Quote:

No as I stated above, medical access should be nondiscriminatory as it is. The payment of the care is individual, as it should be.

Since we are talking about the bottom line, money. Is your argument that if you do not have money, you have a right to the fruit of another mans labor? Could you make this argument about food and shelter as well, being that they are more of a necessity than health care?

I think we can agree to disagree about what is fair and what is not. It is refreshing talking about the nuts and bolts of an ideology rather than partisan bickering.



Yes, water\substance and shelter should also be covered for those who can't afford it (and largely already is). Money is NOT the bottom line. Human life is. That's the difference between us. You think that a guy working a $50 an hour job has more value than a guy working a $5 an hour job.

What if 25 years from now we finish a molecular generator that can create us ANYTHING we want out of thin air? There would no longer be currency. How would you then decide whose life is worth value and whose life is not? A resource based system or just revolt until the outdated system of money can dictate who gets to live? Is the bottom line for you really about money like you say?