Replies

We are talking about human beings here. People that can no longer take care of themselves. What is your solution? Do you side with the pro-death crowd who seek to do away with anyone they find not "worthy." You are so concerned about socialism and people spending your tax dollars, but you really don't give a damn about the defenseless or you wouldn't be making such a trivial argument. You didn't even bother to address the comment about introducing competition back into the health care community to drive down cost--no--you are more concerned about having to spend your money on someone you don't care about. It is clear which direction we are headed--and it isn't toward moral based care for the helpless.

And the author is right. Your arguments are utilitarian in nature. I find it depressing.

Just a thought: why is any old person in the USA financially "defenseless?" Any US senior citizen (leaving aside immigrants) has had at least 65 years in the land of opportunity to save up and invest for his or her old age. The vast majority of those senior citizens were able-bodied in their youth.

By any reasonable reckoning, 65 years is a long time for a non-handicapped person to “make it.” Refugees from other countries have “made it” in less time. Truly handicapped people have made it.

So, given that healthy-in-their youth US senior citizens have had a solid chance to prepare for their own old age, why subsidize the ones that fail? Why take money away from people who are presumably being productive, (or they wouldn’t have anything to tax in the first place) and redistribute it to people who had SIXTY FIVE YEARS WORTH OF CHANCES to make something of themselves (to the point that they could afford their own d**n health insurance), and failed?

Further, you may ask, what are the characteristics of those people who need all that healthcare anyway? Old age may come to us all, but expensive old age is largely the fate of a few. In fact, there is empirical research that indicates that from 50% to 75% of inpatient healthcare dollars spend in the US are spent on people who are drug abusers (including alcoholics and smokers) or obese, or both. Why spend money to keep old druggies alive? They made their own choices; why burden others with the consequences?

Any answers?