user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
But it's free . . .
24 billion dosen't seem like much to assure the health care of a nations citizens, we probably spend the equivalent on waste and pork barrel projects.
^ that's just for the information system, not the whole thing. I imagine the entire cost is significantly higher.
hmmm, the information system, but I'm still for universal health care system
yep, just for the database system to keep the information.
cost overruns are notorious in this area.
by LCD on Thu Dec 21, 06 4:06pm
[+]
Voted : it's a total waste of taxpayer's dollars
This is what happens when you tender contracts out to the private sector.
The railways in the UK are 'privately' owned, yet they recieve THREE times the subsidy it recieved when it was a nationalised company.
The result? Lower safety (type crashes since privatation in any search engine) poor working conditions, more dangerous places for the public (see rape and assault rates, since privatisation) higher fares and fewer trains.
The problem is, that the market has failed when it comes to providing essential services.
They are trying to privatise the London Underground by stealth, and their first salvo is to provoke the staff into taking industrial action.
That has to be worked out, but wouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water
Voted : it's a total waste of taxpayer's dollars
This is what happens when you put government in charge of healthcare.
|
|
