Tinkerntom wrote:

Hillary Care was a startup program that would have cost several
trillion by itself, with no guarantee that it would work, and a
history of big government boondoggles and porkbarrel politics
supporting programs that don't work. If I remember right, they
estimated 1.7 trillion, and politician estimates are always low when
they are the ones trying to sell the program! But what is another 500
billion +/-, we would have gotten, mediocre medical care, by doctors
who gave up really caring, after standing in long lines, waiting for
our slice of the American Pie.

So how is that different from our current health care system? The
current employer-based insurance-reimbursement system is a shambles.

A single-payer system could very well result in a lower percentage
of GDP being paid for health care. In 1990 the US spent more on
health care per capita than any other western nation, and by 1996
spent even more as a % of GDP.

Total 1990 Healthcare Expenditures

Nation Per Capita Percent
==========================================
United States $2,566 12.1 (1996=13.6%)
Canada 1,770 9.3
France 1,532 8.8
Sweden 1,451 8.6
Germany 1,486 8.1
Switzerland 1,633 7.7
Italy 1,236 7.7
Norway 1,184 7.4
Japan 1,171 6.5
United Kingdom 972 6.2

[ http://www.corporatism.netfirms.com/universal.htm ]