Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on October 12, 2007, 09:01:18 PM
-
This deserved a thread on its own, (Thanks LePaul) due to the current events and discussion of "socialized medicine" in the U.S. If we were on the Canadian system of today, where would we airlift our pregnant mothers to get the help they need? Mexico? :huh
Canada's Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver
"I'm a born-bred Canadian, as well as my daughter and son, and I'm ashamed," Jill Irvine told FOX News. Irvine's daughter, Carri Ash, is one of at least 40 mothers or their babies who've been airlifted from British Columbia to the U.S. this year because Canadian hospitals didn't have room for the preemies in their neonatal units.
"It's a big number and bigger than the previous capacity of the system to deal with it," said Adrian Dix, a British Columbia legislator, told FOXNews.com. "So when that happens, you can't have a waiting list for a mother having the baby. She just has the baby."
The mothers have been flown to hospitals in Seattle, Everett, Wash., and Spokane, Wash., to receive treatment, as well as hospitals in the neighboring province of Alberta, Dix said. Three mothers were airlifted in the first weekend of October alone, including Carri Ash.
story cont.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300939,00.html
U.S person--Discuss:
How much do you personally support a Canadian system of health care in the U.S.? (aka the "Hillary plan" of 1994?)
Canadians--Discuss:
What has caused the systematic colllapse of your healthcare system?
-
Airlift or not, its still free.. I'd put my wife on plane to give birth in US.. instant dual citizenship for my kid. thx.
-
Originally posted by KK9
Airlift or not, its still free.. I'd put my wife on plane to give birth in US.. instant dual citizenship for my kid. thx.
So you're okay with the "parasite" system, aka welfare system of health care? :huh
-
Yes, because US is not offering this service for free.
Canadian goverment gets billed for all of that.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
So you're okay with the "parasite" system, aka welfare system of health care? :huh
Exactly. I was just wonder what they would have done if the U.S. hadn't been there to bail them out. Send them to Mexico for medical care?
Wab
-
Hillary is on it....you guys relax would ya? Geeesh. Just let her get things going when she gets in the white house...we'll be fine.:rofl :noid
-
Originally posted by AKWabbit
Exactly. I was just wonder what they would have done if the U.S. hadn't been there to bail them out. Send them to Mexico for medical care?
Wab
No problem.. if Canada can afford medical care in US, then can afford care anywhere else.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
[/i]
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300939,00.html
Canadians--Discuss:
What has caused the systematic colllapse of your healthcare system?
So the so called "systematic collapse" is base on the above story?
shamus
-
so now we have Canadian "anchor babies"?
welcome to Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. ole eh.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
So you're okay with the "parasite" system, aka welfare system of health care? :huh
maybe, how much do you think my taxes would drop if they cut it? how much more would i spend on private health insurance?
-
Originally posted by Shamus
So the so called "systematic collapse" is base on the above story?
shamus
Google "Canadians flock to U.S. for medical procedures". You can find stories dating back to the early 90's. Many threads on this board over the last 7 years discussing the dissinegration of the Canadian socialized medicine system.
-
Originally posted by KK9
No problem.. if Canada can afford medical care in US, then can afford care anywhere else.
Then why cant they afford Pt-Scan machines or MRI machines.....if my wife were a Western Canadian resident, I'd be a widower nowWhy Albany for a PET scan?
Stan Shatenstein , canada.com
Published: Friday, September 10, 2004
Daniel Feist and his wife, Susie, were willing and able to travel to Albany, N.Y., to get a PET scan within 24 hours. Why? The wait.
Hotel Dieu received Montreal's first positron emission tomography machine last year.
In May, at the Montreal General Hospital, the MUHC (McGill University Health Centre) began operating its PET/CT scanner, a more advanced machine that allows images from both types of scans to be overlaid and viewed together, providing doctors even more detailed information than normal PET.
The next-closest PET scan is at the Sherbrooke University Hospital Centre, which has whole body and micro-PET scanners, the latter for research only.
Much of the more than $4-million cost of the MUHC scanner was paid by funds raised by hockey player Saku Koivu, the Montreal General Hospital and Cedars Cancer Foundation. Lise Proulx, manager of the nuclear medicine department, adult division, for the MUHC, said Koivu played an important part in getting the MUHC its scanner. The Canadiens captain expressed incredulity at having to leave a big city like Montreal for Sherbooke for a PET scan that helped diagnose his since-cured abdominal non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Current waiting times for the PET/CT scanner are one to three weeks for urgent cases and six weeks or more for semi-urgent and elective cases. The machine was ready for use before the department's budget was in place, which caused some early delays, but any current underuse of the vital machine is due to the sensitive nature of the FDG used in the scans. This radioactive substance has a half-life of barely two hours and is delivered only once a day, in the morning, from Sherbrooke, limiting the number of patients who can be injected and scanned. A Montreal supplier has been found, and the nuclear medicine unit will soon be able to see about 10 patients a day, up from the current six a day, according to PET scan technologist Chantal Morin.
This year, Quebec became the first province to provide medicare coverage for the cost of PET scans. The FDG injection alone costs $300 to $400, and the entire procedure is valued at more than $1,000. Other provinces are evaluating the cost-benefit ration of this valuable but expensive diagnostic tool. Currently, Edmonton, London and Hamilton are the only other Canadian cities with publicly available PET scanners. A private clinic in Vancouver also has one.
link (http://www.canada.com/national/features/cancer/story.html?id=c2987eea-9e77-4366-8eb3-d44b15b256ca)
-
Well lots of Americans go out of country for medical care, including eye surgery and dental work in Canada, google it if you wish or take my word for it.
shamus
-
Originally posted by vorticon
maybe, how much do you think my taxes would drop if they cut it? how much more would i spend on private health insurance?
