# Canada is Being Libelled as "Hell on Earth" by Republicans



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

I know people here have varying views of how well or badly the Canadian healthcare system is being run, but as someone who has experienced both, you gotta believe me: you have _paradise_ up here compared to down south -- particularly if you aren't rich or under/unemployed!

First of all, the phrase "pre-existing condition" has no meaning here. That alone is a HUGE advantage over the insurance-based system. Secondly, your healthcare is "portable," meaning it's not tied to your job. In a recession particularly, I'm not sure the average Canadian understands what a HUGE difference this makes in your lives compared to those in the US who can least afford not to be covered.

Third, most provinces have "sliding scale" fees, meaning that if you can't afford coverage they will treat you anyway. I hate to say this, but even the "haven of last resort" -- the emergency room in the US -- has ignored this simple principle of medical compassion.

But even those of you who grouse about the wait times, or live in remote areas where services are hard to come by, or feel you are not getting the best value for money ... you would NOT BELIEVE how the Republicans and insurance companies down south portray life in Canada. My emails from friends in the US is just *amazing* in the malarkey they are forwarding to me for verification or debunking (a LOT of the latter, I must say!). You would think Canadian cities are blood-strewn hellscapes of semi-zombified seniors and the infirm to hear them tell it.

Recently, CNN tried to at least debunk the most spurious of the claims, made mostly by media whore Shona Holmes and professional liar Mitch McConnell, but in my view they fell WAY short of the whole story.

Luckily, the Ottawa Citizen was watching, and helpfully sets the record straight(er) in a handy article I urge you all to forward to your American friends:

A reality check on a reality check

For the sake of Canadian tourism and national honour (if nothing else), we NEED to fight the smears that frighten Americans into thinking Canada is a medical third-world country, and those of you who have experienced both systems in particular are much needed to counteract the propaganda. It's fine if the US doesn't want to adopt a Canadian-style system, but they don't need to LIE about us to defend their own status quo (or move to some other model, there ARE other models out there!).

I'd also encourage those of you who have experience with both healthcare systems to contact CNN, forward the OC article and suggest talking with you for a follow-up story. I suggest using the "news tips" function because this IS new/additional information as well as because a human being actually reads those and may pass it on to the right producers.

No system is perfect, but our experience (and those of our friends here) have been MUCH superior to what we got in the US. Unless you are in one of the more remote areas or otherwise ill-served in your particular community healthcare-wise, most of you should be VERY glad you're here and not there when it comes to medical needs.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Chas, I don't think the average American cares about Canada or the Canadian Medical System....if they did they would understand the meaning of a central pay system. What is concerning is how the U.S. is actually trying to submarine something, it appears to me, that both parties want. 

The BNA act specifies who is responsible for what....and medical is a provincial responsibility, although the Feds have had a significant hand in it [ to financial detriment in my opinion ] what I would like to know is, does the U.S. have a similar type of act which specifies which jurisdiction is responsible for what ( read health care )...we never hear about that here, all we hear about is the Federal side. 

thanx Robert-paul


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

The Americans are misreading the problems we have, and perverting them for their own political purposes.

The problem in Canada is not in funding, but the fact that the medical system has attracted a great number of leeches and political hacks that sap the strength out of what should be a world class system. We end up paying top dollar for services that don't make the grade, with grungy hospitals that dispense death because they have politicised workers in unions that protect the lethargic and apathetic, with a healthy amount of cash skimmed off for luxury luncheons and pet projects that have no place within public institutions. The constant leeching, and the petty politics that goes on, means that we end up paying top dollar for untimely and very much delayed health care. Sure, someones having a heart attack, they deal with that, at least if you don't live in places like Fort Erie or other places not on University Avenue in Toronto - but for most maladies, it can take months or years, or perhaps never, for problems to ever be attended to.

The problem in the US is that they have hospitals that are out to make huge profits, so yes, if one has cash, they can obtain the best treatments possible. If someone doesn't have cash, well, that's too bad because hard capitalism has no compassion.

Looking at Canada should really alarm Americans, not because of public funding for health care - but of the potential for the politicisation of heath care that saps money, where health care ends up in a distant third place behind the massive efforts placed into executives posturing and "looking good", and the endless petty feuds and empire building that go in in our system.

Our system is broken not because it is universal or publically funded, nor it is broken because it lacks the business sense of hard capitalism - but because the system is endlessly prostituted to the special interests and glad handlers that have found their way into the system - where actual health care is nothing compared to dishing out fat cash to the lazy who loaf behind their desks sufing the Internet or reading wedding magazines, or in endless union "grievances" where the lethargic are paid huge cash to accomplish nothing. What our system needs is a big kick in the ass, with actual doctors making scientifically based decisions of which the only purpose is to provide health care - rather than the current wastefilled system where CEOs score half million dollar salaries doing nothing but complaining that their hospitals are filthy because the Government won't provide them with brand new gold plated Taj Mahals every five years.

It doesn't help that in Ontario, the Government saw fit to start these LHINs - which were meant to look at ways of improving health care - but have proven themselves to be more savvy at empire building and catering to the whims of their favourite CEO cronies, and are hell bent on removing health care, not only from remote, distant northern communities that have no services, but in communities right here that have actual hospitals, simply because the buildings aren't big and impressive enough for them.

The system lacks accountability, and has long lurched into dysfunction and failure - even though the glad handlers continue to say that the problem is that we need even larger Taj Mahals that are far away from actual patients.

America, on the other hand, needs to have a health care system that doesn't bankrupt the citizen who happens to have broken a leg...


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

It really is incredible the blatant lies I've seen being promoted on US TV lately. Not only is it outright offensive, it's truly unbelievable that any American could possibly be so stupid as to believe a word of it.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

bsenka said:


> It really is incredible the blatant lies I've seen being promoted on US TV lately. Not only is it outright offensive, it's truly unbelievable that any American could possibly be so stupid as to believe a word of it.


Are you kidding?

These are the people who believe by the millions that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim, that he wasn't born in the United States (and can say this staring at a copy of his birth certificate)... who could not find Canada on a map, who probably could not find a map...

with respect to the millions of intelligent, reasonable, ecologically educated and caring other citizens of the United States.

It just seems like there are a whole lot more of the former category sometimes.


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

thanks for posting Chas.

I saw a clip on the news where an ontario lady was on a commercial talking about how she had to go to the US for care. I couldn't believe how construed the commercial was to make it seem like we were a 3rd world country for healthcare.

I do find it sad that people in my hometown of Sault Ste. Marie have to drive to Sudbury for cancer treatments (that's a 3.5 hour drive on a 2 lane highway). Something's not right about that and I think Evan hit on some key points.

That said, one of the reasons why I'll never leave this country is b/c of the healthcare. When my son fell off a dock last Sept 1st and had a tooth knocked ALL the way up, I didn't think of how much it was going to cost, I just got him to the hospital knowing he'd be looked after. Of course, in that situation, I probably wouldn't think of the cost right away, but i'm sure it would have crossed my mind at some point. (he's fine btw, the tooth is still half way down and I doubt it will descend all the way 

But my point is that I like knowing I don't have to worry about getting care or having to pay for it. We do through our taxes yes, but up front, it doesn't hurt the individual or as Evan said, "doesn't bankrupt someone for a broken leg."

I do question whether or not a country like the US can implement successful health care for everyone. The US seems to h*ll bent on profits, profits, profits and they've not had a taxable system for healthcare that I can't see them buying into it - like it's already too late?

Another related topic could be how lifestyle habits could impact healthcare costs. Much like applying for life insurance, your premiums are higher if you smoke, are obese, engage in dangerous activities (ie. skydiving etc..). Should ppl who fit the previous pay a bit more for healthcare coverage? I personally think so, but I do believe it's a fine line b/c there are many factors involved (ie. for obesity, it could be a hormone reaction and not the fact someone simply overeats). It would be interesting to see if that has any bearing.

Anyhoo, hope I didn't redirect the original thread intent.

Cheers,
keebler


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

HowEver: there is serious coin involved in this with the HMOs which, I think, Nixon helped set up as his solution to the U.S. healthcare problem. While they are an oligopoly, they have a significant lobby effort. And with the mid-terms coming up in less than 2 years, the local voter is going to believe what they see as credible sources. I'm waiting to see the National Enquirer's story on how a raft full of Canadians went over Niagara Falls in an effort to escape the wait times so they could get treatment in the U.S.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Rps said:


> Chas, I don't think the average American cares about Canada or the Canadian Medical System...


Under normal circumstances, this would be true. But I run a blog about US-Canada differences and education, and the uptick in GROSSLY misinformed and alarming email from US readers asking me to verify some really hair-standing-on-end horror stories they've been told via TV ads, mainstream media and such has really upticked in the last couple of weeks as the work on bringing the US into line with sanity (at least healthwise) ramps up ...



> if they did they would understand the meaning of a central pay system.


You're talking about people who don't even know what "socialism" means, but that doesn't stop them using it as a blunt instrument ... 



> What is concerning is how the U.S. is actually trying to submarine something, it appears to me, that both parties want.


No, the Republicans definitely do NOT want *any* change from the current status quo. The two parties that want some kind of public option and health care reform are the Democrats and the vast majority of the American public.



> What I would like to know is, does the U.S. have a similar type of act which specifies which jurisdiction is responsible for what ( read health care )


No. Most states have minimal responsibility for health care at all (apart from licensing and inspections). There are usually one or two "public" (ie not-for-profit) hospitals in most large US towns (Orlando, where I lived, had one -- for a metro population of 2M!). These are paid for by the municipality primarily, with aid/grants from the states and federal level. States used to run mental hospitals and such (again with federal aid), but Reagan closed them all down and literally put the patients out on the streets.

In the United States, healthcare is (except for Medicaid and the poorest of the poor) a private responsibility. It's the patient's job to find -- and pay for -- healthcare solutions. This is why the insurance industry has become such a huge monster, able to ration care and dictate who lives and who dies (literally) and set conditions such as no coverage if you have a "pre-existing condition" (which has turned into a nonsense catch-all to deny coverage).

This would all be fine if the insurance companies were non-profit, but they aren't. They have a legal responsibility to maximise profit on behalf of the shareholders, so they have a fundamental conflict of interest I would have thought would be obvious to anyone with half a brain, but America loves capitalism more than it loves people.

Having a baby in the US costs between $15-25K assuming you don't have any serious complications, and insurance doesn't cover most of that because it's "elective." Just one example (though to be fair, you do get some tax breaks to soften the blow).

Unless you are absolutely destitute, there is little to nothing the government will do to help you with a serious medical issue. Medical expenses are responsible for about half of all personal bankruptcies in the US -- something I don't think Canadians can even dream of. Say you fell off the roof of your house while installing an antenna and couldn't work for a couple of months while you recuperate. In the US, you would likely be denied coverage (because it was your own fault), you wouldn't get any income supplement (since it wasn't a work-related accident) and thus lose your job, and you'd be faced with tens of thousands of dollars in hospital and PT bills. You might VERY WELL lose the very home you fell from unless you are rich. Can you imagine it?


