The only problem here is that you are pretty much wrong on all counts. Humans didn't evolve by sitting around in lovey-dovey quilt making sessions. They evolved by the ones who were better able to survive wiping out the ones who were not.

The problem is that the majority of the population are lazy gets who when given a choice between 1) work hard and earn something for yourself and 2) let your neighbour work hard and earn it for you, pick 2) every time. So you can prattle on as much as you like about collective endeavours, but that's not human nature. Come down from your ivory tower and smell the coffee. Most of the world is perfectly happy to let other people carry the load for them.

This is the crux of the issue. a) that somehow medical treatment is totally different than any other service/commodity (it's not) and b) that we should be force at gunpoint to pay for every unhealthy
  clown on the planet because of their bad choices.

If i want a better house, I earn more money so I can buy it. Ditto with a car. Want a better education? Pay for it. That's how the world works.

As for the second point, all you need to do is work at the ER in a major hospital for a while to see what happen when you give people free medical care. All the welfare grabbing losers who are already sucking on the government teat like that was no tomorrow show up for the most trivial reasons you can imagine, just because it won't cost them anything. Things that any normal person would either self treat of see their doctor in the morning. I'm not kidding, I saw a guy arrive once in an ambulance because he ate something that gave him gas. Think of how many thousand dollars that cost the taxpayers.

Didn't your mom warn you about that? "They give you one for free, and then when they have you hooked....wham!"

If a student has been showing up to class for several weeks, and then come test day a different, formerly unknown person shows up to sit in that seat and take the test, all but the most braindead professors will figure out that something is amiss. And at large colleges, with large class sizes, it's common that students will be required to show a picture ID to enter the testing room. (Thinking here of some multiple section courses, where 300 stendents take the exam in a large auditorium or something similar).

I didn't say community colleges, I'm talking about the "all online" ones you see advertised all over the place, but which claim to have accreditation. And to the poster who said I have no clue, I have been to training seminars where these companies tout their job opportunities. You truly do get paid for counting how many times each student logs on per week, and no, there is no security in place for testing or anything else.

Do you have any idea how bogus the whole online diploma process already is? None of the major "all online" schools have any way to check who actually did the work. So student A signs up, and Student B does the work, but Student A gets the credit. As an employer, when I see a "degree" from one of this places, I just laugh.

modding on parent brought to you by the humour impaired sheesh

ah, but you forget that defamation (the term I used in my post) covers more than libel and slander. There are things such as public disclosure of private facts, false light, invasion of privacy, etc. that also fall under defamation and truth may not be an absolute defense at all in some of those cases.

except they must have left out one important fact about this in your classes. "Publication" in the case of defamation has a very specific legal meaning, and it's not "being published in a newspaper" but rather refers to disseminating the information, via a number of possible routes. So it might well be possible to "publish" information by standing on a stage in a large auditorium full of people and saying it over the PA system.

The defamation part is in publishing information that might harm the person's character. Nothing there about truth. In some cases truth is a defense, sometimes not, but it's not part of the original tort. So yes, it's sometimes possible for a true statement to be defamatory.

No, there is a different tort for written material. Slander must be spoken. An action might lie for libel, but not slander.

This would be funny except it's scary instead . . .

I have an even better idea. You know how water cooling makes your computer run better? Well my theory is that water cooling would work the same way for the OP. He needs to get a large tank, fill it with ice water, and be sure to keep his head fully submerged while doing all his computer work. I'm sure he'll be amazed at his increased productivity.

Read TFA, they say that bringing them back on line might take up to a year, because the transformers are custom made, and don't exist as readily available replacements. So yes, I'm sure it would be a priority, but how will those millions in NYC last the nine months or so it will take (according to TFA) to get them back on line?

except that "easier" is contained in "no harder" so the parent was correct :-)