(Shrugs) I'm not sure how much you would spend. That would depend on your employer, and what you're willing to pay out of pocket for a good health care system. We pay about $50/month. But then again, we're fortunate to have two good employers that offer 3 types of health care systems. Free enterprise system.
I also don't believe that the Gov't should pay for my food, shelter, fuel bills, etc. either, but that's just me.....
-
U.S person--Discuss:
How much do you personally support a Canadian system of health care in the U.S.? (aka the "Hillary plan" of 1994?)
Canadians--Discuss:
What has caused the systematic colllapse of your healthcare system? [/B]
Keep in mind Rip, this is what I find hilarious, You sound like some kind of political pollster trying to skew the results by posing ridiculous questions :)
shamus
-
Originally posted by vorticon
maybe, how much do you think my taxes would drop if they cut it? how much more would i spend on private health insurance?
Not by much... Considering the state of US dollar, everything is so cheap the US, maybe its even possible to get a deal in healthcare... Americans should really be happy about this, they are the ones who are profiting in this.
Besides, Seattle close to Vancouver and most BC population is so close to USA border. And if you gotta fly someone somewhere... its probabbly more practical and more economical to fly 100 miles south, then 700 miles east.
-
U.S person--Discuss:
How much do you personally support a Canadian system of health care in the U.S.? (aka the "Hillary plan" of 1994?)
[/B]
1. Say goodbye to hi-tech medicines/machines. Most countries with socialized medicine lag behind when it comes to life-saving high tech machines.
2. Hillary Plan 2.0 will be a lot different (heh I'm still reading it...)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
(Shrugs) I'm not sure how much you would spend. That would depend on your employer, and what you're willing to pay out of pocket for a good health care system. We pay about $50/month. But then again, we're fortunate to have two good employers that offer 3 types of health care systems. Free enterprise system.
I also don't believe that the Gov't should pay for my food, shelter, fuel bills, etc. either, but that's just me.....
Government is about helping the eldery, sick and poor. Those than CAN pay something should.
I baffles me how it somehow became the employers responsibility for someone's healthcare? If an individual is responsible for homeowners, car and life insurance, why not health? (I know, health insurance started to become an employment beneift to attract employees....but boy, hasn't this snowballed into a disaster for any small business)
I'm lucky, I work for a hospital that is self insured. My insurance is $0. I pay $10 for the Dental plan. At my previous job, health insurance was $219 a month. (Single, no dependents...). Needless to say, this new job is a huge savings in healthcare alone. (I've diverted what I would pay for healthcare into both a larger 401k contribution and medical savings account).
-
Originally posted by LePaul
I baffles me how it somehow became the employers responsibility for someone's healthcare? If an individual is responsible for homeowners, car and life insurance, why not health? (I know, health insurance started to become an employment beneift to attract employees....but boy, hasn't this snowballed into a disaster for any small business)
Isn't the trade off a lesser wage for medical insurance?
Its a very very VERY uncommon practice here to have medical insurance as a benefit, I can't think of a single person I know who has it.
Originally posted by 1K3
1. Say goodbye to hi-tech medicines/machines. Most countries with socialized medicine lag behind when it comes to life-saving high tech machines.
We don't and Australia is a world leader in medical research...
I'm quite happy for my taxes to go into health, having said that the current Liberal govt would rather force people into expensive private insurance than say spending the $A billions of dollars its wasting in Iraq than on the public system.
Private hospitals only benefit are elective surgery, anything like an emergency they send you to a public hospital emergency room anyway.
We had our twins in a private hospital because my wife wanted a particular obstetrician...its amazing what suddenly private insurance suddenly won't cover! And it wasn't some mickey mouse coverage either... Although the govt. partly covered our out of pocket expenses (which was a hell of a lot) we'd never go private again, considering all our friends/family had just as good treatment for their children in the public system.
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by 1K3
1. Say goodbye to hi-tech medicines/machines. Most countries with socialized medicine lag behind when it comes to life-saving high tech machines.
What difference does it make if you can't afford the treatment?
Eitherway, the claim of technology lacking behind isn't really true. Unless you mean such hi-tech medicine/machine that even an average american can't afford.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
What difference does it make if you can't afford the treatment?
Eitherway, the claim of technology lacking behind isn't really true. Unless you mean such hi-tech medicine/machine that even an average american can't afford.
what kind of impression you must have of us a people!!! you are mistaken if you think that healthcare is reserved for only those who can afford it. I could walk into any emergency room in the country and receive proper medical care even if I don't have an insurance card. there would be lenghty dealings come payment time but I would receive the care and then be sent to the county hospital for whatever follow up medical care might be required. I could then repay the services at any rate I select, even one dollar per month based on my ability to repay.
we are a benevolent people, we just don't believe in socialism though there is a misguided element within the society that does which so far has been kept at bay by the great hardworking and independant minded majority.
-
Country - Life expectancy - Infant mortality rate - Physicians per 1000 people - Nurses per 1000 people - Per capita expenditure on health (USD) - Healthcare costs as a percent of GDP - % of government revenue spent on health - % of health costs paid by government
Australia - 80.5 - 5.0 - 2.47 - 9.71 - 2,519 - 9.5 - 17.7 - 67.5
Canada - 80.5 - 5.0 - 2.14 - 9.95 - 2,669 - 9.9 - 16.7 - 69.9
France - 79.5 - 4.0 - 3.37 - 7.24 - 2,981 - 10.1 - 14.2 - 76.3
Germany - 80.0 - 4.0 - 3.37- 9.72 - 3,204 - 11.1 - 17.6 - 78.2
Japan - 82.5 - 3.0 - 1.98 - 7.79 - 2,662 - 7.9 - 16.8 - 81.0
Sweden - 80.5 - 3.0 - 3.28 - 10.24 - 3,149 - 9.4 - 13.6 - 85.2
UK - 79.5 - 5.0 - 2.30 - 12.12 - 2,428 - 8.0 - 15.8 - 85.7
USA - 77.5 - 6.0 - 2.56 - 9.37 - 5,711 - 15.2 - 18.5 - 44.6
-
I have heard horror stories of American heath insurance companies cutting off coverage of 'sick' clients.
