[everfree]

The other reply to my comment proves that my question wasn't a provocation, but a successful intuition of some people's beliefs in this thread.

Further, the US' lack of universal healthcare shows that it's a societally acceptable stance to not give aid to ill people just because they are ill. I'm not trying to provoke anyone, I'm trying to clarify their belief within a set of beliefs that are socially acceptable.

[monktastic1]

The other reply mentions that cash is not a good way to help such people, not that they shouldn't be helped. Are you sure you're not reading things into people's replies?

[everfree]

A politically tenable portion of the USA seems to be of the opinion that tax funds should not be used to help ill people just because they are ill, cash or not. This is not an extreme political opinion, nor something that is unreasonable to ask someone whether they believe.

[monktastic1]

I'm asking specifically about the "other reply" you mentioned.

[ryuhhnn]

> This is not an extreme political opinion, nor something that is unreasonable to ask someone whether they believe.

Why are you asking if this is something they believe if by your own admission it’s a position that is widely held? Again, how is your question not a provocation? And why am I still entertaining it?

[everfree]

The opposite belief is also held relatively widely.