The editorial, "President Obama’s Budget: Progress on Health Care," is one written in favor of the progrees of President Obama's future plans for Medicare.
The editor makes an argument using facts about the reserved funds and spending of the government that is planned to be set: where the money will be saved in certain areas to be spent in other needed areas. The editor points out where the budget plans expect to receive half the money, that being from new taxes set on the wealthy, and where the budget plans plan to save money to spend elsewhere.
I find this argument one that is very covincing because it is logical. The editor brings up a valid arguement using facts that is stated in the budget plans. Are these plans rumored, or have they been set in motion? That I do not know, but I believe the editor uses these perceived facts resourcefully.
I agree with this argument because I beleive it is the best thing to do financially. To see where money is being spent too excessively so that it can be saved to spend in a more needed area (this area being medicare for those who can not afford it) is important. This argument is one that is significant because it is one that will effect many for their benefit. I believe that in America, where we are advanced in technology, no one should be denied healthcare because of the inability to pay for it. I believe that it is imperative for the government to step in and help support families that need the help. This should be one of the priorities and if there is a way to cut some expenses in areas to put in medicare, it should be done.

The Editorial, "President Obama’s Budget: Progress on Health Care"