NationStates Jolt Archive

The Kingdom of Charlemont proproses a United Nations Health Service. The UNHS would be responsible for overall policy on all health issues and would be responsible for the provision of all FREE health services in member states. Private medical companys would still be able to offer services in each nation, particually for services such as cosmetic surgery, which would not be offered free on the UNHS

The UNHS would offer every citizen in a member nation the eqaul oppotunity to good quality FREE health care. For many poorer nations it would probably be there very first structured health service. This would also no doubt help combat the spread of HIV/AIDs. Please have a heart and help by voting for this proposal, which can be found on p.g. 16 of the proposals list.
PS Please say what you think, any additions to the proposal? it will all be usefull so if it does not pass i can add to it next time!

I see a good proposal in a UN Health Service. It will surely help many struggling nations to get back on their feet. With a UNHS, famine will be cut. Many pandemics will be beaten.

This allows many opportunites for nations worldwide to co-operate in medical reasearch too so more diseases can be cured.

Therefore, I shall support this proposal.

- Booyardan Chief Medical Advisor

Yes it will cut famine and pandemics, its great that you will support it and i hope on its behalf you can lobby fellow delegates to do the same.

thanks
Kingdom Of Charlemont Goverment

The Kingdom of Charlemont proproses a United Nations Health Service. The UNHS would be responsible for overall policy on all health issues and would be responsible for the provision of all FREE health services in member states. Private medical companys would still be able to offer services in each nation, particually for services such as cosmetic surgery, which would not be offered free on the UNHS

The UNHS would offer every citizen in a member nation the eqaul oppotunity to good quality FREE health care. For many poorer nations it would probably be there very first structured health service. This would also no doubt help combat the spread of HIV/AIDs. Please have a heart and help by voting for this proposal, which can be found on p.g. 16 of the proposals list.
PS Please say what you think, any additions to the proposal? it will all be usefull so if it does not pass i can add to it next time!

Make up your mind. Are you trying to help developed or developing nations?

If you're trying to help developed:
Who will pay for all of it?

If you're trying to help developing:
Not only do you need to establish how this will be funded, you should also realize that most foreign aid money ends up in Switzerland or the Cayman Islands or the Russian Military Surplus Stores. Foreign aid will NOT help developing nations that are ruled by dictatorships or in states of anarchy. The US gives plenty of aid to Somalia, for example, but that's not helping anything. The professor Amartya Sen wrote a whole book on it, I'd suggest you read it. Botswana and Zimbawbwe produce less food per capita than Somalia but they don't have any starvation problems becuase Botswana is [more or less] democratic, and Zimbawbwe os [more or less] capitalist. No mass starvation has EVER occured in a democratic or viable free-market system, and I defy you to counter that.

The professor Amartya Sen wrote a whole book on it

<ooc>I've actually met him (not that that fact is relevant, I just wanted to boast...)</ooc>

Botswana and Zimbawbwe produce less food per capita than Somalia but they don't have any starvation problems becuase Botswana is [more or less] democratic, and Zimbawbwe os [more or less] capitalist.

<ooc>A bit out-of-date, but true at the time it describes.</ooc>

No mass starvation has EVER occured in a democratic or viable free-market system, and I defy you to counter that.

<ooc>I'd like to counter it, but I think you may actually be right. Damn capitalists... :? </ooc>

The Global Market wrote:
No mass starvation has EVER occured in a democratic or viable free-market system, and I defy you to counter that.

What the hell has mass starvation in democracys got to do with it, this is about providing a FREE structured health care system to all countries in the UN. It will no doubt help poorer countries who have never had a proper healthcare system. Its about providing FREE care, FREE drugs to those who need it most. Its about combating pandemics suchs as HIV/AIDS etc.
Admitedly developed nations already have decent healthcare but this is about helping everyone. Its a bit unfair to ask the developed countries to fork out millions of pounds to the UN in aid to set up a FREE health service that they will get nothing out of. Not all developed countries have free healthcare, so im sure there are people in these countries who struggle to pay for care and die needlessly. Healthcare should be a right for everyone not just for the privalleged.

The Global Market wrote:
No mass starvation has EVER occured in a democratic or viable free-market system, and I defy you to counter that.

What the hell has mass starvation in democracys got to do with it, this is about providing a FREE structured health care system to all countries in the UN. It will no doubt help poorer countries who have never had a proper healthcare system. Its about providing FREE care, FREE drugs to those who need it most. Its about combating pandemics suchs as HIV/AIDS etc.
Admitedly developed nations already have decent healthcare but this is about helping everyone. Its a bit unfair to ask the developed countries to fork out millions of pounds to the UN in aid to set up a FREE health service that they will get nothing out of. Not all developed countries have free healthcare, so im sure there are people in these countries who struggle to pay for care and die needlessly. Healthcare should be a right for everyone not just for the privalleged.

