Or Sweden, Canada, England or France. That's the thing. There's plenty of examples of advanced countries with a government run healthcare system.
There are zero examples of advanced countries that do things the way conservatives say would lead to prosperity.
So, it's not silly to say 'try somalia if you want zero government'. It is silly to say 'try north korea if you want more government', especially since north korea provides fewer government services than western states.
Opposition to government-subsidized healthcare is not anarchism.
So yes, it is silly, to put it nicely.
So, it's not silly to say 'try somalia if you want zero government'.
It's very silly, because it implies that the alternative to spending $3.8 trillion a year is to dismantle core government services.
Domestic discretionary spending has actually been falling relative to inflation the last 12 years. (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/feb/...)