if the gov't takes care of me militarily, i.e. iraq, why shouldn't they take care of me health-care wise?

Question

the cost of one vs. the other is so lopsided, yet all i hear is how expensive health care provided by the government is. oh, yeah, and it is socialism. isn't the military intervention in iraq, supported by less than a majority, a socialistic function as well? i don't think you can have it both ways. either government provides medical care AND military care, or they provide nothing. if it is about money, then stop the war.

i knew the way people would line up to answer. but you always hear how great it is that we are in ieaq. but providing for me health wise is a free ride. i've served my country, in a war situation. i have my own health care. i don't go to the va, tho' i am service connected. but to say that they are so thoughtful to keep the terrorist off my country at a trillion dollars a pop, but health care is too expensive. is illogical.
pfo-i know what socialism is. i do not term it that way. it is the neo cons who you should educate, they started calling it a socialistic expression of the government, to scare the less informed. i find it amusing. when big brother protects me, it is a government function, but health care is the cradle to the grave, get a job, lazy liberal argument.

thanks for all the thoughtful answers.

Answer 1

Your question makes sense. The problem is, there are some who believe it's ok to spend our tax $ on the war, which the majority of the country rejects, but not ok to take care of those who NEED it. I'd much rather have my tax $$ helping those in my country than spending it on another country's civil war we can't win and don't see an end to.

Answer 2

You are right about stopping the senseless war. But the government is not, and should not be your nanny or your big brother.

Two wrongs don't make a right. I reject both Universal Health Care and the senseless war.

What the government should do is remove the government sponsorship of big corporations in the health-care sector and other sectors. Every sector. The government has been handing out corporate welfare for so long it's not funny. That's why health-care is so expensive - it's because of government's protections on the price of medicine. If the government removed all the protections, the price of medicine and healthcare in general will go down due to more sources of medicine and healthcare.

And this FDA is as corrupt as the IRS. Free markets everywhere is the way to lower the price of healthcare. And on top of that, remove the Federal Income Tax to allow people to spend more of their own money on healthcare.

Edit: I think prisoners getting free healthcare is preposterous. No wonder some people don't want to leave the prison system - they get free meds, free cable tv, and free room and lodging, and free food.

Answer 3

Responsiblity for some things are better suited to the Federal Government; everything else is to be controlled by the States or the people respectively. That is the way the Constitution was designed. If it does not specifically give the power to the Federal Government, the Federal Government is supposed to keep out of it.

Things like education, health care, welfare, retirement, infrastructure, public works etc. are not supposed to be controlled or financed from the Federal Treasury. However, some things are such as: Foreign policy, treaties, embargos and most importantly, NATIONAL DEFENSE.

National Defense was placed in Federal hands because it is impractical and inefficient for the individual states to raise and maintain a Navy or an Army. Also, it would not work to have more than a single Commander-in-Chief. So the Constitution is structured so that the Executive Branch holds the Commander-in-Chief and the Legislative Branch holds the power to declare war and the power of the purse.

You should take note of the fact that although the Military is charged with the security of America as a whole, it does not provide you with your own personal security. Your local government does that and you, yourself, are responsible for your own self defense. This has already been proven in court cases. When the police failed to protect a victim and the victim tried to sue the police, courts decided that the victim is ultimately responsible for their own defense, not the police.

.

Answer 4

Yes, valid points.43 million Americans go without health care while B2 bombers at 2 billion a pop drop depleted uranium over whatever new convenient oil route gets masqueraded for "humanitarian intervention.

400 million dollars is spent in national presidential campaigns by the two, sorry, the *one* major parties disenfranchising anyone but the wealthy, such as Bill Gates, who has more financial assets than Argentina, while Americans get a legal and illegal drug appetite, biggest on the planet, from boredom, insecurity and a lack of meaning to life (in spite of religion's and advertising's promises and the possession of more and more stuff) amidst the greatest wealth and poverty disparity a nation has ever had the fortune and misfortune to possess in human history.

Answer 5

Well, because soldiers serve the government whereas you want the government to serve you.

I wish people that supported socialism knew what it was, but then if they did they wouldn't support it :)

Socialism is a redistribution of wealth, it has nothing to do with majority support for a cause. You can't argue "since we're in a war that I don't like I should get something in return" it makes no sense. The government doesn't function specifically to only do things with your approval.

Answer 6

Sure. Every single Iraqi now receives free health care courtesy of the US taxpayer thanks to Dubya's "noble cause." Why shouldn't you also get free health care.

Answer 7

Because Mr. Neo-Con wants everyone to protect his butt and your broken leg does nothing to protect his butt! Sad,but true.
I agree with you 100% though!

Answer 8

Because the Constitution says that the government of the United States is to *PROVIDE* for the common defense, while it *PROMOTES* the general welfare.

Other taxpayers footing the bill for your health insurance...is that part of general welfare...or is it a specific handout?

Amazing...absoltuely amazing...quote the Coinstitution, and get the Lib thumbs down...again and again.

**********************...
THE LIB THUMBS DOWN
MY BADGE OF HONOR!
**********************...

Answer 9

I can't buy a tank, fly it to Iraq, and kill our enemies. I can get a good paying job that allows me to purchase health insurance, if I want to.

Killing our enemies is required, buying health insurance is not.

Not killing our enemies affects the entire community. If you don't have insurance to fix your broken leg, that doesn't affect the entire community.

It's truly sad that I have to point out the obvious like this.

Answer 10

Wow.... why not stick both hands out.... you seem to need a helping hand.