I just think people need to step back and really contemplate the size and scope of this thing. The government will destroy health care. It will not look the way it does right now. Would that benefit some people? Sure. Would it screw over a bunch more? Definitely.
And if I can go back to the cost again for a second. Frankly, isn't there something un-American about asking me to pay for my 2-pack-of-smokes, 12-pack-of-beer-a-day neighbor? The one that brags about not seeing a doctor in 15 years? I refuse to feel obligated to "cover" health care for people who choose a different lifestyle. I don't think you should have to pay for it either.
I *do* think there needs to be affordable health care available for people. But *free* is not the same as *affordable* and either way I don't want the government involved, at all. I think that's where a lot of people go off the rails. Not to mention, before we go making the government pay for it - why don't we look at why it costs so much in the first place?
Ok so maybe that would be another (long) post by itself, so lets just consider this: People love to demonize the oil companies for all the money they make, right? (Most recent data I found was for 2006, when they achieved a profit of about 9 percent of sales.) But the drug companies?
...ranked far above all other American industries in average net return, whether as a percentage of sales (18.5 percent), of assets (16.3 percent), or of shareholders' equity (33.2 percent). These are astonishing margins. For comparison, the median net return for all other industries in the Fortune 500 was only 3.3 percent of sales. Commercial banking, itself no slouch as an aggressive industry with many friends in high places, was a distant second, at 13.5 percent of sales. Source: "The Fortune 500," Fortune, April 15, 2002, p. F26
Before we try asking the government to run our entire nation's health care, how about we see if they can fix this one facet of the problem to start with? Now that my friends, is something to ponder.