Lash wrote:This is exactly why some people of conscience are against socialist healthcare programs, like the one Hillary forwarded during Clinton's first term.
A welfare state cannot be sustained.
Britain has a National Health Service (Blair's reforming it, but there's no talk of ditching the principle of universal coverage).
Australia's got universal health insurance - called Medicare. All permanent Australian residents are entitled to free public hospital care, and it meets the bulk of costs for GP treatment, specialist consultations etc as well.
(No universal health insurance in Ireland it seems - but they've got a medical card, everyone
under a certain income is entitled to one and it gets you free GP consults, medicines, hospital and out-patient services, dental, optical and aural services.)
All in all, if the economic success of Britain and Australia (alongside that of the US) was meant to prove that healthy economies require ditching Hillary-style "socialist healthcare programs", there's a bit of a definitional problem here. Seems they can be combined.