Honestly I really don't know what to make of the American people sometimes.  First they elect a Democrat majority but then, less than a year later, give that congress an all-time low approval rating of 11%.  What's up with that?  Do you think it might have something to do with the disconnect between candidates talk and incumbents walk?               

Peoples faith in government has always mystified me.  Does it really exist or do politicians just pretend it does so they can continue to perpetuate the myth they matter?  The line between cynicism and skepticism is thin indeed but, when push comes to shove, peoples faith in government is about as strong as their faith in campaign promises.  Given the performance of the former and the consistent breaking of the latter, that 11% approval rating shouldn't surprise anyone. 

This Gallup poll seems to bear it out.  http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003647275

But then again the same poll shows peoples faith in themselves is also slipping.  Weird.   

Health care is a perfect case in point.  On one hand candidates of all stripes treat this issue with the utmost urgency while the fact of the matter is the system we have works perfectly fine for a great majority, 85% or so last time I checked.  So is there really a ground swell of support to completely overhaul the health care industry or is it, as I suspect, mostly vote-getting rhetoric? 

We have been hearing since the early 90's that some 45 million people are uninsured.  We also know there are up to 12 million illegal aliens, that cuts the number by more than a quarter.  Another, somewhat related group, foreign nationals, a.k.a. legal aliens, numbers about  9 million.  Can we allow that a certain percentage is between jobs?  Let's use the unemployment rate, conservatively at 4.5% of the remaining 24 million is roughly another million, down to 23 million.  Now it gets interesting.  

The census bureau shows that over 18 million of the uninsured is families earning over $50k per year and 9 million of them over $75K per year.  In other words roughly 40% of the 45 million uninsured can actually afford health insurance but choose not to.  

This sounds about right judging from my own experience selling health insurance to small business owners and self employed.  More often than I care to remember potential clients simply decided to trust their luck on health and pocket the money, even though these were good plans that offered anywhere from 20 to 50% savings.  As a salesman I could try to scare them into buying just in case, but logically, I couldn't argue their point.  The fact of the matter is healthy people don't need insurance, they're not sick. 

For those of you keeping score at home that leaves us with approximately 5 million genuinely uninsured.  Now, given these figures, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to develop a narrowly focused program to take care of these 5 million than it would be to nationalize 17% of our economy, destroy competition and the innovation incentives it provides, and reduce medical Doctors status to that of auto mechanics?  Worse still, it would completely upend the heath care supply demand equilibrium because the inevitable rush to get in line for freebies would overwhelm the available supply causing waiting lines from here to eternity.  (You need only look to countries with government provided health care and the waiting lines attendant to that care, for proof of the latter point)

Just asking some basic questions, cause you know, the obviousness of the answer isn't all that apparent to big government lovers.  Or is it and they choose to ignore the laws of economics for their own agenda?           

Seriously then, can someone explain to me why any sane person would want to turn over their health care to the same government

-That handled the Katrina aftermath
-Whose bureaucratic incompetence allowed for 9/11
-Whose political expediency and addiction to spending is pilfering Social Security into bankruptcy
-Who took 2 years to build 145 miles of an 800 mile fence
-Who still hasn't secured our ports

I could go on but you get the point, governments strong suit, regardless of who happens to head up the executive branch, has never been, nor will ever be, competence.  The health care issue has nothing to do with your health and everything to do with your vote.  Anyone who doesn't recognize this as the largest vote-getting scheme since the new deal is blindly ceding the next giant leap toward socialism.

When the government has control of your health care they have you by the short hairs.  Socialized health care is simply the latest attempt at social engineering, like the tax code, except here you put your health, rather than your wealth, in the hands of government.  No thank you.

Here's a piece of ironic cud to chew on; all this universal health care nonsense is courtesy the same folks who, in defense of Roe v Wade, insist medical privacy is the ultimate right, but now seem to not notice, or mention at least, that everyones medical records will necessarily become part of the public record.  (take a moment to let the mind boggle, but don't contort your faculties in search for coherence, there isn't any)   

To believe single payer, universal health care, or socialized medicine, pick your name, is a good idea requires the willful, or genuine, ignorance of the endless stream of government failures and, even more unlikely, a belief that somehow, some way, this time the government will suddenly become competent. 

That's a crap shoot at best, and you can bet your health on it - - but I wouldn't bet mine.