Supported Universal Healthcare Model? - The Best Online Debate Website | - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website |

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons! is the largest online debate website globally by activity where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


Learn more about's EdTech solution aimed at Middle Schools and High Schools, DebateIsland Education, here!

Supported Universal Healthcare Model?

Debate Information

Hey everyone,

Wanted to start a topic on what system of universal healthcare you would like to have implemented. This can be as simple as a current country's system (with or without modification), a completely new model, or a anything else in between. Should the government pay for all or none of it? What role does the market and government play in your system? 

Note: This isn't a debate about if we should have a universal system of some kind or not. That would need to be a separate debate in and of itself.  

Look forward to reading and discussing this topic with you.

Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place

Details +

Post Argument Now Debate Details +


  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 860 Pts   -   edited July 14

    One where the term "universal" means opportunity to access. Free market should determine supply and demand and all the prices should be known.

    To me the government should only be helping for illnesses that the person had no control over. I don't think the government should be determining whether you get treatment or how much is available, the person providing the service should just like all other industries.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 3946 Pts   -  
    I am generally in favor of spontaneously arising order, as opposed to intelligently designed order. It is natural for people to want to have some form of security in their lives, some assurance that, should something unexpected happen, they will be protected from the consequences - but it is a big mistake to assume that such security must always be built artificially. More often than not simply having access to resources allowing one to mitigate the damage is enough.
    As the famous saying goes, "Give a man a fish, and you will feed him for a day. Teach him to fish, and you will feed him for a lifetime." Instead of being given the final product, people should be given access to tools allowing them to obtain that final product on their own.

    Applying this reasoning to the universal healthcare, I would suggest a fully private and voluntary system where "universality" is assured through private charity and insurance. Those who cannot pay the healthcare fees and have not received enough charity and insurance coverage could take a loan and pay it off later. Those who cannot receive a loan either... well, they need to pitch their cause better. People generally are kind and are willing to help you if you can make it worth your while. And if you cannot, then, honestly, no one has any reason to help you, and that is perfectly fine too. The whole idea of peaceful coexistence is that people do not force anything on each other and, instead, offer something in exchange for services they want to receive from others.

    This is both a moral-based and practicality-based argument. I can elaborate further on both accounts, and I would also add that, in terms of efficiency, private-based system has the benefit of being easily adjustable by individual providers, while public-based system is, to a large extent, set in stone and inflexible. A good actor on a bad private market can still provide high-quality healthcare, while on a bad public market everyone is forced to provide low-quality one.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021, all rights reserved. | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us
Terms of Service

Get In Touch