Sorry for not responding sooner but here is my response. It costs upwards of a million dollars or more to train a doctor and most of that money is provided by taxpayers of all incomes. When you try and hog this doctor all to yourself with no regard with anyone else because you are convinced that a fat wallet entitles you to medical treatment before your poorer neighbors, is that not stealing according to your definition. All Americans who pay to train doctors should get a benefit, shouldn't they?

This Pollyanna attitude that people who are not able to afford health care because they were booted off by the insurance companies or lost thier jobs and can't afford the astronomical rates being charged by these pirates should wait in hopes that the milk of human kindness might on a good day flow from GTO and that he may deem to drop a few rupees in the poor box as a substitute for a national health plan is one of the kookiest notions I have ever heard.

A lot of people adamantly opposed Bush and Cheney starting a war in Iraq and basically walking away from the war on terrorists. According to your logic they shouldn't be forced to pay the cost of this war out of their taxes because that would be stealing. Why should single people pay any taxes toward the education of children if they choose not too? Not their kids, right. Somewhere roads and bridges you may never use have been built with your tax dollars. Would you call that stealing?

Your vision seems to be a population of completely selfish human animals who only commonality is your existence in agreed upon geographic boundaries. The world you think you are in today didn't exist even 200 years ago. The arguments you presented are a childs arguments. Full of selfishness and self importance. Time to grow up.

Was that calm enough for you?

Thank you for the response.

First off, I'm not aware that taxpayers pay for the doctor's educations in this country; at least not in an outright sense. If you mean by a Cuban style type of health care where the government pays for a doctors education and then the doctor works for the greater good of their society in a so called 'free' health care system, (which is actually in a completely oppressed socialist/communist country); then that's not the way it works in this country; (at least not yet; Oboma is working hard on it though). Maybe someone can help me out here; but my understanding of how it works here is that if the student/doctor can't pay for their education outright; then they get their education through scholorships and/or student loans.

Scholorships come predominantly from trust funds created out of donations by others for the purpose of helping promising students in need of financial aid. You notice that the key here is that scholorship funds are created and funded by well meaning people who give of their monies voluntarily and freely in order to help and improve others; having more doctors, or engineers, or whatever will by default help and benefit society as a whole. And yes, I'm aware that there are government scholorships also.

Student loans are another way that students fund their education. Student loans come from us, the taxpayers, via the government. In the case of student loans, the student borrows X amount and then once they complete their education they pay that amount back; with interest. Theoritically we the taxpayers come out ahead financially; (which we all know isn't really true as the government spends FAR more than it takes in by whatever sources of income). Although not voluntarily; again, here is a case whereby helping the student out through student loans, society as a whole benefits. We now have a professional who makes more moeny, (thus contributing more to the tax base via income taxes). Depending on what field this former student was educated in, he or she may now be a business owner and have employess of their own; thus providing jobs for others and increasing the amount of wealth that is circulated in the economy along with increasing the amount of taxes paid into the general fund.

Just FYI, on the subject of insurance; and everythign else I talk about here; I am no expert. I'm just talking based on my understanding of things and hopefully some common sense.

Let's talk about insurance companies. Insurance companies are companies that are set up to cover people, property, etc... in times of need by way of assessing risks and charging premiums accordingly. If a person is high risk, then the insurance company charges a premium accordingly; the same is true of low risk people. The inurance company must balance all of it's risks so that it can make sure that it has enough funds available to cover the majority of it's clients in a worst case catastrophic scenario in which it would have to pay out HUGE sums. (Think something along the lines of Katrina here). And let's be clear; insurance companies are for profit companies; they are not charities. If you take the risk factor out of insurance comapnies; then the insurance companies are no longer truly insurance companies. I don't even know what you would call them. What do you call a company that is forced to take on any customer, no matter how high the risk and the probablility of paying out huge sums, without the option to not be able to reject that person as a client up front? Clearly, insurance companies as we know them will cease to exist. They will literally just shut their doors. And where would that leave the vast majority of people who have insurance and are happy with their insurance?

By the way, do you honestly believe that the government will do a better, more efficient job of running healthcare? Name me just one government program that is ran effeciently and is solvent; just one. And by solvent I mean that it takes in enough money to pay it's way; not by running a deficit.

Now, this doesn't mean that there aren't problems with insurance companies and the rules that they must play by. Nor do I think it's right/fair if someone has been a good client for an insurance company who actually starts having serious health issues and is in need of his/her benefits and the insurance company gives them the boot at that point. Insurance companies and the health care system are in need of reform. (And don't tell me that monsterous power grab by Oboma and the socialist's of 1/6th of our economy was the fix).

As far as your anology of roads and kids go; building roads, highways, bridges; (it's all infrastructure), benefits all of society as a whole. The same is true of kids. Even though I, and many others don't have kids; I understand that for our society to have a brighter future, we must invest in our children's education. I hate to use this word because it is so overused; but investing in your society is synergistic. By investing in infrasture, education, companies, even your house; the idea is that you get out far more than what you put into it. Of course, that's not full proof; it doesn't always work that way. But that's the idea.

As far as entitelments go; I make my argument based on principle. I myself have been unemployed since 2006. I have been going to school since that time in order to better myself and be a greater contributing member of society. The taxpayers are not paying for my education. And if they were, it would be through student loans; of which I would pay back. Twenty something years ago I went through school on student loans and paid every cent back; plus interest. Like many others, I have gone through times where I had no health insurance of any kind. Would I have like to have had it; hell yea! But I went without until I could get a job again and thus re-aquire health benefits. Then and now I don't believe that it's the governments role to take care of me.

And by the way, your last paragraph was a typical liberal dig; making it personal. Being self responsible ,self sufficient, and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps is what adults do. Children expect their parents, (or in this case the government) to take care of them. I care very much for others. I think you and I just differ on how we go about that caring. I don't feel that I owe others or am responsible for others; you do. I also want to invest in our country, society, people, and future. I think that in the name of a good cause that you would suck us dry; squandering our present and future. We will have no future if we are destroyed from within. These well meant, feel good social programs are literally going to destroy this country. And all your well meant, feel good stuff isn't going to mean diddly squat then...

- 67GTO