Anyone listen to Glenn Beck this morning?  His monologue discussed socialized medicine, and he got a few calls from people in canada and europe (if i remember correctly).. very informative, falls right in line with this post.

But Cuba has the best health care in the world!

/NOT

Lee:

I’m a few days late with this story, but I just found it yesterday.  Here’s the latest socialized medicine success!

Egad, more proof that all public health care is a failure based on one specific incidence of confused/poorly implemented policy. What to do?

Some thoughts from the WHO’s ranking of the world’s health systems - 2000.

WHO’s assessment system was based on five indicators: overall level of population health; health inequalities (or disparities) within the population; overall level of health system responsiveness (a combination of patient satisfaction and how well the system acts); distribution of responsiveness within the population (how well people of varying economic status find that they are served by the health system); and the distribution of the health system’s financial burden within the population (who pays the costs).

A couple of interesting findings (that support my viewpoint):

The U.S. health system spends a higher portion of its gross domestic product than any other country but ranks 37 out of 191 countries according to its performance, the report finds.

One key recommendation from the report is for countries to extend health insurance to as large a percentage of the population as possible. WHO says that it is better to make “pre-payments” on health care as much as possible, whether in the form of insurance, taxes or social security.

In North America, Canada rates as the country with the fairest mechanism for health system finance – ranked at 17-19, while the United States is at 54-55. Cuba is the highest among Latin American and Caribbean nations at 23-25.

The impact of failures in health systems is most severe on the poor everywhere, who are driven deeper into poverty by lack of financial protection against ill- health.

“The poor are treated with less respect, given less choice of service providers and offered lower- quality amenities,” says Dr Brundtland. “In trying to buy health from their own pockets, they pay and become poorer.”

It’s important to note that if you don’t feel “fairness” is a key indicator of a successful health care system, you probably don’t put too much stock in these rankings. But in the least, it’s hard to argue that perhaps the US isn’t spending its health care $$ wisely..

witchndigger:

But Cuba has the best health care in the world!
/NOT

Does the US?

Of note on the WHO table is Cuba’s overall ranking of 39, two places behind the US. This despite the US’s #1 ranking in health expenditures, versus Cuba’s 118. Considering other Latin American countries’ reliance on Cuba for providing medical care that is almost on par with “developed countries”, I think Cuba is doing quite well. Not to mention the incredible doctors they produce down there. How about comparing the US to a country that is more economically similar, like France or your Canuck neighbours to the north?

Housing is an important concern for every American. Who doesn’t need a place to sleep and put their stuff? I think that the government should be paying for my apartment. I certainly use it a lot more often than I use my doctor. I’ll be forwarding my rent bill to Hillary.

Does Canada have an influx of undocumented aliens that demand to be taken care of? More to the point, if I showed up in Canada and went to the doctor, would I be treated? I’m not making a statement, I’m asking, for real, because I don’t know the answer.

I really don’t want the government to start “managing” health care. We have another agency (that should be abolished) with the world “management” in the title, and look how well they’ve managed to manage things.

I don’t think there’s a magic pill for making sure everyone is guaranteed health care. It’s a service that people provide, which means guaranteeing that service to everyone means forcing someone to perform it, at least some of the time. I don’t think that’s fair. I think the answer lies in capping lawyer fees and damages, and getting insurance companies to offer fair rates to doctors, so they wouldn’t have to charge so much to cover the premiums.

swagger:

Housing is an important concern for every American. Who doesn’t need a place to sleep and put their stuff? I think that the government should be paying for my apartment. I certainly use it a lot more often than I use my doctor. I’ll be forwarding my rent bill to Hillary.

We call it affordable housing up here and it was featured in Bowling for Columbine (though not all of it is quite as nice as Mikey portrayed it to be..)

Just as I expect the government to pay for a base level of health care, I think it’s reasonable to have a social safety net in place to ensure that the basic level of housing is available. The former doesn’t include breast implants, like the latter doesn’t include your apartment – though I could be convinced the of the merits of the former..

Belcatar:

Does Canada have an influx of undocumented aliens that demand to be taken care of? More to the point, if I showed up in Canada and went to the doctor, would I be treated? I’m not making a statement, I’m asking, for real, because I don’t know the answer.

If you include the busloads of American seniors coming up here to have their prescriptions filled, than yes. To your second question, yes, I believe you would receive treatment while you were here in the case of an emergency…though I wouldn’t recommend coming up for a hip or knee replacement, or to have a cataract zapped...there’s a bit of a wait at the moment.

I’m curious, are you suggesting that your downfalls in border security should impact your health care policies? And why are you coming here for medical help?…

I really don’t want the government to start “managing” health care. We have another agency (that should be abolished) with the world “management” in the title, and look how well they’ve managed to manage things.

I’m guessing FEMA here… Depends on what people you have in charge I suppose. I wouldn’t recommend Brownie for any positions in the Department of Health though.

