[.38sw]

You won't be paying for just your parents' drugs, you'll be paying for wealthy people's parents drugs, and everyone else's parents' drugs. I have told my nephew, who is just a few years older than you are, that he and his friends will be looking at huge tax increases to pay for everyone else's parents' drugs. He supports national health care, and this is one big step in that direction. I don't think he realizes just yet what a big ticket item this is, and he'll be paying for it.

I'm considerably older than you are, but I think that this drug benefit is a huge mistake. It will cost far more than estimated. Government programs always do. Besides, where in the constitution does it say that if you are over 65, you can force everyone else to pay for your medical care and prescription drugs? What next? Your housing and food? After all, those are necessities as well.

[supercat]

I'm considerably older than you are, but I think that this drug benefit is a huge mistake. It will cost far more than estimated. Government programs always do. Besides, where in the constitution does it say that if you are over 65, you can force everyone else to pay for your medical care and prescription drugs? What next? Your housing and food? After all, those are necessities as well.

Is there any time the government has acted to subsidize a good or service for a particular group of people, and the result has been anything other than skyrocketing prices for that good or service? Generally quickly reaching the point that even the intended beneficiary of the subsidy ends up paying more for the good or service than would have been necessary were the subsidy not in place?