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

HowEver said:


> Are you kidding?
> 
> These are the people who believe by the millions that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim, that he wasn't born in the United States (and can say this staring at a copy of his birth certificate)... who could not find Canada on a map, who probably could not find a map...
> 
> with respect to the millions of intelligent, reasonable, ecologically educated and caring other citizens of the United States.


No offense taken. There ARE millions of sensible Americans, possibly even a majority, but they are easily distracted and drowned out by "hot button" issues like race and gay marriage (orchestrated by the 24-hour news cycle, the worst thing to happen to the US since Reagan) and the nutballs who obsess on pettiness instead of the real issues.

It's largely the public's *passivity* to this manipulation and their _gullibility_ to obviously fraudulent claims/sources/personalities that drove me to look for a country where the people are more sensible. And thus, I'm here.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

keebler27 said:


> I saw a clip on the news where an ontario lady was on a commercial talking about how she had to go to the US for care. I couldn't believe how construed the commercial was to make it seem like we were a 3rd world country for healthcare.


Worse than that: as the article makes clear, Ms. Holmes is blatantly lying about several aspects of her condition and her treatment to become a right-wing celebrity. Turns out she didn't actually have a brain tumor, but a cyst that did not require emergency treatment. Turns out she DID receive prompt attention when the condition was diagnosed, but OPTED to go to the US to receive quicker care (because, and this is key to the whole thing, she could afford to do so).

She also fails to mention in the ad that her treatment in the US cost her $97,000(US). Oh yeah, that little detail. I don't know how many of the members of this forum could deal with a surprise $97K bill without going into bankruptcy and losing everything we've worked for, but I would bet that the number of members who could swing that is pretty low. 



> I do find it sad that people in my hometown of Sault Ste. Marie have to drive to Sudbury for cancer treatments (that's a 3.5 hour drive on a 2 lane highway).


Agreed, but have you seen those "Cancer Treatment Centers of America" ads on US TV? Again, they don't mention the cost in those ads, but let's just say your kids aren't going to college if you have to go to one of those places. Even with insurance.



> That said, one of the reasons why I'll never leave this country is b/c of the healthcare. When my son fell off a dock last Sept 1st and had a tooth knocked ALL the way up, I didn't think of how much it was going to cost, I just got him to the hospital knowing he'd be looked after.


The above sentence is really one of the keys to the whole thing, and bears repeating.



> Another related topic could be how lifestyle habits could impact healthcare costs. Much like applying for life insurance, your premiums are higher if you smoke, are obese, engage in dangerous activities (ie. skydiving etc..). Should ppl who fit the previous pay a bit more for healthcare coverage?


I would say yes to that as you did, with the qualifications you mentioned.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Say Chas: I saw a recent set of statistics which had Canada spending about $3600 per person on health care while the U.S. spent almost $7000. For our $3600 we have lower infant mortality rates and a longer life span [ although I think we are still too high infant deaths ]....so where does the money go. If the governemnt is spending that amount of money [ and assuming some people had insurance ] the numbers from the U.S. don't seem to add up.

Thoughts?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

bsenka said:


> It really is incredible the blatant lies I've seen being promoted on US TV lately. Not only is it outright offensive, it's truly unbelievable that any American could possibly be so stupid as to believe a word of it.


It isn't a lie though - our "system" has some very grave systemic problems. For instance, my shoulder was blown out because of unsafe workplace regulations imposed upon us, by which we were forced to overreach because "standing on a stool is unsafe". By the time it became full blown, and after numerous doctors visits, ultrasounds, etc., I remain without the MRI that I need. I have been on the MRI waiting list for over three years, with no indication other than I'll have to go to Brampton to get it, when that day comes along. Of course, such things are a same day proceedure in Buffalo, but to obtain that, I need a Presidential Pardon to go there. Any chance of obtaining Compensation, or to sue the boss that imposed the rule, has long passed the statute of limitations, and I still have a blown out shoulder.

These things are legendary. People in places like Fort Erie no longer have proper health care - unless they smuggle themselves to the US. The anecdotal evidence is huge, millions of people have no family doctor at all, and waits for specialists are lengthy - though if you are havign a heart attack, they will be right on that. Cancer treatment is a joke, seeing that it depended on an antique, obsolete reactor at Chalk River that has rusted out...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Rps said:


> I saw a recent set of statistics which had Canada spending about $3600 per person on health care while the U.S. spent almost $7000. For our $3600 we have lower infant mortality rates and a longer life span [ although I think we are still too high infant deaths ]....so where does the money go. If the governemnt is spending that amount of money [ and assuming some people had insurance ] the numbers from the U.S. don't seem to add up.
> 
> Thoughts?


1) Americans choose to purchase more health care than we do. They have a greater range of services available and they get their health care much faster than we do as well.
2) The government mandated insurance coverage doesn't allow people to pick and choose the type of coverage they want--or to let insurance companies choose which conditions they cover.
3) High pay-outs in insurance cases. In the absence of tort reform, some hospitals have actually closed because they're located in counties where jurors make it their business to hand out $50 million settlements.
4) Government already pays about 70% of all health care costs in the U.S. The programs are run very badly and don't encourage competition.

Socialized health care saves money through four methods:

1) Decreasing the number of services available.
2) Rationing care.
3) Extending wait times.
4) Limiting the number of medical professionals practicing.


----------



## sharonmac09 (Apr 10, 2009)

My parents wintered in Florida earlier this year and they purchased insurance. My mother was felled by diarrhea and was admitted to the hospital. The doctor diagnosed her with a tumour in her large intestine and wanted to operate immediately. Of course the insurance company was contacted and based on whatever info it gathered, it declined the operation and instead sent a nurse and 2 first class airline tickets. Upon arrival in Toronto, Mom was immediately transported to the hospital. She was subsequently re-diagnosed with c-difficile and as many of you know it is highly contagious..... but treatable. She is fine now but would she if she had the operation?


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

EvanPitts said:


> I remain without the MRI that I need. I have been on the MRI waiting list for over three years, with no indication other than I'll have to go to Brampton to get it, when that day comes along.


 I got an MRI within an hour when I dislocated my hip (in Manitoba), my son got one in about three hours when he was cross-checked head-first into the boards (in Ontario). When you actually need it, you get it, right away. Even if it's not an emergency, you might wait a few months. In Ontario, the current wait is 100 days. Three years? There's something else going on there.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

bsenka said:


> Even if it's not an emergency, you might wait a few months. In Ontario, the current wait is 100 days. Three years? There's something else going on there.


I can't even remember if it is three years, it was so long ago that I have really just given up, and they probably have to. It is bad here in Ontario, since we do not have any modern MRI machines here in Hamilton, and the nearest one in in Brampton, according to my doctor.

Regardless of my situation, there are tons of people with horror stories about the legendary badness of heath care in this country. It is all about waste, executive luncheons, building empires - and little about actually getting some trained doctors into places where there are shortages. Hamilton has a major shortage of doctors, and it is going to get worse because there is a lengthy list of doctors that are planning on retirement. Even though numerically we have a major shortfall - we do not qualify for any funding from the Government because we have a medical school. Great, we pump out graduates that end up going to Burlington because they can cash in large with a $35,000 grant from the Government to go to under serviced areas that don't have medical schools.

I don't think there is any "libel" - it is a truthful story about someone who could not get timely care in this country, and had to resort to bankrupting themselves to maintain their life.

The Government is "proud", according to the Minister of Health, that 9 out of 10 Canadians have a family doctor! Yes, 4 and a half million have no access to a family doctor - which is the entry point into the "system". That is something to be proud about. We should also be proud of the fact we stack patients in hallways because we don't have "beds" - code word for "my empire diddled your empire out of funds."

The problem is not public funding - but the perverted system that has mutated from the vision of Tommy Douglas into a smelly gold plated ogre that eats money. We ended up with a politicized system where feudalism is rife, and patient care is the lowest possible priority. Instead of being able to go to a doctor and obtaining proper care, it is a game that consists of endless, useless 10 minute visits in which nothing is done, then passing the patient onto the next doctor - who can then bill for more useless 10 minute visits. It's all about collecting large money rather than any actual notion of health care or health maintenance.

Our system is so bad - that even our Supreme Court ruled that such torture was entirely unconstitutional, and that "wait times" must be reduced. This was really a departure from their usual rhetoric and attacks of class and race warfare they usually peddle - so it is saying something.

We pay top dollar for "free" health care that is not timely, and half the time, not healthy. Hospitals want nothing more than to shove patients out of their buildings because they are so utterly filthy - people die of the filth. Who knows how many people die because they can't even get a doctors appointment in time. Americans need to know what they are getting into - because by the look of the VA hospitals, it looks like hard capitalism could turn publicly funded health care into an even bigger disaster than the LHINs have managed here...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I was supposed to wait 9 months for an MRI in Toronto. Possible brain tumour. 

McGuinty outlawed private MRI clinics and made it illegal for all but veterinarians to own MRI scanners. 

Time offered by Buffalo, MRI in Buffalo, NY: 24 hours.
Time offered to injured dogs and horsed in Ontario: 24 hours.

Sharonmac: medical misdiagnoses and incompetence run through all systems and countries.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

The Government has long railed against any attempts to provide health care. Twenty years ago the Government decided that lithotrippters will only be located in London - an obvious attempt to buy votes in London, and when a group of doctors went out and bought their own, with their own money, and without wanting to even bill for it - Bob Rae the Socialist who was "all about health care" shut them down and banned the machine.

More recently, another group of Hamilton doctors came up with a way of providing cost effective gastric bypasses in house. It is a procedure that is routine in the US but expensive. These doctors figured out how to do a better job for one quarter the price, but the Government shut them down because it was going to be in Hamilton, rather than some other city of the Liberal parties choice where they need to buy votes. So instead, OHIP flips the bill for $50 large to send people to Buffalo, rather than just doing it here, in existing facilities, for $12 large, all because of politics and feudalism.

We have other nasty problems. The locations of our hospitals was entirely adequate if one looks at the settlement pattern and population in 1912. Since then, the City has grown significantly, and I mean significantly, but the hospitals are in the same places as they were in 1912. For half the population, there just is no hospital nearby, with no service in east Hamilton, Stoney Creek, or on the west Mountain, the part of the mountain south of the Linc, or Ancaster. Of course, health care in West Hamilton, Westdale and Dundas are entirely imperiled since the LHINs decided to abolish the Emergency Department at McMaster - instead suggesting that people from the west end should trek to Brantford General, Cambridge Memorial or Guelph General if they happen to have an emergency.

They did the same thing in Toronto, closing many hospitals that serve huge, underserviced areas of large populations, in order to dish out large funds for the dozen hospitals on the same block on University Avenue - which is only of benefit if one lives at the American Consulate (or on the lawn of Queens Park).

