No one has the right to health care.  A right is something man is able to do without impediment from others in nature.  I have the right to free-speech because I can say what I want without assistance from others.  I have the right to defense because I am able to defend myself against attackers in nature.  Rights are not something granted by a government entity nor are they something that requires the willing or unwilling contribution of others.

Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

From someone who claims to have created Capitalism and understands it well, you sure don't understand the concept of the free-market.  I'd assume since you understand Capitalism (meaning you read the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith) you would also be familiar with John Locke who also is an inspiration to the US founding fathers.  As Locke said, we have the right to life, liberty and property.

Forcing a segment of the population (Doctors) to perform a service at a pre-determined amount for all that come by is not liberty.  You may have the right to live, but you don't have the right to services provided by others.

Since 10% of the population utilized 70% of all medical resources in this nation, I fail to see how providing "free" care for all is advantageous to society.  Especially considering that the segment that utilizes most of the resources often contributes little to nothing in terms of the economy and same programs they utilize.  I would not be opposed to the government creating an entirely optional program ran not for profit that people could join for their health insurance needs.  So long as this program is entirely funded by those who enjoy its benefits and not at the expense of others.  This of course would never happen as demonstrated by the tragedy of the commons.  For those not aware or familiar with this tale, it symbolizes the problems of a collective effort when a segment of the organization is able to use more resources than they contribute thus limiting the amount of availability to others.

Socialism and fascism are one in the same regardless of how some would try to imagine or convince us of otherwise.  Both fascism and socialism place the needs and desires of the populace at the will of the government or collective and remove individual identify and ownership.  After all, the world's most famous Fascist, the Nazi party, identified themselves as a socialist party.

If America does instate a socialist medical program, I hope they go all out and resemble something similar to 1984.  Obese and unhealthy people need to be required by law to stay within certain weight ratios and exercise regularly.  After all, if I'm paying for your care than I should have a say in how you live your life.  If the government is responsible for your health care, than that responsibility doesn't stop at the doctor's office.  All activity deemed unhealthy needs to be outlawed as to not burden the system.  Such policies are already going into affect by banning smoking and trans fat in foods.  I say take it a step further and immediately abort all fetuses found to have geneitic defects or problems that would require extra medical care.  If society is responsible for the health of the nation, than society should put in laws that ensure that health and ability of equal care to everyone.

Hopefully my above comments outrage people who read them.  Hopefully they feel such a system would be a violation of their personal rights and ability to choose what is best for them.  Because I feel the same outrage when someone says I should be responsible for their care because they have made decsions that hinder them from gaining their own care.

Need does not necessiate access to service.  This is best demonstrated by the Ayn Rand dialogue below:

Health care is currently available to almost all American citizens who want it.  The majority of the uninsured are the youth of America who don't feel they need such coverage because they see no reel risk of serious illness or disease.  Your typical 25 year old doesn't need to worry about cancer or a heart transplant, so why should they pay for a service they don't need? 

Freedom means the ability to make choices on your own without permission from others.  Mandating a government plan to force tax payers to pay for the needs of others isn't freedom - it's socialism.  I should only have to pay for services that I use; I'm not responsible for the lives of others.

you obviously didn't look very hard or just disregarded this thread with two positive reviews-one from the same company as the negative one!
http://www.gnrevolution.com/viewtopic.php?id=4445&p=1

By: Peter Venkman

At the pace the Velvet singer search is going I'll probably get this done before then.