The health care reform currently in congress should be passed

Thanks for your response. I don't want to answer your questions about arguments, as I don't think this should turn into a pointless meta debate. I've explained eactly what in your arguments that are factually incorrect, and I find it self-evident that your first round of arguments are largely emotionally based, with quotes saying "we must rebuild", "American citizens want reform" instead of actually explaining why the reform would be good. But enough about that, meta debates are less of interest, and you have abandoned these emotional arguments, since I don't argue against them (how could I, when they have no substance?) Now to the topic. It is a common misunderstanding that spending got the US out of The Great Depression, but unfortunately it just doesn't fit the facts. The general view amongst economics is that fiscal policy, spending and WW2 made very little difference. The main reason for recovery is usually seen as the abandoning of the gold standard. [1][2] The Keynsian/Socialist policies like spending and trade protection in fact rather prolonged the depression. In the US, the New Deal included both these types of policies, but most importantly, the first part of the new deal was the abandonment of the gold standard, which enabled the US economic recovery during the 30s. That centralized economy and state spending are bad for the economy are well known and has been well known since Adam Smiths "The Wealth of Nations" 1776. It is wholly uncontroversial. The Keynesian ideas of spending yourself to riches has been tried many times with little success. I do agree preventive care could help lower costs, but there is nothing wrong with maths. The health care for uninsured are in average around 2000 dollars per person and year or a 100 billion dollars. The health care for insured are around 8000 dollars per year person or year. I agree that everybody should have health care, and I think universal health insurance is a good long term goal. But saying that it will make these 100 billion dollars lower is simply delusional. When the state pays for health insurance for the uninsured, their health costs will rise to 8000 dollars per year and person as well, and this reform will cost the state 300 billion dollars per year. It's as simple as that. Reforming the system in the US so that health costs per person is lowered is likely to be possible, they are after all much cheaper in other countries, like France, while not being significantly worse. But pretending that universal health care will be cheaper than no universal health care is simply delusional, and I quite honestly find it annoying that I have to repeat this basic mathematics three times in a debate. No, we do not both want change. You want change, no matter what. I, and the american people, want improvements. You have completely failed to show that the current proposal will provide any improvements. You have also, in fact, not even showed what the current proposal is about. You haven't really taken up many of the points in the proposal, but instead argued from generalities, like claiming that we should spend ourselfs out of a crisis, when spending in fact will prolong it, and universal health insurance lowering spending, ignoring both that this contradicts your first point, and that it is obviously false. Health care reform must be based on a rational, factual view of the world, not on vague dreams and overactive imagination. Only with our feet firmly on the ground can we grow. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org...