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

it's fine it's no big deal. but to start this debate about how my opponent has stated that we can make this cheaper by having a single payer system. well by adopting universal health care we would be insuring 47 million people with health care so they could get treat meant and not paying so much where as without health care you would be paying out of your pocket. also that with are citizens having more money due to not paying out of there pocket this would lead to us having more money to buy consumer goods which would stimulate are economy and benefit to our currency. also my opponent is talking about we could have are debt decrease if we have a single payer system but this resolution is just talking about if we should implement universal health care and by modeling after the French so what he is talking about single payer system is totally irrelevant to this debate. we are not trying to get rid of the debt because it would be impossible to do so. what I'm trying to prove is that by implementing universal health care we would be saving more money and that the national debt would not increase so fast where as we spend about 2.3 trillion dollars due to health care last year and estimated to be around 7 trillion in 2016. as in France there deficit is only 9 billion dollars last year, so you can already see the difference between the two. but to say that either way both health insurance would be putting us in debt regardless but what I'm saying is that by taking in universal health care we would be slowing down our increasing debt. economically and qualitatively is what my opponent is saying about the French system and how it would not work in the united states. well to start off the physicians in the united states are ranked in the top three so we already have some of the best physicians and that if we implement universal health care which is better then our health care system. so this means with better health care and better physicians then this logically means better quality. this is what my opponent has stated in his third contention. 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 in my oppents I believe first contention he stated according to bbc news in 08 French doctors have gone on strike for the past 7 consecutive years because of abysmal pay and conditions. well how is that possible when doctors were forced to work which is allowed in France. but also doctors were back at work but were wearing strike signs. so I believe that you were mistaken but I am not saying you were wrong. doctors just protested they were on strike but under French law they still were forced to work. also why would you quit being a doctor after many years of school for this major, just to find another job. where as if you only have a degree in education how could you possibly find a job that makes more then what doctors already get. MY RESPONSE TO THIS I do not understand that giving half a million people jobs would hurt our economy, I believe it would only help because you would be giving more people jobs, and in his third contention he stated it would put medical technology companies go out of business. if this were true how come he has not shown us what business have gone out due to this universal health care.