The government can work to provide the medication that its citizens require to stay alive. Under such a system, those who are able and willing to work can, via taxes or other contributions, provide medications that some citizens require to stay alive. Many such systems seem to cost less overall than the system currently existing in the United States, so the average man who will work will have to work fewer hours to pay for an average dose of average quality anything required to stay alive.
Alternatively or in tandem, the pharmaceutical companies can sell such medications at cost, with rebates and coupons for no/low-income patients, while still making plenty of profit on reasonably priced pharmaceuticals that patients do not technically require to survive.
https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(19)...
That does not seem likely to result in a stable and productive society, particularly when many working people would have below average housing in order that government beneficiaries could have average housing provided to them.
Yes, I believe people should have food and water sufficient for survival regardless of their ability to work.
That doesn’t seem like it will have broadly popular support.
This is certainly possible because it already happens now with the current setup.
> U.S. manufacturer gross prices per 100 international units of insulin were on average 9.71 times those in OECD comparison countries combined.
It is 10 times more expensive in USA.