Health care has or is being removed from many other places. Have an emergency in Fort Erie, you better hope you have your passport and that the Peace Bridge isn't entirely log jammed so one can get help in Buffalo. Have an emergency in Welland, hope you don't get caught speeding trying to get to Buffalo as well. Half of Brantford lost their hospital two decades ago, and none of the new, built up areas have any health care. The Government has also spent a lot of time trying to assist in the death of people in Paris by always wishing to close the Willett Hospital. And the list is endless - every hospital is in jeopardy.

Not just hospitals, but we have seen the constant bleeding of talent to other places. For all of the hype about a "nursing shortage" - hospitals will not take on graduates, so graduates end up leaving if they actually want a job. Our nurses, trained on our dollars and in our schools, are on duty all around the world, in countries like Saudi Arabia, Germany, Australia, and even Texas. Here, the hospitals see fit to "retire" nurses, so they collect their pensions, then rehire them on "contract" - thus driving even more graduates to go elsewhere for work.

In return, we have well qualified people from other countries. I am not talking about some "doctor" who knows little more than voodoo and who purchased a doctorate from some coconut college. I am talking about people with the real qualifications, who quite often went to some of the most elite schools possible. I know one lady who was entirely trained in and worked at some of the greatest hospitals in Austria and Germany, with hard core knowledge - but her credentials were not recognized in this country, and she ended up cleaning toilets at the mall because she was a refugee and couldn't do anything else.

Another friend went through school, had high marks, but because she was an RPN, couldn't find any work that wasn't just part-time, straight nights on weekends, and pray that some nepotism doesn't creep in and steal even that crumb away. So she went to Australia, where after the six month waiting period they have for immigrants there, she was able to take two courses, write two exams, and be a real nurse, in an actual hospital - rather than just being an overtrained bedpan cleaner.

The stories are infinite - and all of them point to the very real fact that our system is entirely broken, from the top down.

In this country, cats and dogs not only have access to food that is properly inspected and meets higher standards than human food - they also get better, more compassionate and more timely care than the humans, who are nothing but fodder for the payola machine.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

chas_m said:


> I would say yes to that as you did, with the qualifications you mentioned.


I wasn't even looking for this and found it today in the Citizen:

Obesity costs US health system $147 billion: Study

WOW! (of course, numbers could be bloated (no pun intended), but wow!


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Macfury said:


> Socialized health care saves money through four methods:
> ....


While your list is amusing, in the interest of being taken seriously you might want to include the biggest one: eliminating the BILLIONs of dollars worth of profit the HMOs extract from the system.

While I'd be the first to admit our system is less than perfect, and I'd even agree with some of Evan's views regarding the parasites and grossly incompetent managers, the reason our system still serves the vast majority of our citizens better than even most insured Americans is because, despite the inefficiencies and incompetence, we don't have to pay the HMOs. If you took the portion of the money Americans spend on health care that is captured by the HMOs out of the equation, the costs of the American system would probably be less than ours.

Where there is profit to be made, there will be profiteers. I don't have a problem with that when you're talking about consumer goods and services, but for emergency services, heath care, education, national security and environmental protection, the common good should outweigh the right of the individual to make money, and this is where the government should provide services funded by taxation.

Cheers


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

chas_m said:


> Under normal circumstances, this would be true. But I run a blog about US-Canada differences and education, and the uptick in GROSSLY misinformed and alarming email from US readers asking me to verify some really hair-standing-on-end horror stories they've been told via TV ads, mainstream media and such has really upticked in the last couple of weeks as the work on bringing the US into line with sanity (at least healthwise) ramps up ...


I would love to read more about what kinds of things they are asking you about, either here or at your blog.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> 1) Americans choose to purchase more health care than we do. They have a greater range of services available and they get their health care much faster than we do as well.
> 2) The government mandated insurance coverage doesn't allow people to pick and choose the type of coverage they want--or to let insurance companies choose which conditions they cover.
> 3) High pay-outs in insurance cases. In the absence of tort reform, some hospitals have actually closed because they're located in counties where jurors make it their business to hand out $50 million settlements.
> 4) Government already pays about 70% of all health care costs in the U.S. The programs are run very badly and don't encourage competition.
> ...


Oh yes. They have soooo many more choices. Unless of course, your HMO disallows the proceedure, says they don't cover it. Then what do you do. Mortgage your house? If you even -have- a house? That's worth any money?

Macfury you're full of crap. Go live in the real world down there. Unless you have a huge bank account, your post is nothing but pure BS.



sharonmac09 said:


> My parents wintered in Florida earlier this year and they purchased insurance. My mother was felled by diarrhea and was admitted to the hospital. The doctor diagnosed her with a tumour in her large intestine and wanted to operate immediately. Of course the insurance company was contacted and based on whatever info it gathered, it declined the operation and instead sent a nurse and 2 first class airline tickets. Upon arrival in Toronto, Mom was immediately transported to the hospital. She was subsequently re-diagnosed with c-difficile and as many of you know it is highly contagious..... but treatable. She is fine now but would she if she had the operation?


It declined the operation. How many times have I heard that through my family? In this case, it proved to be a blessing in disguise, but imagine if it was real cancer. Then I suggest knocking on dr. Macfury's door and ask him to tell you all about the wonderful options they have in the US.



Macfury said:


> I was supposed to wait 9 months for an MRI in Toronto. Possible brain tumour.
> 
> McGuinty outlawed private MRI clinics and made it illegal for all but veterinarians to own MRI scanners.
> 
> ...


Interestingly enough, I spoke to a guy down the hall who needed an MRI for his wrist. He got one in a few weeks. I think both you and EP are "playing for the camera". 

Both systems are in dire need of improvement. But for anyone, to say that one, or the other is vastly superior, is a complete fool, or doesn't understand the 'other system' at all.

Of course, I can't leave off with a nice example of the shrieking righteous right/libertarian lunatics whipping themselves into a -frenzy-. Right up Macfury's alley I'm betting...





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanc said:


> While your list is amusing....


The list may be amusing, but is fully understood and endorsed within the Ontario Ministry of Health.



bryanc said:


> ...in the interest of being taken seriously you might want to include the biggest one: eliminating the BILLIONs of dollars worth of profit the HMOs extract from the system.


The HMOs are a creation of government, signed into law as the HMO Act of 1973 by Richard Nixon. Far from being an example of the excesses of private medical care, they are an example of the willful tampering with the market by government. Like the recent spate of bail-outs designed to transfer taxpayer wealth to banks and corporations, the HMO Act was designed specifically to transfer wealth to the president's supporters. As John Ehrlichman told Nixon on one of the infamous tapes: “… the less care they give them, the more money they make.”


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Rps said:


> Say Chas: I saw a recent set of statistics which had Canada spending about $3600 per person on health care while the U.S. spent almost $7000.


That's probably the 2006 averages from this well-sourced wikipedia article that you're quoting: the exact figures are Canada: $3678 per person average, US $6714. As bad as that sounds however, it's the percentage of GDP that's truly alarming; Canada spends 10% of its GDP on healthcare, but the US with its vastly larger population still spends a shocking 15.3% of its GDP on it. 



> For our $3600 we have lower infant mortality rates and a longer life span


You're getting an even better deal than you think; in addition to those stats you mentioned, Canadians are also fitter, less sickly, have a lower percentage of people on disability and lower odds of developing any serious diseases.



> ...so where does the money go.


Primarily, the extra money goes to profits for the insurance companies. A bit of it goes to fraud and waste too, but mainly that extra money is profit for the insurance companies.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

sharonmac09 said:


> The doctor diagnosed her with a tumour in her large intestine and wanted to operate immediately. Of course the insurance company was contacted and based on whatever info it gathered, it declined the operation and instead sent a nurse and 2 first class airline tickets.


I have to admit that is one smart insurance company, and that they actually saved the company some money AND did the right thing! 



> She is fine now but would she if she had the operation?


Indeed.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

groovetube said:


> Macfury you're full of crap. Go live in the real world down there. Unless you have a huge bank account, your post is nothing but pure BS.


I didn't see MacFury's original post, and I'm not going to argue with him by proxy through you, but I did notice one "fact" he cited which is in fact incorrect: his assertion that the US government pays for about 70% of all health care costs.

The actual figure is 46% (source), and this includes everyone on medicaid/medicare (ie seniors and the extremely poor), disability, prisoners, military and government employees. This figure, however, does not tell the true tale: only a portion of a person's medical expenses are covered under these US government plans, ie the care is VERY MUCH rationed (if you are a senior, a vet, or poor) except for certain classes of people (government employees, prisoners and military get more-or-less 100% coverage).

Most Americans who do not fit into one of the above categories (which as a group I will call "the workers and their families") either buy private insurance subsidised by their employers, or they do not have health insurance at all.

I had what was considered top-quality health insurance when I lived in Florida, and had no major issues with them (because I'm reasonably healthy). But my costs per month as a healthy person with no serious issues (a prescription for high blood pressure, that's it) were the same there UNDER insurance as they are for me now as an immigrant who is NOT covered under Canada's healthcare system (ie, visitor/tourist rates), both in terms of doctor visits and prescription costs.

As mentioned previously, I didn't see MacFury's full post so I don't know that it was "all BS," but I confess to wondering why he *doesn't* move down there and see firsthand for himself, as his political views and general philosophy seem very influenced by the US and I would think he would find himself in a country much more in line with his general worldview than here ...


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

chas_m said:


> I didn't see MacFury's original post, and I'm not going to argue with him by proxy through you, but I did notice one "fact" he cited which is in fact incorrect: his assertion that the US government pays for about 70% of all health care costs.
> 
> The actual figure is 46% (source), and this includes everyone on medicaid/medicare (ie seniors and the extremely poor), disability, prisoners, military and government employees. This figure, however, does not tell the true tale: only a portion of a person's medical expenses are covered under these US government plans, ie the care is VERY MUCH rationed (if you are a senior, a vet, or poor) except for certain classes of people (government employees, prisoners and military get more-or-less 100% coverage).
> 
> ...


Macfury likes to pontificate on how the US is a world of incredible opportunity of healthcare. He is one those people that think that, because you can stateside with a huge wad of cash in your hands and get what you want, that somehow means they have a better healthcare system. 

And he thinks people are stupid enough to actually believe that. Pretty much in a nutshell.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

groovetube said:


> Macfury likes to pontificate on how the US is a world of incredible opportunity of healthcare. He is one those people that think that, because you can stateside with a huge wad of cash in your hands and get what you want, that somehow means they have a better healthcare system.


You are being absurd, since MacFury never said that. What he did point out is that in the US, if one has the money, they can get timely health care, and that more procedures are available - and compared that to socialized health care which attempts to bring down costs by increasing wait times and limiting the number of medical personnel in the system.

I do not think that MacFury is saying that publicly funded health is evil, and we should trash our system in order to enjoy the panacea of medical bankruptcy that they have in the US. No one, not even the Americans, want to horrors of their infinite profit system. But then, no one in Canada is advocating keeping out current crazy system in place. It is too riddled with corruption and politicization that leads to stacking people in hallways because they don't have "beds" available, or tediously long waits that many people end up suffering from when it comes to obtaining basic diagnostics.