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
I have heard horror stories of American heath insurance companies cutting off coverage of 'sick' clients.
True, lots of claims get rejected but there is an appeal process.
Our system isnt perfect. Never said it was.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
(Shrugs) I'm not sure how much you would spend. That would depend on your employer, and what you're willing to pay out of pocket for a good health care system. We pay about $50/month..
I bet you pay a lot more than that, you just don't know it. I'm guessing your employer makes a substantial contribution to your health care premiums. Guess where that money's coming from.
It's the same as when Canadians talk about their "fee" health care. They're paying for it indirectly with taxes.
That's one of the problems with this whole issue, a lot of folks don't understand how expensive health care really is.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Canada's Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver
Misleading title. Health care is managed by the province. This specific problem is a BC one.
Canadians--Discuss:
What has caused the systematic colllapse of your healthcare system?
Faulty premise. The system hasn't collapsed and isn't collapsing...perhaps in the near future it will. Our current system is are least on par or better than the US one is just about every measurable category. Of course the US system is just about as socialist as the Canadian, although everyone likes to pretend it isn't.
And what is wrong with our system is the same thing that's wrong with the US one, socialism. The main difference is that our bureaucrats are unfortunately more efficient at running a socialist system. This make the system look better than it is.
Luckily we are switching to a more market based, less socialist system.
-
How do you have "free" health care? Are all canadian doctors and drug manufacturers slaves of the state and work for free?
We have a problem here with the fact that we have so many illegals and they are not healthy nor do they live in a healthy manner.. we have negros who are drug addicted and have drug babies (more than other races)
We already give "free" medical care to all of them. the rest of us support it. None of this would go away with socialized medicine.. it would just attract more people to the hospitals and doctors.
If you want cheap medical.. you simply have to not allow the doctors to be sued and.... roll back the types of procedures you will do to the 1960's say... nothing fancy.. don't offer MRI and bloodwork and transplants..
If you have socialized medicine that is what you will get anyway.
It is funny... the people who will fight it the hardest are the scum lawyers but it is really bad for all of us... probly bad for the world.
lazs
-
Originally posted by LePaul
True, lots of claims get rejected but there is an appeal process.
Our system isnt perfect. Never said it was.
Doesn't help much if you are d-i-e-d during the appeal process because you couldn't get medicine and/or treatment.
-
There is 'white trash' in the USA lazs.
-
how was it a failure... did they not all receive quality health care in the states?
the canadian system is a single payer universal health care system. the system uses public funds but 95% of the service providers are privately owned or are non profit institutions.
a pure socialized health care system is when the govt pays and delivers the complete bricks and motar service like in britain... or like any police or fire departments or utility.
say what you will... but we get universal coverage at half the per-capita cost and the canadian system has the bureaucracy slipstreamed to about 2% of total cost the american system is around 10%.
since the implementation of it a few decades ago we've spread apart 2.5 years more in life expectancy and have a substantially lower infant mortality rate.
also current studies have shown canadians are healthier and have far less diseases than their americans counterparts.
sure there is never going to be a perfect system... and each system has it problems.
but then again... it's a failure because faux news tells the sheeples so.
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
Doesn't help much if you are d-i-e-d during the appeal process because you couldn't get medicine and/or treatment.
here is the basic flaw in your thinking and the difference between our respective philosophies.
the first question is are you mortal? if you are then you must be prepared to die.
would you spend any sum to extend your life for a short period? if it were my money I would not. if it were my son we were discussing I still would not.
life is finite, the problem is some people will go to any length and any expense of someone else's money in the absurd hope of extending life in a worn or faulty body.
be wise, have your affairs in order because eternity is just around any corner.
-
milo.. well.. yes, of course there is.. you can look up the stats if you like. there is a percentage.. that does not change the stats for other races tho.
torque... canada is not the US. you do not have near the illegals we do. nor the negro addicts. In order for us to have anything like your system it would cost at least twice as much.
How much do your doctors pay for malpractice insurance a year? How many MRI machines per capita do you have?
lazs
-
Socialized health care a sham in Canada? You bet it is.
Here's a short story (true btw).....
My son has some significant knee problems. They put him on the waiting list for an MRI here in Alberta. Told us it would be a minimum of a 3 month wait and possibly as long as six. However, if we would pay for it ousrelves it could be done within a week.
You see, it's not a shortage of MRI's etc that is the problem. It's a shortage of who the Provincial Government has a deal with.
Obviously we popped for the $1000.00 to get his knees looked at right away. We are fortunate, we could afford it, many are not.
He is now on a waiting list for surgery, anywhere from 4 months to a year we are told. Apparently there are only 2 Orthopedic Surgeons in Alberta. We are free to take him to another Province (although the waiting list is the same), or the U.S. provided we pay all the cost. That we can't afford, so we wait.
I'm more than a little steamed.
RTR
-
Move to Ontario then RTR. The nephew 'popped' his knee playing hockey and had his knee looked, at and fixed, with-in a month or so.
storch, might as well close all health care facilities, discontinue medical and medicine research and put doctors on the extinct list then.
lazs, not our problem that you let your society degenerate.