It's not really FREE, somebody has to pay for it. So what you really mean is "stolen" healthcare.

My point about mass starvation in democracies is that FOREIGN AID (in the form of healthcare in this case) WILL NOT HELP PEOPLE IN THIRD-WORLD DICTATORSHIPS OR ANARCHIES.

<ooc>I've actually met him (not that that fact is relevant, I just wanted to boast...)</ooc>

Seriously? When?

YOU NO HOW MAD THIS MAKES ME I MADE A BETTER TOPIC ON HEATH CARE THAN THIS AND NO ONE REPLYED I CANT BELEIVE YOU PEOPLE! :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

So, if you intend for the UN to provide free healthcare to the citizens of member nations, how's it going to get paid for? There is already a resolution on the books prohibiting the UN from direct taxation, which I happen to believe is about the only sensible resolution passed thus far.......

So, if you can get member nations to pay for this out of the goodness of their hearts, bully for you.....but requring contribution would directly contravene existing regulation.

I think this is a great idea, even though I'm new. If it comes up for voting in the U.N., I will vote yes.

Morgainio Chief Minister

So, if you intend for the UN to provide free healthcare to the citizens of member nations, how's it going to get paid for? There is already a resolution on the books prohibiting the UN from direct taxation, which I happen to believe is about the only sensible resolution passed thus far.......

So, if you can get member nations to pay for this out of the goodness of their hearts, bully for you.....but requring contribution would directly contravene existing regulation.
Unfortunately, "UN Taxation Ban" only prevents the UN from directly taxing the citizens of member nations. Several resolutions require the governments to pay for stuff. :?
("'RBH' Replacement" is probably the only other 'sensible' resolution...)

<ooc>I've actually met [Amartya Sen] (not that that fact is relevant, I just wanted to boast...)</ooc>

Seriously? When?

Just a few weeks back - drinks with The Master (Trinity College, Cambridge UK).

So, if you intend for the UN to provide free healthcare to the citizens of member nations, how's it going to get paid for? There is already a resolution on the books prohibiting the UN from direct taxation, which I happen to believe is about the only sensible resolution passed thus far.......

So, if you can get member nations to pay for this out of the goodness of their hearts, bully for you.....but requring contribution would directly contravene existing regulation.
Unfortunately, "UN Taxation Ban" only prevents the UN from directly taxing the citizens of member nations. Several resolutions require the governments to pay for stuff. :?
("'RBH' Replacement" is probably the only other 'sensible' resolution...)

This is true, which is, I suppose, why I am asking the question. There seems to be a great deal of pie-in-the-sky do-gooding around here, but very little understanding of the realities involved when money starts getting thrown at problems. As the old saying goes: "there's no such thing as a free ride"

I just don't want this body to be about forcing nations to contribute it's people's tax dollars (or what have you) so it can spend like a bunch of drunken sailors on liberty.

It's not really FREE, somebody has to pay for it. So what you really mean is "stolen" healthcare.

My point about mass starvation in democracies is that FOREIGN AID (in the form of healthcare in this case) WILL NOT HELP PEOPLE IN THIRD-WORLD DICTATORSHIPS OR ANARCHIES.

Yes perfectly true, i should have stated free at the point of use. It will have to be paid for by Member nations through taxes from the UN. therefore the money the governments pay the UN in taxation is bound to have come from peoples pockets, but that’s the way democracy works. Take the Principles of the NHS (in the Uk, just type it in google!)and apply them here. And as i said it would be paid for by UN taxation of nations) (resolution already in place) obviously poorer nations would contribute considerably less than richer ones.
And finally it is my belief that it is part of the UN job to try and create democracy in these dictatorships and when they have they to can have the UN free healthcare. But don’t forget their of plenty of democratic third world countries who would benefit to.

So let's say my nation is doing quite well economically, and it's people are enjoying an excellent level of care.....better than the UN service can offer. Can we A: opt out of the system and B: does that mean we are exempt from paying into the system? Or (and I already know the answer to this question) do we have to pay for our own healthcare plus pay for everyone else's?