I don’t think there’s a magic pill for making sure everyone is guaranteed health care. It’s a service that people provide, which means guaranteeing that service to everyone means forcing someone to perform it, at least some of the time. I don’t think that’s fair. I think the answer lies in capping lawyer fees and damages, and getting insurance companies to offer fair rates to doctors, so they wouldn’t have to charge so much to cover the premiums.

I don’t think there’s a magic pill either. Perhaps here is where I’m a bit of a dreamer, but I hope a good chunk of the people who get into medicine do it for the right reasons. I work in not-for-profit, while I could make a fair bit more scratch in the private sector. IMHO though, the intangibles are priceless.

But if the intangibles don’t do it for them, I happen to know that our top cardiac docs pull in about $750,000+ a year, top orthos about $450,000+ and head nurses about $100,000+, so I don’t think anyone is putting a gun to their heads to come into work.

I think you make an excellent point about insurance premiums and lawyers fees, etc. From what I understand, medical litigation is a little out of control down there. But I’m not clear on why you feel the government is, in this instance, capable of effectively managing/regulating the process..

Well, as far as the seniors going up to get their prescriptions filled, don’t they turn around and leave? And if you’re just getting a prescription filled, it doesn’t require a visit to a doctor. All you have to do is go to the drugstore.

I’m suggesting that our pathetic border security does impact health care by increasing demand without a similar increase in the ability to pay. Smoking and obesity increase the demand even further. I think these increased demands make it tougher to offer affordable care.

But I still don’t think that Health Care is a right. Rights are protections against arbitrary government. Forcing someone to peform a service for someone else would appear to violate that person’s right to not be subjected to involuntary servitude.

Lastly, I don’t really have a decent solution for getting scumbag insurance companies to lower rates for doctors. I’m thinking maybe we should get the Mafia involved.

Belcatar’s point about immigrants is very valid.  Canuck, seniors who cross the border for prescription drugs would generally be considered a boon to your economy, not an anchor.  Throw in lunch or something and Canada gets a few bucks.  Widespread illegals add little or nothing to our economy, but suck up dollars for healthcare, education, etc.

I would also add Americans, unfortunately, need a lot of health care.  We smoke, drink and eat with the best of them.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but we’re still considered the most obese nation by a significant margin.  This country is all about “everything in extremes.” I can’t disagree with Canuck’s point we can spend money more wisely, but find me a nation in which this isn’t the case. 

My other concern about the study is a lot of it rides on “customer satisfaction.” Again, disagree if you want because I’m playing hunches...I certainly can’t back this with evidence.  But Americans are, to a large degree, spoiled.  A Canadian may consider an hour wait and scheduled follow up visit to a hospital a bonus; an American may consider it outrageous.  Cubans may not bitch at all, either from fear of “rocking the boat” or simply being used to what they have.

To this point, I’ve known a fair share of Canadians who spent months at a time in the US.  (I worked for a professional in-line hockey club.  Yes, we had a lot of Canadians.) Granted, even with the dozen or so I’ve talked to about this, it’s a small sample size.  It was also ten years ago or so.

But to a man, they preferred doctors and care on this side of the border.  Now let me be fair and mention the majority of their treatments were covered by the team.  For all intents and purposes, it was free for them.  When I asked them how’d they feel with co-pays or deductibles, it simply came down to the amount of money we were talking.  $10-$20 co-pays for office visits and prescriptions didn’t bother them.  $100 and more co-pays and deductibles brought more debate and dissention.  Note, however, even then there were some who preferred what we have.

Sadly, the hockey team is defunct as I’d love to revisit this with them.  I was obviously a decade younger than and not wise enough to ask the questions I would think to ask today.  Even the ones who preferred the US health care system did give me a bit of a smile and remind me, “but of course, ours is free.” Only one added “and you get what you pay for.”

The GOVMT does a good job of what?
Just list what they are good at.

Where will I go when I have Cancer, Heart problems, a hang nail....Canada, Cuba, the UK?

Come On.

I would guess more sick people(with the money) are comming to the US to get their Health Care. (note I did not say I have proof.)

The GOVMT does a good job of what?
Just list what they are good at.

A lot of people complain about it, but I think that the postal service does a bang-up job. Think about it - you can send a physical object over 3,000 miles to the other side of the country for thirty-nine cents, and it usually only takes 2-3 days. That’s quite a bargain.

Besides that, they’re pretty good at spending money. Especially on useless things. That’s quite a skill, especially if you consider the scale of the spending.

Just as I expect the government to pay for a base level of health care, I think it’s reasonable to have a social safety net in place to ensure that the basic level of housing is available.

So it wouldn’t be unreasonable of me to request a reimbursement in the amount of the cheapest single or one bedroom apartment in my area? What if I live in Beverly Hills? Do I get a subsidy based on that or will they pay me the Compton rate?

