[tirsales]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

History in the use suggests otherwise.

Well, it's not perfect in Germany (historical evidence is presumed to be known) - but: The law nowadays guarantees equals treatment (up to a given level). Unequality gets kicked from judges on a quite regular base. Public welfare has been introduced by Reichskanzler Bismark (ending 19th century, beginning 20th century) - and has since then never been revoked.

For example, throughout the Jim Crow era in the US, government funding most certainly did differentiate on the basis of (ethnic) group membership. During the same period, much private philanthropy did too... but quite a bit did not.

Well, e.g. welfare housing is open to whatever ethinc, religious or social group you come from (and yes, differing based on sexual preferences is illegal). OTOH private organizations (like e.g. churches) tend to differ e.g. based on religious reasons.
I am an atheist - and could thus never get a welfare flat paid by one of the churches - but governmental ones would be open (they are not allowed to differ).

On the front of governments providing "guaranteed funding," I observe (anecdotally) that government funding is by no means guaranteed.

It is (for the important parts) in Germany. But of course there is always some fluctuation, change of priorities, etc
In Germany people tend to do volutary work in associations (e.g. most youth soccer clubs are trained and regulated by voluntaries) - so it's more of a work-based charity instead of a money-based one (no intention to judge the value of each).

Originally Posted by Xenophon

Well... we also lionize Nobel Prize winners. And Turing Award winners. And leading academics. And successful business people. And authors, musicians, painters, preachers, soldiers (sometimes)...

Please dont start a Nobel Prize discussion - it is not a fair measure for a variety of reasons

It should be no suprise that literacy and education was not a high prioirty to be given to peasants. They might become competitors.

See me last post
This is (quite simply) not true for quite a bit of Europe. We never had too many natural resources, so getting "smart people" was literally our only chance of success. (And education was (and is) in great parts valued higher then success or money).
Feudal systems (to what you, I believe, where referring) are so 17th century

Originally Posted by DixieGal

I'm curious about something. What do Europeans do if they believe they are not receiving the best care available? Over here, we fuss and grumble and write letters to clinic managers until a problem is solved.

We fuss and grumble and protest and fuss and grumble a bit more.
Then we complain to televisions or newspapers - gives the next "big medical scandal of the year" (until next week)

The medical system in Germany was one of the best of the world. It perhaps still is - but its running downwards quite fast.
We have a strange system - everything is paid by health insurance companies. You (literally) must be insured - if you dont have the money to pay the insurancy, the government will cover for you.
This ensures (to a given part) that medical treatment is equal to everybody - everybody has the same kind of insurance, so everybody pays the same to the hospital.
Well - and thats when it gets complicated, because there are treatments that dont get covered (somehow simplified: One standard therapy is covered. If you want to differ from this (e.g. a different kind of hearing implant) you either have to have a very good reason - or you pay (the difference) yourself).
There are insurancies that cover more (or more expensive) therapies, etc. If wanted, I can explain it in more detail.
This is a "standard solution" that can be found in quite a number of different parts - some level of treatment/living/whatever is guaranteed (and, normally, really achieved equally for everybody). Above this point you have to pay for yourself.