Universal Health care

Con asks too many questions to be addressed so I cannot hit them all. For starters, I don't like copy and paste arguments. Con sent a message and told me to "make it good" in reference to my position. A strange request from a person who did not take the time to write the material he presented. Con should present his own arguments in the future or at least source them: . http://www.newpatriotjournal.com... (paragraph starting with "There isn't a single government agency…") Con's whole RD 1 is a copy and paste, without a source; this is plagiarism. I ask for a conduct point from the start. I spent considerable time sourcing this pundit piece as no citations were offered. After addressing Con's points, I will be presenting the Pro position on universal healthcare reform in the United States presented by the recently passed bill in the US Congress and signed into law by President Obama. H. R. 3590 . http://thomas.loc.gov...:: Con asks, "Should the Government Provide Free Universal Health Care for All Americans? " The answer is simply that the government is not proposing free health care for anyone. As Con accurately copied later in his argument, nothing from the government is free, we pay for it. In addition, the government will not be the health care providers, individual companies, under new regulations, will be the providers. The public option did not make it. . http://www.politifact.com... Con plagiarizes: "There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently" I disagree, the US military runs quite well. We have an effective blue water Navy, one of the best Air Forces in the world, and the Army and Marine Corps have shown time after time that they are formidable fighting forces. In addition, the healthcare plan is very nice for US military members, and the government runs the entire show. I have no need to address the other agencies listed, as I need only offer this one per Con's stipulations. Government Waste: Yes, any bureaucracy entails waste, I agree, but we need to examine Con's specific claims: 1. Tooting Cows: Anytime I can talk about farts in a debate is a good time (I can't stop giggling). As much fun as cow farting is to me, the issue has "exploded" worldwide. Agriculture is a big business in the US and the USDA conducted studies to deal with the large amount of methane, and other problems, "emitted" by livestock. In addition, animal waste is a huge concern considering the amount of livestock present in the US. Here are the studies: . http://www.ars.usda.gov... this issue may seem trivial at first glance, but changing the feed and other conditions can help lower err…emissions. How is this a bad thing? The studies were covering an important issue considering the amount of livestock in the US. 2. In reference to the M2 Bradley, I am familiar with the book, "The Pentagon Wars" concerning this issue, but I fail to see the analogy between heath care reform and defense procurement problems from the cold war era. I ask that Con clarify. Con copied, "What good would it do to wipe out a few hundred dollars of monthly health insurance premiums if our taxes go up by that much or more? " The problem is that many would not mind paying out a few hundred dollars a month for health care; the issue is they can't get it. One of the major functions of this reform is the elimination of the preexisting conditions criteria within the private health care industry. This reform bill will not be the first piece of legislation dealing with preexisting conditions as many states have a high risk fund. . http://www.naschip.org... and the states allocate money to these programs. If you live in one of these states, you have been paying taxes for these programs already. You live in Texas so you have been paying for a while now. . http://www.txhealthpool.org... Con copied, "Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness. " Always? Remember your statement about the M2 Bradley? The contractor (BAE), a private, profit motivated, competitive company produced the machine, not the US government. I need only one instance to make this statement false as it is absolute, and you provided it for me, thank you. . http://www.baesystems.com... The bottom line on the healthcare reform bill is that the US Government is not making the healthcare industry a government agency. The industry is now regulated better and Americans are required to purchase insurance or must pay to not have it. State governments have been doing this for years with vehicle insurance. In emergency situations, all patients are taken. One is not pulled from a car wreck AFTER checking for insurance. A patient about to give birth is not turned away at the door. We pay for these procedures now in the form of increased medical costs. . http://www.washingtonpost.com... . http://www.acponline.org... . http://www.kff.org... We are already paying for medical care for the uninsured and have been for quite some time. Now we can get some better regulations to deal with the matter. So much of the healthcare debate dealt with pundits screaming, "Socialism and death panels", but the government has been involved for quite some time. We finally got a President and Congress able to overcome the vast ignorance associated with this issue and able to implement solid reform. The reform bill is not a government takeover or socialism. The bill is a badly needed reform package that addresses many concerns individual states have attempted to address already.