And your unsubstantiated “this is the largest tax increase in American history” is flat out propaganda.

You don’t seem to be interested in any kind of reasoned debate on the health care issue. Rather you just want to parrot republican propaganda.

For someone who claims he refuses to “drink the kool-aid” you certainly seem to be doing so on this issue.

I do see where you are coming from on the “raise taxes on the top 10%” argument, though I don’t want to raise taxes on anybody, but rather cut out some of the waste. I also am dubious about taking money from those who create jobs. I agree the whole thing is a thorny issue, though, and personally, I’d have liked to have seen the Bowles-Simpson Report been given a more serious hearing than it was. There seem to be some loopholes that ought to be closed with regard to taxation–my understanding is that this is one of the things that this report suggested.

On the last point, I guess we’ll see in time whether that “understanding” is correct or not.

You have a very strange definition of “freedom.” However, lets run with it. So if your taxes go up by 1%, but your overall health care costs go DOWN by more than your taxes went up, then you would have MORE “freedom”, by your definition.

And lets exam this concept of “freedom” outside the health care debate. If the government increases the taxes on the top 1% of people by wealth in the US by say 10%, then distributes (via scholarship funds, food stamps, housing subsides or even direct cash payments) those taxes to the bottom 30% of people by wealth, then more people will have more “freedom.”

“If this is the largest tax increase in American history–and apparently it is, from what I understand”

And where did you get this “understanding” from? I suspect this claims is even less accurate than the “death panels” claim was.

Couple things: one, a parent with a sick child and no health care would only be “happy” with the healthcare I have if that sick child had contracted something that would land him/her in the hospital for more than a day or two. I doubt they’d even be happy with that, given the ridiculous deductible that we have. My wife and I figured it out the other day, and as unlikely as this scenario is, it would be possible for our family of four to ring up $25,000 of medical bills, as we understand our coverage, and the insurance company not pay one thin dime (I know for an absolute fact that we could ring up half that and more without a dime being paid). That’s the kind of family healthcare that anybody with a brain would like???

In simplest terms, Ken, I argue that when money is taken from people, freedom is taken from people. If my taxes go up 1%, I have given up a little of my freedom thereby. That’s not to say, of course, that no taxes are legitimate; let’s not go there, because no one with a brain defends that thinking. If this is the largest tax increase in American history–and apparently it is, from what I understand–then that alone qualifies as a loss of freedom.

That’s ridiculous! laughter Sorry but you’ll just have to take my word for what I’m saying or write me off as a liar, being that you disagree with me and all.

Mark