"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:26:33 -0600, the infamous Dave Balderstone
scrawled the following:

In article , Larry Blanchard
wrote:

Isn't it amazing that the only examples opponents come up with are
England and Canada? Yes, England's plan is screwed up. But I've spent
a
lot of time talking to Canadians about their plan and all of them, while
admitting it could stand improvement, are on the whole quite pleased
with
it.

Our plan is on the brink of collapse. If we had been as affected by the
recent recession as the rest of the world was, we'd be f*cked. Health
care takes up almost 50% of the provincial budget here in Saskatchewan.

There is NO room left.

Take out a tree or two. There's plenty of room up there.


50%. Think about that.

That's good. It means that your administrative overhead is small(er).
Look at D.C. and the crap they plan for this healthcare debacle!

http://fwd4.me/J4T says Canadian healthcare cost 9/8% of GDP in '05.
Why is Saskatchewan so heavy on the medical? Lower incomes? Fewer
people? What?

Truth?