SICKO

[tony]

Some quotes that speak for theirselves, mostly from other forums:

I think you're missing the point. They have been shuttled down because of a lack of space in the Vancouver ward. (or Calgary has done the same thing) Not due to better care, not due to cost, or any other reason. The fact is that what did it cost them extra? $0. The system had an urgent need, and reacted in the best, fastest way to ensure proper care.

People with zero actual knowledge of the system keep throwing out this "waiting list" bs. Are there lists, of course. Is it for critical, life saving care? Absolutely not. You want a hip replacement because you are experiencing discomfort, there's the line. You broke your hip in a crash and need replacement, in you go. Organ transplants, look at the waiting list in the US for transplants. It's not due to a lack of ability, it's due to a lack of organs to transplant. Same goes.

You can always find enough data to support whatever stance you choose to take. People died waiting for some procedure in Canada, UK, France or wherever. People die in the US from no coverage, waiting in waiting rooms, or because of denial of insurance. Six of one half dozen of the other.

Universal health care is nowhere near free, and it is not the solution to all problems, but it is a different mindset than the US, that's all.

In a letter to the Wall Street Journal, Robert S. Bell, M.D., President and CEO of University Health Network, Toronto, said that Michael Moore's film Sicko "exaggerated the performance of the Canadian health system — there is no doubt that too many patients still stay in our emergency departments waiting for admission to scarce hospital beds." However, "Canadians spend about 55% of what Americans spend on health care and have longer life expectancy, and lower infant mortality rates. Many Americans have access to quality health care. All Canadians have access to similar care at a considerably lower cost." Canadians pay 9% of GDP to insure 100% of citizens, compared with 14% of GDP to insure 85% of Americans.

I work in the health care system in Canada, and I work next to a nurse who is a US expat. She has long experience in both systems, and she has no doubt whatsoever about which system she'd prefer to be under herself: the Canadian system, by a mile.

One of my jobs is to book MRI's, CT scans, and other tests for patients. There are protocols in place for scheduling these tests. A team of physicians reviews all requisitions and decides priorities. Someone who needs an MRI today gets it today, at no charge. Someone less urgent may wait a few weeks or months if they want it for free. Someone who needs it on a much less urgent basis can wait 3 to 6 months, roughly. In all instances there is no charge. And, as in the US, if you've got the money, you can buy the scan privately, or fly to some US institution if that is what you'd like.

I'm talking about how things work normally. In 6 years on the job, I've never experienced any case that hasn't worked that way.

One poster here remarked that he's never heard of someone coming to Canada for superior medical treatment, I would attribute that to the fact that relatively few Americans have an interest in knowing much about what's going on outside America in any area, medicine included. Fewer still care to hear about pursuits in which someone else performs better than America. They do not hear about this kind of thing in the US media. But FYI, Canada is a world leader in applied neuroscience (e.g. brain and nervous system injury and disease), and on the treatment of diabetes.

I have American friends who occasionally report symptoms that would have me at the doctor's office or emergency room immediately, but they put off the visit, waiting to see if it gets worse before they risk blowing the money for a visit! Frankly, that's unthinkable in Canada. Money is never, ever a factor.

In summary, I think the medical systems in both countries reflect the values of both countries. Health care, even the most complex surgeries and long-term in-patient care, is covered by taxes paid by all Canadians; some pull more than their equal share of the weight, and some pull less. The social safety net, the civil society, is more highly valued. In the US, it is the "American Dream" that is more highly valued - the opportunity for the advancement of the individual. Many are left out. The social safety net, the civil society, is less highly valued than the individual's pursuit of success.

[ironchef]

In a letter to the Wall Street Journal, Robert S. Bell, M.D., President and CEO of University Health Network, Toronto, said that Michael Moore's film Sicko "exaggerated the performance of the Canadian health system — there is no doubt that too many patients still stay in our emergency departments waiting for admission to scarce hospital beds." However, "Canadians spend about 55% of what Americans spend on health care and have longer life expectancy, and lower infant mortality rates.

That right there is questionable. Life and how people live it, whether it will be healthy or not is what is attributable to life expectancy and lower mortality rates, not the type of healthcare available in the country.

In summary, I think the medical systems in both countries reflect the values of both countries. Health care, even the most complex surgeries and long-term in-patient care, is covered by taxes paid by all Canadians; some pull more than their equal share of the weight, and some pull less. The social safety net, the civil society, is more highly valued. In the US, it is the "American Dream" that is more highly valued - the opportunity for the advancement of the individual. Many are left out. The social safety net, the civil society, is less highly valued than the individual's pursuit of success.

If the social safety net or civil society in Canada is so highly valued, why doesn't everyone contribute equally? Why must some people pick up the slack for others. That guy is taking a stab at the "American Dream" because people here feel that they shouldn't have to take care of others, why is that wrong?

[tony]

If the social safety net or civil society in Canada is so highly valued, why doesn't everyone contribute equally? Why must some people pick up the slack for others. That guy is taking a stab at the "American Dream" because people here feel that they shouldn't have to take care of others, why is that wrong?

The last quote addressed that, its the difference in mentality between the two countries. The American Dream addresses individual achievement while Canadians value the sense of community as a whole.

