...will pay anything to not be that way. In other words, they are an ideal market. Selling to that market will be profitable, and for those who can't afford to pay, that's just too bad. Fully and efficiently exploiting any market requires someone does without. Enough will be able to pay to make it worthwhile to the seller.

Social Security, health benefits, state supported education, any form of social welfare, insurance of any kind deprive the private sector of a source of revenue, which is why it is so bitterly opposed. But of course, there is more to it than that.

Those who pay for these services must earn money to do so, which makes being able to work a matter of life and death for them. You can never have enough when any little thing can bankrupt you. If you don't pay, you die. It's that simple. This makes for a very docile and cheap work force.

But it also stands to reason we can't all live off the largesse of the state, and people need to work for what they receive, and their benefits should reflect what they contribute to the society. Not only that, private enterprise IS more efficient than the state at providing most goods and services.

The obvious solution is to do what we've always done, select a middle course between laissez-faire capitalism and doctrinaire socialism, picking the best of both to construct a humane and prosperous society.

But there is bitter opposition to that, too.