I do not think that MacFury is saying that we should go whole hog hard capitalist where profits are first - but rather, that our system is feeble because it is too politicized and has too much involvement on the part of swarms of government bureaucrats, rather than being run by medical people in some kind of efficient manner.

I know for one that the MRI machine at the local hospital goes unused for much of the time, even though they have a massive backlog for MRI tests in the city, and that OHIP quite often sends people down to Buffalo, or out to Brampton - all because of some petty politicization where it comes down to "funding", that is, empire building and the wars between the empires within the hospital, and the interminable problems of politicized unions that promote the achievements of the lethargic and apathetic worker who wants to make massive paycheques while spending much of the day lolling and reading wedding magazines or downloading porn on the Internet.

No business could survive long using management practices that our hospitals use. It is sad when companies like Toyota keep their auto assembly plants in a cleaner and healthier state than the hospitals keep their facilities. It is also a sad thing when Toyota or other auto makers have more janitors on staff cleaning those plants, while the hospitals see fit to treat those workers like useless trash subject to layoff and termination on the whim of a caviar eating CEO. It is also sad when a hospital gets so dirty that people die of the filth - diseases that people that work at garbage dumps don't even get - and the Media is so stupid that they allow the CEOs to politicize the situation and blame it on the Government because there is not platinum plated new building to stuff more administrators in on the horizon.

This is the kinds of things MacFury is implicating - that we have a health system that is unable to provide suitable health care within a reasonable time frame, and that the system is so bad that even the Supreme Court has ruled that the hospitals are breaking the law. Then he points across the river, where they have a different, for profit system, that though it is costly, it effective and timely, so long as one has a good line of credit.


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

The ability to access necessary medical assistance is a basic Human Right (1) and should not be dependent upon your financial resources.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

EvanPitts said:


> You are being absurd, since MacFury never said that. What he did point out is that in the US, if one has the money, they can get timely health care, and that more procedures are available - and compared that to socialized health care which attempts to bring down costs by increasing wait times and limiting the number of medical personnel in the system.
> 
> I do not think that MacFury is saying that publicly funded health is evil, and we should trash our system in order to enjoy the panacea of medical bankruptcy that they have in the US. No one, not even the Americans, want to horrors of their infinite profit system. But then, no one in Canada is advocating keeping out current crazy system in place. It is too riddled with corruption and politicization that leads to stacking people in hallways because they don't have "beds" available, or tediously long waits that many people end up suffering from when it comes to obtaining basic diagnostics.
> 
> ...


What??? Did you even read?
He said it in black and white. Now save your 1000 word essays on nothing for someone who cares.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

chas_m said:


> I didn't see MacFury's original post, and I'm not going to argue with him by proxy through you, but I did notice one "fact" he cited which is in fact incorrect: his assertion that the US government pays for about 70% of all health care costs.
> 
> The actual figure is 46% (source), and this includes everyone on medicaid/medicare (ie seniors and the extremely poor), disability, prisoners, military and government employees.


That figure refers only to the federal government. State and county governments make up the rest.



chas_m said:


> As mentioned previously, I didn't see MacFury's full post so I don't know that it was "all BS," but I confess to wondering why he *doesn't* move down there and see firsthand for himself, as his political views and general philosophy seem very influenced by the US and I would think he would find himself in a country much more in line with his general worldview than here ...


You know, that was my intention until I saw Obama elected. At this point the idea no longer intrigues me.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

So staying amongst the communist Canadians intrigues you further.

Or, maybe it's the fact that you can get free healthcare here. Reality's a b....
There are plenty of 'grass is greener' lemmings I've encountered in these debates before.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Groove, _some_one's gotta keep the heathen Canucks in line - who better than a fellow Canuck who has seen the glorious light?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> Groove, _some_one's gotta keep the heathen Canucks in line - who better than a fellow Canuck who has seen the glorious light?


Max: Since Obama took over, Canada is now a freer country offering more personal choice than our neighbours to the south. Our personal and corporate tax rates are lower, and by next year, after the Obama tax regime kicks in, ours will be _significantly_ lower. Better to remain here and protect a superior system.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

heathen. I'll have to add that to the list.

I'm generally amused at the shock of someone calling someone out on nonsense. I guess I tend to forget that the theoretical 'it's better over there' should almost always be accepted carte blanche, as gospel.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

oh now we're '_better_'. I see.

That must be because we have such a drastically different government than say Cretien. Holy crap I don't recognize Canada. They made Toronto a province? Whaaa?????


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

MF, I am certain that you will continue to find many a reason to disparage our system, no matter where it stands in relation to the Americans. Of that I remain confident.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> MF, I am certain that you will continue to find many a reason to disparage our system, no matter where it stands in relation to the Americans. Of that I remain confident.


I still think our system needs my help, but I've stopped offering any assistance to our friends in the USA.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Macfury said:


> I still think our system needs my help, but I've stopped offering any assistance to our friends in the USA.


LOL

This is likely to completely break their spirit. I urge you to reconsider this rashness.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

Max said:


> LOL
> 
> This is likely to completely break their spirit. I urge you to reconsider this rashness.


I believe there is a nascent "Draft MF" movement gathering steam down there. "Please MF, don't abandon us to Comrade Hussein Obama!"


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

groovetube said:


> Of course, I can't leave off with a nice example of the shrieking righteous right/libertarian lunatics whipping themselves into a -frenzy-. Right up Macfury's alley I'm betting...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for that GT --- NOT!

That Glen Beck character is quite the piece o' work. He manages to make O'Reilly seem rational. The new voice of the Looney Right.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> Thanks for that GT --- NOT!
> 
> That Glen Beck character is quite the piece o' work. He manages to make O'Reilly seem rational. The new voice of the Looney Right.


sorry about that. But it's comforting to know that the lunatics aren't -all- lefties now. The righteous libertarian oops right are such a sane, logical bunch aren't they.



Max said:


> LOL
> 
> This is likely to completely break their spirit. I urge you to reconsider this rashness.


Absolutely. Any system relies upon the, 'Undefined Visionary'.


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

PBS Frontline; Sick around America


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> I believe there is a nascent "Draft MF" movement gathering steam down there. "Please MF, don't abandon us to Comrade Hussein Obama!"


Someone must break that rascal's spine!


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

dam those wascally wiberal types for getting things so balled up eh...





+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Gratuitous: If you think I'm going to push the button on an unlabelled YouTube video and get Rick Rolled...


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> American military medical system is 100% run by the government, not private enterprise, it's the best in the world, and must not be made available to the American public.
> WOW!
> What an idiot.


Actually, the military hospitals are an unmitigated disaster - complete with a big scandal a few years ago. Money is misappropriated, continuing care gets short shrift, etc... Thinking that American military hospitals are "better" is a horse and buggy ideal from the old days - they are as germ ridden and filled with empire building as the hospitals are here in Canada.

It's not just Canada's system that is "falling apart", many other systems in the world are in terrible shape, and for the same reasons - that it is not longer a matter of health care provided by doctors, but rather, the construction of a massive bureaucracy that does things unrelated to actual health care in order to "provide jobs" while all other sectors of the economy are picked off and destroyed by progressive minded Third World nations that are hungry to do business.

In Canada, we have a system that is inexpensive for patients but provides long lead times, numerous cancellations and untimely care - while the US is expensive but has short lead times and quite often, same day care. The US is entirely able to compete with Canadian hospitals for dirt and filth, and the VA hospitals are among some of the worst in this respect.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

That's interesting. You'd think the GOP whiners would be all over that then...



EvanPitts said:


> Actually, the military hospitals are an unmitigated disaster - complete with a big scandal a few years ago. Money is misappropriated, continuing care gets short shrift, etc... Thinking that American military hospitals are "better" is a horse and buggy ideal from the old days - they are as germ ridden and filled with empire building as the hospitals are here in Canada.
> 
> It's not just Canada's system that is "falling apart", many other systems in the world are in terrible shape, and for the same reasons - that it is not longer a matter of health care provided by doctors, but rather, the construction of a massive bureaucracy that does things unrelated to actual health care in order to "provide jobs" while all other sectors of the economy are picked off and destroyed by progressive minded Third World nations that are hungry to do business.
> 
> In Canada, we have a system that is inexpensive for patients but provides long lead times, numerous cancellations and untimely care - while the US is expensive but has short lead times and quite often, same day care. The US is entirely able to compete with Canadian hospitals for dirt and filth, and the VA hospitals are among some of the worst in this respect.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

EvanPitts said:


> Actually, the military hospitals are an unmitigated disaster - complete with a big scandal a few years ago. Money is misappropriated, continuing care gets short shrift, etc...


Agreed. That's common knowledge.

I think the best health care program in the U.S. is enjoyed by members of the Congress and the Senate--and they have exempted themselves from the health care they want for the American people.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Yeah, really.
> 
> GOPsters make so little sense in all of their arguments.


Oh but it's 'common knowledge'.

lmfao...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Yeah, really.
> 
> GOPsters make so little sense in all of their arguments.


The GOP just doesn't want to dish out money for other people's health care, and really, is it going to affect Senator McCain that much to add a mortgage on one of his houses?

The GOP would rather spend large on military contracts because that buys votes. Of course, spending more on their military than all other nations combined doesn't bring success, just look at the various disasters, like Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course, they can pick off penny-ante nations like Panama and Grenada, but only when they have a President that is set on it...


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

I think the following is an interesting insight into the American healthcare system;



Gelfin said:


> Most people who oppose healthcare reform are inspired by the romantic (which is not to suggest altogether worthless) notion that American prosperity revolves on its tendency to offer each individual the maximum freedom to excel, with the attendant caveat that this is identical with maximum freedom to fail. This we call "individual responsibility."
> 
> We are thus suspicious of any measure that seems to shackle us all to one fate, inhibiting one person's opportunities for success in order to protect another from failure. This attitude is reflexive in many Americans, which unfortunately results in false positives, inappropriate firings of the reflex.
> 
> ...


Mac Forums - View Single Post - What a crap system!!! (U.S. health care)


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

The discussion in the Excited States today might take some advice from how Canadians felt and what they had to say nearly 50 years ago. 

Universal Health Care was not embraced by all Canadians back in the day. Interesting comments and view from this CBC Archive. The CBC Archives clips are slow to commence so please be patient. The Birth of Medicare | CBC Archives

IMO people are conservative by nature and resist change. It will be interesting to hear US citizens views fifty years hence if Obama’s plans for payment reform of health care are realized.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

If Obama's ideas are passed, the U.S. will be in the same place Canada is in today--its government burdened by health care costs and endless announcements of various shortages, cutbacks, etc. It's people will become petty, constantly trying to ensure that nobody else in the country can get better health care than they do. In the meantime, countries such as India and China will be on the forefront of medical care and taking people's hard earned savings to provide timely life-saving treaments no longer available in North America.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

> Want to spark a renaissance in small business innovation? Want to leverage American ingenuity to bring us back to the forefront of the world? Want to encourage established American and foreign companies to locate inside the U.S. and give Americans jobs? Reform health care. Stop using "individual responsibility" as an excuse to bleed individuals dry. It's hurting us all.


