AFAIK Canada (and old Europe too) has big headache how they are going to fund their systems in near future. Everything comes with the cost, i.e. Universal Health Care means either drastic cut in the level of service or drastic raise in taxes, and, the most unfortunate, it is never one-time event.

>That is IMHO, because it has proven to be the case in the U.S. Other countries are much more successful in managing government programs such as health care and demonstrate a greater degree of fiduciary responsibility.
>
>
>>>>>Care to have an example other than alcoholic beverage control?
>>>>
>>>>There are too many historical examples.
>>>>
>>>>>I've recently come across an interesting datum that the administrative overhead of Medicare is 2%, while the overhead of regular health insurance is over 23% or so. I know that once we had a minor surgical intervention on the skin, they gave us 25% discount on the spot, when they heard we had no insurance.
>>>>
>>>>I wonder how this statistics collected and what means 'overhead' in this case. Anyway, there is rampant abuse going on in Medicaid system, and it's completely gov't business. Would you disagree?
>>>
>>>I don't really do full research on everything that I read, or else I would never go past three articles read a year. I guess that I can (or have to) just trust my memory that I did read what I did read.
>>>
>>>I'd like to see the data - including the facts on how much does the billing and administration in general cost the HMOs and others. Know of a company posing as a mediator between companies and doctors, for pretty much just billing services and rebate. They were charging a percentage of the actual savings and it was a win-win-win situation: the employers had their workers' health handled for less and with more coverage than through insurance, the doctors had a steady stream of patients, and the mediators lived well off the part of the difference. And this whole business model was based on being cheaper than health insurance.
>>>
>>>So if the health insurance is so highly efficient and better than sliced bread, how does such a company manage to thrive on part of the rebate? And where's the guarantee that private insurance isn't just as riddled with fraud as the governmental? It's the same people. If you can fool the inspectors in one, so you can in the other.
>>
>>One may argue from very general positions here, and these positions could be very different. My position is that government business is inherently prone to bureaucracy and waste exactly because of absence of monetary stimulus (or whatever you call it). Please, be assured that I relate it to any gov't business, not necessarily to one that we currently discuss.