I think that healthcare, like housing, transportation, food, etc. is the responsibility of the person who needs it, with a few possible exceptions. It’s not the government’s job (at the taxpayers’ expense) to provide those things to anyone.

Today’s my last day at the company I work for. I found out a week ago that I was being laid off - not a lot of time to find work elsewhere, which I haven’t yet. Who do I expect to take care of my food, rent and bills? Me. I didn’t put myself into a position where the unexpected loss of my job could force me out of my apartment.

It’s a simple matter of personal responsibility. I shouldn’t be penalized because someone else doesn’t have any.

Many people harp on the insurance providers for not being affordable, but the stark reality is that it is the healthcare itself that is not affordable.  Hospitals and pharmacudical companies bilk us blind.  I could afford my regular doctor’s office visits.  What I could not afford is an extended stay.  Hospitals charge exhorbatant fees as do the drug companies.  When my wife gave birth to our daughter she was given 800mg of ibuprofin for some lingering pain.  Do you know what that pill cost?  $7.  For 800mg of generic drugs.  amazingly enough, I could walk down to Walgreens and buy 200 count 200mg tablets of ibuprofin for the same price.  So why was I charged 50 times more for that dosage than I would have paid on the open market?  Why do drug companies, who’s #2 expendature behind R&D;is marketing and advertising, spen billions of dollars a year advertising drugs to me that I have to see my doctor to get anyway?  Couldn’t they cut their costs by targeting their advertising to the MDs who prescribe the drugs and leave us out of it?  Should my doctor not know more than I do about how to effectively treat my symptoms?  “If you have high cholesterol, ask your doctor about Lipitor...” How about if I have high cholesterol, my doctor tells me which drug would most effectively treat it.  But why do they get away with it?  Because who’s going to refuse a medical bill?  Who’s going to haggle when their life is at stake?  [/rant]

That was probably a bit incoherant and rambling but I needed to say it…

Sir Not Appearing In This Film

Where is the most R&D;done?

This again is a real question. Aren’t American CO’s doing the bulk of R&D;in the world? Are Americans paying that cost so the rest of the world get the benefits?

Aren’t American CO’s doing the bulk of R&D;in the world?

Off the top of my head, I know that Merck, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca are all based in other countries.

There’s still a lot of R&D;done in the U.S., by companies that aren’t pharmas (e.g. Amgen) as well as the pharmas themselves, but most people don’t realize that a lot of the names they hear on the nightly news all the time aren’t U.S. based companies.

If only it were as simple as “that fat guy over there is evil, let’s string him up and the problem will be solved.”

I think as long as people feel entitled to health care, they will expect other people to be responsible for their health. We should be doing everything we can to look after our own health, and then call upon the pros when we can’t do it on our own. That means eating a balanced diet, not smoking, getting regular exercise, and one that a lot of people seem to overlook - WASHING ONE’S HANDS ON A REGULAR BASIS.

Just think of nasty smokers, not washing their hands and then inhaling carcinogens and ingesting virii at the same time.

Belcatar:

Well, as far as the seniors going up to get their prescriptions filled, don’t they turn around and leave? And if you’re just getting a prescription filled, it doesn’t require a visit to a doctor. All you have to do is go to the drugstore.

Indeed, I was being more tongue in cheek than anything. I do take your point though…

I’m suggesting that our pathetic border security does impact health care by increasing demand without a similar increase in the ability to pay. Smoking and obesity increase the demand even further. I think these increased demands make it tougher to offer affordable care.

I still don’t see how failure in one area of government is a reason not to do something in another. Firstly, it seems kind of defeatist, and secondly, would illegal immigrants place that much strain on a proposed health care system that it collapses?

But I still don’t think that Health Care is a right. Rights are protections against arbitrary government. Forcing someone to peform a service for someone else would appear to violate that person’s right to not be subjected to involuntary servitude.

And I suppose this is where our ideologies really split. I believe basic health care is a right. I just can’t imagine being cool with thinking that if a loved one had a serious medical emergency that the ambulance attendant would feel for their wallet before their pulse. And if the bulge in the former wasn’t thick enough, well, that’s just tough. If I can’t imagine that for my own family, it seems reasonable to extent that consciousness to strangers as well. To me, a healthy member of society elevates the entire society – which is a major point of the WHO study.

I did a study in college of a well-known Canadian company that invested heavily in workplace enrichment, including fantastic day care, impeccable food service (fresh oj was cheaper than a can of Coke), a futuristic gym, etc. Though those initial cash outlays were more than most companies, the ROI in terms of less sick days, man hours lost, productivity was incredible. Why can’t/shouldn’t that model work in society as a whole?

Though there is no doubt that abuses of the system take place – lord knows our emergency rooms are full of people with the sniffles (I think that’s ignorance more than intent) – I don’t know many people who go out of their way to cheat the system. That is to say, I’m not going to go have my spleen removed, just for the hell of it.

