>>>>And my point is that payment is spread among all people - theoretically equally, rather than those who need care most paying by far the most (which is likely unaffordable).
>>>>
>>>>And my point is that it is not spread among all people. I can see that for myself every time I go to the grocery store the first week of the month and watch my tax dollars at work. I wonder how much the people on welfare are contributing....
>>>
>>>So you figure people on welfare should be paying taxes out of their welfare (so the taxpayers can increase the payments to welfare to make up the difference)?
>>
>>Would you agree that the ideal healthcare system should treat every person the same way, i.e. the same level of care for the same out-of-pocket cost (i don't talk about taxes here) ?
>
>In an ideal society and ideal economic situation where everyone could afford to pay the same, certainly.
>
>We are not in an ideal society or an ideal economic situation. People still have healthcare needs.

Let me change the question then. If universal healthcare system will offer the same level of medical service to everyone, but some people will get it free while others will have to bear partial or full cost, i.e. accomodating for not an ideal situation, would it be better than the 1st suggestion?
Please, consider, before the answering, that 2nd situation would be basically the same that we have now. The only debatable issue is how much cost is bearable, and how fair to tell a person that he cannot afford to have serious illness and middle-class lifestyle together.