This one (which won't fit in this space) goes out to the "U.S. govt has no place in health care" crowd.

Question

This hobby I've taken up of trying to find ethics and morals in those who seem to take the most pride in not having them is, I imagine, a little like searching for penguins in the desert, but I find it fascinating. What would you do with the severely, emotionally and psychologically disturbed, and physically disabled? How about the elderly who've worked hard all their lives but could never afford insurance? Then there are those who currently work 40 hours a week at minimum wage and can't afford insurance. What do we do with them? Do we let them live and die in the streets? Do we execute them? Put them in a giant pen? Or just ignore them and not care?

Not everyone has babies and friends to take care of them.

Answer 1

Have you ever read Plato's republic, those against universal health care remind me of those words in a book where it is suggested that all elderly and disabled be set on the side of the hill to die. But in a modern world I would think it would be in everyone's self interest to take care of others because we to our time will pass. When we grow older I would think that we would want somebody to take care of us, as we take care of those that are older then us, and if we become disabled would we not want for someone to helps us in ways that they can. It seems to be wrapped tightly in greed, the richer you are the less you care for others. In answer to your question, of course even those that are now saying that they do not want to pay for somebodies health care will want health care if they can no longer afford it for some reason.

Answer 2

If the Federal government got out of the business of trying to provide everything to everyone, the Federal budget would be reduced by more than 50% overnight. We could reduce taxes enough to allow people to BUY what they need. As for those who work 40 hour a week at minimum wage, you need to learn more about minimum wage earners. 60% of them are teenagers covered by their parents insurance. The other 0.25% of the population were better served by private charities before the government took over.

Answer 3

get past the propaganda and look at the facts.

Those you list already have their health care paid for at the state level, i used the "medical assistance program" in Maryland years ago when my daughter was born, it's quite good.

Those are not the masses of "uninsured" that they talk about when they speak of the 46 million that are uninsured. It's mostly people who are young and healthy and gambling that they don't need insurance if nothing goes wrong, and those people are right.

Don't be fooled by what sounds like a good idea, dig deeper.

Answer 4

Find the people that abuse all of the governement programs set up for the people that really need it. Charge these people as committing fraud against the US and force them to work this off as community service in different locations. A portion of the money the city or business saves from these community service objectives should be donated toward a fund which in turn rebuilds what was spent on these criminals. Kind of like how not everyone on welfare needs it. Find the abusers in the community punish them, make them work off what they abused, and put that money toward the people that actualy need it for the limited amount of time. Basically instead of handing out money and not checking on the progress of where it goes, maybe we should.

OR you could gather up all burdens of society that ruin it for those that need it and place them on the court house lawn the day after taxes are paid. All citizens that pay taxes get one rock and throw them at the abusers since they wasted your money; but thats just me.

Answer 5

The humanitarian thing to do is to simply take care of those who cared for us as babies and children. You wouldn't turn your back on your loved ones. Why would you turn your back on them? On all others before you.