And again, I ask you to survey the doctors and nurses in our hospitals if they feel they are being subjected to involuntary servitude . The passion that they pour into their jobs, and the Porsches they leave the parking lots in, would indicate to me, no.

Lastly, I don’t really have a decent solution for getting scumbag insurance companies to lower rates for doctors. I’m thinking maybe we should get the Mafia involved.

I imagine they already are. Probably for the bad guys though…

and secondly, would illegal immigrants place that much strain on a proposed health care system that it collapses?

YES, YES, YES, YES, YES, YES, YES, and uhhhh YES!

I hope I am getting this message through but the answer is a resounding yes.  Think about it.  As many as 5 million illegal immigrants are in this country and most of those could not afford the health care they have now.  Imagine as well that they have jobs that may not report their wages to protect both worker and company.  Where does that leave this health care program?  Well, I believe the answer is collapsed.

Again, to me the whole thing sounds like “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need” style of marxizm but hey what do I know?

BD05:

To this point, I’ve known a fair share of Canadians who spent months at a time in the US.  (I worked for a professional in-line hockey club.  Yes, we had a lot of Canadians.) Granted, even with the dozen or so I’ve talked to about this, it’s a small sample size.  It was also ten years ago or so.

Ha. Good ol’ Canucks, always prepared to fulfill a stereotype, eh.

But to a man, they preferred doctors and care on this side of the border.

I don’t doubt it… we actually have private forms of care popping up here in T.O. to service the executive physical market – Medcan comes to mind. Beautiful offices on the 50th floors of our banking towers, indoor rockery fountains, no waiting lines, gorgeous receptionists and a faaaaaaaaar better selection of magazines… makes the place I go to on the plaza look like a dump.

But:

Now let me be fair and mention the majority of their treatments were covered by the team.  For all intents and purposes, it was free for them.

There’s the rub. That’s what this whole discussion is about. Access. I don’t dispute that there are some really swanky private clinics down there that service professional athletes, executives, the high foreheads of the liberal media. But that means nothing to the person in Compton or rural (random state) whose appendix is about to burst and has no coverage; they’d probably wish it would, so they could avoid paying the fees after the surgery.

Holding the health system up high for its quality of care, while neglecting to consider the segment of the population who don’t have access to it, doesn’t offer a complete picture.

Sadly, the hockey team is defunct as I’d love to revisit this with them… Even the ones who preferred the US health care system did give me a bit of a smile and remind me, “but of course, ours is free.” Only one added “and you get what you pay for.”

Oh, it ain’t free. My pay stub’ll tell you that…

Shame about the team.

witchndigger:

Where will I go when I have Cancer, Heart problems, a hang nail....Canada, Cuba, the UK?

Yes, maybe, yes.

Come On.

I would guess more sick people(with the money) are comming to the US to get their Health Care. (note I did not say I have proof.)

It’s a fairly broad claim to make, with no proof to back it up. But more sick people from where?

Your qualifier “with the money” is the crux of the argument here…as stated in my post to BD05. No doubt, the States has some excellent health care facilities, you have made enormous contributions to world health (and perhaps have had an equally devastating impact…I’m looking at you Ray Kroc), and heck, you’re still ranked 37 out of 191 countries on the WHO countdown…

But IMHO, the disparity that exists in access to care drags the US system down.

I would appreciate some insight from posters on this site as to what your individual situation is as far as Health Care is concerned.  IE) Do you work for companies that provide a health care benefit?  What is your annual spend on health care?  If a severe medical situation came up suddenly, are you financially prepared to deal with it?  If a medical condition caused you to lose your job, what would be the impact?

I ask this in the context that in Canada, I believe, none of the answers to the questions above impact a persons ability to get health care without inducing financial hardship.

I also ask it relative to the context of American Corporations and the the Health Benefits Packages that they give to their employees.  What does Walmart do for example?

I saw an Associated Press story in the last week or so, about a meeting between the Auto Industry and George Bush.  The Big 3 automakers claim that the health care cost built in to each car is more than the cost of the steel in the car.  GM claims to have spent $5.3 Billion to provide coverage to 1.1 Million people last year.  If true, it means the annual spend is about $4600 per person.

With the auto industry bleeding red ink, is this sustainable?  Are other American companies facing similar concerns?

I will certainly grant that American health care is right up there at the top of the charts, but is the system not under any stress (and not just related to illegals)?  At least some sort of Government supported plan would allow you to mitigate costs across the entire population.

American hostpitals are without fault of course
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2657722

bluesambas:

YES, YES, YES, YES, YES, YES, YES, and uhhhh YES!

I hope I am getting this message through but the answer is a resounding yes.  Think about it.  As many as 5 million illegal immigrants are in this country and most of those could not afford the health care they have now.  Imagine as well that they have jobs that may not report their wages to protect both worker and company.  Where does that leave this health care program?  Well, I believe the answer is collapsed.