Canada has
8.1 CT machines per million population
1.7 MRI machines per million population
from an article dated 13 Jul 2005
The United States spends more on health care per capita than other industrialized nations but does not receive more services, according to a study published on Tuesday in the July/August issue of... Health Affairs, the Los Angeles Times reports. For the study -- led by Gerard Anderson, a health policy professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health -- researchers analyzed the health care costs of 30 nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The study found:
* The nations examined spend a median of $2,193 per capita on health care;
* The United States spent $5,267 per capita for prescription drugs, hospital stays and physicians visits in 2002, compared with $3,446 per capita for Switzerland, the next highest spender;
* Health care spending accounted for 14.6% of the U.S. gross domestic product in 2002, a time when only two other nations -- Switzerland and Germany -- spent more than 10% of their GDP on health care;
* The United States has 2.9 hospital beds per 1,000 residents, compared with a median of 3.7 beds per 1,000 residents among the other nations examined;
* The United States had 2.4 physicians per 1,000 residents in 2001, compared with a median of 3.1 physicians per 1,000 residents among the other nations examined in 2002;
* The United States had 7.9 nurses per 1,000 residents in the United States in 2001, compared with a median of 8.9 nurses per 1,000 residents among the other nations examined in 2002;
* The United States has 12.8 CT scanners per one million U.S. residents, compared with a median of 13.3 scanners per one million residents among the other nations examined;
* The United States appears to have more magnetic resonance imaging machines per capita than many of the other nations examined, but the machines are used only 10 hours daily in the United States, compared with a median of 18 hours daily in other nations; and
* The average medical malpractice payment, which included both settlements and judgments, was $265,103 in the United States in 2001, compared with $309,417 in Canada and $411,171 in Britain.
Anderson said, "We pay more for health care for the simple reason that prices for health services are significantly higher in the United States than they are elsewhere." Karen Davis -- president of the Commonwealth Fund, which supported the study -- said that the United States "does not get commensurate value for its health care dollar" (Girion, Los Angeles Times, 7/12).
-
what? isn't alberta a large sized city?
We kinda have the reverse problem here... if you have insurance... they almost beg you to get expensive tests and surgeries..
lazs
-
alberta is a western canadian province. that would be similar to one of our states. it borders montana
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
storch, might as well close all health care facilities, discontinue medical and medicine research and put doctors on the extinct list then.
why is that milo?
-
well milo.. it seems pretty simple then..
All we got to do is make everyone get their MRI at 3 in the morning and... cut all the doctors and nurses salaries and... there we are.
you say that the malpractice suits average about the same.... what is the number of suits in each country? If you only have one a year at 300k but we have thousands a month at 200k....
That is why I asked... what is the cost per year of malpractice insurance in canada?
What is the average wait for treatment? What would drugs cost in the US if they did not need to be approved?
When my first wife broke her leg in BC.. we went to a hospital there (70 miles away) and seen some of those "beds" they looked like something from a 1950's US hospital.
Point being.. we don't need socialized medicine... all we need to do is force our doctors and nurses to take a whole lot less money... crowd in a few extra beds per hospital room... don't allow as many lawsuits and...
junk two thirds of our equipment and run the rest 18 hours a day...
not to mention.. stop the FDA from testing drugs or having silly restrictions.
and why not? that is what we would get anyway with your system.. why not just do those things and let eveyone enjoy the reduced insurance rates.... well...everyone but doctors, nurses and patients that is.
lazs
-
link (http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed072005b.cfm)
United States and Canada: A Tale of Two Medicares
by Derek Hunter
In 1997, George Zeliotis, a Quebec citizen, learned that he needed hip-replacement surgery. But his troubles were just beginning.
As is standard in Canada for non-emergency surgery, Zeliotis was put on a waiting list behind everyone else in Quebec who needed the same procedure. When he learned that his wait would be a year and that he would have to endure the pain of an arthritic hip during that time, Zeliotis decided to pay for the surgery himself.
Then he made a disturbing discovery: He couldn’t pay for it himself. Canadian law forbids private payment for a covered medical service.
Since its inception, Canada’s Medicare has been the favorite model for single-payer healthcare among those who advocate socialized medicine in the United States. They tout that every Canadian is covered from cradle to grave and that all have equal access to the same level of care. The facts on the ground, however, are quite different.
While coverage is universal in Canada, most Americans would consider the Canadian system’s limits on access to care unacceptable. As Zeliotis discovered, access to care in Canada is determined by where one is on the waiting list — and there’s no getting around the waiting list. Private health insurance has long been illegal in Canada, as has been contracting with a doctor directly — that is, paying out of pocket — for medical services that are covered by Canada’s Medicare program.
Zeliotis teamed up with Jacques Chaoulli, a Montreal physician, to challenge legally the province of Quebec over the ban on private payment for medical services. After two defeats in lower courts, they took their appeal to the Canadian Supreme Court. On June 9, the doctor and his patient won a major victory. In the 4-3 decision, Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin wrote for the majority, "Access to a waiting list is not access to health care."
Most things in the US probably won't change too much when Hillary becomes president, but the above scenario will likely rear its head
-
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
-
Originally posted by storch
why is that milo?
Because when your number is up, it is up.
That is the impression I got from you, so my statement.
lazs, that was an article from the USA.
Try Google if you want an answer to how much insurance costs.
Btw, supplying drugs to Americans is a thriving business in Canada.
What did it cost you for that broken leg?
Btw, I have heard horror stories of ppl (from Americans) requiring medical treatment to be shuffled of to a second hospital because they did not have medical insurance.
