>Which is why at the moment I'm much more excited by the "fair share"
>legislation targetting employers like Wal-Mart than single payer, since a
>whole bunch of folks are very excited and involed in thinking about
>challenging irresponsible corporations, rather than sitting in wonk rooms to
>design the perfect payment system for health care.
Wow. This is surreal, looking-glass stuff. Let's see, which is more wonkish: "play or pay," which involves laws with complex tests like "employers in this state with over X employees who pay less than y% of their payroll in health benefits shall be required to contribute z% to a fund..." or "Everyone resident in the US should be covered by publicly administered and funded health insurance"? Which has actually inspired a popular movement with tremendous potential to inspire more, and which is the creature of dealmakers and lobbyists (and now litigators, since the legality of the Maryland measure is now under challenge)?
This is sad, Nathan. I used to disagree with you about the Dems, but always thought you were fundamentally on the right side of the big questions. Now I'm really beginning to wonder.
Doug