So, assuming your figure of 5 million illegal immigrants is correct, and generously assuming that all 5 million people don’t have any health coverage, are chomping at the bit to bilk the services of a proposed health care system, and even have the means to do so without being stopped, is 1.67% of the population really able to collapse an entire system??

Again, to me the whole thing sounds like “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need” style of marxizm but hey what do I know?

There is a cozy spot on the spectrum before we get to full-blown Marxism/communism. You’ll note that most of the 36 countries ahead of the US on the WHO’s list have managed to strike a balance.

Link

I know this want satisfy ya Canuck, but it is a pretty darn interesting tidbit.

Enjoy!!

Canuck,

Basic health care is really a matter of personal responsibility. How many health problems are avoidable through prevention? We aren’t entitled to have a plumber come look at our pipes, and we don’t have a right to have the oil changed in our cars, even if that car is the only way we can get to work to feed our families. I understand how this might seem callous to you, but I really don’t believe we’re entitled to recieve services from private individuals or from companies.

Once again, we differ on what a “right” is. I believe that a right is a protection against abritrary government. In our constitution, the rights are generally limitations on government power. No right should ever constrain a person to do something.

The company that provided all of that extra stuff didn’t do because someone made them do it. Providing that stuff most likely attracted a lot of people, which gave the company a richer pool of applicants to draw from, which enabled the company to select the very best employees. In turn, the employees rewarded the company by improving its productivity and quality. Voila! The Free Market works when people allow it to. The reason this won’t work for society as a whole is because the government doesn’t give people the choice to fund things like that. They simply take, take, take, waste what they’ve taken on mismanagement and sheer, bloated bureaucracy, and then take some more, and then complain that the dumb social program they took all that money to fund didn’t work because it wasn’t adequately funded.

tboy:

I know this want satisfy ya Canuck, but it is a pretty darn interesting tidbit.

Very interesting, thanks tboy. What exactly should it satisfy for me?

Unfortunately half the links provided in the article are dead, the other half were from opinion pieces – two from the same author, so checking where the stats came from was a challenge.

I don’t doubt that there are important issues surrounding border security, but I’d be weary of who you quote. Use of words such as “alien” and “invasion” are intended to frame the argument, and I can’t help but see them as offensive. It completely de-humanizes these people. There were some other real gems on that site:

“The present system of trying to save our country from chaos and third-world invasion is not working.”

“The American public now angrily refuses to allow the politicians to ignore the fact that in a War on Terror, millions of illegal aliens from all over the world trek into our nation each year – or that English is becoming an optional language in the United States.”

“We have formed THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE FOUNDATION to confront the powers that would destroy our Republic and our way of life.”

“Our nation is being invaded and colonized.”

“As American patriots, we are joining to take back an America that has lost the rule of law on which it was founded - a nation that is nearly unrecognizable from only a generation ago.”

Nope, not xenophobic at all…

I would appreciate some insight from posters on this site as to what your individual situation is as far as Health Care is concerned.  IE) Do you work for companies that provide a health care benefit?  What is your annual spend on health care?  If a severe medical situation came up suddenly, are you financially prepared to deal with it?  If a medical condition caused you to lose your job, what would be the impact?

I spend about $4300 annually, out of pocket for my family’s coverage (my employer pays about the same).  I’ve got PHENOMINAL coverage though.  That includes my insurance and flexable spending account, which covers everything- copays, prescriptions… everything.  All of which is tax deductible.  I also have short and long term disability insurance, so if I am ever incapacitated, I am covered financially (and my job can not fire me or end my medical coverage).  Plus the $300,000 in life insurance if things go REALLY bad.

I ask this in the context that in Canada, I believe, none of the answers to the questions above impact a persons ability to get health care without inducing financial hardship.

And anyone can walk into any emergency room and get medical treatment.  They can be admitted to a hospital without having any means of paying for it.  Plus, there is Medicaid for those who have nothing.  So, what’s the point?

I also ask it relative to the context of American Corporations and the the Health Benefits Packages that they give to their employees.  What does Walmart do for example?

Varies from company to company.  I’ve worked in small offices that offered me no healthcare (or more than I could afford to pay out).  But the last few years, my medical coverage has been about the same.  Similar cost, same coverage, despite having been under 4 different plans on 3 different jobs with two different insurance carriers.  I don’t work at Walmart, so I don’t know what they offer.

Seems about right to me.  Like I said, my company and I split the costs 60/40 and I pick up $1500 in flexable spending.  Ans let’s not forget that they are talking about spending that $5.3B covers 1.1M employees, which includes their families.  I’m paying for healthcare for 4.  So in reality I am paying about $1075 per member in my family for coverage.  Is it worth it?  Your goddamn right it is.  But then, my priorities are straight.  I’m not willing to skimp on my healthcare so that I can have a PS3 or the latest cell phone or any other status symbol.

