A speaker questions why government should run healthcare but not food, even though people need food immediately to survive while most go decades without hospital visits. He argues the logic doesn't hold up.
No one has ever answered my question. Doesn't mean there isn't. I would like to know what the answer is, but no one has ever answered my question that I posed for very many years. If the government should be the provider, the single provider of medical care, why shouldn't it be the single provider of food? Why is medical care more important that it be government doled than food? You can't live without food after a number of days. You— most people live without medical care for half a century. I mean, how many people go to a hospital in the first 50 years of their life?
Life, Legacy, and a Dangerous Mission in the Soviet Union | Sunday Fireside Chat
