Wealthy people can afford better healthcare. That is a truism. No matter where you are in the world that is so. My question is for people who support universal/government health care ... is there a limit for you in what you would make available to everybody. There are always going to be expensive procedures which wealthy people can afford but which poorer people don't have access to, right? If wealthy people can afford it, do you think the populace should be taxed until we've all somehow given enough so that everyone can have it? I guess I'm in favor of "death panels" so-to-speak. (That was very unfortunate language which my side chose to use about something which I think would have to exist.) There has to be an upper limit on the level of care which is considered universal. There are all sorts of exotic and expensive treatments which could be available but we just can't afford to do it for everyone. I know this is an old conversation for most of you. I haven't really given much thought to universal healthcare. I've basically been against it on general small-government and "we can't afford everything" principles since the 1980's. My mother died of complications to a liver transplant and it was all so very expensive that for myself I thought I would choose no transplant if it ever came to that for me. But as I get older ... and as my husband gets older ... I view some things differently. So ... if you are generally inclined toward some sort of universal / government health care, I'd like to know what it means to you. How great of care you think should be universal and what your sense of the limitations are. So please humor me. If this subject is boring to you, pass by it. If you have something worthwhile to add, I'd appreciate it.