Discussion for article #230661
Why always leave this on an emotional vs cost basis? Why not cut to the chase that most lawmakers and business people focus on the most–costs and benefits, especially over time–an environmental impact study, if you will? It’s been shown over and over again, for example, that providing the homeless with homes winds up reducing costs to the state/local budgets by huge amounts, such as one I recall that reduced costs from about $30K to $10K per homeless person.
IMO the same would almost certainly be true for health care situations. Not only would health care needs be taken care of earlier at lower costs, but providers would be paid instead of having to operate on emergency/charity budgets. I suggest that crime and policing, homelessness, child delinquency, school dropouts and many other measures would be reduced as well, but I know of no studies in this regard. Not to mention the increase in taxes paid by those who can continue to work because they are in decent health. Well people don’t transmit diseases either, to all those non-“illegals”.
Where are all these measures? We all benefit from such improvements, even if a particular person in one’s view might not “deserve” what they are given.
You are on the right track and it seems very obvious to me as well. There are surely many positives and not just negatives. One of them being, the people are there using the services anyways except in the least financially wise method possible.