Prime Minister to Australians: All your hospital are belong to us.

[Deadlokd]

Two days ago the Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced a $50 billion a year takeover of the nation's hospitals. At least that is what it will cost the states in lost Goods and Services Tax handouts every year. The reaction of the state Premiers has been "mixed".

The idea is to reduce waste and waiting lists in hospitals. Up to now hospitals have been run by the states as part of their respective Departments of Health. The states rely on money from the Federal Government every year to pay for everything. Unfortunately we had twelve years of a PM who didn't believe in social services and welfare and cut taxes and contributions to the states. Less money, less funding for the state's health systems.

When the Ruddmeister got in he promised an inquiry into the nation's health system. The main recommendation was a federal takeover of all health departments but Ruddy has decided on little steps. Another recommendation was that the government starts including dental in Medicare, a move that could cost an additional $8 billion a year.

Me? I like the idea. Some of the wait times are ridiculous and there is huge inequality across the states. Also, anything that erodes the states's power is okay with me. We only have 21 million people, that isn't enough to fund three layers of government. I think we can do without state governments. Heh, in another federalist move Rudd unveiled a national curriculum for school students. Take that Queensland Education!

[godfry n. glad]

Uh...

I hate to tell you this, but once this has all transpired, and the states are stripped of their power and the federal government bloated, then the whackjobs take over control of the bloated federal government and bludgeon healthcare ceaselessly, while the powerless states stand by to do nothing because they have been stripped of their powers to do anything.

Bigger and more powerful national government does not always lead to desired outcomes.

Here, it was necessary to invoke a strong national government to counter the provincialism and ossification of moral standards which had come to pass in states, particularly in regard 'civil rights'. In the process, and since we'd already given the feds access to way to much revenue, the 'stronger' federal government became even more corrupted, because it was of greater benefit for the corrupters to corrupt.

Good luck with all that....I hope you can strike a sane balance between states and nation.