-
not at all milo. if a person has appendicitis for example he will receive treatment irrespective of ability to pay. furthermore that person will receive the very best care available. the same goes for any other illness. my point is that we will all die and I would not use up my family's resources to extend life for say another year if that were the case.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
This deserved a thread on its own, (Thanks LePaul) due to the current events and discussion of "socialized medicine" in the U.S. If we were on the Canadian system of today, where would we airlift our pregnant mothers to get the help they need? Mexico? :huh
Canada's Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver
"I'm a born-bred Canadian, as well as my daughter and son, and I'm ashamed," Jill Irvine told FOX News. Irvine's daughter, Carri Ash, is one of at least 40 mothers or their babies who've been airlifted from British Columbia to the U.S. this year because Canadian hospitals didn't have room for the preemies in their neonatal units.
"It's a big number and bigger than the previous capacity of the system to deal with it," said Adrian Dix, a British Columbia legislator, told FOXNews.com. "So when that happens, you can't have a waiting list for a mother having the baby. She just has the baby."
The mothers have been flown to hospitals in Seattle, Everett, Wash., and Spokane, Wash., to receive treatment, as well as hospitals in the neighboring province of Alberta, Dix said. Three mothers were airlifted in the first weekend of October alone, including Carri Ash.
story cont.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300939,00.html
U.S person--Discuss:
How much do you personally support a Canadian system of health care in the U.S.? (aka the "Hillary plan" of 1994?)
Canadians--Discuss:
What has caused the systematic colllapse of your healthcare system?
that's cherry pkng stories, not relevant to compare the medical services of Canada and US,
i'm imigrant in Canada, 2nd day after i landed legal ,in Toronto 9 years back, i went to gov.health care office recived healh card, thx God i didn't need it, i know lot of friends waiting long time for small surgery,
look at most EU,Japan why don't they follow the US,health care system if is better?
Try to imagine a recesion,stock market crash, with 30-40% unemployement,like we had in Romania in 1990 after comunism regim crashed,but hospitals still did the job, women still gave birth in hospitals , and peoples didn't die for a basic appendix crisis . And the way i see the global economy , that scenario is posible quick overnight, you can find yourself without job, without money and health insurance, and what? should you die for a dissease curable 100 years ago ?
Don't take me wrong i'm not crying the socialist system, but healthy peoples with $$ in their poket,don't think about hospitals and health insurance, untill they get sick,
i read in United States are 45 milion peoples out of 300 milion population,without health insurance,without acces to health care services, i consider the canadian way not perfect, but overall better,
Imagine an unemployed who just lost his job,without insurance cuz can't aford it,watching the Discovery Chanel, the new advances in medicine, but poor guy can die in anymoment for a basic appendicitis, curable 100 years ago,
-
20 million, 30 million, 40 million, every few months the Dems increase the amount of people in the US who are said to have no insurance......if no insurance = death, then WHY are dozens upon dozens of hospitals near the Mejican border closing down due to losing money hand over fist?
No one at El Centro Regional was surprised. The public hospital is losing more than $1 million a year treating undocumented immigrants, many of whom were injured trying to cross the border -- people who've broken bones jumping from the 20-foot border fence in Calexico, nearly drowned trying to swim the All-American Canal, or become dehydrated in the Imperial Valley desert.
Neighboring Pioneers Memorial Hospital lost more than $500,000 on similar cases last year, not to mention unpaid ambulance service and physicians' fees. The two hospitals have to cover 150,000 people in a county that already has some of the highest unemployment and poverty rates in the country. "We're struggling to treat needy people, and the cost is bearing down on people least able to afford it," says Ted Fox, CEO of El Centro Regional.
link (http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2000/06/border_hospitals.html)
Originally posted by Straffo
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
Why do socialists hate the 'rich' so much?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
So you're okay with the "parasite" system, aka welfare system of health care? :huh
What you failed to realize is it's not like that everywhere in Canada. In big city sure there might be a wait. Guess what in the US in a big city at a busy hospital you are going to wait just the same.
You don't think hospitals in the US turn down people because they are full? Well guess what we do it too and we are on a paid non socialized system.
The only difference is, in Canada they have the choice to take the free health care, or pay for service if needed for what ever reason. Here in the US, if you don't have insurance or can't pay then u go bankrupt paying ridiculous medical bills.
humm sure don't sound better than Canada's system to me. Not to mention even if you do have insurance here in the US, their main priority is to figure out how not to pay your claim or how to deny your treatment.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Why do socialists hate the 'rich' so much?
They don't understand choice or free will. They never will.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
They don't understand choice or free will. They never will.
That's funny, because you seem to be against choice and free will for Americans.
Just because there, might be socialized medicine in Canada doesn't mean they can't pick to pay for services not provided by the govt. So they have "the choice" to use the free govt provided healthcare or pay for service provided by private care.
Here in the US we don't have the same "choice" or "free will", seems to me Canadians have more choices and free will than we do.
-
Originally posted by crockett
That's funny, because you seem to be against choice and free will for Americans.
Just because there, might be socialized medicine in Canada doesn't mean they can't pick to pay for services not provided by the govt. So they have "the choice" to use the free govt provided healthcare or pay for service provided by private care.
Here in the US we don't have the same "choice" or "free will", seems to me Canadians have more choices and free will than we do.
Was that the best you can reply with? I've seen you do better when you were drunk.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Why do socialists hate the 'rich' so much?
Because they do not beleive in working, they feel the government should fund them for existing. Those who work hard and suceed in life should be punished, by their narrow view.
-
Originally posted by crockett
That's funny, because you seem to be against choice and free will for Americans.
Just because there, might be socialized medicine in Canada doesn't mean they can't pick to pay for services not provided by the govt. So they have "the choice" to use the free govt provided healthcare or pay for service provided by private care.
Here in the US we don't have the same "choice" or "free will", seems to me Canadians have more choices and free will than we do.
