Han wrote:
Mark & Juanita wrote in news:rOCdnfBjI7-
:
To use this kind of trick to attempt to take over 1/6 of the US economy
is nothing short of stalinist and dictatorial.
You and I are paying for the indigent medical care now already. Better to
get some rules that will prevent personal bankruptcy and/or death and
exhibit some compassion for the less fortunate than this idea of everyone
for themselves AND let the other guy rot.
... granting for the moment, the 30 Million people uninsured number (it's
not correct as it includes illegals and those who, by choice, are
uninsured), how on earth does finding insurance for less than 10% of the US
population justify nationalizing 1/6 of the economy, destroying a system
with which most people are satisfied, and setting us on a road to inferior,
rationed, health care as the program spending spirals out of control? Why
does it take a 3000 page bill to insure 30 million people? This bill is not
about health care, it is about complete, absolute control over peoples'
lives. This is a bill that has "effectiveness panels" -- i.e., it's going
to have people like those at the department of motor vehicles deciding what
treatments are effective and affordable, and when you should "just take the
pain pill". There are things in this bill that have nothing to do with
health care -- at one time it was going to regulate food vending machines
(don't know if that is still there or not).
There ought to be a better way than democracy ...
We don't have a democracy, we have a representative republic. However,
that statement above is still truly frightening. i.e., you are willing to
surrender your personal freedoms to someone who claims to know better than
you what is in your best interests. You are free to feel that way, but if
you do, go find a country that is governed that way and live there, don't
try to force that enslavement on the rest of us.
--
There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage
Rob Leatham