Bruce Bilosky has a great column today that addresses Communism and the proposed healthcare legislation in Congress. A couple of interesting tidbits:
"A business colleague of mine commented recently that he supported Communism. He stated it would be fine if he were at the top and thus in control of money and decisions. He mentioned Fidel Castro’s supposed $6 billion that he has in foreign bank accounts. This gentleman understands that not everyone has the same results under Communism."
"...refer to the July 15th editorial in Investor’s Business Daily which speaks to their reading of the bill. It only took them to page 16 to find a clause that would outlaw anyone from taking on a new private policy once the public option is established thus forcing everyone into government-run health care."
[Edit: That last claim, which seems so plausible, may or may not actually be the case. Page 16 (out of 1018 pages) of the House's healthcare legislation is written in such dense legalese that it can mean practically anything they want it to mean. So the claim of "outlawing new policies" is on the bubble of credibility at this point.]
[Edit #2: There now seems to be at least some merit to the claim. Fortune/CNNMoney.com stated in a recent column: "The employees who got their coverage before the law goes into effect can keep their plans, but once again, there's a catch. If the plan changes in any way -- by altering co-pays, deductibles, or even switching coverage for this or that drug -- the employee must drop out and shop through the [Government-run] exchange. Since these plans generally change their policies every year, it's likely that millions of employees will lose their plans in 12 months." So the needle moves slightly to the "credible" side.]