Our country can afford to provide healthcare to all. This is not a constitutional entitlement, but it is a civil entitlement that exist in all nations that have the economic ability to provide such for their people.

==============================

1.  Your resource argument.  We are currently running a debt of  >16Tr.  We are running a deficit of around 1Tr (to grow soon to >1Tr) a year.  We don't have the resources.  We are mortgaging the futures of those yet born to attempt to live your fallacy.  If we lived within our means this ridiculous idea that you are entitled to the work, schooling, and training of another human being would be seen for what it is.

2.  Your "entitled" argument.  Again society and government are being mixed.  The voluntary and the forced are being mixed.  In a civil society, people who show up would probably be tended to . . . out of a shared sense of responsibility based on society.  Docs would volunteer their time, reagents and compassion.  As would all the facets of medical care.  All these interactions would be voluntary.  The cost of which would not be transferred whole hog to the backs of the larger society through the government.  There would be places that did this well and places that did not . . . probably based on socioeconomic situations in the area.

3.  Your argument is government enforced slavery.  If you are entitled to healthcare, then you are entitled to the training of the doctors and nurses.  You entitled to their time and energy.  No where is it written in any founding document that you are entitled to the time and energy of another person.  This is a destructive notion.  It is tantamount to servitude for those with specific talents and expertise that the government deems others need as an entitlement.

)

"We're borrowing 10% of GDP each year to get 1-2% growth. That isn't"
an improving economy. We're simply mortgaging the future.