With the mid-term elections approaching, it’s a good bet that Democrats will be tossing around the entitlement dollars in an effort to buy their way back into power. I believe that one of their top propaganda tools will once again be socialized healthcare.

Let's set the record straight: Healthcare isn't a "right." Healthcare is a service. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Freedom of Speech, and Freedom of Religion are rights protected under the Constitution and they generally require only that we respect them. It doesn't cost me a dime when some guy gets up on his sidewalk soapbox and speaks his mind, and I don't have to listen to him if I don't wish to. However, when you seek medical care someone must administer that care. Someone must examine you, dispense drugs, set a broken bone, etc. It takes time and costs money.

Medicare, Medicaid, and the Veterans Administration only provide healthcare for a fraction of our population. The Federal Government's estimated cost for "free" healthcare services for fiscal 2005 is $638,473,000,000.00. That's right folks... over six hundred billion dollars in healthcare costs to cover only a portion of the population. Do we really want to expand this to cover everyone? Thanks, but I'll keep my private insurance.

Should we provide healthcare for the needy and disabled? Yes, I believe we should. But the line must be drawn somewhere. Those who are able to pay for their own medical care should be expected to do so. Veterans who suffered service-related injuries or illnesses should of course be covered for obvious reasons. But those who leave the military without service-related problems should be expected to get private insurance like everyone else. It is unrealistic to expect taxpayers to continue to carry an ever-increasing financial burden as the number of people receiving benefits continues to rise.

For a real world comparison, I quizzed a Canadian citizen with whom I do business about the state of affairs with his country's socialized healthcare system. He has asked to remain anonymous.

Thorny question, this. Canada's health care system is a train wreck. Keep in mind that not only does it stipulate that publicly-funded health care be universally available -- it also mandates that no other source of health care be available, such that there not be a "two-tier" health care system wherein wealthy people can get better care than everyone else.

At the moment, Canadian health care accounts for about a third of government spending, making it the single largest consumer of public money.

Health care in Canada ranges from mediocre to awful, depending on where you live. There aren't enough doctors, hospital beds, MRI machines... the list is extensive. People with life-threatening, time-critical illnesses find themselves on waiting lists for diagnosis and treatment. Imagine being told you have cancer and you won't begin treatment for eight to ten weeks... or six months. It's common. People die on waiting lists fairly regularly, or die after treatment because it wasn't administered soon enough.

The salaries of medical professionals are defined by the state, and because the state is often a bit cheap, they're not very competitive with other countries... yours, for example. Canada trains a lot of doctors who split for California as soon as their training is complete.

Not surprisingly, wealthy people in Canada who get sick find there is a two-tier health care system, the second tier being south of the border. Unwilling to die on a waiting list, they elect to pay for treatment in the States.

Canada's health care system covers a number of somewhat questionable areas. For example, it pays for sports medicine -- injury and illness of athletes brought about by engaging in activities they knew full well would injure them. Canada also has legions of parents who bring their children to a doctor every time one of them sneezes -- what the hell, it's free.

Despite the availability of state supported health care, people are still often unable to afford things like drugs, medical devices and hospital services, which aren't covered by the state.

Finally, funding for health care has become a political issue, as everyone wants it and no one wants to pay for it. It was originally split 50-50 between the federal and provincial governments. Over time, the feds weaseled their share down to 14 percent, and then started blackmailing the provinces into concessions in other areas to get some of the funding back. In the mean time, the waiting lists got longer.

Universal health care sounds like a great idea -- people shouldn't have to die because they don't have the money to afford treatment. In practice, it's an unattainable goal. Politicians simply haven't the vision and acumen required to make it work, and when it fails to do so, the result is worse than traditional private health care. It's mind-numbingly expensive, ineffective and it allows people to die who shouldn't have.

Would you trade American healthcare away for what is described above? The reason America has the best healthcare system on Planet Earth is that it's privatized. There's money to be made in healthcare. That's why doctors drive fine automobiles and live in fine houses. And you know what? If that doctor can save my life by employing the skills learned from spending years (and a lot of money) at medical school, then I'm all for him being able to do so. It doesn't bother me in the least.

And don't whine about the cost of new drugs. All of the research and development that goes into creating new drugs costs millions of dollars and the drug companies have every right to recoup that cost. If they can't make money, they can't stay in business. And if they go out of business, who'll make the next life-saving drug? It bothers me when I hear about people needing a new drug that they cannot afford. But that does not alter the fact that the drug companies require revenue to operate.

Life isn't always fair, and it isn't always fun. We all must brave up to the fact that unless you want to see even more of your earnings taken away in taxes, we must curb and eventually reverse the growth of government programs. Politicians don’t know how to save money. They only know how to spend it. It's up to us to demand change.