: Oh, hold on there MDG, by debating actual issues that effect real life working people you are actually commiting the major sin of diverting attention away from grand plans and blue prints and the all hole commitment to 'revolutionary truth' and zealotry.
: That will entitle the ivory towered theorists to call you names, including 'petty-bourgousie', 'liberal' (read pragmatist, some peoples penchants for political prejudice is great, their actual learning must be restricted) and insinuate you are in fact a selfish capitalist.
: On subject, I've researched indepth your health system it's about the worst compared with the various European models.
Thanks for the support, Lark, though I do agree with Pete that you're aiming a zinger or two at friend Barry. I advocate very radical ends in a number of areas (e.g. economic systems, animal rights, beer quality), but (and this may be a sign of impending death, i.e. m-m-middle age), I'm not eager for a revolution, as the grief and misery revolution would cause in the short run is bound to be great, and there's no telling, especially with the case of violent revolutions, what the ultimate outcome will be. Violence definitely breeds violence. I advocate revolution when one's back is against the wall, as in the Guatemalan resistance movement, but even here in this most inequitable United States, I don't see that necessity. While there is poverty and state repression, there are no death squads, institutionalized torture chambers, and bans on basic human freedoms, hence, my advocacy of reformist means to radical ends.
Also, as you and Pete and others have pointed out, small reformist measures can make a crucial difference in peoples' lives. Consider regulations mandating fire safety devices in factories -- reformist, to be sure, but how many workers' lives have such regulations saved?