Only the U.S. government, through the HMO Act of 1973, has sought to bleed Americans dry. Nationalizing health care won't do a damned thing to create jobs. It will begin by cutting employment in the health care sector to control costs. Companies locating in the U.S. are more likely to be frightened off by the monstrous corporate taxes that Obama is intent on increasing.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Macfury said:


> If Obama's ideas are passed, the U.S. will be in the same place Canada is in today--its government burdened by health care costs and endless announcements of various shortages, cutbacks, etc. It's people will become petty, constantly trying to ensure that nobody else in the country can get better health care than they do. In the meantime, countries such as India and China will be on the forefront of medical care and taking people's hard earned savings to provide timely life-saving treaments no longer available in North America.


It doesn't have to be that way. The US is in a much better position that we are to be able to deliver our kind of system. Our biggest issue here is the sparse population spread over such a large land mass. If we had the population density they have, we'd be able to deliver even better service for even less money. 

The problem for Americans is they simply do not have the will to do it all the way. Not only will half-assed measures not work, they'll probably make it worse.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bsenka said:


> It doesn't have to be that way. The US is in a much better position that we are to be able to deliver our kind of system.


Population density has very little to do with it.


----------



## arminia (Jan 27, 2005)

*From another forum*

My daughters boyfriend was diagnosed with leukemia, he recently died from it. He was 17 when diagnosed and still on his fathers insurance plan. Even though he had a so called decent plan he still almost lost his house and probably would have if people hadn't come forward with donations. He also had to go through more of an experimental treatment as that was much more affordable for them personally. If the insurance hadn't dropped the ball he may have received better treatment but as it stands he had to have the experimental and partially donated treatments which obviously didn't work. I'll also point out he had the most curable of the childrens Leukemia.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

arminia: It's obviously a tragic story. I don't want to trivialize it by trying to pick it apart.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Only the U.S. government, through the HMO Act of 1973, has sought to bleed Americans dry. Nationalizing health care won't do a damned thing to create jobs. It will begin by cutting employment in the health care sector to control costs. Companies locating in the U.S. are more likely to be frightened off by the monstrous corporate taxes that Obama is intent on increasing.


Well we can look at it on the bright side. We won't have to listen to your endless rants about losing quality health care workers to the US anymore...


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> If Obama's ideas are passed, the U.S. will be in the same place Canada is in today--its government burdened by health care costs and endless announcements of various shortages, cutbacks, etc. It's people will become petty, constantly trying to ensure that nobody else in the country can get better health care than they do. In the meantime, countries such as India and China will be on the forefront of medical care and taking people's hard earned savings to provide timely life-saving treaments no longer available in North America.


well I hear there's lots of customer service IT jobs over there. Maybe when you're fed up with the horrible state of affairs here things would be rosy for you there.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

^^^
I do not think it is acceptable for any Citizen to be a champion of a dysfunctional, money wasting system that dispenses death and disease in order to aggrandize a contemptable and corrupt system of management.

No one is disputing the advantages of a funded system in which all citizens can obtain affordable and timely health care - the dispute is to whether or not our system is actually affordable or timely. In that, our Supreme Court has already rendered the verdict, that our Health Care system is being run in an illegal manner, with excessive wait times that are costly and life threatening.

No one in Canada wants an Americanized, for profit, get sick and your family goes bankrupt system of health care. What Canadians want is a system run by professional health care people, which is able to dispense health care in a timely manner, and where people are not killed simply because they went to the hospital to get a mole removed, but end up with some disease of filth, like C. Diff, flesh eating disease, or SARS.

What we need to do is simple, to fire all of the CEOs, boards of directors, eliminate endless layers of "administration", and dismantle giant medical empires that remove health care from smaller centers in order to build giant Taj Mahals that only exist to perperuate endless money gobbling Administration at the cost of removing bed spaces and in needing to operate obsolete, 50 year olfd rusted out equipment. In other words, we need a system that is run by doctors, nurses, technicians and janitors - rather than a system that is overwhelmingly possessed by accountants and bureaucrats.

Our system was hijacked by political hacks. Tommy Douglas envisioned a fair and equitable system where all people, no matter what income or circumstance, could obtain medical help - in the same way that the citizen can obtain an education by a fair levy on the taxpayer. His vision was then perverted by the mindless empire builders who see nothing better than to score fat paycheques and bonuses while doing all they can to save money by removing health care from the health care system.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

Ottawaman said:


> The ability to access necessary medical assistance is a basic Human Right (1) and should not be dependent upon your financial resources.


This is really the core of all of it, isn't it?
In Canada we hold this right sacred and to some degree define ourselves by it. What ALL of us are wrestling with is how we pay for it, and all of this comes down to the old demographic/aging population problem. 
The Republicans can crank up the media machine, but the reality is that in the overwhelming majority of cases, we get the health care we need in Canada and it isn't income dependent.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

mc3251 said:


> we get the health care we need in Canada and it isn't income dependent.


However, the health care that is provided is provided in an untimely manner, and in many cases, it is never to be provided. It is entirely unacceptable that we have a system where 10% of the population of this country has no family doctor, and that we have persistent shortages of doctors and nurses - though there is close to zero chance that foreign born doctors and nurses have a shot at a job outside of the mushroom picking, toilet cleaning and worm farming industries.

It is also unacceptable that in rapidly growing cities, the Government sees fit to close down hospitals, and to shut Emergency Rooms - while allowing the kleptocrats that have spent decades ruining the vision of Tommy Douglas continue to loot and build their empires and Taj Mahals. In Hamilton, we have major tracts of the City that have no health care services, nothing on the west or south mountain, nothing in Ancaster, Dundas or Flamborough, nothing in Stoney Creek, and in fact, nothing east of Gage Avenue. More than half the city has no access to a hospital. The same situation elsewhere, where half of Brampton no longer has a hospital, or that Scarborough is pretty much dependent on one hospital because the kleptocrats prefered to build their dozen empires of hospitals two blocks away from Queens Park.

We also do not have proper care for great segments of the population, especially the poor, that have no access to doctors or clinics, where the mentally ill get to roam the streets committing crime and abusing drugs because mental illness has nothing to do with health care apparently. Same with our First Nations, that suffer with high rates of disease because their votes obviously don't count.

It is hypocrisy to praise the system we have while damning the system the Americans have - because both systems are utterly brain damaged and unfair to all citizens.

I hear of all this stuff about people "falling through the cracks" - which would be fine excuse if the system fired the incompetent, the lethargic, the apathetic, and all of the tools that loaf around desks in the hospitals, reading endless wedding magazines or downloading infinite internet porn at work.

Of course, nothing is worse than the LHINs - which serve much the same purpose to health care as the People's Court did in Nazi Germany for justice...


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Max: Since Obama took over, Canada is now a freer country offering more personal choice than our neighbours to the south. Our personal and corporate tax rates are lower, and by next year, after the Obama tax regime kicks in, ours will be _significantly_ lower. Better to remain here and protect a superior system.


FAIL.

White House steadfast on pledge of no middle-class tax increase - CNN.com


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

EvanPitts,

You need to understand that is Ontario, not Canada. The things you are talking about are unheard of in Manitoba, they rarely happen anywhere else, and I bet they are a lot less common in Ontario than you are trying to make it sound as well.

Even if I suspend my disbelief and taken as a given that your experiences are the way it commonly works in Ontario, that's still not an indictment on Canada's healthcare system. If the Ontario government is cutting back your healthcare, it's Dalton McGuinty who is to blame, not universal healthcare, not the federal government, and not the Canada Health Act.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Time to pay the bill










Military Spending Worldwide |

and that's not knockon costs for health and pensions....


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

no no no macdoc. It's Obama who is spending like crazy. We all know the republicans are the one's who were so careful with money and the economy. And the financial collapse was all the dems fault. The democrats forced all the banks during the 8 years of republican rule to give 800 thousand dollar mortgages to people making 12/hour as a security guard.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

bsenka said:


> The things you are talking about are unheard of in Manitoba, they rarely happen anywhere else, and I bet they are a lot less common in Ontario than you are trying to make it sound as well.


Unheard of in Manitoba? Even our dopey local news stations have reported on the sad state of affairs in Manitoba, where First Nations people have suffered from and died of the most rampant influenza outbreaks because they could not get proper health care - and some crackers in the racist Manitoba Government determined that natives should have access to proper sanitation supplues because they may drink the hand cleanser to get drunk.

Perhaps Manitoba does not have the hospitals filled with kleptocrats that are robbing it blind - but they certainly have their set of problems to deal with.

The problems in Ontario are legendary, and I think that Google servers would break of one tried to do a search. Pretty much every day, there are a dozen sordid stories about the myriad of problems with the facilities in Ontario. There are stories about major breakouts of C. Diff and other diseases caused by filth, with such places like Joe Brant having been in the news for at least ten years or perhaps longer for such situations. There are tons of stories about the major delays in providing health care, and just a few weeks ago there was the whole fiasco about OHIP shipping women to the US in order to give birth because there are few pediatricians left, and the whole problem of citizenship and passports and other bunk. There are always stories about people that spend two or three days in the waiting room in Emergency, or people stacked on gurneys in the halls. Same with the persistent doctor's shortage, or places like Hamilton that can not gain new doctors because we have a medical school here - so a new doctor can score $35,000 from the Government to set up shop in Oakville. There is also the fact that there has been a call for the past two decades to ban nurses from going overseas to get work (even though there are no entry level jobs ever offered to recent graduates), etc.



> Even if I suspend my disbelief and taken as a given that your experiences are the way it commonly works in Ontario, that's still not an indictment on Canada's healthcare system. If the Ontario government is cutting back your healthcare, it's Dalton McGuinty who is to blame, not universal healthcare, not the federal government, and not the Canada Health Act.


The last I looked, Ontario was not only a part of Canada, but also the most populous province. I wouldn't blame McGuilty for the health care crisis - the crisis happened when they allowed a corporate culture of self entitlement that has lead to layers upon layers of bureaucrats and adminsitration, with health policy being set by political wannabes like the LHINs, rather than being set by actual health people.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

I have lived in small communities in both countries. 

What I remember most about the US, where we could not afford insurance was being parked in emergency for half an hour until my wife signed away our future and then the bill coming back at the triple the estimate.

Locally my one encounter involved several visits, no paperwork, no money out of pocket and no waiting except for an ultra-sound. Booked Wednesday performed the following Monday. 

And yes I got my Doctor of choice.

Other big thing was the weekly newspaper articles. Every edition in the US had at least one story of a fund raiser for a local family shattered by enormous medical bills. Can't remember a single time that has happened here.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Americans are crazy - with almost half of military spending in the world, coupled with the 20% from European allies - they still can't beat the Taliban who are reliant on some old AK-47's and ancient muskets left over from the First Afghan War, plus some homebrew bombs made out of fertilizer stolen from Pakistan.