At least some sort of Government supported plan would allow you to mitigate costs across the entire population.

So what, I end up paying even more out of my pocket to get less quality coverage so the jackass down the street doesn’t have to sacrifice his PS3?  I don’t think so.  The state already has a program in place for the poor.  It’s called Medicaid and it sucks.  Would I support some form of an unemployment medical coverage?  Sure.  Make it work similar to unemployment insurance, and you might actually have something I can back.  Beyond that, forget it.  Not to sound like a cold hearted prick here, but I have worked damn hard to get where I am, despite not having finished my bachelor’s degree yet.  And every step of the way, I have made sure that my family is provided for.  They have been my priority.  If a job didn’t offer medical coverage (or adequite coverage), I didn’t take it.  Period.  People are free to do that you know.  If an employer doesn’t offer the benefits you want or the salary you need, you don’t take the job!  It ain’t that hard.

Sir Not Appearing In This Film

So what, I end up paying even more out of my pocket to get less quality coverage so the jackass down the street doesn’t have to sacrifice his PS3?  I don’t think so.

Interestingly enough, Gord mentions in several of his tales how Canadians on welfare just love to spend a huge chunk of their welfare check on video games.

So, if America were more like Canada, not only would you be paying for the jackass’s medical coverage so he could have his PS3, there’s a pretty good chance you’d be paying for his PS3.

Interestingly enough, Gord mentions in several of his tales how Canadians on welfare just love to spend a huge chunk of their welfare check on video games.

Awesome.  Thanks for participating, I needed a good chuckle after a long day of programming!

Hey, the Gord speaks, I am but his vessel.

Interestingly enough, Gord mentions in several of his tales how Canadians on welfare just love to spend a huge chunk of their welfare check on video games.

I’m not going to say it’s a Canandian thing.  I have a friend who didn’t graduate HS, works as a stocker at the local grocery store.  He’s always looking for a new place to live or roommates because he can’t afford to rent on his own, or afford a decent place.  He drives a broke-down junker of a car (an 84 Oldsmobile) that is nowhere near reliable.  He’s always broke.  But he owns an XBox 360, a PSP, just dropped $1500 on a new computer, and plays 2 MMORPGS, a collectible minatures game and warhammer 40K.  If he took the money he spends on his recreation evrey month, he could afford a decent car or better appartment.  But no, he’s gotta have the latest geek gear.  It’s a matter of setting priorities.  I’ve seen and known too many people who put creature comforts over necessitites.  For those types, I have no sympathy whatsoever.  Now if we are talking about people who are genuinely having a difficult time even taking care of their necessities, then that is another story.  I am happy to help those types.  Unfortunately in my personal experience, it is less about not being able to pay for something as it is about choosing to pay for something that they want instead of something they need.

Sir Not Appearing In This Film

Well now, Sir Not, look at it this way. It’s your friend’s right to spend the money HE WORKED FOR how he sees fit. As long as he’s spending his own money, he should be allowed to live his life as he chooses. Maybe foregoing security or better living so that he can have geek toys makes him happy. As long as he’s not stealing, or refusing to get medication for his sick kids so that he can afford the latest Grand Theft Auto game, he’s still being a productive member of society in some fashion. He just has different priorities than you do.

I mean, you say he works as a stockboy. Sure, it’s nothing fabulous, but he’s still a few steps up from someone cruising by on the money of others without lifting a finger.

I get that.  I really do.  And he rarely complains about his situation.  But if he did, how much sympathy should I have?  I’ll have some as he is my friend, but he’s made his choices in life.  i have offered advice, but as of yet, he hasn’t taken any of it.

Sir Not Appearing In This Film

Canuck

Ha. Good ol’ Canucks, always prepared to fulfill a stereotype, eh.

They all enjoyed drinking and carousing, too.  Of course, an average of 2 out of 5 actually ended their sentences with “eh.” Go figure.

There’s the rub...Holding the health system up high for its quality of care, while neglecting to consider the segment of the population who don’t have access to it, doesn’t offer a complete picture.

I understand your point.  And I won’t argue which system is “better.” They both have pluses and minuses, obviously. 

Most of my concerns are based on speculatives right now.  We don’t know in the US exactly how a govt.-paid system would work.  Would private practices continue in large numbers or be phased into public?  Assuming privates continued, would prices go up to compensate for the lack of business or lower because of competition?  Would public practices overflow with minor cases since all treatments are free?  All hypothetical right now.

But my problem is basic: this country is founded on having choices.  Abide by the laws, but spend what you can on what you want.  If public health care means longer lines, lesser treatment, etc., why should I be penalized?  Yes, you’re raising the system for the have-nots, but you’re lowering it for the haves.  And by haves, we ain’t talking the wealthy.  For this discussion, I’m a have.  Trust me, I am not a rich man.

