Sigh. I do not understand why we must explain the reasons why free market advocates are not fans of socialism over, and over, and over, and over, and over again to the lefties. Luckily, I am a patient, patient woman and I will indulge you (and you know who you are) by trying to explain it yet again. I will begin by discussing the universal healthcare myth.
Healthcare is not a right for which the government is responsible to provide. Period. If you disagree, then you move to a country whose government provides it. Beyond it not being a right, there are pragmatic reasons why government should NEVER be responsible for healthcare. Two reasons that immediately make themselves clear are the decreases in quality and quantity of healthcare that occur when guv'mint takes over. When I say quality, I mean the standard of care drops significantly. Just ask all of the Canadians and Europeans who come to the US for care. When I say quantity, I am referring to the rationing of care. The only way for a government to control healthcare costs is to lay out a set of rules that determine whether or not your treatment is "cost-effective" to society as a whole. If your treatment is not cost-effective, too bad, uhh buh-bye. Gosh, that sounds like a pleasant society to live in! Can't wait 'til my parents are considered too old to get some drug or treatment so they are left to die. Oh wait! I'm being hasty. The government will provide them with assisted suicide options so that they will not be a slow drain on society. Whew. At least now we won't be putting "the biggest and oldest democracy on earth" to shame.
If you care so much about non-insured people, here's an idea for you: why don't you start a charity whose sole mission it is is to subsidize the cost of health insurance for the poor. People could apply for some sort of voucher, based on their income level, in order to help pay for insurance. Or perhaps one family could sponsor another family - voluntarily - in the form of helping them to purchase health insurance. God forbid something like this be done outside of the halls of government. You know what, maybe it won't be free, but maybe it shouldn't be free. Did you ever think about that? It is a healthy thing to be held accountable and responsible for your own health. If you are invested in it, by having to pay for part of your care, why you might just take better care of yourself. It is called an incentive. If a person has no responsibility for his or her healthcare because the government pays for everything, then there is little incentive for that person to behave responsibly in regards to his or her health.
Additionally, with this kind of model, there is no confiscation of other people's money. It is a voluntary gift, from one human being to another. You are not committing a real injustice to cure an imaginary one. Again, it is immoral to take one person's money and dole it out at say, YOUR discretion. I-M-M-O-R-A-L. Say it with me, immoral. Maybe citizens would love to donate to something like this, but so far, the unimaginative left (and I admit, the leaders on the right haven't been too creative either) can only come up with more government, more government, more government. But let's keep on using the same tired models of more bureaucrats and a longer gauntlet for the tax dollars to move through so that at the end a few drops get squeezed out. That sure sounds like progress... or change... or something catchy.
And before you say something snotty like, "We Western Europeans..." implying that I'm some dolt who thinks Hamburg is a new meal at McDonald's, allow me inject some info here. I have lived and worked in Ireland for an extended period of time. I have lived and worked in Australia for an extended period of time. I have lived and worked in New Zealand for an extended period of time. I lived and worked in England, while attending the University of Oxford for a year. Soooooo I kind of know what I'm talking about. And while I'm at it, "We Americans..." are the most prosperous, successful, affluent people in the world, across the board, from top to bottom, because we base our society upon the Rule of Law and the Free Market; and we place Individual Liberty above the much vaunted but inadequate potential of "the collective." Also, your healthcare sucks in Western Europe. If you love it, you can keep it. I'd rather pay out of my own pocket (as I do now) for quality healthcare. You know, like the kind that allows me and every other woman to get a Pap smear anually to check for abnormalities like precancerous cells, unlike the healthcare in England that only allows women to go every three years, and it's like a 15 second exam there, a.k.a. completely inadequate.
PLUS - we have low income healthcare as it is, right now. All those millions of people are probably eligible for some sort of healthcare, but many of them choose not to sign up. You have to pay a little sometimes, but gosh, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT? Not that a lot of those programs are even good programs, but there are already community health programs and discounted rates for people with little income. It is a sad, sad day when you become a slave to your government for a little bit of love here and there.
Remember, with rights come responsibilities. If citizens do not have responsibilities, they have no rights.
I will deal with the rest of your comment tomorrow. I need some time to choose my words carefully... After all, I wouldn't want to lose my credibility...