Many uninsured can afford health insurance but refuse to make it a priority.

Point 1: People Lie About Their Income I agree that some people lie about their income (i.e. off-the-books jobs); however, the number of people who engage in this type of dishonest behavior has gone unreported or unproven by Pro. And even if Pro had proven that this were the case, the number of people who do this for personal gain would have to be equivalent to 'many' ... i.e. at least 30 million out of the 47.5 million uninsured Americans. That's a lot of people. Further, most people who work off the books do so for jobs that do not make a lot of money in the first place. For instance, many bussers at diners or restaurants work off the books; however, these people only make a few dollars an hour. The same logic applies in other professions where this practice is common; for instance, babysitting gigs. Illegal immigrants are another group of people who tend to have jobs that are off the books, and again, do not make a lot of money in these types of positions. Therefore Pro's assessment that these people (36 million) are not really impoverished is faulty, at best. While some may get away with not paying taxes, they are still probably living well below the poverty line. 2. Poor People Receive Free Housing, Food, Etc. While this may be true for SOME people, the majority of people who are considered poor do not receive these 'luxuries.' One thing that really irks me is how people assume that they know everything about the welfare system when they are clearly misinformed. For instance, not every 'poor' person receives free housing or food stamps. They have to apply for that, and in many cases, they are denied (especially due to the lack of available housing). In reality, people who are on welfare... and let me be clear that these people must go through a significant amount of meetings with case managers and doctors who agree that this is the case... receive about $200 a month to live, which we all know is just about impossible. Further, even if some of these people ARE assisted regarding housing/rent/food, the amount of welfare that they receive is reduced accordingly, making Pro's statement a blatant untruth. 3. College Kids Are Considered Poor Maybe, but only if they are trying to receive financial aid by claiming that they are 'independent.' In most cases (a significant majority), students continue to be considered dependents of their parents and therefore this is irrelevant. They may only earn $10,000 a year in part-time jobs; however, they are HARDLY considered poor. 4. People Who Don't Have Health Insurance But Do Have Cars, Cell Phones, Etc. Are 'Wrong' I agree to some extent. In some instances, it is actually more cost effective to have a car than to rely on public transportation. However, I do agree that cell phones, Xboxes, the internet, etc. are all luxuries that should be put second to health insurance. The problem for this 'argument' is that Pro never provided any factual information to back this up -- he simply assumes that this is the case for "many" of those without insurance, which without evidence, is just a form of discrimination. Further, Pro's input regarding his personal experience is mute -- I can just as easily put in my 2 cents regarding personal encounters with people who are disciplined, hard working and even educated... yet cannot afford basic health insurance. This applies to a growing number of college graduates, for instance, who upon leaving the university are no longer eligible to receive healthcare under their parents' plans, but who struggle to find a job (even with several degrees). You'd be surprised for how many people this scenario is a reality. 5. "I believe the truly poor should receive help TEMORARILY, and only as long as they can demonstrate they are improving their situations..." Perhaps Pro should read another debate of mine regarding long term welfare. In that discussion, I have detailed the regimented case plans that welfare recipients have to endure if they would like to continue receiving government assistance. The fact of the matter is that the government wishes to drastically reduce the number of people who receive aid, so they have hired outside companies (i.e. FEGS, WeCARE, etc.) to try to weed people out of the system. Those who remain a part of it have been proven by doctors and case managers alike to be in dire need. For Pro to suggest otherwise is once again his biased opinion. Consider the fact that maybe he does not know all that he thinks he does regarding the lives of his supposed tenant leeches, hmm? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - My Points: It costs about $12,700 to insure a family of 4 per year. [http://www.nchc.org...] Again, 36 million people live on under $21,200 (family of 4...). For those people, health insurance would be 60% of their total income. That is frankly unfeasible when considering other unavoidable costs of living. Thus, even with 'luxuries' aside, health insurance is just not practical for these people. These truths aside, let us not forget the high costs of co-pays and other charges and fees for seeking medical attention. The "affordable" basic insurance that we have been discussing lacks an exorbitant amount of substance, to say the least. This type of 'care' applies only to preventative measures. That is, a regular check-up with a PCP may only cost someone $20; however, if that PCP detects the smallest inclination of a health problem, the chances are highly unlikely that basic insurance will substantially cover anything that needs significant medical attention. Likewise, a trip to the ER could cost thousands of dollars even if one is insured. Thus, many people feel that money put towards health care is essentially wasted -- they might be better off saving that money for a rainy day where they actually need service instead of just medical tests, or small, relatively affordable procedures. But back to the topic at hand, I am hardly a flaming liberal NOR do I consider health care to be a necessity, per se. However I do highly disagree with Pro's assessment that "those who truly cannot afford housing and food are the exception and not the rule." In fact this is an ignorant and unfortunately widespread assumption about welfare, poverty and those that it affects. Now I understand the resentment people feel when it comes to parting with their hard-earned money; however, simply because they have a problem with policy does not mean that it is OK to make up blatant lies to coinside with one's beliefs... or to disregard the necessity of assistance for those in need.