Of course, all of the speding on various military projects is far more important than health care - you know, it's important that the Americans build another two dozen nuclear subs to counterbalance the nuclear sub that India recently launched. It's all about overkill, having a hundred times more arms than the nearest competitor - but being a panty-waste nation that can't use them.

Americans should have a publically funded health care system; just as long as it isn't modeled on our "system" that is nothing more than a kleptocracy that makes Mugabe's crew look amateur...


----------



## whatiwant (Feb 21, 2008)

EvanPitts said:


> but being a panty-waste nation that


ahem, I believe you mean pantywaist


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

jawknee said:


> ahem, I believe you mean pantywaist


Sure - but either works for me, since I like making sure that I get some "waste" into the discussion...


----------



## whatiwant (Feb 21, 2008)

EvanPitts said:


> Sure - but either works for me, since I like making sure that I get some "waste" into the discussion...


hehehe. try that with "discharge"... it makes more sense.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

eMacMan said:


> I have lived in small communities in both countries.
> 
> What I remember most about the US, where we could not afford insurance was being parked in emergency for half an hour until my wife signed away our future and then the bill coming back at the triple the estimate.
> 
> ...


That's the socialists fault cause they made it that way in 1973.

They did they really did.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> Sure - but either works for me, since I like making sure that I get some "waste" into the discussion...


To paraphrase Dan Quail, a panty is a terrible thing to waste.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Dan Quayle is the reason why no one hears from Joe Biden - Obama can't afford the embarrasment of endless mindless, stupid statements that Biden is prone to make.

However, this detracts from the OP - and in so many ways, there is no libel since the stories put forth are truthful and are supported by innumerable statements by the Government and Opposition, as well as innumerable stories and anecdotal evidence that has been put forth over the years, all stuff that is entirely supported by the hard data produced by the health system itself. All of this stuff is self evident, and reading any week of a newspaper will reveal numerous stories of this ilk.

We have a system that is unable to provide proper and timely health care, and does so while eating more and more cash - so much that it is the largest expense on the Government ledgers. It appears that the more money thrown at it aids in the entropy of the system, mostly because most of the cash is frittered away into large executive salaries, endless inefficiencies that are propagated by union politicization of the work force in hospitals, poor and short sighted decisions based on vote buying in favoured ridings while doling out punishment to ridings that didn't vote a certain way, and in many cases, acts of race and class warfare that see the poor, immigrants (immigrants that have been recuited to this country by the very same Government), First Nations, and many of those that worked overseas and returned to find out they can't get a doctor.

There is too much hand washing, too much blaming it on "oh, it slipped through the cracks" or "oh, C. Diff is hard to treat". There is far too much executive indulgence and cash wasted on useless Taj Mahals, with decisions made without regard to technical reasoning or scientific examination, decisions made by political hacks without reference to actual health care people. The system is riddled with endless empire building where the expense is that people get to wait for a day or two in an Emergency Room, or get to suffer from workplace inflicted pain for years on end because they are pawned off in endless waits for doctors and specialists - simply because they system imposes quotas and restricts care. There is no one with the balls to stand up and say "hey, this is WRONG - we need to bring about real and substantive changes that bring health care to people." We have people washing their hands of it, with no one showing any leadership.

It's not any different from the Toronto Garbage Strike - since the reason it happened in the first place was that workplace issues were politicized, and there was no leadership, just useless politicization which saw that the elites aggrandized themselves with cash and benefits beyond belief for a job poorly done, while the worker gets pooped on, and has their earnings slashed, while the public ooohs and aaaws, denouncing the workers that simply want to keep what had been promised, while lionising the political hacks that brought about a ruinous situation without virtue or dignity.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

mc3251 said:


> To paraphrase Dan Quail


It's actually "Quayle."

And "potatoe."


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

EvanPitts said:


> Unheard of in Manitoba? Even our dopey local news stations have reported on the sad state of affairs in Manitoba, where First Nations people have suffered from and died of the most rampant influenza outbreaks because they could not get proper health care - and some crackers in the racist Manitoba Government determined that natives should have access to proper sanitation supplues because they may drink the hand cleanser to get drunk..


If you believe the sensationalist stories you see on TV, that would explain why you have a skewed idea of how healthcare works in this country.

The overwhelming majority of residents get timely world class care. The very few extreme examples of problems are grossly exaggerated by people with political agendas.

I get to choose my doctor, I get to dictate my course of treament if I know enough about the situation to know what questions to ask, and I get what I want pretty much when I want it. I can get in to see my family doctor the same day virtually every time. When I dislocated my hip, I showed up to the specialists office without an appointment, without a referral, and within an hour I had my rads done, and was discussing them with the doctor. When my leg was cut open by a skate in a hockey game, I went to the nearest hospital emergency room, was taken in and treated, stitched up, and back in my car driving home also in about one hour. When my son was cross-checked head first into the boards, they wanted to make sure that he got an MRI done, even though he was in no pain, and was fully mobile. He got it within a couple of hours. When my brother in law needed a liver transplant, his need was assessed, he was placed on the list in priority of his need, and he got the first one available. They even flew him out of province to the hospital best equipped to do that particular surgery. I have co-workers who were diagnosed with cancer. They got both their diagnostics, and started treatments with a week of presenting symptoms to their doctors.

Even elective surgeries are a lot easier than most people think. For a vasectomy, I waited a whole four days for my appointment. That was bizarre, because I EXPECTED to wait, and suddenly was getting nervous about getting snipped when they told me I could have it done so fast. I had a mole on my neck that I was concerned about because I kept cutting it shaving, and people were telling me that was bad. I walked in just to book the appointment to have it looked at, and was ushered into the examination room immediately and had it removed right then and there.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

chas_m said:


> It's actually "Quayle."
> 
> And "potatoe."


 Ah. Thankfully I've not had the need to spell his name for some time.
Thanks Chas


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

bsenka said:


> The overwhelming majority of residents get timely world class care. The very few extreme examples of problems are grossly exaggerated by people with political agendas.
> 
> I get to choose my doctor, I get to dictate my course of treament if I know enough about the situation to know what questions to ask, and I get what I want pretty much when I want it. I can get in to see my family doctor the same day virtually every time. When I dislocated my hip, I showed up to the specialists office without an appointment, without a referral, and within an hour I had my rads done, and was discussing them with the doctor. When my leg was cut open by a skate in a hockey game, I went to the nearest hospital emergency room, was taken in and treated, stitched up, and back in my car driving home also in about one hour.


I didn't know that people could post from the bizzaro universe. None of that would ever occur in Ontario. No one gets to "choose" a doctor. Getting a doctor requires years of work, and lots of begging. If you need an appointment, it takes weeks, if not months, to get in.

Treatment - the patient has the choice of either jumping through the giant flaming hoops of fire, or not getting any treatment. It's take it or leave it. Very few things are "same day", or even "same week", unless it is for diagnostic tests that are run by for-profit companies. One can expect to wait at least a month for an MRI, and only if the area has an MRI machine. Most people will face long travel times for such thing, not to mention the fact that wait times of up to a year are certainly not unheard of.

If someone showed up at a specialists office without an appointment, and no referral - they'd be calling out the SWAT team. No one can get around the "system", because it is all about having the maximum number of doctors cash in on appointment after appointment. After the fact, one is liable to receive a letter from the government in order to "confirm" that one actually went to the doctor in the first place.

Emergency Rooms are a dying breed. One can expect to wait at least eight hours, and even a full day, before anything happens. Many hospitals have had Emergency Rooms removed by the LHINs, meaning that people that have medical distress can expect a lengthy drive across the province. Ambulance services are regularly overwhelmed because they get stacked up at Emergency Rooms as well, since they just can't abandon someone on the doorstep.

Elective surgeries are regularly delayed in this Province, and I am not talking by a day or two - but by months on end. But then, no one is is a rush because this province operates some of the filthiest and most disgusting facilities imaginable, riddled with disease because they don't have anyone to clean anything. It's all about executive luncheons and building Taj Mahals, because they are far more important than some poor sod that ends up with flesh eating disease, or poisoned to death by E Coli.

So if your experience is different from that indicated above - you are not living in Ontario or Quebec, where such things are entirely endemic. Of course, Ontario is in even worse straits simply because of the LHINs that are working to decimate health care, in order that their cronies can build their empires at the expense of everyone else.

As for the woman that told her story in the US - I entirely see her point. I know people who have either died or have had their health severely compromised because of the lack of timely care in this province, and it is really, nothing new. It's been going on for at least two decades, perhaps longer, but LHINs are certainly flushing what is left down the toilet.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

EvanPitts said:


> I didn't know that people could post from the bizzaro universe. None of that would ever occur in Ontario. No one gets to "choose" a doctor. Getting a doctor requires years of work, and lots of begging. If you need an appointment, it takes weeks, if not months, to get in.
> 
> <<SNIP>>
> 
> So if your experience is different from that indicated above - you are not living in Ontario or Quebec, where such things are entirely endemic. Of course, Ontario is in even worse straits simply because of the LHINs that are working to decimate health care, in order that their cronies can build their empires at the expense of everyone else.


Funny... I had no idea that I'd suddenly been transported out of Ontario without knowing it.

I know there is a family doctor shortage in Ontario, but I still chose my family doctor. This was only a few years ago.

I didn't want to keep seeing my doc from childhood (my dad's doctor) and didn't want to switch over to my mother's doctor, so I went to the College of Physicians website and looked up who was accepting new patients. 

I decided that I wanted a female doctor and that I wanted someone on the young side so that they'd could be my doctor long term, as some of the doctors used by my then-husband's family had recently passed away. I selected 4 possible candidates. Then I called them--the first two were no longer accepting new patients, the 3rd was. Never called the 4th. 

I didn't have an urgent need to see anyone--just wanted to do a general checkup and interview the doctor--and so I had an appointment maybe a week later. Since then, to do my annual physical (which is a longer appointment) I generally have to call a few weeks ahead of time. If I have a specific problem, I call in the morning and I get an appointment in the afternoon.

I debated changing doctors again, since mine is close to where I used to live, but farther from where I currently live... maybe 30 minutes if I drive. But I really like the one I have so I will stick with her. If I didn't like her, I'd start calling around again for someone new.

I got exactly the doctor I wanted, my choice, no begging, and it took me about 10 minutes of looking on the internet, and then 3 phone calls. 

But evidently, I don't live in Ontario.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Sonal said:


> Funny... I had no idea that I'd suddenly been transported out of Ontario without knowing it.


You are in Toronto - things are different, especially if you live near University Avenue, where they have what, 12 hospitals all in spitting range. For the rest of Ontario, like remote places like Scarborough, or Brampton, or where ever, the situation is quite a bit different.



> I got exactly the doctor I wanted, my choice, no begging, and it took me about 10 minutes of looking on the internet, and then 3 phone calls.