If I make $60k a year I have no problem paying say.. $50 a month vs someone who makes $30k a year and pays $10 a month. If we are both giving the same proportionately then where is the problem? In real wages we are both giving as much we can and in reality I still have more to spend than they do.

[ironchef]

The last quote addressed that, its the difference in mentality between the two countries. The American Dream addresses individual achievement while Canadians value the sense of community as a whole.

If I make $60k a year I have no problem paying say.. $50 a month vs someone who makes $30k a year and pays $10 a month. If we are both giving the same proportionately then where is the problem? In real wages we are both giving as much we can and in reality I still have more to spend than they do.

Well if you pay proportionally, shouldn't the care be proportional as well?

You even mentioned yourself in another post...

Nothing more? I wont lie I make a tad more than that and things aren't tight but they sure are not quite comfortable either. Taxes totally kill my pay.

Well if they're killing the pay right now, just imagine how much worse it would be with them being increased thanks to universal healthcare. And you know if universal healthcare gets adopted, they'll push for universal education. So then you'll have to pay even more taxes just so Joe Blow can do keg stands 5 nights a week and barely pass class.

[Batlground]

Well if you pay proportionally, shouldn't the care be proportional as well?

You even mentioned yourself in another post...


Well if they're killing the pay right now, just imagine how much worse it would be with them being increased thanks to universal healthcare. And you know if universal healthcare gets adopted, they'll push for universal education. So then you'll have to pay even more taxes just so Joe Blow can do keg stands 5 nights a week and barely pass class.

[tony]

Well if you pay proportionally, shouldn't the care be proportional as well?

You even mentioned yourself in another post...


Well if they're killing the pay right now, just imagine how much worse it would be with them being increased thanks to universal healthcare. And you know if universal healthcare gets adopted, they'll push for universal education. So then you'll have to pay even more taxes just so Joe Blow can do keg stands 5 nights a week and barely pass class.

I'll take the pain of that additional tax if I have the peace of mind knowing I can pursue entrepreneurship like I want without the worry of health coverage, sign me up now!

So you're saying that healthcare should be proportionate? That the person who makes less (For instance a teacher who will never make 6 digits but remains a great asset to society) should get less quality healthcare because she does not make enough for better care?

And in my statement I said that proportionately we are paying the same thing. Again, if I make $50,000 a year and pay $50 a month then the person making $30k a month pays $30 a month.. we are both paying the same percentage of our wages so we should be entitled to the same care.. I see nothing wrong with that.. its proportionate and fair.

[ironchef]

I'll take the pain of that additional tax if I have the peace of mind knowing I can pursue entrepreneurship like I want without the worry of health coverage, sign me up now!

So you're saying that healthcare should be proportionate? That the person who makes less (For instance a teacher who will never make 6 digits but remains a great asset to society) should get less quality healthcare because she does not make enough for better care?

And in my statement I said that proportionately we are paying the same thing. Again, if I make $50,000 a year and pay $50 a month then the person making $30k a month pays $30 a month.. we are both paying the same percentage of our wages so we should be entitled to the same care.. I see nothing wrong with that.. its proportionate and fair.

Let's take a look at it from an entrepreneurship point of view. Lets say you're some sort of provider of medical services or equipment as your business. Person A contributes his share to "society" @ $50/month, and person B contributes the $30/month, but your service or equipment costs $100. So while people are paying proportionally to what they make, its not covering your costs, not even break even costs. How do you feel about losing money on your entrepreneurship?

I agree with you in that teachers are a great asset to society, as well as cops/firefighters/military personnel and the like. They should all be paid way more than they currently are.

Proportionality is fair, thats true. But to use another example, some guy gets taxed on his $1 million in income. But guy B falls below the line and doesn't get taxed on his earnings. Yet guy a's taxes went to building the roads and infrastructure that support guy b even having a job or sending his kids to public school. Wheres the fairness in that?

[tony]

Let's take a look at it from an entrepreneurship point of view. Lets say you're some sort of provider of medical services or equipment as your business. Person A contributes his share to "society" @ $50/month, and person B contributes the $30/month, but your service or equipment costs $100. So while people are paying proportionally to what they make, its not covering your costs, not even break even costs.

The figures I've provided show that with universal healthcare costs go DOWN, furthermore taxes received will cover the cost of care without shortage. If the taxes do not cover then that is a problem with the government for now distributing funds as they should and not the system.

[Batlground]

And in my statement I said that proportionately we are paying the same thing. Again, if I make $50,000 a year and pay $50 a month then the person making $30k a month pays $30 a month.. we are both paying the same percentage of our wages so we should be entitled to the same care.. I see nothing wrong with that.. its proportionate and fair.

Tony what is your position on taxes then, would you want to pay taxes the same way.......

[tony]

Tony what is your position on taxes then, would you want to pay taxes the same way.......

Now that is where it gets tricky for me since I don't like how medicaid and social security is drawn from checks but that is the one way I see it implemented. Its the same way we're funding the war we are in currently (through taxes) and nobody seems to care about that. The president just submitted a $3.4 Trillion budget but we complain about the possible cost of healthcare, I do not understand that.