"Federally Supported" or "Tax Payer Supported"

When was the last time you felt all warm & fuzzy about the IRS, or Medicare, or the INS...or any number of government agencies? When was the last time you complained about taxes or government waste/fraud? Now tell me what the difference is between the two phrases in my title. Hint: there is none. They both describe the same pile of cash, and they both describe programs/projects supported by tax paying citizens.

Remember this the next time you watch the evening news. When the media (or government officials) want you to feel warm & fuzzy, they describe government projects/programs as "federally supported". When they want you to bristle, projects/programs are described as "tax-payer supported". Why? Because there is a basic disconnect between what the government provides and how those provisions are funded. Every single, solitary cent spent by the government comes from the American tax payers.

So let's look at "universal" healthcare and what it really is...healthcare provided by you & I. Where I come from, taking care of the needs of the impovrished used to be called charity. Now it's considered a government function. If you think the government should supply your healthcare consider how badly they muck everything else up and consider how well it's working in other countries like Canada, Britian, etc. Hint: It's not. Imagine less qualified doctors and nurses, more government waste/fraud, and less money in your pocket 'cuz that's exactly what will happen. The current healthcare system is in shambles, but "universal" healthcare is not the answer.

The money required to establish and maintain this little brain child doesn't come from Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy, folks.