And I suppose this is where our ideologies really split. I believe basic health care is a right. I just can’t imagine being cool with thinking that if a loved one had a serious medical emergency that the ambulance attendant would feel for their wallet before their pulse. And if the bulge in the former wasn’t thick enough, well, that’s just tough. If I can’t imagine that for my own family, it seems reasonable to extent that consciousness to strangers as well. To me, a healthy member of society elevates the entire society – which is a major point of the WHO study.

And just where exactly is this the case Canuk?  That’s not how it is in the US.  Back in 2000, my sister was involved in a very bad accident.  By the time the ambulance got there her fingers and toes were already starting to curl up.  They had never had someone live if that was the case.  It was an 11 minute drive to the closest hospital.  And from there she was careflighted to a larger hospital over an hour away.  Not once did they ever wonder if she was covered by health insurance or if we would end up being able to pay for the medical expenses.

The fact that you talk like that demonstrates your complete and utter lack of understanding of the way hospitals and medical care works in the US.  Congratulations asswipe you’ve accused doctors nurses and paramedics of being more worried about getting money than saving someone’s life.

He’s had it explained to him a number of times, Buzzion. Like Michael Moore, he figures if he ignores the truth and keeps repeating his version enough, no one will call him on it.

You want a “free” country - I got yer “free” country right here:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,446045,00.html

BD05:

Guilty as charged with respect to the “eh"-thing. Never really understood the whole “a-boot"-thing, but I’m sure my ears are deaf to it..

I understand your point.  And I won’t argue which system is “better.” They both have pluses and minuses, obviously. 

Most of my concerns are based on speculatives right now.  We don’t know in the US exactly how a govt.-paid system would work.  Would private practices continue in large numbers or be phased into public?  Assuming privates continued, would prices go up to compensate for the lack of business or lower because of competition?  Would public practices overflow with minor cases since all treatments are free?  All hypothetical right now.

But my problem is basic: this country is founded on having choices.  Abide by the laws, but spend what you can on what you want.  If public health care means longer lines, lesser treatment, etc., why should I be penalized?  Yes, you’re raising the system for the have-nots, but you’re lowering it for the haves.  And by haves, we ain’t talking the wealthy.  For this discussion, I’m a have.  Trust me, I am not a rich man.

I think we completely agree here…Every day I see firsthand the shortcomings of our public system, and to solve the woes of it - especially in the space of this blog - is certainly beyond my scope of ability. If anything, the WHO study that I posted showed that each system had its strengths and its shortcomings.

And I hear what you are saying about the speculative side of our debate. I feel the same about private practices creeping in…of which, I can’t say I’m adamantly opposed to. But if we do go that route, will our public system become the poor cousin? Will our public hospitals attract second rate care providers? What will it do to access?

These, and many, many more, are important questions that we need to answer in order to evolve how we offer care in Canada (our aging boomers are going to be a heckuva challenge.) That said, the postings on this site have done little to show me how the private system in the US, one of the remaining few in the industrialized world, is superior..

Buzzion:

And just where exactly is this the case Canuk?  That’s not how it is in the US.  Back in 2000, my sister was involved in a very bad accident.  By the time the ambulance got there her fingers and toes were already starting to curl up.  They had never had someone live if that was the case.  It was an 11 minute drive to the closest hospital.  And from there she was careflighted to a larger hospital over an hour away.  Not once did they ever wonder if she was covered by health insurance or if we would end up being able to pay for the medical expenses.

The fact that you talk like that demonstrates your complete and utter lack of understanding of the way hospitals and medical care works in the US.  Congratulations asswipe you’ve accused doctors nurses and paramedics of being more worried about getting money than saving someone’s life.

First, why not leave the name-calling and childish remarks to Rann? (please refer to his posting that follows your post.) They’re his schtick, and it would be a shame to render his input completely worthless..

Second, when the heck did everyone on this site get so literal?? I can’t believe I have to write this, but I do not actually believe that paramedics search through one’s wallet for cash before they provide care in the US. Perhaps my attempts at hyperbole/sarcasm are poorly executed…

Third, I fundraise for a hospital, working very closely with the doctors and nurses who offer care, and have the utmost, let me make that very clear, utmost respect and admiration for the work they do – no matter what side of the border they work on. So don’t bother going that route…

I don’t claim to be an expert on your health system, just as I doubt neither you, nor the hosts of this blog really know that much about mine. I’m completely up for a tutorial to ensure my opinion is as informed as possible. We can start the discussion with you explaining to me how your sister’s care was covered…

Third, I fundraise for a hospital, working very closely with the doctors and nurses who offer care, and have the utmost, let me make that very clear, utmost respect and admiration for the work they do – no matter what side of the border they work on. So don’t bother going that route

And you show that respect by making “jokes” accusing them of being more concerned about making money than saving lives.  Yeah real respectful.  The part of you I quote makes no attempt to be hyperbole or sarcasm.  You make the claim that you think healthcare is a right, and that keeping members of society alive should be the focus.  Stating that those who are not like you are more concerned about getting paid.  And when you hold the same views as others here have, and then make statements that you claim were only kidding but they have said in full seriousness in the same manner, how do you expect people to view it?

