I'd even, gasp, go so far as to say I'd happily give it away to citizens and illegal immigrants alike. Oh hell, everyone on the planet. No strings attached.

This is where my taxes should go. I can't stand the rhetoric that it's bad tax payers are footing the bill for those without insurance and those here illegally. That's what a society is supposed to do.

Imagine giving Palestinians insulin instead of bombs? Instead we give them both and wonder why they get mad about the free bombs without looking at the free insulin. I mean how ungrateful are they? Can they not say thank you?!

/s

As a right wing anti gov type, I agree wholeheartedly.

The funny thing is if memory serves right insulin once you get it going is exceptionally cheap to produce. Unironically the 11 bucks may very well be the gross cost of production and transport per batch, probably not wages though.

I'm not. It's a step in the right direction.

Canada too. My son has T1D. Never paid a cent for insulin even through my insurance.

Validating who earns too much or too little is a colossal task that leaves opportunities for people to lose access to food because they haven't logged in that month to report their earnings.

It also often costs more in bureaucracy, people and infrastructure than simply giving it to everyone.

It also causes social stigma as you are seen as poor for using a service.

If it's available to everyone, then none of these problems occur.

Rich people will typically self-opt out of these systems anyway, as they will want the better expensive version of the thing anyway.

For case studies where this works, see:

• Free school meals
• UK NHS

For places where the system doesn't work because of income cutoffs, see:

• UK benefits (working a little will cut you off, plunging you back into poverty
• Basically all welfare programs

Adding means testing to programs like this generally cost more money than it saves.

I like this. Ultimately there shouldn't be any rich people, but that's a step we can figure out later.

No, because that just opens the path for the ever expanding "except for them" for a very small portion of the population.

Make them pay full price, period.

Some people feel like if you can't provide society with your labor, you should still be fed, clothed, and housed.

Price floors and price ceilings reliably cause market failures like shortages and unemployment. If we're not willing to let people die without it, then we end up playing stupid games like "free emergency room only".

Economics is a social science and every proposal should be based on empirical results, not intuition.