The analogy works for me, as the article discusses the federal budget being divided between congress and the president, who authorize spending and what flows through to constituents- there is little political gain from self-restraint since what may have been saved is consistently hoarded up by others. Your second point expresses marxism- could I afford to bore a two mile deep hole, assume all risk, OSHA, taxation, insurance, regulations and after all end up with a $3.45 gallon of gas? Not likely, but a private company can do just that with reasonable consistency, and I'm happy to have dividends from it's shares for retirement.

Actually nkris, there are different levels of coverage for different situations, and premiums normally vary because of this- if the point is discussing risk spread out over a population, then we could learn a lot from New Jersey's old 'driver pool' that caused the highest premiums in the country at one time- the bad drivers were pooled in with the good ones, and the majority of good ones were being forced BY LAW to subsidize the bad ones (like socialism?) When reform later took place and bad driving habits among other factors became reflected in the way premiums are billed, it allowed the majority to have there rates come down significantly, while shifting the high risk drivers back to paying higher premiums to reflect their habits.

Thank you, tibby2.

RussianLiteratureMajor sez: 'Anchor Baby Michelle Malkin is just a token Asian for FOX News and GOP Spin Machine outlets like Townhall.com. Does she ever have anything of substance to write about?' Umm...were Ms. Malkin's parents here illegally, or do YOU actually have something of substance to write about, Dr. elitist screenname? I find it refreshing that Ms. Malkin, who is a commentator, is honest about her viewpoint, unlike the progressive-socialist activists who commonly pose as journalists that I have been marginalized by for decades. Fox and TH offer what the overwhelming majority of media outlets do not. My family left from Eastern Europe, and perhaps your studies should include the people it put in the ground in socialism's name

..with the law being used as an enforcement mechanism. It is also very much like NIMBY.

Thank you Mr. Bozell, this article expresses what has been on my mind as well- I have worked catering to the news and entertainment industry for about 25 years, and can say that the vast majority of those I deal with within these organizations do share a progressive / socialist / union mindset- the common denominator seems to be others being directed to pick up the tab for all the social justice and engineering....

Thank you, Ms. Parker- the spectacle of what happened in the UK last summer is so revealing- when a dependant underclass went out and were burning and looting, even killing when the spigot was being turned off is the same result of this subsidization, i.e. welfare dependancy / atrophy of desire to actually earn a living, over 350,000 people there have never worked, and in many cases is shown to be multi-generational. It may be unpleasant, but if someone identified groups of people over there or here doing this, it still would be to demonstrate the point that this solution isn't bettering the lives of any group overall. Jobs, not food stamps, and allowing people to choose their own schools is a proven way out of this mess.

Thank you Ms. Doan, for this insightful article- I will be voting to kick this administration's collective can out of office.

Also, not sure what you mean by 'totally secular'.. where no state religion is to be established, but also does not prevent the free exercise thereof- this is to prevent a similar outcome such as the Church of England being part of policy making in the old world....if religion was to be excluded from public life- as those who misinterpret the commerce clause say it does- the Jefferson would not have allowed the use of a bible and a hymnal as teaching tools in schools...

Stan sez: 'I wonder if Chuck's ever read the Constitution? It's totally secular and approved and protected slavery to the point that slave-owners could count their slaves as 3/5 of a person even though they were not citizens and had no representation. ' Actually, it was the result of a difficult compromise between freedom from the Crown and slavery being allowed to operate in the South, these were the opposing forces involved. The 3/5 clause limited the influence of the south by devaluing the unit of each slaves' representation as part of population, with eventual goal of end of slavery. The constitution also made possible to destroy slavery- which existed worldwide for thousands of years- within 90 years of this country's founding.