Americans use the phrase "Don't tax him, don't tax me - tax that man behind that tree!" to describe this hoax. Sugar-coating this swindle with euphemistic names such as "universal healthcare" may make one feel good and altruistic for a while. However, behind the mask economic reality lurks.

Demand becomes unlimited as the cost constraint eases. The limits of the healthcare are never defined. Care providers are subjugated by the state to satisfy the incessant demands foisted on them by the politicians. Budgets are never paid in full as there is insufficient tax collection to cover actual costs.

Healthcare taxes drain growth and jobs out of the country's economy, sacrificing economic advancement of the poor in direct opposition to the stated goals of universal care. This discrepancy is totally ignored by the do-gooders who propound these schemes, as it is one too many logical steps away from their limited thinking.

"Healthcare" is a nebulous entity, constantly changing, expanding at an ever-accelerating pace in technology and costs, always overshooting the last budget "fix". Having health institutions permanently in the red ensures that the morale of the caregivers plummets. Advocates of universal healthcare have absolutely no clue as to how quickly bitter cynicism develops in the caregivers, who are the first to realise how the system is abusing them. The quality of treatment then suffers immensely. Waiting lists, rationing, arrogance and skimpy care become the norm.

The British experiment in universal healthcare is now "doomed", according to The Times. Demographics and costly new technologies have blown away the budget of the UK's National Health Service, which even their tax-happy socialist Chancellor Gordon Brown can't fix.

Predicting the future of universal healthcare in Thailand is easy: all of the above and continued cost overruns for eternity. Better by far to develop a healthy economy with readily available health insurance that defines and controls benefits. Free-market insurers competing for the consumer's baht will control costs.

Wilfred Knight

Orange, California

----------------------------------------------------------

Reversing the dissolution of Parliament is one way out

 On Friday night I saw an interview on Channel 11 with one of the caretaker ministers talking about the difficulties arising from having less than all 500 MPs after the April 2 election. He said legal experts were optimistic a solution could be found. Why? Because it is not the intention of the Constitution to create a deadlock …

While I fully agree with this observation I was baffled to hear it now, after the spirit of the Constitution has been countered so many times during the past two months: refusing a debate in Parliament, dissolving Parliament without pressing reasons, calling for election on short notice, the boycott by the opposition, etc, etc.

I would like to propose another way out. Ask the Constitution Court to first nullify the April 2 election, reverse the House dissolution and recast the election as "a referendum on support for Thaksin".

Consequently, the previous House could reconvene - but without Thaksin as PM - and consider the past two months a "parliamentary recess".

Taking the spirit of the Constitution into account there could be a dozen reasons to nullify the April 2 election:

a. The absence of solid reasons to dissolve the House and call an election in the first place.

b. The preparation time was too short; Thai Rak Thai members were "held hostage" by the 90-day condition.

c. The boycott by all major opposition parties means it wasn't truly a general election.

d. Allegations relating to the registration of small party candidates and the disqualification of about a half of them are still hanging in the air.

e. Allegations concerning improper election promises by Thaksin weren't investigated.

f. Thai Rak Thai candidates were unopposed in 278 constituencies, and one had no candidates at all.

g. Polling day problems: booth configuration, posters, pens, etc.

h. More than one hundred MPs were "beaten" by "no" votes.

i. By-elections needed in 39 constituencies.

j. There is one party-list MP short.

Reversing the dissolution of Parliament might be unconstitutional, but finding solutions for dozens of missing constituency MPs and one party-list MP will frustrate the Constitution even more. And the result would be a Parliament of "lame duck" MPs, many of them "beaten" by "no" votes.

In the election in February last year, 500 MPs were chosen for a term of four years. After just one year one man decided differently. Deciding he was wrong and giving those 500 MPs back their mandate seems to be the right thing to do. No one, except that one man, will win or lose.

Thai Rak Thai won't have the 500 MPs it is are counting on, but it saves face by not running the most ridiculous Parliament in history. The opposition will get back their seats, but won't get the approximately 200 MPs they would have had if they hadn't boycotted the election.

