Is this not because these things are public goods while Universal healthcare is not, or maybe there is no such thing as public goods at all.
Yes, these things are public goods indeed. The protection of life and health of the citizens whether it's threatened by a mugger, volcano, axe murderer, hurricane, terrorist, foreign invader, tsunami, drunk driver, incompetent pilot or just about anything else is considered to be a public good in every civilized society and as such is generally managed by the government on a non-profit basis and without regard to income, tax status and/or availability of insurance. Somehow threats to life/health caused by medical conditions are excluded. So yes, you're right, Universal Healthcare is not considered to be a public good at this time, the whole point of this debate though is that it should be. PS thanks thunderdog.
If health care is a public good should it include people that take it up the ass? People that ride motorcycles? People that shoot up? Our public roads are off limits to bad drivers, no?????? Making health care a public good would be the biggest boon to dumb, irresponsible, and perverted people ever..... oh wait a minute, that's what Democrats are all about isn't it..... We had the motorcycle crowd activists all up in arms about helmets, but they were sure as hell going to use their health care benefits to the last penny when they crashed and got brain damage..... Health care a public good my ass, it's a privilege for those that can get it together.....
This whole discussion would be funny if it weren't so pathetic. There is no discrimination against the sick in the good ol usa currently. If you got the money, you can get what you want and there are no laws to stop you, provided you are trying to get them from a licensed medical professional. Contrast that to the socialist medical system that Hillary Clinton tried to introduce when she was co-president. There were something like 400+ "thou shalt nots" in her program followed by punishment of fine or imprisonment if you did. In other words, laws that say "unless you do it our way, you'd better not provide any medical service to that dying person. Now that's discrimination. And isn't it true that these same type of laws exist in Canada, although they are conveniently looking the other way and not prosecuting, precisely because if people actually followed these discriminatory laws people would roll over and die?
Its hard to fight a war against another nation alone, but fighting urself should be possible, I mean is it so difficult to just buy health insurance. Some do not think long term, or are gamblers. Subjective value of life have got to depend on if ur rich or poor, if u want to go from one place to another and are a gambler why should ur comparative advantage be stolen from u? It does not make sense for society to decide the risk/reward for a person they cannot know as well as the person himself. If society realy have any feelings for these people why not just help after the person have screwed up?
... and what if you don't have the money? Am I to conclude you don't give a sh!t about your fellow American brother or sister? Too often when I hear conservatives say "personal responsibility" they are code words for "hell no I'm not paying tax dollars to pay for someone else's problems." Someone said, I've forgotten who: "Modern American conservatism is the neverending search for a moral justification for selfishness in public policy."