it should provide food and housing for those people who can not get either
Agreed. That's very different from paying the large majority of everyone's food and housing costs, which is what the left wants to do with health care.
Every other industrialized country has national healthcare of one form or another, and they all beat the crap out of us on cost while competing on quality. This isn't a theory, this is a fact.
No matter how many times you yell "socialism", that will still be true. The only question is how much money we waste before we finally switch over.
Health and food are two different things. He said he pays $12,000 a year for health cover. There are people there who get $12,000 a year to live on. They can afford food quite fine, but if they get some health problem they would be in deep trouble. Life and death sort of trouble, which you hardly get with food in the west anyway. You only need a dollar to survive at the bare minimum.
So food is not a problem. Nor is housing or transport. The latter are very different from health. You can afford very much not to travel. Walk instead. So too you can afford to not have your own house for a month but live at a friends house. Besides, the vast majority would not want to be provided a free house if they can afford it finely.
But with health there is a matter of principle also. The same principle that each life is precious applies to it. A person should not be free to die because of money in such a rich and prosperous country. Also, there should not be a two tire system whereby the rich can afford first class health care and the poor just enough to get on with plenty of annoyances or worse die.
Agreed. That's very different from paying the large majority of everyone's food and housing costs, which is what the left wants to do with health care.