The Problem with a "Moral Obligation" in Government and Economics

In the below video, Howard Dean argues that the reason liberal economic programs are mandatory are because people who opt out of these programs will need to be taken care of anyways when they fail because we have a "moral obligation" to do so.

Excuse me, but don't we have a personal obligation (and a moral one) to be responsible for ourselves?

Additionally, if people are so dependent upon Social Security and Medicare today, then how have these programs been successful? 

What Howard Dean seems to keep out of the "moral obligation" card is cost.  Is it worth bankrupting the country to provide everyone with health care (essentially a bankruptcy would not lead to health care for all)?

Liberals needs to pick up a book and study economics as a system, to the heart of which is scarcity.  If you try to ignore scarcity, you will either create inventory and/or price distortions.  Anyone who looks at the CBO's projections can tell that we've taken scarcity out of the retirement and healthcare services sectors for baby boomer retirees and thrown it square on the backs of the taxpayers.  When will we ever learn?