[Emproph]

Is the socializing of health care and medication morally and ethically just?

I chose number #2, within the context of #1

1) Yes - the welfare of all humans should be protected by all humans.

2) Yes - with certain restrictions, restraints, and understandings

As a matter of ethics, I think the welfare of all humans should be protected by those humans who are wealthiest and/or most capable of doing so.
--
I can support this about what you said:

I would be suitably enraged for any fraction of a penny I paid in taxes to be used to perform an abortion on then next generation's prom queens because of their football-playing boyfriend. …I also would be displeased to have to pay for a lung transplant for a person who has chain smoked all their life

I can understand the perspective that these lifestyle choices should be dealt with by those who brought them on themselves. But that list goes on and on and on, including complications of obesity, like diabetes and heartfailure, etc.

I have this question to pose to any and all members who read this post - is the socializing of medicine truly just and right?

My question is thus - do the personal lifestyle choices of any person fall under the jurisdiction of any government, and, should any form of aid or charity be taken by force and by law from those unwilling?

Are you against the governmental socialization of all things, if that person cannot afford it, or just when it comes to health care?

If it is just about health care, are you also against Medicare, veteran’s benefits, and the health care that members of Congress now enjoy?

Or are you against all governmental socialization, like mail delivery, garbage pick up, firefighting, police protection, etc.?

I hear no complaints coming from the right about those socialized services, which leads me to believe that the complaints about so called socialized medicine are disingenuous.

Have you considered the tangent benefits of “socialized” medicine? Fewer trips to the ER, which would benefit us all--cost wise.

The last time I ended up in the ER I was faced with a $1700 bill for a few tests in a scant several hour visit. Fortunately my HC provider paid for most of it, but I was still responsible for about $400.

I look at that part of it like I look at shoplifting, we all end up paying higher prices for the same goods.

And what about the PREVENTABLE 45 thousand deaths every year due to lack of health insurance, and the costs surrounding those deaths, as per loss of breadwinner, toll on businesses for work lost, bankruptcies, emotional toll--requiring further medical care, etc. How much of a toll do you think taxpayers have to pick up for all that?

Unfortunately that’s one monetary equation that I haven’t seen yet as far as taxpayer savings go.

Access to health care is a moral issue that is being politicized, which I consider to be immoral, given that lives and quality of life are at stake--as well as $billions of taxpayer money that is being wasted by not addressing these issues.

As Alecto said:

Originally Posted by Alecto

"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness". As far as I'm concerned, healthcare is covered under "life".

When quality of life, and lives themselves are disregarded for the sake of those of us who can afford insurance, we ALL pay the difference in one way or another.

If you are making the case that all taxpayer government services (mail delivery, garbage pick up, firefighting, police, Medicare, Social Security, Veteran‘s benefits, Congressional health care, Defense funding) should be done away with (at least for those who don't deserve it), then make it. I’ll disagree with it, but at least I can respect the consistency of your position.