Ahem:Then he made a disturbing discovery: He couldn’t pay for it himself. Canadian law forbids private payment for a covered medical service.
This was the law for YEARS---the article I referenced was written 2 years ago, after the poor shmuck went through the legal system for most of a decade---if you recall, the 1993 version of HillaryCare had this exact same provision...WHY would anyone want to pay to get service? To get around the incredibly LONG waiting lists that socialised medicine invariable brings about for many procedures---this prevents the afore-mentioned evil rich people from jumping ahead in line and getting treatment (which they NOW get by going to the US)
-
Originally posted by bj229r
20 million, 30 million, 40 million, every few months the Dems increase the amount of people in the US who are said to have no insurance......if no insurance = death, then WHY are dozens upon dozens of hospitals near the Mejican border closing down due to losing money hand over fist?
link (http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2000/06/border_hospitals.html)
Why do socialists hate the 'rich' so much?
It's nothing related to the rich but a rich who want to bypass the rules and have not a slight idea of what morality and ethic is , fyi : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics
Originally posted by lasersailor184
They don't understand choice or free will. They never will.
you,neither ,had he cross the border or gone to the private sector his problem would have been solved.
I don't understand why a wimp should have been pushed up in list just because he has more money than someone suffering like him but poorest.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Ahem: This was the law for YEARS---the article I referenced was written 2 years ago, after the poor shmuck went through the legal system for most of a decade---if you recall, the 1993 version of HillaryCare had this exact same provision...WHY would anyone want to pay to get service? To get around the incredibly LONG waiting lists that socialised medicine invariable brings about for many procedures---this prevents the afore-mentioned evil rich people from jumping ahead in line and getting treatment (which they NOW get by going to the US)
And the rich to want to pay more taxes to improve the efficiency of public services
A chicken and egg story.
-
"at least 40" people doing something isn't an indication of "success", or "failure".. or even news. I saw 40 people on the bus, car sales must be failing.
"It's a big number.." said one person, woah.. now thats convincing.
Canada has a whopping 33 million... not even equal to California's 36 Million, free health care for such a small population hardly compares to what it would take here, with 301 million.
Using this tortured logic, plastic surgery in the US is a "failure" since "at least" 40 Americans travel to Mexico for plastic surgery, US divorce laws are also a failure, "at least" 40 US citizens get a Mexican divorce every year.
Free health care is a great idea, and the US could easily afford it with a little less .gov waste... but the republicans & democrats are way too inept and slaved to "the party" line to actually come together for the good of the people and accomplish anything that difficult... they'd rather point the finger & play the blame game in a transparent attempt to protect those who donate the most $$.
-
xmar4ine... I see your libertarianism does have limits... you do want other people to pay for your "free" medical care.
milo... the article said very little.. it did not answer any questions at all.. I don't know how much money is taken from both systems in malpractice for instance.. just what the size of the awards are.. not how many.. I did google and found out that 70% of the insurance the doctors have is paid for by the government but that share is going down.. medical will go up.
We discover and test the drugs.. a very expensive process and the canadians reap the benifiets. If we stopped testing and approving them they would be cheap..
If we trashed out expensive machines and ran the rest 24 hours a day and cut put a wage cap on medical people... and crowded in just one more bed per room.... we would save money.... if we had a waiting list for non critical operations until people on the list died or gave up... we would save money.
oh... the broken leg in BC cost me $275. When I got home we had to have the thing recasted after the leg was "adjusted".. seems they had not taken an xray and had cast it wrong.... well... wrong so far as the US doc was concerned.. it would have been crooked but she would have lived.
lazs
-
Originally posted by KK9
Yes, because US is not offering this service for free.
Canadian goverment gets billed for all of that.
So your canadian wife will have to fly all the way to mexico if the US follows suit.
I wouldn't let hillary wash my truck.
-
Look. I could almost be convinced that that a minimal, basic level of health assistance should be provided by the goverment for those who would not otherwise be able to afford it.
But I think the form it should take should be closer to a Goverment susidised health insurance pool rather than Goverment doctors and Goverment hospitals. A sort of GEICO for health insurance.
An absolute deal-breaker for me, would be any suggestion that I couldn't pay extra out of my pocket to a private doctor for faster/better service if I have the income to do so, whether the procedure is covered by the Goverment plan or not.
An absolute deal-breaker for me, would be any suggestion that doctors could only practice within the Goverment health system, that they could not have a private practice.
-Wab
-
Originally posted by AKWabbit
Look. I could almost be convinced that that a minimal, basic level of health assistance should be provided by the goverment for those who would not otherwise be able to afford it.
But I think the form it should take should be closer to a Goverment susidised health insurance pool rather than Goverment doctors and Goverment hospitals. A sort of GEICO for health insurance.
An absolute deal-breaker for me, would be any suggestion that I couldn't pay extra out of my pocket to a private doctor for faster/better service if I have the income to do so, whether the procedure is covered by the Goverment plan or not.
An absolute deal-breaker for me, would be any suggestion that doctors could only practice within the Goverment health system, that they could not have a private practice.
-Wab
My thoughts as well--the Dems currently state there are some 40 million uninsured (likely half that long term, far less if you take out illegal aliens:D) WHY cant people have the option of checking a box on their W-4 form which would deduct a couple hundred a month out of their paychecks, give them a little card, create a small agency to deal with them (billing), like an OTHER insurance company? The problem so many have is they perhaps own a small business, or a have 2-3 part-time jobs, and don't qualify for 'group' coverage anywhere.---And of the afore-mentioned 40 milion, how many are kids in their early 20's who see no reason to HAVE insurance...200 a month is a good chunk of a payment for one of those obnoxious little jap cars with the loud stereos:)
-
anyone can get a high deductible insurance plan for less than $100 a month...
