To lox:

>those who oppose it are greedy and don't want to have to live up to their responsibilities.<

This is (largely) true for a great many, I think. It is disappointing to see the great bulk of the debate addressing "what's in it for me" and "Here's what's in it for you." That applies to SO many identifiable groups of every stripe and interest.

As of yesterday, newspapers were saying the minimal public option idea may have to go down in flames because people are realizing "it may raise some employee premiums." Well, duh.

The problem in discussions, though, is that the "it" (in "oppose it") is ever changing and very, very different than an NHS or single payer function, and the discussion gets complicated as well given that the public assistance mechanism(s) currently exist as a very large but unsatisfactory "it."