Fair question Peter.

Here's the thing, and where we may differ: private charity is going to provide less and less of the needs of the truly needy, when government usurps the role of society looking out for its own, aka private charity. Surely you're not under the impression 'government is getting the job done'. Which we both know, it is not, despite trillions spent on the war on poverty since the 60's.

Other scriptural factors you haven't mentioned:

Of greater consequence to this discussion, Jesus pointed out, 'that if one would not work, they should not be provided food'. Clearly Jesus drew a line where charity should reasonably end. You live next door to Mass., do you suppose the SNAP(food stamps) and EBT(cash benefits) fraud going on there is isolated(20k+ lost EBT cards p/month). Surely you know people who modify their usefulness, so they may qualify for their benefits. People view these entitlements as free, money growing on governments tree, but mostly those benefits are borrowed moneys, which the next several generations will be paying interest on to the central banks. I could go on respective to the incentives encouraging non productive results.

The thing is sir, the psychological prompts(programs) in place in this society, do in fact, discourage personal responsibility. E.g., the society at large wouldn't need social security if people had been encouraged to provide for their retirement instead of for several decades receiving the message that social security was a retirement program(it's in the old literature). My point being, if we step back and look at all the Fed programs, the underlying message is one needn't take personal responsibility for their actions because the state is there to pick up the pieces. AND, in my opinion, one of the intended consequences was that people would modify their productive behavior in order to qualify for their freebies; which has been a grand success.

As to the health care for all. America already has that. You can be in this country illegally and walk into an emergency room. [ that is not true of dental care, nor according to NPR this morning, will that be true in PA any longer: just cleanings and extractions from now on. ] But more to the point, there was a time in this nation when the Hippocratic Oath was widely practiced; meaning most doctors regular gave free treatment to the needy; it was part of their regular schedule. Government, the Federali's in particular, undermined that.

Now, I don't believe the US was founded as a Christian nation, BUT!, it's underpinnings via the colonies that settled this land(I have Indian ancestors, this discussion isn't about that issue) were scripturally infused. That infusion carried over. Which leads me to this point: one can either have a cultural whose underpinnings include Christian scriptural norms such as: tolerance, the treatment of women as more than chatel, the expectation of literacy, respect for rule of law and charity as pillars of good citizenship or one can have whatever it is we've become and are becoming; which I guarantee any and all, will be far less humane.

It depends which Christ you're talking about Peter. There are two Anointed Ones in scripture, and they don't have the same standards, nor goals. But on the assumption you're talking about the only begotten, I seriously doubt he would approve of universal health care, not what we're going to get anyhow. Jesus has more respect for his creation than to provide them a eugenics plan.

Another problem here Peter is unrealistic hopefulness, that this plan is going to be as good as we would make it; which is utterly ridiculous because we're talking about government, liars who regularly promise -apart from war- far more than they could ever hope to provide.

As someone once stated: Socialism is great, until you run out of other peoples money.

All the best....

peaceably,