Game, at this point your logic is so scattered, contradictory and absent minded to me that I can't continue. At one point you seem to agree with my points in theory but then argue against what you had previously agreed with.
You say that private healthcare being available to the rich is ok, but then defend the public option by saying people who don't like it can buy the private care we've already established they can't afford.
When the idea of universal public care is challenged with specific questions and severe issues, you respond with responses that amount to "good point, but they'll fix/avoid/overcome that." with no real explanation how and we should just go with universal care anyway.
When we mention real problems with the current legislation, you just say they'll avoid them when the actual legislation isn't overcoming any of them.
In the end, I have no idea what your ideas on the subject are, beyond being for public options "damn the torpedoes", with all arguments leading to that end regardless of leaps of reality that must be taken to get there. Public healthcare does not default GOOD. There must be real solutions and challenges overcome, not simply a unthinking movement toward an immediate goal.
I can't even say whether or not I agree or disagree with your thoughts on healthcare, because I have no clue what those thoughts are after paragraph after paragraph of attempted discourse. I wish to be enlightened in these conversations, and I leave utterly dumbfounded.
Re: Public option for healthcare
Threaded Mode