Considering the April 2 election a referendum will show that Thaksin really did lose. In a general election with multiple parties participating, it is appropriate to disregard the non-voters as people who are not interested in politics or unable to make a choice. But in a referendum it is reasonable to assume that non-voters are not supportive. Of 45 million eligible voters Thaksin was able to motivate only 15 million voters to support his constituency candidates and 16 million to vote for his party-list candidates. So he is only supported by one-third of the Thai people! I know this way of interpreting the numbers is controversial, but having 15 million eligible voters disinterested, disillusioned and staying away from the election should mean something.

What would you do if you were caught in a dead-end street? Climb the wall to see if there is a way out on the other side? Enter buildings to see if you can find a back door to gardens or back streets? Or would you retrace your steps to the main road? Admitting mistakes were made isn't wrong and reversing them is the right thing to do. Covering up mistakes by making even more would be a disgrace.

Bangkok Pieter

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------

Kamnan Poh's disappearance says a lot for our rule of law

 Surprise, surprise, Kamnan Poh, found guilty of premeditated murder and graft, was granted bail while his sentence was being appealed and has now disappeared.

On March 24, when he claimed to be sick and so missed his court appointment, did a court-appointed doctor verify his illness - or had the bird already flown the coop?

Whatever induced the judge to give bail to a man with more than ample motivation and means to flee?

Some rule of law we've got, where a lawyer can be murdered for defending his clients, the military can accidentally kill protesters and not be court-marshalled for manslaughter, where our ex-CEO, a PhD in Criminal Justice, can be accused by the auditor-general of making corruption legal - and almost everybody does little but wring their hands.

We get what we deserve. Are you satisfied with the judicial system we've got? At least let's speak up for rule of law.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------

Easy with the water, lads

- the ladies don't like it

 This is a plea to young men not to get too aggressive with throwing water during Songkran. As we know, the choicest targets are young women, and invariably these same women who get roundly splashed are going to giggle and smile. What the young men of Thailand don't know is that many of these girls don't really like getting pails of water thrown full force at them while riding their motorbikes. Their feigned smiles are about as sincere as their feigned laughter at your soggy jokes.

None of the revellers throwing water can fathom the concept that some of them will do grave harm, but statistics show that hundreds of people get injured and dozens die each year as a direct result of water assaults during Songkran. What was once a charming ritual of sprinkling a bit of water on someone dear as a show of respect and blessing - has turned into an orgy of … well, you fill in the blanks.

Millions will get through the melee merely drenched in water - but dozens of families will wind up drowned in sorrow.

Ken Albertsen

Chiang Rai

----------------------------------------------------------

Venezuela teaches US a lesson in giving

 The bombarding of the US ambassador's car in the Venezuelan capital Caracas with eggs and tomatoes is the latest tit-for-tat incident in the sharply differing political styles of the two countries.

It was not a security incident as the US State Department wants us all to believe but rather the traditional non-violent protest practised widely against public figures who overstep the mark - in this instance an attempt by the US to naively pretend to care for the poor and underprivileged in Venezuela.

The real egg on the face of the US government was Venezuela's donation of heating oil this winter to the American poor, who were neglected by the government of the richest nation on earth. This South American country did not single out poor Americans for charity but helped people in neighbouring countries likewise.

It's high time for the Bush administration to step back and accept the differing political colours of other countries and stop their crusade of interference in the name of democracy - a term more to do with freedom of trade for big corporations than individuals. Cuba for example has not been a threat to the United States since the Cold War ended, yet the US insists on continuing sanctions after all these years. It's probably more to do with loss of face from botched insurrections like the Bay of Pigs invasion.

The redistribution of wealth to the poor by the Venezuelan government may be a principle alien to the United States, whose administration favours the survival of the fittest. The US prefers to masquerade as a caring country to buy influence through its so-called foreign aid programmes - aid it denies to its own people, as in New Orleans.

David Prescott

Bangkok

----------------------------------------------------------

Imagining a doctrine based on pure greed

 Democracy is a fragile thing that needs to be defended constantly against those who wish to subvert it for their own ends. I have paraphrased a scene from the film "Wall Street" to illustrate what I believe sums up the psychology of our current leader:

"The point is ladies and gentlemen that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms - greed for life, for money, knowledge - has marked the upward surge of mankind and greed - you mark my words - will not only save Shin Corp but that other malfunctioning corporation called Thailand. Thank you."

Yuri Velasquez

Bangkok

Send us your views in an instant E-mail your opinion, with 'Letters to the Editor' in the subject box, to: letters@nationgroup.com