mmm, coffee :)

The thing is, you pay for your healthcare now - either you fork out for insurance OR your employer does on your behalf. You *shouldn't* spend any more - if this cash went to the govt rather than a 'for profit' insurance company, I'd suggest you'd be no worse off.

In Australia, we have a mix of public and private hospitals and we *can* buy private insurance (though this is not really required). What our tax money does is give us access to a GP when we need it. Sometimes this is absolutely free, but sometimes you pay the doctor and claim most or all of the money back from the government.

If I end up in a public ER, whatever needs to be done to me, is done, and I'll not have to pull out my wallet at all (except to show my government 'medicare' card). A lot of private hospitals have ERs as well and, from memory, you can be charged for some thing when visiting.

RE operations - if you have something life threatening, then that is done for free in a public hospital - you don't get a choice of doctor (but then I'd not really have much input). For non-life threatening (e.g. knee reconstruction) you can go onto a public waiting list, which can be quite long, OR you can get it done ASAP in a private hospital. If you take option B, you'd better have insurance or be happy to foot the (sizeable) bill.

I think the system works pretty well and we do have some of the best health care in the world.

The linked article talked about the aging population - that is going to be an issue for Oz as well and the government is trying to encourage better earning people (with tax breaks) to take out private health insurance - this is an effort to make better use of the private hospitals we already have.

In terms of being taxed for porn? I think it is an unlikely scenario, but whoever raised it might find themselves out of office (for meddling in private affairs).

here's hoping they don't raise the taxes on that either.

:lol: good point.

It seems to me that it is one of the best tools government has to direct culture

Why do you want government to "direct culture?" Where in the Constitution is the Federal government given the authority, much less the responsibility for that?

Ummm, I've never ever been told what doctor to go see, nor have I been told how often I can go to said doctor, nor have I had to wait 3 months to see said doctor. Don't know where you're getting your information from but you're really misinformed.

My guess would be a misinformation program set in place by those that would stand to lose the most from universal healthcare...insurance companies.

Don't come down to hard on rahl, though. His is the viewpoint of most Americans. Why? 'Cause we just don't know. We hear about the one horror story out of a million cases and we run with it. That...is a media thing. Hell, the only real reason that I, myself, know better about the Canadian healthcare system is because fine Canadian TFPers, such as yourself, have set me to rights.

From personal experience, I can equate universal healthcare to the healthcare that I received in the military. It was excellent healthcare. Superior in every regard. However...compare that healthcare to that provided by the VA, and you have the difference between night and day. The VA healthcare system absolutely sucks. Why? Government bureaucracy and red tape. You Canadians may have gotten it right, and my hearty congratulations for doing it...but I don't trust the United States government to get it right. I see it turning into a bloated version of the pathetically inept VA system. This is one of those times that I do hope to be proven wrong.

My issue with taxes designed to regulate "bad" behavior is that the people being taxed may not benefit for what they've paid. Those taxes should be put into a "savings" account to be used when needed by the people who've paid the taxes, thereby alleviating the burden on the health care system; otherwise, what are the taxes being used for?

since alot of people here seem to think the gov should be able to discourage certain behaviors with high taxes, how would those same people feel about them, say if a pro-life congress were to implement a $200 tax for an abortion?

dk, that's an interesting edge to something I've not considered.... thanks for the reminder!

I would be fine with that. I would even put a tax on having a baby and not being married. That is sometimes child support, but not always. I think it should be done 100% of the time though.

I would be ok with a tax on R-rated movies if it meant that the governments books were balanced a little better. I kind of wonder what the tax rate would have to be raise to in order for the government to have a balanced budget?

you could raise the tax rate all you want, the govn't will just spend more to make up for it. I am in no way ok with the govn't taxing anything I do to discourage it. That is not their function

That is not their function.
I agree...100%. But, then neither is it the function of government to manufacture cars. This is a crazy world that we now live in. 50, 40...hell, even 30 years ago, the government that we have today would have been simply unimaginable.