Justice Part 3

Rawls idea that we would choose equal liberties and to be treated with respect by government of course assumes that we would choose to have a government. Remember, we are trying to envision what kind of society we would create if we did not know what our situation was...our talents, starting points, etc. I am going to bypass this point, but any anarchists out there might want to challenge this. It seems pretty obvious to me that we would want to have the essentials of any sort of decent life. If we were unlucky in health and could not work, we would want to have at least the basics covered by those luckier. The basics would at least include food and shelter. What if we were too poor to afford necessary medical care? That seems like an essential. Well, our government provides food stamps, housing assistance, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security disabilty benefits for those who are poor, old or unlucky. Another question is to what extent should we provide these services. With food, the answer is clearer. People need a certain caloric intake to be able to function. How about medical care? As a friend pointed out to me some time ago, we really haven't been addressing what is the basic level of medical care that should be provided. In fact, beginning to do so seems to leads to screaming from various people about rationing. I understand that it is rational for seniors to be worried about this issue, but we cannot afford to give everyone every treatment they want. But what about all reasonable and necessary treatment?