Were you born in the U.S.? If so, you probably were insured as a child via Medicaid or a SCHIP plan.
Medicaid covers all persons below the poverty line in exactly zero states. In some states, Medicaid isn't really funded despite the availability of matching federal funds. Medicaid's low reimbursement prompts many providers not to accept it. This is largely beause Medicaid is for the poor. They might actually fund it if everybody had to use it, and then they could get cooperation from the middle class.
SCHIP was created in 1997, but the number of uninsured children continues to rise. 2/3 of newly uninsured children were in families less than 200% of the poverty line.
http://www.vimo.com/reports/uninsured.pdf
Bush vetoed expanding the funding of SCHIP twice. Though I don't think it was the ideal solution, I'm glad they passed SCHIP. That year was one of the few years the number of uninsured did not increase much, but it remains underfunded and is the wrong approach. Caste-based health systems won't work, least of all in a representative democracy where it is considered shameful to be poor.
While we're on the subject, which amendment authorizes the government to require citizens to purchase insurance?
Necessary and proper clause + commerce clause, unless you're a strict constructionist. Healthcare expenses are 2.2 trillion per year and eats up 16% of our GDP: A threat to economic security.
Clearly you have never served uninsured or underinsured people.
Get off your pedestal. And make sure karma doesnt hit you in the ass on the way out (especially if your ass is as big as your head)
We shouldn't put as much stock into anecdotes as he does, because he's wrong to do so. I have worked with the poor and I don't see them whip out expensive blackberries either, but maybe he has. But neither his nor my experience matters because we can't determine what is usually the case based upon our personal experiences. That takes statistics.
"Cost of a bowl of soup at homeless shelter $0.00 dollars
Having Michelle Obama serve your soup $0.00 dollars
A homeless person who is receiving government funded meals while taking a picture of the first lady using his $500 Black Berry cell phone... Priceless"
Some people prioritize different things. I've seen people with nice sports cars who live in trailer parks. People with nice houses who drive crappy cars. People with expensive cell phones who don't have cars. Some people who don't have much would like to have just one nice thing, instead of 3 mediocre things. It happens in a consumption-worshipping society.
It's hard to infer much about a person's income based upon a 500 dollar item because 500 dollars isn't very much money unless they're spending proportionally on their car/house/etc. Maybe they had enough money to buy a 500 dollar item last year but lost their job and are eating through their money faster than they can find a new job. One might be able to make the case that welfare programs should not dispense cash, but food stamps for nutritious food, utility subsidies, and things like that, though. And maybe make people work for it to the greatest extent possible while they can't find a regular job.
You might say that people who do not prioritize their health deserve to die early. While I do disagree with that, the point is that what we want is to reduce costs for the wider society. If we let them be irresponsible by being uninsured, it will affect the rest of us when they declare bankruptcy from ER/inpatient visits. We can introduce incentives to reward responsible and irresponsible behavior, without the supreme lack of pragmatism that is found in letting people continue to go without coverage. For example we could cover more cost-effective things at a higher rate, and things that were preventable given different behaviors at a lower rate. We should also tax unhealthy foods to hold people accountable for that.
Wow 4 years!?!?
Exactly how many hours a week? 2? Please, you're the one on the pedestal. No one gives a s*** about your volunteer work, and it certainly doesn't give you the right to talk like you know more than medical students.
This med student worship is just disgusting. They aren't all geniuses and they don't all know a lot about healthcare policy or society. Maybe I'd yield to them when it comes to anatomy or pathology, but even then they're not infallible. Volunteer work is more relevant than pre-med versus med student status for this issue.
And because they're not rich?
or because they're not getting screwed by 22% overhead (2% in Taiwan, 5-10% in pluralistic systems like Germany and Switzerland), and massive malpractice costs. Other than America, the richest nations do have universal coverage, though not always by single payer. If anything, America's dominance is diminishing because of our poor management of healthcare.