The problem is that insane statement was true. The bill is laced with so many "To be determined by the sectary of..." that we really did not know what was in it.

Now we have over 100,000 pages of legislation that finished off the 2,000 pages of the bill. We have regulators that have been authorized by congress to change that 100,000 pages, or add to it at any time. No law need be passed.

They wish to target white gun owners that are also have a belief in god because these three things could make them a terrorist. All they need to is add some regulation and they can do based on the health care system.

That statement was true, and while insane it should have scared the hell out of anyone supporting this bill to realize it was true. It should have stopped the bill cold.

Good move!

About a year ago, my newly minted adult grandson and I went to dinner and a show. He insisted on paying. I didn't protest because I could sense the pride he had in doing so. A milestone!

I assume that you are excluding intrinsic....

Actually, one of my college profs told us that the main role of the government, was to produce jobs.

The government provides nothing, produces nothing

Hey, CG, so where have you ever found a "free" vaccine? Or free anything?

When I heard Rand speak at FHF in 1973, her last line of the evening summed up my future teaching philosophy: "Never begin to doubt the value of your own intelligence!"

Thanks so much Herb. I'm sure there were many. I had several back in the Iron Age.

Why weren't there teachers like you when I was in school back in the Bronze Age.

This story is not so unusual. As a former educator, students tell me frequently of having to settle. They may not be as brilliant as your grandchildren (not just my opinion) but they're subject to the same injustice under Obama's "pyramid of disability."

You are correct, just like in England there will be a small number of people that can still afford real health care, the rest will be left with the government version, that is precisely what I described with some dramatic flare.

I get that. :)

Are you asking a question about that? Sorry I'm slow to get it. Once I understand what you're asking I'll probably have an annoying long post. :)

"Your irrational reverence for "helping" is not only silly,"
My comments are in no way related to my reverence for helping.

I'm saying it _sounds_ (in this forum lending itself to simplified msgs) like your comment about stealing only relates to helping people: If we could save a life by jailing someone, that wouldn't be stealing. If we do it by giving out a free vaccine, it is.

My view is it's only stealing if it's done to provide an excludable good or service.

I agree this is a complicated subject for this format. I will provide more detail about why helpful things are not necessarily stealing, even if on the surface they look like forced alms.

I'm ignoring the ad hominem stuff.

THAT is why I said it's a damn shame that WE'RE going to get what HE deserves.

Maybe it can be arranged to only hand out cg's money since he supports that. I would support that.

Yes, so do I. And single payer wins out. Trapped.

My questions were not rhetorical, but I know you know the answers.
To quote you directly [from 3hrs,50 min ago}: "The gov't could just hand money to the poor to insure against illness, something I would generally support"