[mobiplayer]

Single payer is not a political goal, it objectively saves and improves lives.

[dragonwriter]

It is a political goal. It maybe shouldn't be a divisive, partisan political goal for the reasons you describe, but in fact it is that, too.

[mobiplayer]

Then the argument of "too high for a political goal" is moot, because everything is a political goal.

[wayn3]

Saving and improving lives IS a political goal.

[mobiplayer]

Then everything is a political goal, and there's no point on you classifying anything as a political goal as to measure its value.

"Too high price for a political goal" and "everything is a political goal" are not compatible.

So, tell me, what's your point really?

[wayn3]

the point is, one party values not redistributing money over saving peoples lives.

the other does not.

one of them got elected by poor rural people who really need the ACA.

i dont think that political goals have value. theyre about the last thing to have "value". "Exterminate all jews" was a relatively popular political goal just a couple decades ago. As far as "valuable things" go, political goals range relatively low on that totem pole.

[mobiplayer]

Hah! I tried hard to avoid bringing the Holocaust reference as a political goal, but I guess it clearly shows that saying something is a "political goal" is a moot point, which you seem to agree with anyway :-)

[wayn3]

why try so hard?

[mobiplayer]

Godwin's