40 million people in America are uninsured. Meaning, when 40 million people get sick, they seriously contemplate a doctor's visit.
The argument against universal health care, also known as Socialized medicine, is that the government isn't in the business of keeping people healthy. Indeed, get socialized medicine and watch the waiting times go up and services go down. That seems patently obvious since adding 40 million people to a service would , in some ways, cause strain on the service.
Now for a second think about all the money being spent to 'protect America' through the war in Iraq. (This isn't a post about if only we'd spend the money here, instead of there, so stay with me.)
That money is being spent on protecting us. One can argue rightly of wrongly, but that's the crux of the Argument.
Now go back to the thought in the opening paragraph. What if one of the 40 million uninsured is hit with a biological weapon? What about bird flu? They show off symptoms, but due to the costs, they hold out, hoping that Chicken Noodle and lots of water will beat it. All the while, they are transmitters.
My point: Can you make an argument that, in these times, universal health care is actually something that can protect us?