There is a near perfect correlation between people asking this question, and being unbelievably arrogant bastards too stuck up their own ass to even listen to the other side. This article does nothing to break that correlation.<p>This article could easily be completely discredited had they taken a moment to actually ask someone who dislikes the current health care reform <i>why</i> they dislike it. Considering that even large swathes of the Left currently have no great love for what has actually passed even the BBC might have been able to find such a person.<p>I, for one, don't give a shit how great your healthcare system is when a fundamental component of it is "Oh, and we'll break the economy on the rocky shores of immovable mandates." It doesn't matter how awesome your promises are if the economy can't sustain them. It is also perfectly reasonable to believe that the problem is that we already have too much government control, so turning it all over to the government is hardly the solution. (One question I'd ask those who still support this health care bill is, are you ready for when the Republicans control Congress and the Presidency again, and therefore control all your health coverage? It's not "if", it's "when".)<p>Note that arguing with me about whether we'd break the economy or whether more freedom in the market might help is besides the point. The point is that I am in fact "voting" (not yet, but I would and quite possibly will) against something I don't perceive to be in my interest. The <i>shocker</i>, the <i>unthinkable thought</i>, the <i>terrible tragedy</i> is not that I am willing to "vote against my interest", it is that <i>I don't agree with you about what is in my interest</i>.<p>If I seem incensed, well, I am. This is the argument of a supercilious bastard and deserves no attention, here or anywhere. <i>People disagree with you</i>. Deal with it. (People disagree with me too, only I don't go on about how they are stupid for "voting against their interest"....)