In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
All urban public transport systems in every country are subsidised.

Out of taxation in one form or another.

They are after all a public service. Or do you expect to pay the full
cost of any medical treatment?

It would be far more cost effective than letting the government
collect tax, add bureaucracy and deliver a third rate service.

Third rate? Would this be the same as in the US where 1/3rd of the
population is without *any* medical cover? And there are plenty of moves
afoot to remove medical insurance as part of a salary package there as
it's simply becoming too expensive. Bit the same as final salary pensions
here.

It's the same thing, whether public or private, a
form of insurance that levels out the costs to the individual.

The "levelling out" is taking from the haves to subsidise the have
nots in an extremely inefficient way.

And private insurance is always better? Some figures, please.

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.