>It seems to me that the issue is not whether poor people should get benefits >not available to others but whether government is the best agency for >providing those benefits. I agree. >PE: It is one thing to bitch and moan about government >(this is not aimed at Paul!), but another to suggest a reasonable >alternative. I have no quarrel in WHAT the [Canadian] health care system provides, it's the way in which it provides it that is the problem. I am a direct beneficiary of its existence (having had a life-saving heart operation 16 years ago) which would have probably bankrupted my family, had we lived in the USA. I didn't pay a dime for anything other than a single 4 weeks subscription after the operation. No problem... BUT... the three year HELL that I went through in order to jump through all the hoops to GET the operation? now there's something WRONG with that. It could be much better. It could save lives -- I almost died as i went from a healthy teenager to a very sick college student while I waited -- and it most surely could treat people in a more timely fashion if the government wasn't in control of it. Like I said a few months ago... this universal health care is pretty good, if you're almost dead, but if you're just sick, mmm, not so much. Paul p.s. by the way, Phil I know your parenthetical remarks were inserted JUST to be nice <marlena wink> ########## Paul Stone pas@xxxxxxxx Kingsville, ON, Canada ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html