As Americans, we have the freedom to be who we want to be and live our dreams to their fullest potential. Our freedom comes in many ways, such as speech, marriage, religion, sports and the lifestyles we have the right to enjoy, but most importantly, our health. The level of economic freedom varies from country to country. Economic freedom is the main point where Americans get more opportunities in life because people have a better quality of lifestyle. It is one of the most important factors of any country's economic performance. Is the philosophy of healthcare about who deserves it or is it a fundamental right of all people? It also includes the costs of treatment, drugs and hospital stays. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay To begin the essay, every human being has some kind of purpose; regardless of whether they are right or wrong, it is based on a general point. For lay people, respect for these general points is considered an essential condition for a dignified life. What we consider an existence worth living depends on our thoughts about our tendency and the states of its satisfaction. They are the qualities and values ​​by which we live. This event can connect to external factors such as health/wellbeing, material success and economic well-being. The United States is the leading country to experience a continued loss of economic freedom recently, and the reasons are clear. A notable development in the size and scope of government under the Obama administration, including through new regulations in areas such as health care and finance, has affected the economy, impacting virtually every American here, diminishing openings for generation and non-administrative businesses. The development of government has been accompanied by growing clientelism which has undermined the standard of law and the impression of reasonableness. Economic freedom is based on the fact that there is a solid positive connection between financial opportunity and normal real per capita income and freedom. The American opportunity is extraordinary. Nowhere has the freedom of ordinary residents been more important, progressively secure and increasingly assured. Admirers of our freedom and opportunity have respected all aspects of it, from our religious security, to the freedom of our free races, from our right to speak freely to our impartial legal framework, to our ability to choose our private affiliations and rights of heaven. the limit from there. One of the most compelling aspects of our freedom, of course, is America's high level of economic opportunity and the burgeoning riches that flow from it. The American view is the right to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. . We weren't born with the right to take a trip to Orlando or eat at Cheesecake. We have specific rights. Healthcare in today's society is scientific, complex and a service; so can anyone be born with the right to this? According to American law, you reserve an option for health care on the off chance that you can pay for it or if you can earn it through your activity and effort. Some individuals cannot handle the cost of medical care in the United States. Be that as it may, they are basically a small minority in a free or even seedless nation. The fundamental unpredictability of Plato's hypothesis of forms as first connected in the Phaedo is barely perceptible, because the Phaedo initially proposes that memory is close to understandingof ideas: the idea of ​​“fairness defined in size,” for example, is stimulated by the vision of sticks and stones that appear practically equivalent (74a–e). Not only that, the equivalent is suggested by the overview with which Socrates initially presents the Forms, 65d–e: 'Do we say that there is such an incredible wonder as the Just One himself? or not? Furthermore, the Beautiful and the Good? I think this speaks to health and strength, and in a word to the truth of everything else, what both of them ultimately are.' Such an intrigue of memory leaves much to be desired. Likewise Plato considers the way in which the learning of their temperament, which cannot be obtained only by the acumen of the senses, as a satisfactory proof of the presence of the different structures, since he demonstrates it by virtue of sticks and stones from the proportionate appearance. it is promised in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence states that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” In which job today would health care not be guaranteed in the context of life and the pursuit of happiness? I have loved ones who, thanks to early cancer recognition or medications, quickly live long and extraordinary lives. Without healthcare and insurance, their lives would soon end. If healthcare is simply for the rich and powerful, then we must not be equal. But if the poor and a normal man are denied medicinal services (healthcare), at that point they are denied the right to life and happiness. So every American has good quality health care as a fundamental right, not a privilege? It is not difficult to understand the sincere enthusiasm with which such a large number of people approach the issue of the healthcare system. It would take a surprisingly cold heart not to care about the urgency of people who need care but can't handle the cost. In any case, rights do not arise from energy or need. Needing something does not qualify you to get it, not if another person has to give or produce that something. The rights described in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are negative rights in that they guarantee our self-sufficiency, allowing us to live sweetly and seek satisfaction and happiness, without forcing others or being bound by them. For me, the greatest risk from The Future of this imaginative and logical country, the United States, is our inability, thus far, to respond adequately to the breach of protection brought to us by innovation. It's not simply about the NSA and its breaches, or the numerous trackers, signals, and exposure engines that exploit our means through the Internet to make money, or the malefactors with their malware, or our own lack of judgment in archiving everything we do. on Facebook. These are largely parts of a gigantic problem. Innovation has given us the strength, and has given us valid justifications, to insert more and more parts of our lives into the computerized world such as friendships, medical treatments, bank statements, phone calls, the places we are in, are on the web. Furthermore, gradually, the private and peculiar well of our vitality and innovativeness begins to dry up. In today's society the government oversees almost every single aspect of our lives and it seems like there is a law for every little thing that controls what we do as Americans. This doesn't apply to everyone who is a genuine extrovert and a genius kid who thrives unprotected. Most Americans arecautious and need to conciliate others. This is beyond the realm of imagination. America's freedom and opportunity are limited by their resilience to everything. From bathroom laws to abortion to free healthcare for all, the expense of every case is thrown away. America is focused on the present, rather than the long term, taking a look at ordinary American debts. Another risk is the government; I think one of the greatest dangers to American freedom and opportunity is government. In Exercise 24 we learned about two dangers to our freedom and opportunity, moral relativism and soft despotism. Both of these ideas have run the government and, in the long term, have led to lost opportunities. In moral relativism there is a slide of the legislative body towards tyranny which leads to the loss of opportunities. In soft despotism the general population voluntarily goes to parliament together to obtain satisfaction, ultimately leading to the loss of opportunities. I think as Americans today we are accidentally heading towards a soft despotism. Since it was established, the United States government has become progressively more entrenched and given more power over the population than its creators expected. For example, many administrative occupations that are permitted government oversight often ignore their jurisdiction. The government is supposed to secure and protect its population, but in previous years it has neglected to address the problems of the general population who needed additional protection. Numerous shootings and acts of violence have occurred throughout the United States in recent years. The government's wastefulness in making laws to improve these issues has made it an incredible risk to our freedom. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were created to protect the general population and their rights from the government. I think parliament has done more harm than good and perhaps looks to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in case anyone has damaged them. Rather, they should use the archives to improve the way our administration is monitored by uncovering areas of weakness. The government should just focus more on the wishes of the general population. Rousseau's theory believed that healthcare made the issue very clear: pitting the free market against socialized medicine, which did not help Americans discover understanding. In its most fundamental dimension, the discussion about health services is about how to make care progressively impartial by making it open and reasonable to a greater number of individuals, for example by requiring individuals to purchase protection, while safeguarding individual opportunity and decision individual. Balance and opportunity are challenged in health care as in many other areas, for example welfare, the lowest pay allowed by law, social security, firearms control, the right to speak freely and issues religious. Will healthcare drive rationing of medical care? Evans says it will and argues that Americans should look for the phrases “quality of life” and “quality-adjusted life years,” which mean there is a life that is not worth living. Evans also agreed with Sarah Palin's statement that the bill would create death panels. He stated, "If your life depends on a decision by one of these panels of experts that President Obama talked about a few months ago, and they deny you care, then that's a death panel and that's what we have to deal with." . This is it'.