payer

The Pentagon is spending about $11 billion on the F35 for the entire fiscal year (2% of its budget).[1] About ~$30 per tax payer.

Single-payer is not the only way to achieve universal healthcare, nor even the only way it's done in Europe.

Checks are kept out-of-sight, for each payer to process individually without a lot of discussion, and tips are usually kept private.

School districts can unilaterally give raises to teachers, which increases the tax-payer's burden via additional pension obligations when that teacher retires.

The reason it's much cheaper in Canada is collective bargaining through the single payer.

By that metric, the US should have had single payer health care years ago.

Tax-payer funded work comes with a process of prioritising and deciding what is important to the public and should therefore receive public funds.

Really, this is why I think single payer or just full-on nationalized health would work better in the end.

Most small business owners that I know would prefer single-payer health care to avoid the distraction of employer-sponsored coverage.

The initial estimate in 2005 was even lower, foreseeing costs of below 100M for the tax payer with donations supposed to cover the difference.

Despite the cost to the tax payer, I'd love to see this guy sue the crap out of everyone involved.

Costs for the tax payer are actually more than seven times (789M EUR) the original estimate at the time construction began (114M EUR in 2007).

It opened in 2011 but has not received a single flight." Your government is pretty broken when it spends this much tax payer money to build something nobody uses.

And yes, it is "thousands of dollars" cheaper to do a grid tie system, and yet the regulatory changes are making it harder on home solar systems to recover costs (mostly because it shifts peak load costs toward the utility and away from the individual rate payer, the utilities are trying to avoid that).