"Paul Middlestat" > wrote in message
om...
> > The US health care may rank among the best.
> > Unfortunately only those who can afford it have acces to it.
> > The others have to make do with far less or with nothing at all.
>
> > Privatisation usualy has the following effects to the customer:
> > - rising cost
> > - less service
> > - less quality
> > - less safety
> > - less reliability
>
> Unfortunate, but true. Has anyone ever known of any program of the
> federal government which was managed successfully? The only way to
> make the current health care system worse is to allow the government
> to control it.
>
> And recall that the fiasco known as HillaryCare was DOA in '92.
> But if you want to see what a mess the federal government could make
> of health care, take a look at that proposal. One of the more
> striking items -in my opinion- being that congress would _not_ be
> covered by the plan. And neither would their families or their staff.
> They would be managing a program which would impact on the rest of us
> while continuing to enjoy their taxpayer-paid, no waiting, state of the
> art, full coverage, health care. All of which would then be a distant
> memory to the rest of the population.

The Canadian system has the provinces doing the actual administration. Would
you feel more confident in your state being able to do a credible job?