I know that all those poor uninsured folks have cell phones and cable tv and a car and car insurance.
many are illegal aliens who need to simply go home... many are people who have 3 or more kids when they can't even take care of themselves... that is not my problem. they need to get spayed and neutered.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
We discover and test the drugs.. a very expensive process and the canadians reap the benifiets. If we stopped testing and approving them they would be cheap..
I didn't know that it was only the usa that discovered and tested drugs.:rolleyes:
Read up on Sir Frederick Grant Banting and Charles Herbert Best.
Btw, just because the usa passes a drug does not mean it passes in Canada.
-
I am generalizing... we discover and test far more drugs than anyone else.. and.. it is far more expensive the way we do it. Look at the abortion drug and all the your-0-peean snake oil cancer "cures" for instance... go to mexico and buy copies of US drugs for pennies on the dollar... take your chances of course...
I don't really care tho... get rid of the FDA so far as I am concerned... put the stuff out there... after enough canadians and such have done the human testing for me... If I need it... I will buy it.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
torque... canada is not the US. you do not have near the illegals we do. nor the negro addicts. In order for us to have anything like your system it would cost at least twice as much.
How much do your doctors pay for malpractice insurance a year? How many MRI machines per capita do you have?
lazs
i was just replying to rip's post on the failure aspect of the canadian system and you're bent if you take that as an advocating for americans to go universal... oddly enough rip seems to despises 'socialized medicine' unless it is in the form of a subsidy to beoing.
our system is basically the same as your mediaid and medicare minus 300 million people and without the doughnut hole in the middle... so the middle-class that pay for it get to use it.
cry me a socialist river that private american companies spends too much on research and such... as i don't really care... they still charge for the drugs or services.
-
Torque, my medical benefits are part of my negotiated salary, not welfare. I work for those benefits. I could go contract and get double the pay for the same job, but I prefer to have the retirement package (plus the matching .75 cents to the dollar contribution to my VIP) and the medical package in leiu of double pay.
-
I wasn't aware the US had any special way of discovering drugs Lazs do tell. I was doing just that over the summer working working at Leeds University Anitmicrobial Research Centre, any help would be greatly appreciated.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
xmar4ine... I see your libertarianism does have limits... you do want other people to pay for your "free" medical care.
lazs
Free health care is a great idea, but that's it. The current system sucks and letting the mental midgets in the .gov take it over would also suck... both exist because our leaders, so called, suck.
The country is broken, there are no real solutions anymore.. when is the last time this .gov did something that actually fixed anything? just a bunch of clones bickering that their party idea is the best... any legislation they do pass is guaranteed to accomplish nothing and cost too much $$.
-
How many times does it have to be proven?
Socialism doesn't work...no one prospers...in fact, most live substandard existances, without motivation to succeed.
Socialized programs are not an exception... THEY FAIL.
-
Edit nevermind found something:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Income_Taxes_By_Country.svg
According to this (I'm a little dubious of these numbers... but..) we pay less tax than the USA in NZ. We have free healthcare, free early childhood schooling, a free education system, and a social welfare propping up the lazy.
Seems to me if you are paying higher taxes AND insurance then you're getting ripped off?
-
Not sure of the allocations, but OVER 50% of annual US budget is committed to various programs i.e. Medicaid, food stamps, AFDC....etc. When they argue about budget here, its only about how to spend the remaining 49%:cry
-
Originally posted by thrila
I wasn't aware the US had any special way of discovering drugs Lazs do tell. I was doing just that over the summer working working at Leeds University Anitmicrobial Research Centre, any help would be greatly appreciated.
My wife has been in the medical industry for 20+ years, she claims that the high cost of prrescription drugs in the US. helps pay for research and development into in medical break throughs, advances, and drugs. I'll take her word for it (a source from the industry) rather than some gal named "thrila". ;)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
My wife has been in the medical industry for 20+ years, she claims that the high cost of prrescription drugs in the US. helps pay for research and development into in medical break throughs, advances, and drugs. I'll take her word for it (a source from the industry) rather than some gal named "thrila". ;)
Yup after what is left over from what the stockholders get.
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
Yup after what is left over from what the stockholders get.
are you saying that people having return on investment is somehow improper? are you really such a tool?
-
Not at all.
Btw, look in a mirror.
-
The only answer to this is for people to stop getting sick.
Health insurance in the US costs a fortune because health care is run as a business and profits come out just ahead of avoiding malpractice suits as the number one priority. Customer satisfaction or value for money is a distant third.
On the other hand, back home in the good old UK, health care is run by civil servants with predictable results.
Neither system is satisfactory, but in the end the big difference for me is I never worried about paying for health care in my old age (when I'm actually likely to use it) in the UK. My US employer's health insurance scheme isn't going to help when I retire.
Out of interest, how does the average retiree pay for health care in the US?
-
I'll bite...Medicare? either Part A...B...C...D.....anyhow in 2006 it was over 3% of the entire US G.D.P.....likely to increase as baby-boomer folks like myself hit retirement age
-
Originally posted by TalonX
How many times does it have to be proven?
Socialism doesn't work...no one prospers...in fact, most live substandard existances, without motivation to succeed.
Socialized programs are not an exception... THEY FAIL.
Nah, the more socialist a country is the great the chance that their economy will collapse...everything else being equal. But a socialist program won't necessarily fail alone by themselves. They are however a very inefficient use of resources and are immoral.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
My wife has been in the medical industry for 20+ years, she claims that the high cost of prrescription drugs in the US. helps pay for research and development into in medical break throughs, advances, and drugs. I'll take her word for it (a source from the industry) rather than some gal named "thrila". ;)
That's great, you work in the "aviation field" therefore I should ask your opinion on flight attendant labour issues in a small Uzbek carrier?
