politicalmetrics.org

There's no such thing as "free health insurance"... only "government subsidized" which simply means we're paying for it, but letting the government mandate how it runs, guaranteeing it won't be done efficiently.

I don't think they mean free as in conjured out of thin air but meaning free to the student and therefore paid by for by the government (public). That could just mean government subsidizing private health care.

That's just freaking genius. Let's take a group of people, many already receiving government subsidies, then give them another, separate government subsidy transferred from tax-payers for as long as they continue collecting the first subsidy. What could go wrong?

When the government "subsidizes" something with (my money), they ALWAYS meddle with it. Maybe not at first, but down the road when something isn't done how the bureaucrats want it done, they'll use the purse strings as a means of control. Funneling taxpayer money directly into private industry, especially one so large and important to the nation's economy and overall welfare, is simply "indirect socialism." Or worse, it leads directly to socialism.

I can't disagree with any of that but that doesn't mean that I'm not okay with some government bureaucracy & redistribution of wealth (socialism) towards a common good.

Those who say, "a little bit of wealth re-distribution is ok, but I wouldn't want to live in an entirely socialist country" are all too willing to dive head-first onto the slippery slope. It is a universal truth that governments never shrink nor give up power without revolution. I accept that today's bureaucratic monstrosity cannot be easily downsized. However, supplying it with fuel to grow bigger and more powerful is only the goal of fools and marxists.