Name-calling? Don’t see in that post where I called you anything, you Canadian piece of shit. (There, now that’s name-calling.) I also don’t see how it’s childish to point out that you’ve had the way emergency medical care works here pointed out to you repeatedly, and that you refuse to acknowledge it and continue to push your own version. You big poopy-head. (And that’s childishness. Are you happy now, you pathetic fuck?)

Canuck,

Ignore Rann, sometimes he gets excited when they let him outside without his helmet on.  Nothing to be taken seriously.

Oh my, I see up4debate put on his big boy pants today, and decided to prove, yet again, how wrong I am for giving him even the faintest measures of respect. I’ll have to make a note not to do so again in the future.

up4:

Canuck,
Ignore Rann, sometimes he gets excited when they let him outside without his helmet on.  Nothing to be taken seriously.

Indeed. I’ve been following his posts on the other thread (“Who wants to bet…”) and biting my tongue to post something. Funny when you called him out to actually produce some measure of factual information to back up the utter shite he spews, his response was, “Unfortunately, nothing I can cite sources on” and then goes on to talk about some letter from some Senator directed at Obama. Nice. Air tight.

Then his crap about the race card… using an article on CNN that takes a three sentence Obama quote out of context from an entire speech and says… “I’ve also seen him pull the race card in several articles….Of course, he says this without giving any solid reasons of why black people should vote for him over a Republican.”

What the idiot doesn’t realize (despite Obama’s quote explicitly stating not to vote according to race) was that Obama wasn’t campaigning for himself; he was delivering his speech in support of a white Democrat, Ben Cardin, who was running against a black Republican, Michael Steele. He was asking his primarily black audience not to vote for the Republican, who had been courting black voters, just because he was black. Here.

Sooooo, Obama, black, was playing the white race card at a black university???

Rann’s a child.

Sorry OT..

Funny when you called him out to actually produce some measure of factual information to back up the utter shite he spews, his response was, “Unfortunately, nothing I can cite sources on” and then goes on to talk about some letter from some Senator directed at Obama. Nice. Air tight.

Yes, and I said up front I couldn’t quote the source. I don’t sit and archive every single news story I read just so I can win arguments with it later.

But then, I’m not a Canadian, and thus my time is worth something. You, as a Canadian, have a worthless existence, and can thus take all the time you want to fling around links, obfuscate the truth, and generally be worthless.

By the way, did I mention that you and up4debate are worthless Canadians? Oh good. Because I wouldn’t want anyone to think that your opinions mattered, you being Canadian and all.

Rann, I may be a little slow (being from north of the border and all), but I starting to think you dont like Canadians!

Rann Aridorn:

Yes, and I said up front I couldn’t quote the source.

Well, as long as you say up front that you have nothing to back up your claims, you should be safe…good job.

I don’t sit and archive every single news story I read just so I can win arguments with it later.

Actually, I googled the phrase you quoted and several stories came up. Took about 10 seconds to cut, open a new window and paste in the search bar. About the same amount time you spent thinking about argument that Obama was playing the race card. Speaking of which, have you figured out his quote yet?

But then, I’m not a Canadian, and thus my time is worth something.

Goodness knows where the world would be without insightful ruminations such as which anime character you’d like to f*. Indeed, very worthwhile.

You, as a Canadian, have a worthless existence, and can thus take all the time you want to fling around links, obfuscate the truth, and generally be worthless.

By the way, did I mention that you and up4debate are worthless Canadians? Oh good. Because I wouldn’t want anyone to think that your opinions mattered, you being Canadian and all.

Are you serious? How have you not been banned yet? Let me know how the job at the call centre pans out…

Raptors finally won one tonight. Take that Cavaliers of Cleveland. Yeah.

<Sigh>

Let this be a lesson to you kids, don’t drink and post. Not that I disagree with what I wrote, but it was not really necessary. Apologies to the msg board.

Happy Thanksgiving to all American posters. Enjoy your turkey and football.

Back to the issue at hand: sociailized medicine.

Why is it that when the issue is debated here it always seems to turn to no-one is turned away at a hospital when there is an emergency?

What is the situation in the US for non-emergency situations for those who have no insurance?  Are annual physicals available, what of anything in regards to preventative medicine?  Prostate exams for example, can someone without insurance get one?  Can everyone afford one?  What does one cost?

FYI, in Canada when it comes right down to it, we can’t even figure out what a publicly funded system is.  People get up in arms if anyone mentions privitization.  Funny thing though, earlier this year the Liberal government ‘delisted’ routine eye exams and we now have to pay for them.  Nobody said a word in complaint.  To me, it looks like delisting and privitization are the same thing.  Clearly, to others, there must be some subtle difference.