That's a fair point, but the anti-intellectualism that can crop up in some of these discussions is absurd. I'm not calling out anyone in particular. Right, which is precisely what the Obama administration would say, and what they did say to SCOTUS: the mere fact that you exist means, like it or not, you are a part of the healthcare market. Therefore, your participation in that market means it can be regulated through the interstate commerce clause, which is the legal and economic rationale for the ACA. And I agree with you on the discussion part, but then it actually needs to be a discussion. Not "This is the most ungodly, unconstitutional law ever created in world history," which is what a Republican congressman from Indiana said yesterday. Yes, it was on the Daily Show, but that is the rhetoric I hear constantly from a lot of people. It's ridiculously overblown. Is Massachusetts a godless communist hellscape? No. The Republicans should at least let the law- which is constitutional, and was passed through this country's national legislature, regardless- go into effect. If it doesn't depress costs enough, then get rid of it or modify it. I'm pretty sure Republicans will have the presidency at some point. The "ZOMG IT'S SO UNJUST" backstop was the Supreme Court, and John Roberts of all people voted to uphold the law. This is a nice paternalistic sentiment and I appreciate the concern, but I don't, dude. I think for myself, which is why I'm able to say, "You know what? I don't think the ACA brings down long-term costs enough, but I'm willing to wait and see if it does." Or, more controversially, "You know what? I think most of what the NSA is doing is actually okay, but I think it needs more oversight and the scope should probably be reduced." I also think Guantanamo Bay is an affront to human dignity! I have opinions that are different about different things because I'm a person and I read stuff!