Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
memphisdebate

health care

Recommended Posts

does anyone have any cards that say universal healh care is vital asserting u.s. leadership? I need it asap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

( ) Universal healthcare solves competitiveness – reforms employer-based insurance

Chua and Casoy, AMSA fellows, 2008

[Kao-Ping Chua and Flávio Casoy, fellows at the American Medical Student Association, “The Case for Universal Health Care”, AMSA, updated in 2008, http://www.amsa.org/uhc/CaseForUHC.pdf]

 

The above are the costs of not achieving universal health care in American by any solution. There is a specific subset of costs that would remain if the solution chosen to achieve universal health care builds on the current system of employer-based insurance (e.g. if the solution is not a comprehensive reform that moves to a centralized insurance scheme, like single payer or social insurance). Strain on businesses: The employer-based insurance system in America constitutes a tremendous drain on businesses, as skyrocketing health insurance premiums dig further into profit margins and undermine the ability of businesses to invest in expansion. Health insurance premiums in 2005 grew approximately 2-3 times the rate of overall inflation (3.5%) and wage increases (2.7%). Loss of global competitiveness: Health insurance costs are built into the prices of American products. Because businesses in other industrialized countries are not responsible for shouldering most of the costs of employee health insurance, American companies are at a competitive disadvantage globally. General Motors reports that every car it makes is $1500 more expensive because of health care costs, far more than what Japanese and German automakers have to pay.

 

 

Economic competitiveness is a prerequisite to heg.

Khalilzad, US Ambassador to the UN. 1995.

Zalmay, “Losing the Moment? The United States and the World After the Cold War.” Washington Quarterly, Spring Vol. 18, No. 2, LexisNexis. [Mardjuki]

 

The United States is unlikely to preserve its military and technological dominance if the U.S. economy declines seriously. In such an environment, the domestic economic and political base for global leadership would diminish and the United States would probably incrementally withdraw from the world, become inward-looking, and abandon more and more of its external interests. As the United States weakened, others would try to fill the Vacuum. To sustain and improve its economic strength, the United States must maintain its technological lead in the economic realm. Its success will depend on the choices it makes. In the past, developments such as the agricultural and industrial revolutions produced fundamental changes positively affecting the relative position of those who were able to take advantage of them and negatively affecting those who did not. Some argue that the world may be at the beginning of another such transformation, which will shift the sources of wealth and the relative position of classes and nations. If the United States fails to recognize the change and adapt its institutions, its relative position will necessarily worsen.

 

...Or something like that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...