[grecy]

1) Given that the health insurance companies in America make billions in profit every year, I'm confident the government can be more efficient than that.

2) This is a naive line of reasoning. The (socialist) FDA already stops you from buying food with lead in it. The (socialist) DMV forces you to wear a seat-belt and wear a motorbike helmet and the (socialist) Police stop you beating people up on the street whenever you want.

You are basically saying you don't want "big government" to tell you want you can't do, even though those rules and limitations would make your society better for everyone overall. Everyone's happiness would go up. This is very selfish and shortsighted.

3) It's very simple. Everyone is equal. A billionaire is treated the same as a homeless person. A strongly classed society (like America) does not like this idea, because Americans define success as "better than other people". Public healthcare would take away this distinction.

[baddox]

> You are basically saying you don't want "big government" to tell you want you can't do, even though those rules and limitations would make your society better for everyone overall.

You're demonstrating a very common misconception, which is that people who don't want the government to perform a function do not want that function to be performed, or that certain functions can only be performed by a government.

> It's very simple. Everyone is equal. A billionaire is treated the same as a homeless person. A strongly classed society (like America) does not like this idea, because Americans define success as "better than other people". Public healthcare would take away this distinction.

Is there a competition being held in this thread to see who can make the most ridiculous generalization? Seriously, at least put forth a bit of effort into making your argument seem remotely credible.

[protomyth]

"1) Given that the health insurance companies in America make billions in profit every year, I'm confident the government can be more efficient than that."

Given this theory, explain Indian Health Service.

Point 1 is bad reasoning and demonstrated to be false. On point 2, rules are not inherently socialist (Capitalism actually requires a strong rule of law).

[grecy]

I have no idea what Indian Health Service is.

I know rules are not inherently socialist, what I was saying is you already live with a ton of them, and thinking that adding a few more will drastically decrease your "freedoms" is delusional at best.

[protomyth]

Indian Health Service is the currently running, government health care for a small fraction of the population. If they cannot get that right, they cannot get it right for the rest.

Adding a few more rules is the dictionary definition of loosing freedom. Adding the wrong rules will.