•Everyone has the right to healthcare.
•America is way behind other countries in that we don't provide health care to everyone.
•It is hard to get health insurance because of the expense and existence of preexisting conditions.
•There are lots of inefficiencies in our health care systems.
The underlying question, for me, is what should the haves give to the havenots.
And who should determine that?
One extreme is, as Karl Marx said, that we should work according to our abilities and get paid according to our needs.
The other extreme is that everyone has the right to keep what they have and earn.
It is pragmatic for the haves to keep the havenots happy so that
•they will not revolt
•will be available to provide goods and services for the haves
(hopefully a mutually beneficial position).
Beyond that, how generous will the haves be? Who should determine that?
Before taxes were so high there was much more private philanthropy (just a piece of trivia).
The other health care issues are (besides the one of whether the haves should give health care to the havesnots) are:
•Should gov manage health care insurance?
•Should gov manage health care?
Other than those committed to masochism we are all generous. The difference is in our circle of generosity, which can range from only wanting to give to ourselves to wanting to give to everything.
And there are the proverbs on giving:
•"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"
•"Give a man a fish and he eats for the day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a life time."
I'd like everyone to be happy. I don't want to support everyone nor do I believe that it necessarily benefits one to be supported.
Those are the issues as I see them. I'd appreciate your comments if you disagree with anything I've said or just want to add anything.