In response to:

Improving Health Care

Dina20 Wrote: Jun 13, 2012 3:09 PM
Liberals - they rail against monopolies and big businesses that drown out the mom-and-pop shops. But, when dismantling the giant state-controlled health insurance monopolies, liberals want no part of it just because it is not a specific progressive idea. What they don't get is that it is an American, free-enterprise idea. Wasn't it liberals who were decrying the lack of competition from drug companies that was causing the price of medicine to skyrocket for medicare/medicaid , and the general public? Why should health insurance companies be any different? Why shouldn't they compete nation-wide for our money? Think about it.
Kruelhunter Wrote: Jun 14, 2012 2:31 PM
Cato, Heritage and Reason emag have excellent information that shows how government spending has contributed more to medical costs than any other single cause.

Any day now, the U.S. Supreme will rule on whether the Obamacare insurance mandate is constitutional. Seems like a no-brainer to me. How can forcing me to engage in commerce be constitutional?

But there's a deeper question: Why should government be involved in medicine at all?

Right before President Obama took office, the media got hysterical about health care. You heard the claims: America spends more than any country -- $6,000 per person -- yet we get less. Americans die younger than people in Japan and Western Europe. Millions of Americans lack health insurance and worry about paying for...