I would actually disagree with the statement that "No matter how feasible you think it is, quality health care for everyone is a fabulous idea." I could launch into a lengthy tirade[1] on this, but instead I'll just claim that this statement is pretty platitudinous and about as meaningful as any of the following statements: Quality food for everyone is a fabulous idea. Quality housing for everyone is a fabulous idea. Quality sex for everyone is a fabulous idea. Quality annual vacation to exotic locales with balmy beaches and fruity alcoholic beverages with tiny umbrellas in them for everyone is a fabulous idea.
[1] Tiny version of tirade: Regulation that distances individuals from the true cost of things that benefit them is bad. I am convinced that much of what is wrong with health care as it stands now is not that too few people are insured, but that too many people are insured - or, in other words, a much fairer (to all parties except insurance companies) market would exist with respect to health care if the vast majority of consumers of health care services paid out of their own individual pockets.
no subject
Quality food for everyone is a fabulous idea.
Quality housing for everyone is a fabulous idea.
Quality sex for everyone is a fabulous idea.
Quality annual vacation to exotic locales with balmy beaches and fruity alcoholic beverages with tiny umbrellas in them for everyone is a fabulous idea.
[1] Tiny version of tirade: Regulation that distances individuals from the true cost of things that benefit them is bad. I am convinced that much of what is wrong with health care as it stands now is not that too few people are insured, but that too many people are insured - or, in other words, a much fairer (to all parties except insurance companies) market would exist with respect to health care if the vast majority of consumers of health care services paid out of their own individual pockets.