Being a nurse doesn't make anyone an authority on the economics of the pharmaceutical industry, it makes them an expert on administering drugs.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
They are however a very inefficient use of resources and are immoral.
Hell, you could be talking about an Enron CEO. ;)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
My wife has been in the medical industry for 20+ years, she claims that the high cost of prrescription drugs in the US. helps pay for research and development into in medical break throughs, advances, and drugs. I'll take her word for it (a source from the industry) rather than some gal named "thrila". ;)
Of course the cost of prescription drugs covers the pay for research and development. GlaxoSmithKline a British pharmaceutical company is the second largest in the world. However they billions of profit annually, i'm sure they could lower the cost of drugs a little. However my point was that the way the US R&D drugs is no way different to any other country in the Western World, there is no "special way". The more money you throw at it, the more research can be done, the higher the probability something will be discovered.
If i stay on in the biomedical industry I'd like to work in academia (i'm sure many posters would love that), however only about 1/60 post-docs actually have that opportunity. It is much more likely i'll end up working for a pharmaceutical company.
Oh and thrila is unisex damn you! Unisex!!:D
-
Thats the same argument the american drugs companies have when it comes to our Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
The PBS is a list of about 600 types of drugs (2500 brands) which are subsidised by the govt, so the maximum anyone will pay is $30 for a drug on the list (about $4 for pensioners, the elderly, Vets etc) with a safety net of $1050 ($274 concession) which is the maximum you will pay in a year for PBS drugs.
Drugs which make the list are tested for quality as well as for cost effectiveness. The Federal govt. negotiates with Australian drug companies for the cost of the drug on the PBS.
According to the govt: Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/SP/pbs.htm)
Manufacturer prices for Australia's top-selling pharmaceuticals in Australia:
* are at least 162 per cent higher in the US (and 84 per cent higher when discounts are taken into account)
* are at least 48 per cent to 51 per cent higher in the UK, Canada and Sweden
* are similar to pricing in France, Spain, and NZ
Under the Australian - US free trade agreement, American drug companies wanted to abolish the PBS because they didn't like the fact the govt departments negotiate on behalf of consumers for pricing, that "fixed price control" inhibited the recovery of R&D costs, and because the PBS tested for cost-effectiveness and supplanted less effective drugs it was "anti-free trade".
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
That's great, you work in the "aviation field" therefore I should ask your opinion on flight attendant labour issues in a small Uzbek carrier?
Being a nurse doesn't make anyone an authority on the economics of the pharmaceutical industry, it makes them an expert on administering drugs.
She works with some world famous (in the industry) surgeons who have created new surgical procedures so take it for for its worth. The UW is a leader in medical procedure development, partially fed by the pharmacudical industry.
Stories like these result from R&D spending:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071015/D8S9L9LO0.html
-
xmarine...LOL... now socialized medicine is ok for a "libertarian"?
We all have a right to health care right? and to food? and to a roof over our heads? and to that guy over there's money?
It's soooooo unfair that you should have to pay for your own medical. That you should have to take care of yourself when there are all these rich people with money they aren't even using!
I don't care... go ahead.. pay for my medical.. no big deal. Hell... look at all the illegals here who have to wait in the emergency room now... how degrading for them!
I know... why not just build hospitals in mexico and make doctors work there for free?
socialism is a bad thing... period. It is the worst possible way to treat humans. Women in this country will bring it to us tho.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
xmarine...LOL... now socialized medicine is ok for a "libertarian"?
We all have a right to health care right? and to food? and to a roof over our heads? and to that guy over there's money?
It's soooooo unfair that you should have to pay for your own medical. That you should have to take care of yourself when there are all these rich people with money they aren't even using!
I don't care... go ahead.. pay for my medical.. no big deal. Hell... look at all the illegals here who have to wait in the emergency room now... how degrading for them!
I know... why not just build hospitals in mexico and make doctors work there for free?
socialism is a bad thing... period. It is the worst possible way to treat humans. Women in this country will bring it to us tho.
lazs
I'll try again: "it's a good idea", which says nothing about food or home "rights".. which rights are you even talking about?, the bill of rights? Miranda rights? rights of way in traffic?
I think its a good idea to aggressively treat a brokeass US citizen with cancer, or give a poor kid who lost a leg a prosthetic... rather than let them rot to death or hop around.
This country is easily capable of accomplishing that. How?.. I don't know. This joke of a govt is too wasteful & incompetent.. cooperate USA can't make a profit, thus it isn't in their interests. Well, maybe they could make "look how much we care"ad revenue by making 1/2 dead cancer patients and crippled kids wear nascar jumpsuits emblazoned with corporate sponsor logos.
"This cancer brought to you by Viagra, just because you're dying.. doesn't mean you can get laid"
If it goes against some libertarian value, whoop-de fluff'n do.. I don't walk in lockstep with any party, unlike the "left vs right" clowns, I think for myself.
-
You think for yourself? So what party wants socialized medicine and smaller government and lower taxes and want's to let you sit around the house doing nothing?
better yet.. what candidate? I guess we are right back where we started and you really are a socialist at heart.
It comes down to that you think that people who won't get medical insurance deserve for other people to pay for it. The government doesn't have any money... if there is "free" medical it is paid for by someone who has had the money taken from them.
How can anyone not buy health insurance if they can afford a car and cable tv and a cell phone?
So many act like free medical paid for by your neighbor is your right because it is so important...
Important? it must not be since people will by booze and cable tv and cell phones and even a boat before they will buy insurance... if it is so unimportant to them.... why should I care?
lazs