Ideally I would like to prevent people from losing money on their retirement accounts due to market forces. I also would want a way to prevent people from going bankrupt due to an extended illness. And I wish I could get rid of "career politicians". They should be servants of the people for a short time not their whole life.

I would enforce a law that the tax is equal to the price of one pack of cigarettes -- Pack cost $5.50 -- the tax is $5.50 of which now cost all smokers $11.00 to smoke a pack of cigarettes.

Does the government have to pay for surgery for a 3-year old who was hit by a car, and although the child will "live" because of the surgery, it will be life in a persistent vegetative state forever due to loss of brain function?

Does the government have to pay for surgery for Grandma, who is 92 years old and just had her 7th stroke, leaving her a drooling mess but alive physically?

This type of thing sounds great until one runs into a case where the surgery makes no sense from any standpoint other than making the family feel better that they didn't allow their loved one to die without "doing everything possible", even though it is, in actuality, a cruelty to prolong that "life", or the semblance of it.

Beyond that, even if the life is saved, who will pay for the ongoing costs of care? If the child in my first question lives to be 50, who is responsible for providing the machines, caregivers, medical procedures, and other services that will be necessary to keep that person "alive" in that state? Is that also on the government's dime?

Look, I'm very sensitive to this, because my grandmother, who had advanced Alzheimers, was kept alive by a pointless surgery that my father requested, as he had medical power of attorney for her as her only child. It was an absolutely unnecessary procedure that prolonged her existence for 3 additional years during which she drooled on herself, babbled incoherently, and withered away to nothing physically, all because he was too selfish just to say goodbye to his mother; she wasn't allowed to die on his watch, but what he did was far more inhumane.

Preserving all life is a wonderful concept, but sometimes, the more kind thing to do is just let the person go.

I'd annexe the Sudetenland....

Oh, wait; that's what I'd do if I were Hitler.

Remember folks, the President doesn't pass legislation; Congress does. The President signs it into law or vetoes and is then tasked with enforcing newly passed laws. When it comes to legislation, the president can propose it and lobby Congress to pass it (or strong arm them, if he has the clout to do so); but, he can't force it.

For me, I'd flat out push for Universal Healthcare and College Education. This country's greatest period of economic growth coincided with the greatest access to a college education, thanks to the GI Bill. Suddenly, thousands of veterans had access to a higher education that had been denied to them by socio-economic status. Meanwhile, health care costs are one of the biggest drains on individual incomes. Free that money for other things and you have a vital economy.

That's all well and good and the person who came closest to achieving that kind of sweeping change was Roosevelt; but, it took four terms to do it and he still had goals that died with him. Good luck getting that with two terms.

I would also push for term limits on Congress: two terms for a Senator and a maximum of 4-5 for a Representative.

I'd also push for legislation that sets the rights of voting citizens above corporations. The Supreme Court ruling that corporations have the same rights as individual citizens has done much to cede them complete control of the lives of the citizens of this country.

I'd also like a pony.

I dunno what I'd do, but it'd probably look something like this...

This will greatly increase election turnouts and this is not a bad idea! ... 

I’m with you on whether it’s appropriate to save people only to condemn them to mere survival bereft of dignity or joy, but the moral aspect of the matter is independent on whether the state is there to foot the bills or not.

Personally I am very happy that the government is covering the huge medical bills that my mother is currently incurring, despite her advanced age. I am also very grateful that the same deal goes for every citizen. The higher tax rate I have to endure seems to me a fair price to pay in exchange!



Yes, absolutely. We must care for one another. (1)



I fully agree. In many cases, more medical intervention is the wrong way to go.



A hard choice, but I fully agree with that!



(1) I mean as taxpayers and citizens. You are one of the most caring individuals I know, so I’m not giving any lesson, here!