Around here, it is quite a bit different, and many people simply do not have a family doctor at all. There are no free spots unless someone dies, and then, only if one is super lucky and has contacts, can they get that spot. Not only that, but there are a large number of doctors that are coming up to retirement, so there are tens of thousands of people that will no longer have a doctor in the near future.

I was lucky that I scooped up a new doctor that had just set up shop. My old doctor was pathetic and out of date, and was retiring, and no other doctors were accepting patients. I know dozens of people that rely on after-hours clinics, because of the acute shortage.

It isn't just the shortage of GPs - there is a severe shortage of skilled surgeons. The eye surgeon that I was referred to handles thousands of patients, but is the only one in a city of over a half million, plus he gets to cover Niagara and out towards London.

As for Emergency Care - the LHINs are abolishing it in much of the area. So if I am at home, well, I can go to either one of two in the downtown; but if I am at my girlfriend's place, they are closing the Emergency Room at that hospital, meaning that if something happens, it's all about making it out to Brantford, Cambridge or Guelph. Most of the city lacks emergency care, and so does much of the Peninsula.

Of course, if one lives near University Avenue in the COTU, there are a dozen places - but if one is in Scarborough, well, there is no choice except for the one hospital that was "saved" by massive protests. But then, it can be worse - people in Burlington avoid the ER there because of the filth that has killed hundreds of people.

Our system simply can not provide timely care, nor maintain a level of standards, and people in "remote" areas, that is, outside of the COTU, simply have few or no doctors at all. That is the point of the ads in question - that people shouldn't look at the Canadian system as some kind of panacea because the system is broken, inefficient, costly, and is constantly being perverted by political hacks that have ruined it.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Did I mention that I found this family doctor while living within spitting distance of Scarborough? 

If you would like to rail about how bad things are in Hamilton, go ahead--I don't live in Hamilton, I can't tell you how things are there. But Hamilton is not "Ontario and Quebec". 

Now all that said, most people I know in Toronto don't have a family doctor. Either they came to Toronto within the last 5-10 years, or they had one as a kid but haven't seen that doctor in a decade and would like to find another one. But then I ask them if they've actually tried to look for one... and pretty much none of them had. They've heard there is a doctor shortage, that it's hard to find doctors that are accepting new patients, and then they never actually bothered to figure out how...

All I did was google "FInding a doctor" and then got this website All Doctors Search | Doctor Search | College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and then started making a few phone calls. This was not that difficult nor that time consuming. (Oh, and it seems the site has some advice for finding a new doctor. About Doctor Search | Doctor Search | College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario )

Now there genuinely is a doctor shortage in Toronto, and no, promiximity to University Avenue does not help because a) population is a lot denser downtown and b) just because a doctor has privileges at a particular hospital doesn't mean they've set up a practice next door where leasing the office space is much more expensive. But a shortage does not necessarily translate to the elimination of choice.

And frankly, what are you talking about with "one hospital that was 'saved' in Scarborough"? There's Scarborough General, Scarbrough Grace and Rouge Valley, plus depending on where you are in Scarborough, you also have easy access to Toronto East General and North York General.... I do not know when you were last IN Scarborough, but even though it seems like a remote wasteland to all those living south of Bloor, it's not actually that far away....


----------



## Ottawaman (Jan 16, 2005)

Exposing the PR Firms Behind the Fake "Grass Roots" Anti-Healthcare Movement


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Oh, and what is this 12 hospitals on University Avenue? Name them. Because when I start counting, it doesn't come up nearly that high. And frankly, some of those are specialist/research hosipitals--it's not like there's an emergency room there to take you.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

bsenka said:


> It really is incredible the blatant lies I've seen being promoted on US TV lately. Not only is it outright offensive, it's truly unbelievable that any American could possibly be so stupid as to believe a word of it.


I have a ******* friend that quotes this crap back all the time. Sad part is he believes it; cause Barf Limberger and/or Bill "I Cannot Tell A Truth" O'Reilly tells him so.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Sonal said:


> Oh, and what is this 12 hospitals on University Avenue? Name them. Because when I start counting, it doesn't come up nearly that high. And frankly, some of those are specialist/research hosipitals--it's not like there's an emergency room there to take you.


Evan is given to using hyperbole in his posts, Sonal. When he says "12," he evidently hopes you are willing to overlook the less dramatic reality of "3" or "4." Gotta say, I'm also amused by the fascinating claim that Scarborough is "remote" from University Avenue. It's all part of the GTA, innit?


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Max said:


> Evan is given to using hyperbole in his posts, Sonal. When he says "12," he evidently hopes you are willing to overlook the less dramatic reality of "3" or "4." Gotta say, I'm also amused by the fascinating claim that Scarborough is "remote" from University Avenue. It's all part of the GTA, innit?


I should hope that he uses hyperbole, Max, because if Evan really sees the world the way he writes about it here, I have to wonder why he doesn't just shoot himself and end the misery now. beejacon

But I had no idea that crossing Victoria Park put into such a remote area of Toronto, such that on the west side of the street, access to University Avenue is easy while on the east side of the street, I may as well forget it and just lay down and die on the street before attempting to reach once of those distant emergency rooms clustered far away from the likes of me.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

sonal said:


> i should hope that he uses hyperbole, max, because if evan really sees the world the way he writes about it here, i have to wonder why he doesn't just shoot himself and end the misery now.


+1


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Former governor Palin says... "The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil,"

There you have it. Obama is not only a baby killing commie Taliban lover, he's gonna have death squads. Or panel, whatever.

It's gonna be murder though. Like when you know, back in '73...


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

She has retired as governor, but remains full time wacko.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Another US health care memory. While not mine directly it is close enough that I can vouch for the accuracy. A woman on medicare and medicaid knowing she is terminally ill re-mortgages her house and pays all her outstanding medical bills. She dies about 3 months later. Even though MC/MA has covered well over 90% of her bills she dies owing roughly $20,000 to nearly 30 different cogs in the medical systems gearbox. Most were fairly small but nonetheless it took the executor several months to sort it all out. 

One establishment came back 8 months later asking for more money. The executor told them the estate was closed period.

When my mother in law died after a three month hospital stay in Canada not a penny was owed and no medical bills had been paid earlier.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

mc3251 said:


> She has retired as governor, but remains full time wacko.


:clap:


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

EvanPitts said:


> I didn't know that people could post from the bizzaro universe. None of that would ever occur in Ontario. No one gets to "choose" a doctor. Getting a doctor requires years of work, and lots of begging. If you need an appointment, it takes weeks, if not months, to get in.


Wrong again, if it took you a year to get your doctor then you weren't working hard enough, I got my doctor within a week of searching for one and on average I can get an appointment within a weeks time.

Laterz


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

mc3251 said:


> +1


+2


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

groovetube said:


> There you have it. Obama is not only a baby killing commie Taliban lover, he's gonna have death squads. Or panel, whatever.


That's nothing. I've gotten email from some people who I previously thought sane who believe -- seriously -- that Canada pushes its infirm old people out to sea on ice drifts.

Seriously.

This begs two questions:

1. What do you do when the most powerful nation on earth goes mad?

2. Was I smart to leave when I did or WHAT?


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Anti-Health Care Reform Protester Encourages Physical Violence, Use Of Firearms

wow.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

chas_m said:


> That's nothing. I've gotten email from some people who I previously thought sane who believe -- seriously -- that Canada pushes its infirm old people out to sea on ice drifts.
> 
> Seriously.
> 
> ...


What I find so amazing about this is that it is the fact that millions of people in the US have no meaningful access to health care that is sparking this debate. Besides, with global warming we're going to have to change the ice drift strategy. Perhaps we could have a contest to determine the best thing to push them out to sea on.

I know. Let's build rafts out of recycled plastic bags.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

A couple of things. if I may: First, this is a political process, so, you can expect misinformation and disinformation from all sides... all three of them. Second, I've read many postings which talk about the outrageous statements and beliefs that Americans have about our country and health care system ... aren't we just as dumb if we believe these things ourselves? I find it hard to believe that the American populace is as dumb as they are allowed to be portrayed. Isn't the joke on us? Or are we only focusing on the minority and expressing it as the majority ... that is an old political ploy ... it is used because it works.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

+
YouTube Video









ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.






Knowing your audience indeed...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

What do Americans not like about the Obama health care plan? That they will be forced to buy health insurance even if they don't want it for one. And the fact that some Administration types are going around talking about how expensive it is for "end-of-life" care and how they shuld be having "meaningful discussions" with their elderly loved ones about this.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

When he said they knew their audience, he certainly wasn't kidding...

lmao.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

"Sarah Palin's speechwriter" is the funniest notion I've heard in quite some time. I'm still chuckling over that one.



Rps said:


> Second, I've read many postings which talk about the outrageous statements and beliefs that Americans have about our country and health care system ... aren't we just as dumb if we believe these things ourselves? I find it hard to believe that the American populace is as dumb as they are allowed to be portrayed.


It really pains me to say this, but yes, a HUGE and rising (but still) minority are so painfully dumb and mindless that it's deeply embarrassing. They largely congregate in the "flyover" states and deep south, but lately you can find them out west as well, and all over these days (though they don't seem to have as much luck pushing their agenda in the Pacific Northwest or the New England region, or for that matter in the nation's bigger cities).

Bill Maher, as he often does, put it better than I ever could:
Real Time New Rules Aug. 7, 2009- Dumb and Dumber Edition | Video Cafe

Part of the reasons my wife and I left the US was because we were tired of trying to have a civilised debate with people who still aren't sure if they believe COPERNICUS. Far too many Americans can _no longer_ distinguish a fact from an opinion. "Barack Obama was born in Hawaii" is not a "controversy." It's an easily-verifiable-from-multiple-sources FACT. But with about 30% (and rising) of the population, you can't even get THAT far. A hot topic in the states (still!!) is whether they buy into evolution. I'm no scientist, but watching that debate has convinced me that DEVOLUTION exists ... and the saddest part is that they seem to be very PROUD of their ignorance.

I put the blame for this on the decisions made about public schooling roughly 40 years ago, when the US decided to abandon teaching anything remotely connected to reasoning, logic and critical analysis and instead just went whole-hog for the memorise/test/forget cycle that permeates the society today. Independent thinking is _discouraged_, and aligning your views with personally-appealing authoritarian spokesmen without question is _encouraged_ (this is true of both "camps," but lefties don't tend to buy into authoritarianism as much as right-wingers -- witness the flak Obama has taken from his own "side," compared the complete absence of criticism of Bush until he was a lame duck).

So if your self-image is that of a "charismatic maverick," you might find Sarah Palin refreshing and Barack Obama "elitist." If you think of yourself as a "plain-speaking beer-lovin' cowboy" you might identify with George Bush more than Jimmy Carter, even though Bush is a Harvard-educated rich guy with a coke & booze habit, while Carter was a locally-educated peanut farmer, Navy man and sunday-school teacher. 

