Many people believe, or at least suspect, that the government can provide a competitive health insurance plan, by virtue of its sheer size alone. The efficiency and stability of insurance pools grows the larger they get, and they have unmatched buying power when negotiating for goods and services.

If WalMart can win that way, why can't the government?

But you're trying to prespin it so that if the government plan actually succeeds, you can declare it an evil plot to drive private enterprise out of business.

You defend WalMart against that charge. Why give the government special treatment?

There's no winning in your world, but luckily, there's little correspondence between your world and the real world.

Love that computer analogy. Yeah, I'm a computer geek, thanks for the stroke. But it's a ridiculous analogy: How would the government produce computers at half the price? If they were simply 50% subsidized, that wouldn't stay secret for long, and everybody on Earth would call "bullshit!". The only way they could pull it off would be the aforesaid market-driven powers. For an interesting realworld example (be careful on my turf), see the netbook, e.g. "One Laptop Per Child", a dirt cheap small laptop designed according to exactly that philosophy, to be cheap enough for governments and NGOs to pass out like condoms in developing countries. Interestingly enough, in the last year or so it's become a commercial hit.

The realworld is full of examples of government initiatives actually working. I guess you just forgot, after 8 years of Republicans in charge, whose hatred of government ensured eight long years of abject failure. Heckuva job there, Wingers.