"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 11:53:59 -0000, ":::Jerry::::"
wrote:


"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
:::Jerry:::: wrote:

As I've said to in the past, you seem to be one of those 'I'm
alright,
sod
you' types, the only people who would benefit form your approach are
those

That assertion does not seem to fit in with Andy's statement "...that
works well when I want it *and* still be able to contribute into a pot
for those who are not able to do so to a far more cost effective
extent than today." [my emphasis] does it?


I suggest you find out just how many 'above poverty' Americans fall
through
there so called health care system before supporting a 'non free at point
of
use' health care system....

Even countries with socialised medicine have charges at the point of
delivery - e.g. small payment for GP visits, exempted for the poorest.
AFAIK, Britain is the only country that attempts a free at the point
of delivery system. It's an outdated nonsense.

Such tripe. Despite this free at point of delivery, people still do not go
and remain ill.