The key to these identifications, however, is that YOU have to be a real Zoolander-level _ignoramus_. It's impossible to look at a written transcript of the stuff Palin spouts without wincing -- but if you can't read very well in the first place, PROBLEM SOLVED. This public distaste for "intellectuals" seems to have come to fruition with Reagan, and IMHO the country has been on a generally-downward curve (not without it's "up" moments, but overall) ever since. Some may say Canada is too, but at least from my perspective, the curve is a lot more gentle. 

Certainly there are Canadians with whom I disagree, who hold views contrary to mine. But I find that with few exceptions, they tend to argue from reason and/or experience. They often use (gasp!) _facts_ to support their views. And most importantly, *I often learn something or gain some insight when I discuss opinions with them*. Two of our very best friends in Victoria are fundamentalist Christians who generally vote Conservative -- about as different from me as you can get. They are great people and I love em to pieces, even around election time.  

They've proven to be far more open-minded and thoughtful in their views than the description I just laid out for them might suggest. The reason for this is that they are faithful without being rigid, political without being ideologues, and opinionated without being reactionary.

We didn't select Canada because everyone here agrees with us on a broad range of topics. We chose Canada because we were impressed by the level of sanity and the higher quality of the public discourse (among other reasons). We were hungry for civil, respectful political debate and intellectual discussion. We find Canada pleasantly well-stocked with such people, and happily low-stocked with "flat earthers" and "birthers" and the like.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Interesting opinion, Chas. I see Obama as the folksy guy who is down on the elites and intellectuals, always getting the rabble roused up against "some folk" who aren't willing to to step in with his plan to help "plain folk."


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Too simplistic, MacFury. I think it's more a case of his intellectuals not caring for "their" intellectuals. The team strategists field their intellectuals when it suits them - and field the crowd pleasures and rabble-rousers in much the same fashion. Same game, different tactics.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max: I agree. But the "intellectuals" on Obama's team are exempt, because they want to help the "folks" against "some folks" who are bad intellectuals--or either successful or wealthy.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

The health care discussions, and in particular the comments about "meaningful discussions" with the elderly are simply based in the reality of the situation, not only in Canada but in the US. When we look at demographics, and at the age wave which is nowhere near over, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the proportion of our public budgets being spent on health care is under enormous pressure, and can only grow.

Yes, there are inefficiencies and waste, but I'm not convinced that even sorting all of that out would solve the problem totally. If we can't get costs under control, at some point decisions start getting made about which procedures get done and which don't. It's fine if you are in an income bracket that allows you to just pay for it somewhere else, but most people don't have that luxury or that freedom.

I know a 91 year old woman who just had hip replacement surgery. She was in enormous pain, was living on morphine, and as she has all of her mental faculties intact was really suffering from her forced confinement and immobility as well. Is doing this surgery for her "the right thing to do" if it means not doing it for someone else/younger/more (insert criteria here)? These are very difficult issues, because today these folks are our parents and grandparents, and tomorrow they will be us.

I do think that we need to get a whole lot better at preventative measures-we still have way too much obesity and smoking and other high risk lifestyle and behavioural factors affecting our health. Our view of medicine (western, traditional, curative) is both limiting and expensive, IMO.

Please excuse the lengthy post...I don't usually do this.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

mc3251 said:


> The health care discussions, and in particular the comments about "meaningful discussions" with the elderly are simply based in the reality of the situation, not only in Canada but in the US.


I don't disagree with your post, but your premise is flawed (not your fault).

While the "screamers" in the states are claiming everything from "death panels" to door-to-door euthenasia squads, nothing even remotely like this is actually in any proposals.

Where the unhinged teabaggers got the idea is from a REPUBLICAN insertion into the health care bill currently before Congress. The insertion simply allows doctors to be PAID for the "end of life" discussions we all will have (or have had) with our physicians. It doesn't mandate such things, or take any choices away from patients (or doctors). It simply allows doctors to be compensated for the time spent in such consultations. That's all.

To address the points you raise, I think most of us are rather hoping that cost savings realised through the elimination of for-profit third-parties, combined with solid prevention and anti-fraud/waste measures, will stave off the day when we really have to start playing God with the lives of the most hopeless cases. I think with some effort on the part of getting the public at large to live healthier, we CAN actually forestall that day for a long time to come.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Chas, I agree with you on this, as per your post #114. What I see is a case of "electionnerring". Both side want this to fail ... why I don't know, but look at how this has advanced from an idea for change to a change of idea.

The Republicans put about 100 amendments into the bill [ Obama has no bill in this as he had an open ended suggestion ] and they still are trying to submarine what really amounts to their own bill. As for the Dems, how can a party which owns the House, Senate and the Presidency not succeed in passing a bill.... answer, they don't want it.

To me, this is an "Obamagate" He will be a one termer, and to bad for them ... he generally thinks before he speaks and when he speaks everyone can usually understand and be on the same page ... rare in this day and age. I think this is all a great passion play ... nothing will come of it .... and the American People will be left to suffer.

If I was Obama, I would ask the American People do they understand what a single payer system is .... you know, the one that pays for all the members of their government and their injured soldiers ...


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

> *Don’t talk to me about death panels, Sarah Palin.*
> 
> You, who so carelessly bolstered a lie about healthcare reform to score a cheap political point; you, the most craven of political opportunists, who fearmongers about some dystopian socialist/fascist fantasyland; you, who earlier this year were only too happy to accept free medical, dental and veterinary care from the U.S. military for Alaska’s remote villages; you, dear lady, are an idiot.
> 
> ...


(via CrooksAndLiars.com)


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

I also agree with Chas's post 114. 
I sincerely hope this isn't Obamagate. There is such a need for universal access to health care in the US-for heaven's sake it is a widely recognized problem and is now being turned into a political football.
CubaMarks quote about being given an impossibly large number by a hospital administrator underlines the fact that having little or no access to health insurance strips people of their basic dignity. How shameful. ....AND how grateful I am to live in Canada...warts and all.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

Rps said:


> Chas, I agree with you on this, as per your post #114. What I see is a case of "electionnerring". Both side want this to fail ... why I don't know, but look at how this has advanced from an idea for change to a change of idea.
> 
> The Republicans put about 100 amendments into the bill [ Obama has no bill in this as he had an open ended suggestion ] and they still are trying to submarine what really amounts to their own bill. As for the Dems, how can a party which owns the House, Senate and the Presidency not succeed in passing a bill.... answer, they don't want it.


The reason seems to me that the Democrats don't actually want healthcare reforms at all, they just know that all they have to do is keep claiming that they want it (and that the Republicans are blocking it), and they appeal to a certain base that will almost always vote for them. Republicans do this too with Judeo-Christian social issues. They claim they are against abortion for instance--and that appeals to their base--but they don't actually DO anything about it (and they turn around and blame the Democrats for it).


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Rps said:


> CTo me, this is an "Obamagate" He will be a one termer, and to bad for them ...


Nah.

I'm not being partisan when I say Obama is virtually guaranteed a second term -- even if this thing doesn't happen. The problem is that the Republicans (at least so far) have got NOBODY who could credibly run against him. Their leadership is a carfull of clowns and they are WELL aware of this.

If Obama were unable to run in 2012 or decided he couldn't win, he'd let Hillary run and she would win. The Republicans are not only a shrinking regional party, they just don't have anyone -- at all -- left who makes a credible candidate.

Obviously, this COULD change I suppose, but looking at the Republicans now, their chances of being a majority party again are quite remote.



> If I was Obama, I would ask the American People do they understand what a single payer system is .... you know, the one that pays for all the members of their government and their injured soldiers ...


Actually, what Obama should do is borrow a page from the Canadian election playbook, and announce a public vote on it (once the Dems' final proposal is done) to be held in let's say less than four weeks time. Majority wins. Simple.

The anti-choicers would have their ASS handed to them and STFU for a while.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

you're forgetting about Palin. We can pole fun at her all we like, but the public has a short memory for gaffs, and they did vote for George, twice.

Edit: Did I say pole? I meant *poke.


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

That''s Freudian.
ROFL


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Chas , the in a way, didn't Obama already set a deadline? Which is a form of vote really. The problem is, what happen if he loses ... To me, the best way to get this thing done is to pull everyone in, set fair ground rules on behaviour ... [ check out the town halls, never had that when W proposed hitting Iraq ] . Then have a no question national broadcast on what a single payer system is [ and show that they already have one for two groups of their population ] ... if the single payer is the way he really wants to go. But to some degree, he also has to address the issue of mal practice insurance and rewards which really drive up their costs. Bush actually tried to do something about this, but didn't really have his heart in it.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Rps said:


> [ check out the town halls, never had that when W proposed hitting Iraq ]


George Bush never had a "town hall." He had carefully screened (extra carefully in his second term) public appearances whose invites were limited to Republican party faithful and the questions pre-screened.

On the rare occasion some actual residents would sneak in, they were promptly escorted out if there was even a HINT of dissidence. I recall two educators (with invites) who were barred admittance because they had Kerry buttons on them.



> But to some degree, he also has to address the issue of mal practice insurance and rewards which really drive up their costs.


Actually, it isn't. The number of malpractice lawsuits and awards has nosedived in the US over the last few years.

So why has the cost of US healthcare doubled in the last seven years? I dunno, maybe the huge profits of the insurance corporations have something to do with it??


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)




----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

> Right now, the charge that’s gaining the most traction is the claim that health care reform will create “death panels” (in Sarah Palin’s words) that will shuffle the elderly and others off to an early grave. It’s a complete fabrication, of course. The provision requiring that Medicare pay for voluntary end-of-life counseling was introduced by Senator Johnny Isakson, Republican — *yes, Republican* — of Georgia, who says that it’s “nuts” to claim that it has anything to do with euthanasia.


*Republic Death Trip*


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

It is Tuesday August 18th, 2009. It is 9:15 am, I just finished watching the morning news on CNN where they covered a story of a gentlemen taking an assault rife and side arm to a Town Hall on Health Care in Arizona. He was questioned and stated it is is constitutional right to do so. With all the misinformation and disinformation out there, and especially with the very [ and unnecessary in my opinion ] heated debate and erroneous beliefs on health care reform, I believe that soon, someone will be shot. Won't that be ironic ... someone will probably need health care at a health care debate.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

I see the wing nuts have succeeded. All public options are pretty much dead. No price breaks on drugs, no buying drugs in Canada. It would appear that the American taxpayer is worse off if this bill passes than before.tptptptp

As I said during the election. Judge by their actions. Obama is NOT about change but simply well packaged "Same Old Same Old"


----------



## mc3251 (Sep 28, 2007)

Good lord Nuts with guns. What a good idea.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

RPS, here's the story you were referring to...

CNN: Assault Rifles Spied Openly at Phoenix Rally | Video Cafe


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Talking heads referred to the “gentleman with an assault rifle” seems to me gentle and assault are oxymoronic terms. Funny use of language. Why not say a man with a rifle or assault rifle?


----------