Yep! your system would be incorperated into the UNHS. You woulld stop paying intoyour own system and pay taxes into the UN. (the UN has thousands of members in this game remeber so lots of money in the UN pot!) The UNHS would then be responsible for the running of your health service. And yes you would be paying more to help pay for the same quality healthcare in third world countries. this would bring all services into alignment. this would be very usefull. Everybody would have access to the same quality FREE healthcare. Dont forgget other secnarios, you could have a medc with a failing health system, they would benifit. You could have a LEDC where no one gets care, where it would be a huge benefit, because the goverment probably could not afford the care the UNHS would offer. The money you pay extra above the cost of your nations orig. care cost would be AID to the poor countries who would benefit most.

Actually i see your point, an opt out clause if your service was better than that of the UNs would be good, but yes you should pay a certain amount of aid into the system to help the ledc or medcs who dont enjoy the same level of care. If my proposal is not voted in i will add this next time!

It's not really FREE, somebody has to pay for it. So what you really mean is "stolen" healthcare.

My point about mass starvation in democracies is that FOREIGN AID (in the form of healthcare in this case) WILL NOT HELP PEOPLE IN THIRD-WORLD DICTATORSHIPS OR ANARCHIES.

Yes perfectly true, i should have stated free at the point of use. It will have to be paid for by Member nations through taxes from the UN. therefore the money the governments pay the UN in taxation is bound to have come from peoples pockets, but that’s the way democracy works. Take the Principles of the NHS (in the Uk, just type it in google!)and apply them here. And as i said it would be paid for by UN taxation of nations) (resolution already in place) obviously poorer nations would contribute considerably less than richer ones.
And finally it is my belief that it is part of the UN job to try and create democracy in these dictatorships and when they have they to can have the UN free healthcare. But don’t forget their of plenty of democratic third world countries who would benefit to.

It isn't democracy since your people don't elect those third-world governments stealing their money.

<ooc>I've actually met [Amartya Sen] (not that that fact is relevant, I just wanted to boast...)</ooc>

Seriously? When?

Just a few weeks back - drinks with The Master (Trinity College, Cambridge UK).

Cool.

This is a good idea, but this will not work. We must echo the comments of our fellow skeptics. Who will pay for all this?

The Ministry of Pulbic Health of the States of Stephenson

Lets make this clear, doddgy third world goverments would not be able to steal the money, they would never touch it. The Goverment would seace directly controlling healthcare. It would be upto the UN to admin,and run care

Lets make this clear, doddgy third world goverments would not be able to steal the money, they would never touch it. The Goverment would seace directly controlling healthcare. It would be upto the UN to admin,and run care

Wlel then the UN would need an army to go into the government...

Since the subject of how a UN health service should be funded, it seems that taxpayer's money would be by far the easiest way to do it. Since this is not allowed and would upset the vast majority of people, Governments are going to have to pay for it themselves. This is a tough situation and we will need to go further into this if we are to determine if a UN health service is a good idea.

Look we would need no army to go in:!:
the goverments would just scece control of healthcare. And this is very likely not going to cause a stir because they voted for it! In dictatorships where the goverment wont let us go in just cant have it straight away. We would have to negotiate or bring down the dictatorship. This would not be the job of the UNHS, it would be the job of the security council. the UNHS can only help those who want to be helped.

It occurs to the great and learned Federation of Giradoo that it is fool-hardy for the Charlemont government to make the assumption that so many governments would be readily willing to surrender complete control of their healthcare systems to the United Nations. The U.N. already demands a large enough surrender of our national sovereignty and to request any further surrender is perhaps going too far.

Giradoo recognizes the laudible work undertaken by the United Nations, however we must face the reality that the U.N. is an often slow, bloated bureaucracy. To expect it to coordinate the resources (financial, human, and otherwise) necessary to tackle the dynamic nature of healthcare in all the world's nations is expecting far too much. The UNHS would likely collapse at its inception, if only under the burden of its mandate.

However, all of this isn't to say this proposal is without merit. There are many changes which should be made before the proposal is placed before the body for review. Chief among these changes should be altering the responsibilities of the UNHS to focus primarily on developing nations who direct little to no funding to healthcare services. Secondly, the proposal should be altered so that it is voluntary, in order to assuade concerns regarding violations of sovereignty.

It is our hope that the author will take into consideration the concerns of Giradoo (and those of other nations) in order to transform the UNHS into a more...feasible...agency.


---
Rev. Dr. Hezekizah Giradoo
Prime Minister of the Federation of Giradoo

"Outside of the killings, Giradoo has one of the lowest crime rates in the region."

I admit defete, i cant see this proposal getting through in its current form. I would like to thank all of you for making suggestions for changes in the proposal, i will take heed and resubmitsome time soon. Please fell free to continue the debate all knew suggestions will be listened to.

Thankyou very much
Prime Minister and Minister For Health, Kingdom of Charlemont