Again, we're not having an argument about health care, and I'm not trying to dismiss the book you cited that pertains to the argument we're not having. I'm saying that book is clearly partisan, as is your argument.

And I'm using that observation (which you keep reinforcing!) to justify my suspicion around the economic point you tried to make upthread (that, I guess, "hidden" health care "income" would increase labor's share if measured).

It's 100% clear to me that the labor/income point is spin, and to be blunt I don't believe it for an instant.