that the united states should implement universal health care modeled after the french system

I Negate the resolved. sorry i missed last round. Framework: Okay lets get this straight, for the framework, the pro has to show two things 1. french is best in the world, 2. french can be adapted in the united states this is significant because logically, the united states should adapt after the best health care system, of which they can adapt to (national markets and economies make this a difficult thing to do.) if they dont show this, euthanize their case like a stray dog. (I love dogs dont vote me down if your a member of peta or something). First over the PRO he states that an adoption of the french health care system will make things cheaper in the united states. However, if we want to make things cheaper in the united states, why not switch over to a single payer system instead?France is only 75 percent nationalized, and they have the third most expensive health care system in the world. in a single payer system the government has complete control over the prices, and everything is capped to eliminate waste and spending. in this point the Pro Completly neglects the thought of qualitative health care in a health care system, so if we are going to try and eliminate the national debt, why not use a single payer system like frances or canada's? TO ATTACK NUMBER 2 The con again neglects to show us why we should adopt a french health care system that is inevitably failing economically, and is not as qualitatively sound as the united states system. according to the wall street journal in 08, when it comes to life expectancies for disease , the united states ranks remarkably higher than any other country in the world. so sacrifice our qualitative system for a system that sucks economically and qualitativly? at least going through a single payer system would allow the united states complete control over health care appropriations. at the end of this contention, the con states : Also by implementing this universal health care we would be inspiring more people to become doctors because in the French plan it gives free tuition. tell this to the doctors in france that have gone on strike for the past 7 years because of abysmal pay and conditions. TO ATTACK NUMBER THREE "My third contention is that the United States health care is remarkably ineffective. The United States has, according to business week, the United States has forty seven million citizens who are uninsured, which is about fifteen percent of our country who is forced to use free health insurance care clinics or emergency rooms. " RESPONSE ill give him the uninsured part, that truly is bad, however, it can be fixed more effectively through U.S. based or single payer means. if we were to regulate insurance companies, reform the tax code so it isn't pentalizing the lower half of the income scale, and use health tax incentives, this would allow those americans to purchase health care that is much better than france's. additionally in this contention, while the con asserts that U.S. health care is ineffective, he in no way affirms that the french system is the system to look to for means of reform. so dont look to the cons arguments in this debate. MY CASE contention 1 french system puts around 87 percent of private insurance companies out of buisiness. according to the health care economist in 08. only 13 percent of insurance in france is subsidized through private health insurance. consequentially, 87 percent of health care in france is subsidized by the government in france. if we were to adopt this system in the united states, where the private industry is a 1.02 trillion dollar industry employing 2.3 million people per year (u.s. labor stats in 08) we would put a huge strain on our economy that already sucks. while laying off the majority of 2.3 million people to put an even worse strain on our economy that sucks even worse. contention 2 ruin us quality us has best quality in the world look to WSJ evidence that i provided earlier a. doctors hate it according to bbc news in 08 french doctors have gone on strike for the past 7 consecutive years because of abysmal pay and conditions. if we were to adapt this system into the united states, doctors that are already getting 3 times the pay of french doctors, would either retire, get a new job, or take their business to another country where they can get the most money. b. medical technology companies go out of business according to the health care economist in 08, the french government does not subsidize new medical technologies. addtionally, france doctors don't pay for new medical technology because of the salary cap. according to shafin 08 a graduate from the wharton school of business, he states that the top 20 medical technology companies in 07 took in around 118 billion, and employed around a half a million people. this would put a huge strain on our economy, and would ruin health care, for medical technology is the fundamental reason for our sucessfully qualitative health care in the United States. GO BYU COUGARS!