It's not a policy that people shouldn't receive things they can't pay for. Very few in the US believe that the receipt of goods should be predicated solely on one's ability to counter with money for goods received.
The policy is that the government shouldn't be involved in private affairs and that while public encroachment in these spaces may make things cheaper in the short-term, everyone, except perhaps a very small portion, will be worse off as the intervention matures.
I don't necessarily agree that government should stay totally out of the matter at this point either, and I of course concede that it is a little off-kelter to have the same group screaming bloody murder when they think that they may go to a government-sponsored doctor but happy to submit to electronic strip-searches and groping at the airport, but I didn't want such a gross mischaracterization to slip by without challenge. There are many generous people in the United States and many who'll help you if you need it. The opposition is not hostility to the poor, merely a different conception of the proper place of government.
The policy is that the government shouldn't be involved in private affairs and that while public encroachment in these spaces may make things cheaper in the short-term, everyone, except perhaps a very small portion, will be worse off as the intervention matures.
I don't necessarily agree that government should stay totally out of the matter at this point either, and I of course concede that it is a little off-kelter to have the same group screaming bloody murder when they think that they may go to a government-sponsored doctor but happy to submit to electronic strip-searches and groping at the airport, but I didn't want such a gross mischaracterization to slip by without challenge. There are many generous people in the United States and many who'll help you if you need it. The opposition is not hostility to the poor, merely a different conception of the proper place of government.