Reba, Did your husband have insurance, get cancer and still lost the house? If so, that does need some tweaking.
If he didn't have insurance, got cancer, and lost house in getting treatment, that's justified. The freedom of choice.
Do you want the system to take-care of you, or you take care of yourself. Is I believe one of the basic arguments for/against government.
---
Statistics Canada(Can't find link) did a count once showing that the population of Canada would be 50 million today if it were not for citizens leaving. If anyone can find that reference, I wouldn't mind reading it over). Given the population today is about 30 million, it suggested just how many people prefer it elsewhere.
Back in the 1970's a Canadian could get off a plane in
Australia and as commonwealth basically never leave(paperwork etc of course but...). Today you need $750,000 for a retirement visa, or a Univ. degree + 3 years working experience(experience alone doesn't cut it). This translates into serious time and money just to be able to stay. This seems to be virtually identical in any other first world countries, having the effect of locking up the less wealthy in their originating countries(sure you can leave, but you can't stay anywhere).
But as to my original post, maybe I'm missing something, any suggestions for where someone english, white/blue-eyed, could go and live SAFELY in a climate for tropical animals we humans in-fact ARE?
articles.moneycentral.msn.com/News/StudyRevealsOverwhelmingWealthGap.aspx