starts to go down, collateral damage is what follows. (5) Shows us that a total of 13% of the population is without health insurance. The result, is a stunning ranking of 42nd in world life expectancy (6). If you look at that source closely, Japan, who is ranked 3rd, has public health insurance. Also, our good friend France is ranked at 15th; their citizens live 2 years longer than ours do. There is no doubt that a correlation between the rate of the uninsured and the life expectancy of citizens in a country exists. Employment: Often in the employment field, companies sponsor a specific health insurance provider, and that is detrimental to the work satisfaction and performance of employees. This process is better known as “Job Lock. ” Job Lock is pernicious to entrepreneurship and innovation. “To most health economists, “job lock,” the idea that workers work more or face constraints in job mobility due to provision of work-related health insurance, is a real and important phenomenon. ” (7) When people are forced into working for a company because of the cost of private health insurance, it decreases their job satisfaction, and limits their potential in their career. At the workplace, especially in economically troubled areas, there might be employees who are not fully insured. When there is an outbreak of a contagious virus, uninsured employees could possibly spread it to other workers, and even people around them. Employees may not be able to perform at top capability because of a chronic illness or infectious virus because of their lack of medical attention. This all circles back around to the fact that private health insurance does not fully cover the population, and public health insurance does. What public health insurance does is negate Job Lock, because there is no Employer Sponsored Health Insurance, and there is no incentive to find cheaper health insurance of better quality. Public health insurance covers everyone in the nation, and there is no excessive expense aimed at the citizens. Cost > Effectiveness: Our country, 42nd in the world in life expectancy and 13% of our population uninsured, spent 2.8 trillion dollars on health insurance in 2012 (8), more than any country in the world. Private health insurance is not only forcing our country to spend more than any other country in health insurance, but it does not even work properly. This graph shows us that countries heavily dependent on government funding in health insurance are spending trillions less annually than the U. S. , which has mostly private health insurance. Therefore, privatized health insurance is not a viable option, and it is not worth spending on; 13% of our nation is without health insurance. Conclusion: I have fulfilled my role in the debate, and gained the eligibility to receive votes in my favor by providing reasons substantial enough to negate the truthfulness of the resolution. Thank you, once again, @1harderthanyouthink and @Greg4586. Vote Con! 1) . http://www.drsforamerica.org... 2) . http://www.cnbc.com... 3) . http://thepatientfactor.com... 4) . https://en.wikipedia.org... 5) . http://kff.org... 6) . https://www.cia.gov... 7) . http://theincidentaleconomist.com... 8) . http://www.chcf.org... 9) Chart: . https://epianalysis.files.wordpress.com...