I'm amazed you could even string a sentence in English, much
less understand one! 
In your over-zealous and stoic defence of this regime, I see you've
conveniently - or perhaps, through your limited intellect, been
unable to comprehend - omitted something which has nothing to do
with beds.
It isn't free to whom? The consumer? So is your warped intellect
actually telling you patients are required to pay at the point of
seeking treatment at a NHS institution?
I see, in your desperate attempt to defend this regime's
deceptively generous taxation, you've resorted to conveniently lump
the British tax system with the inadequacies of its social
policies, while failing to consider the wonderful deal you must be
getting for the taxes you pay in a fascist regime. Is that all
"ignoramuses" like you can come up with? Not bad
for a loser, really.
For all your grand rhetoric and tireless endeavour in presenting
(outdated) "facts" in highlighting the inadequacies of the NHS, I'm
still awaiting something more concrete than senseless drivel to
suggest this regime has actually channelled an adequate portion of
public funds to its spendings on healthcare.
Afterall, I'm sure it says a lot about a regime - and its
sycophants - that
spends SGD2.28 billion on healthcare for a population of 4
million, compared to
Labour spending £104 billion (or SGD312 billion) on NHS that
covers a population of 60 million, doesn't it? In your stoic
defence, I suppose we
ought to believe the British taxmen actually collect 130 times more
taxes than Singapore, which helps to explain the "too
little" efficient services provided by public hospitals.
On the basis of such a precedence, what's there to actually
suggest, should taxes be increased, you're going to get more
hospitals and doctors, instead of a ruling elite writing a bigger
paycheck and selling more spin?
That said, I'm pretty sure this regime still has a lot to be proud
of - for a start, brainless cronies oblivious to the harsh
realities of life are more than welcomed.
