There is NO SUCH THING as a "right to healthcare", and giving healthcare to people who can't afford it is an entirely different thing than giving medical insurance coverage to people that can't afford it. Providing healthcare to the poor is humanitarian work undertaken by numerous PRIVATE-SECTOR organizations throughout the world as a voluntary, donation-supported ministry of compassion. How many of these organizations do YOU give money to?
Medical insurance, on the other hand, is a retail product, like cable television, or a gym membership. In the world of grown-ups, retail products you can't afford to buy don't come home with you. If you can't handle the payments on that Escalade, you aren't going to be driving it home. If you can't pay first, last, and deposit on that apartment, you aren't moving in anytime soon.
"But," you say, "we work hard." Big deal! We all work hard. That isn't the standard by which eligibility for insurance gets judged. The standard is, "Can YOU pay for it?" If the answer's "No", it's not the government's responsibility to cut you a check to take up the slack.
Should I or my family not get adequate health care because I chose a profession that does not pay as much as others?
Yes. You and your family should NOT get adequate medical insurance until YOU choose to do something different, or something more, so that you then have the money needed to PAY for it. Until then, you'll do without.
Should my kids go with out dental care because I do construction and am not some kind of lawyer?
No. They should go without dental insurance because YOU -- perhaps selfishly, but maybe not -- choose to work in a profession that doesn't pay you enough to buy it for them.
Whats wrong with sharing the burden of health care so all Californians can be well?
What's wrong with sharing the burden of car payments so that everyone can drive a new 325i? What's wrong with THAT? What's wrong with "sharing the burden" of house payments so everyone can live in a 3 bedroom, 2 bath tract home? The same thing that's wrong with that is what's wrong with "sharing the burden" of medical insurance premiums.
Look, I'm sorry you've sold off your self-respect somewhere along the line; that's a real shame, but you can't legitimately get something for nothing by asking government to rip me off so they can buy it for you. That's what you're advocating, here, whether you've thought it through that far or not. THAT'S what it comes down to: government-sanctioned robbery. They take a whole wad of everyone's money, spread it in a thin layer over several thousand bureaucrats who buy new SLK430's with it, then they compensate medical staff for the mediocre care that they can barely afford to provide with what's left. At that point, the care you'd be getting almost isn't worth having.
So, let me get at least ONE thing straight here: this isn't Burger King; you CAN'T have it YOUR way. AND furthermore, even at Burger King, you can't have it YOUR way unless you've got the money in your pocket to pay for it. No money; no burger. Boo-frickin'-hoo.
If you didn't do enough studying in school to get the kind of job that pays enough for you to be able to afford medical insurance for your family -- sorry, you don't get any. Shop alternatives to standard insurance; co-op plans are far less and there are many. I ran with no insurance for a few years because I worked out of a job shop that didn't provide any benefits. Then I got bare-bones "catastrophic" insurance for awhile; low monthly premiums and a big deductible. I did what I could afford, but I never, never, never, never, never sold my self-respect downriver by implying -- much less EXPECTING -- that anyone else ought to be carrying my water for me.
If I couldn't afford it, I didn't get it.
But it isn't a legitimate function of government to take up my slack, or yours, or anyone else's and pay to get stuff for folks who can't pay for it themselves. That's an inexcusable abuse of money entrusted to the governement by the taxpayers for legitimate government functions.
A healthy society is a more productive society.
A society of individuals that pay less in taxes to their government can AFFORD BETTER HEALTHCARE on their own, AND that society's productivity b!+chsmacks the crap out of your hashish-induced dreamworld.
i am sure that will some how "drip down" to all the fat cat millionaires that oppose universal health care in the first place.
LOL!! Yeah, right. Fresh in from the planet Zarquon, eh? Wake up and smell the burning coffee! All but a paltry busload of your mythical "fat cat millionaires" are, in REALITY, everyday working-class stiffs trying as hard as you are to keep as much after-too-much-taxation income in their pockets as they can SO THEY CAN MAYBE PAY THEIR INSURANCE PREMIUMS. They're your neighbors; people you work with; the people you stand in line with at the grocery store; the guy driving next to you on the freeway in commute traffic. Who opposes universal healthcare? "We, The People," oppose it. THAT'S WHO!
Now, don't ask anymore stupid questions; I'm gettin' cantankerous.