Lol, it's hair splitting to point out that a government subsidized system isn't completely private? Like, for real?

1. not liberal
2. government subsidies =/= "completely private"

move along

omg just because there's massive government intervention you're trying to say it's not completely private? Why do you liberals hate America and want to split such tiny hairs?

ofc
btw if you are religious and dont support: lololololololol

This post was edited by BebebBurns on May 25 2016 11:12am

seems i have been found out. if i had any self respect i would just leave after making utterly erroneous comparisons

What opportunity? Singapore is an incredibly wealth city-state with a model of social welfare that is not feasible for anywhere else on the planet. Anyone who cannot afford education, health care, or any other essential societal service has it paid for by the government. Singapore has a much more developed social welfare system then any socialist/communist state on the planet, and significantly more than the US. Are you saying you want to emulate that?

The US bureaucracy is the model of inefficiency. If single-payer systems are inefficient, what do you define the American system as? I'll give you a few more adjectives: backwards, corrupt, feeble, incapable. I'd argue a single-payer system isn't even possible in the US due to the level of corruption and partisanship that exists at all levels of American government. American governance structures are worse than many newly-industrialized countries.