1) that I (along with my wife and kid) choose belong to the 40 million Americans that are “uninsured” as well as the 80% that are satisfied with our helathcare.

Just insert after the cake quote.

a couple of points.

1)Congress: “Forget it, then!”
Spiro: “Whew! My cake is safe!”80% of Americans that are satisfied with our healthcare. I made a choice to save money on insurance premiums (>$4,000/year for our family of 3), I enjoy the option of choosing my healthcare provider, and I don’t mind paying the cash price for doctor visits and medication — since we choose to maintain a healthy lifestyle and healthcare costs rarely exceed $300/year. You can say I’m foolish for not carrying insurance, but I’d much rather have my freedom to choose now and risk my savings on a future medical catastrophe than have the government take control over my healthcare (at my tax expense).

2) I don’t think we have a particularly representative government, and I do feel like our government rules us, rather than being our equals or servants. That’s what makes me more of a left-libertarian than a leftist.

So, are you at ease with the current situation (your current worldview) of government nobility vs. peasant citizens, or did you become libertarian to work against this? b/c if the former is true, than you are not libertarian. In fact, it is pretty difficult to reconcile government controlled healthcare with libertarian/free choice philosophy.

3) on your car analogy, I’d say the situation with leftist congressmen in favor of crappy healthcare for the masses but not for themselves is more akin to a man who owns the local Daewoo dealership, but forbids anyone in his OWN family from driving one because he believes Korean crash safety standards are too low.

You want your designers to design a policy for the people it applies to, not for themselves.

1.) They are not my designers. My family risked their very life to escape a country of designers.

2.) You can’t seem to grasp the point that when someone designs a VW, he doesn’t FORCE the rest of the population to drive it. Congress does.

3.) Congress IS “the people”, so why should a policy not apply to them.

4.) If we are ruled by an elite akin to the dictatorhips and kingdoms of Europe, it’s time for war again.

5.) Giving money to Ron Paul does not make you a libertarian.

I was just thinking this: You don’t force the German engineers who design the VW Beetle to drive VW Beetles. If you do, you either get unhappy engineers or a Beetle that can go 140 on the autobahn. You want your designers to design a policy for the people it applies to, not for themselves.

(I know one of Coyote’s big problems with the plan is that it applies to people it doesn’t make sense for, so I suppose you could see him supporting this idea as just plain payback.)

I think it is safe to assume everyone gets the context of that statement (and even that she didn’t really say it). To tell you the truth I don’t understand how your original twist on it fits into the context though. “Let them eat cake” would apply more to a Congress that thought the people could get great health care for themselves than one that thought they needed a government handout.

Anyway — you guys have discerned something about my worldview. I don’t think we have a particularly representative government, and I do feel like our government rules us, rather than being our equals or servants. That’s what makes me more of a left-libertarian than a leftist. I actually gave money to Ron Paul last election cycle.

Your example is more akin to saying that since the law prescribes prison for rapists, that law makers should be imprisoned.

You have a point — I took it that way because the people who are proposing this, you guys, clearly do think of being in the health plan as some kind of punishment. (By the way, I think the prison system would be vastly improved if law makers did have to experience the conditions they vote for — but I don’t think I’d support it, because it would probably be pretty bad for law and order. No one would vote for any prisons then.)

The point here is that Congress cannot on the one hand tell us how great this plan is, while on the other hand it is not good enough for them. Our elected officials are supposed to be OF the people, not some higher class of nobility.

Seriously, have you ever listened to Nancy Pelosi speak? Can you still argue that she belongs to some enlightened higher class?

If this plan is supposed to be BETTER and CHEAPER for EVERYONE, then why wouldn’t congress want it for itself? How would the inferior private plan provide an incentive to congress? Shouldn’t their current inferior plan provide a DISincentive?

Your waterboarding example is as stupid as your employees voting for managers example. Nowhere do employees vote for managers because they are not owners, so that’s an irrelevant example. Waterboarding (the merits or demerits of which are outside the scope of this conversation) was prescribed for a small subset of the population based on certain conditions (again, the merits or demerits of which are debatable but outside the scope here). Your example is more akin to saying that since the law prescribes prison for rapists, that law makers should be imprisoned.

Either ALL free citizens of this country are forced into something or NONE are. Choice can’t be restricted to the American aristocracy and this still be called a free country that protects the liberty of men. The trouble is that you think like a peasant.

My God, you do think you’re a serf.

Even if Coyote’s employees elected him to make management decisions…

This is a completely nonsensical example. Employees don’t elect anything because they are not owners, so your whole example is perverse. If they elect a moron, they can still leave. Even if you leave the United States, you are still taxed and subjugated by the United States. Further, the citizens of the United States don’t vote for congress to manage their daily lives. They vote them in to represent them in the protection of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, defense of the realm and of their freedom. If your happiness is to have someone else run your life, then by all means hire someone.

Your waterboarding analogy is just stupid. That’s like saying if congress Ok’s solitary confinement for prisoners, congressmen should be thrown into solitary confinement as well. Waterboarding was OK’d for a very small sub-set of people who posed a danger to the United States (the merits of this claim are debatable on their own, but are outside the scope of this argument). This health care plan is touted as BETTER and CHEAPER than the current option for EVERYONE and is forcibly imposed on a FREE people. If the plan is so awesome that it makes everything better for EVERYONE, then why isn’t congress jumping on board? Why would its members vote to stay on an inferior plan? Why is an inferior plan a better incentive for congress?

The truth is, you think like a serf and you’ll be treated like one – by someone. This country is already far along the road toward the socialist nightmare that was the Soviet Union.

Even if Coyote’s employees elected him to make management decisions I still don’t think he should be forced to personally bear the brunt of decisions that are not designed to apply to people like him. (Spiro gives a good example of why management and employees need different policies to apply to them; Congressmen and the uninsured are just as different.) It’s a bad incentive for a manager. It reminds me of Democrats saying any government official who ordered waterboarding should have to submit to being waterboarded first.

Congress: “Let them eat cake.”
Noumenon: “Sounds reasonable.”

Congress: “Give them all bread.”
Spiro: “Not unless you give up your cake!”

(intended result being:
Congress: “Forget it, then!”
Spiro: “Whew! My cake is safe!”)