2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

It is hard to see how "rich" and "poor" can be left out. I agree that there is no moral component to being rich or poor - but there is a moral component to behavior. Things are stacked heavily in favor of the wealthy. The possibilty of getting good health care and education beyond high school level decreases drastically as family income decreases.

In the past, we have prided ourselves as a nation as being a moral example to the rest of the world. How do we square that with the fact that despite our national wealth, we have one of the poorest health care delivery systems of the industrialized nations? How do we square that with the fact that people who do not have the good fortune to be born into wealthy familes find it next to impossible to get a college education?

We should be working to ensure that we are truely born with equal rights. Those rights include basic health care and education to the highest level that a person is intellectually capable of attaining. I also believe that ensuring these rights is the best way to ensure that our country remains a moral leader in the world, a leader in development of technology and one of the most prosperous nations in the world.

posted 3 years, 9 months ago
view in context

There is no more conflict between government administered single payer insurance and individual choice of care givers than there is in the current insurance system. I have health insurance through my employer and I find that not all doctors are approved by my insurance company. Does this constitute "dictating my choice of doctors"? It would be no different under single payer, government administered insurance.

posted 3 years, 9 months ago
view in context