[Final Authority]

Forget about 1965. That level of medical care was so inferior and so much cheaper than we enjoy today, not even the poorest would tolerate it.

We already have places for the poor and those who wish to freeload and remain dead beats. They are filled with criminal aliens and laborers and the "Y" generation and the aged. They are going broke and as they go broke it puts more pressure on the remaining hospitals. If there was a large enough source of charitable funds, your idea would hold water, but they aren't making enough Nuns anymore for the few Catholic hospitals that remain. Do you want nurses, doctors, and other staff to volunteer? Should the suppliers just be able to write off their shipments to the hospitals?

Since the cost of medical care is rising and is at historic levels of about 18% of GDP nationwide and about 22% in states like Massachusetts which is older and richer and has better than average health care facilities, eliminating even a tenth of our GDP for it to become volunteer work and charity to be able to assume the health treatment of millions of those who don't have it is a dream, as in, not real.

[Jim Noble]

eliminating even a tenth of our GDP for it to become volunteer work and charity to be able to assume the health treatment of millions of those who don't have it is a dream, as in, not real.

What is a dream, as in, not real, is that socialism will equalize health care provision for the wealthy and the poor.

It is no more likely to do so here than in any other economic sector, that is to say, not at all.