If you're not inclined to get into the presidential campaign fray in the post below, here's another chance for you to work on your class participation grade for the 4th nine weeks. First, read the New York Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/us/23health.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Then consider the following questions:
Is it the responsibility of the government to try to close the life expectancy gap between rich and poor? Why or why not?
What might be some results if this gap continues to widen?
6 comments:
Bonjour, Mrs. Stotler! I think that the government can never close the bridge gap between the rich and the poor. There will always be some type of gap between them, and life expectancy seems to be focused on health care and medicards and the such. There are plans out there for people, I know because I think I'm on one, I'm not for sure, all I know is that I only have to pay a certain amount during a visit. But I think it should be based on how people live, not about health care. A rich person can be just as sick as a poor person. Poor people should be able to live just as long as them, but ...wait..I might have forgotten my point..if I have tell me tomorrow so I can fix it...but I think it's up to the public themselves to handle it, not the government. It would be nice, but we all know the gov isn't going to do that.
~Embassador
The government needs to get involved now with health care. It is one thing to close the gap but we have several americans with out health coverage. The government is to busy worring about steriods in baseball than providing all americans with some type of health coverage. With the price of doctor visits the poorer class people can not efford health care they are willing to let there health go and say they will fix it later when they know they later will never come. Rich or poor should not have anything to do with health and we need to do something now about the coverage so all people are being taken care of equally. Bubby
People will never be treated equally, that can bring up a whole nother debate itself. But I do agree that the goverment is worried about the smaller conserns than the larger ones. And Bonjour, Bubby.
~H.B
Interesting...Heather, why do you think the government isn't going to do anything about healthcare for poor people? In many countries, the government provides healthcare to all its citizens free of charge. And in our own country, it's one of the hot topics being discussed by all of the presidential candidates.
Also, Bubby, great point about the government worrying more about steroids in baseball than the health of its citizens. Sounds like you think they should get their priorities straight!
I don't think they will do much because the minority will always be left out. They might say that they are doing something for it, but all in all, that little bit might not be enough. Like for low income people seeking up for the payment of bills, they might be just ninety dollars over or even a dollar over, and they won't help you pay for your bills when you aren't even working! If that makes sense...I could probably explain it better in person.
~H.B
In my opinion, the life expectancy gap can never be closed between the poor and the rich. I think having a socialized health care program would have more negative effects than positive ones. For one, if everyone received health care, taxes would be increased. Also, the health care each person received would be of lower quality because the doctors' offices would be filled with people.
-Katie Close
Post a Comment