Health Care, Obama.....

Dr. - it is good that you are satisified with your countries health care.

Perhaps the reason this thread is so popular is because;
"September 23, 2009
Cost Is Foremost Healthcare Issue for AmericansBut public largely skeptical that healthcare reform will bring reliefby Lydia SaadPage: 12 PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans are broadly satisfied with the quality of their own medical care and healthcare costs, but of the two, satisfaction with costs lags. Overall, 80% are satisfied with the quality of medical care available to them"

As far as big business is concerned the largest corporation in the world is Royal Dutch Shell and their annual sales are $458 Billion. The Federal Gov't in spends $3.6 Trillion! Big Gov't is way bigger than Big Business!
 
More lies you have been fed. I pay no provincial taxes AT ALL. We have no added provincial taxes, nor 'Value Added Tax', whatever that is. And the federal GST was LOWERED 2%, along with basic personal exemptions on INCOME tax. And we ran a federal and provincial SURPLUS, 5 years consecutive before this 'downturn' hit us.

The government has no control over my life, and healthcare is not rationed anywhere in Canada.

Sorry for my incorrect terminology. VAT = GST, and if I recall, it was somewhere around 13% plus added to any purchase I made up there. Call it whatever you like, that's how you're funding your "free" health care.

I'm having a hard time understanding how long waiting lists for health services doesn't qualify as rationing. And I KNOW that's not a lie, the majority of my relatives are Canadians, and have heard first-hand about the wait for services several of them have endured.
 
The Health Board of the respective province. Each Province or Territory does it differently. The Federal Government budgets each of the 13 health boards a given funding cap, and the boards determine how best to spend that money.

What happens when the "funding cap" is met, can my mother and father still get the surgeries they require by the "bench mark"?


What forms of cancer? I suspect these are more lies you have been fed.
Here are the "lies" from the report you cite;

The U.S. has a five-year survival rate in all the cancers studied of 91.9 per cent, while Europe's is much lower at 57.1 per cent. However, survival rates within the U.S. can vary.

The range of survival rates across the five provinces was quite narrow, from a low of 79.3 per cent in Nova Scotia to a high of 85.4 per cent in British Columbia."



I would be too. Diabetes and stroke run in my family, which is why I do everything I can to manage it. Strange concept isn't it? We are responsible for our own health. The government isn't involved.

"The government isn't involved" is contrary to your posts.

You keep saying I am being feed "lies" and yet these "lies" you speak of come from numerous and diverse respected sources including the Canadian HEalth Institue. Perhaps there is a huge conspiracy to promote these "lies"? More "lies";
"Date: Monday, August 17, 2009, 8:35 PM


Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors
By Jennifer Graham (CP) – 2 days ago
SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.
Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.
"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.
"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."
The pitch for change at the conference is to start with a presentation from Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA, who has said there's a critical need to make Canada's health-care system patient-centred. He will present details from his fact-finding trip to Europe in January, where he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France.
His thoughts on the issue are already clear. Ouellet has been saying since his return that "a health-care revolution has passed us by," that it's possible to make wait lists disappear while maintaining universal coverage and "that competition should be welcomed, not feared."
In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.
He has also said the Canadian system could be restructured to focus on patients if hospitals and other health-care institutions received funding based on the patients they treat, instead of an annual, lump-sum budget. This "activity-based funding" would be an incentive to provide more efficient care, he has said."
 
Last edited:
Dr. - it is good that you are satisified with your countries health care.

Perhaps the reason this thread is so popular is because;
"September 23, 2009
Cost Is Foremost Healthcare Issue for AmericansBut public largely skeptical that healthcare reform will bring reliefby Lydia SaadPage: 12 PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans are broadly satisfied with the quality of their own medical care and healthcare costs, but of the two, satisfaction with costs lags. Overall, 80% are satisfied with the quality of medical care available to them"

I never said anyone was dissatisfied with the quality of the US system. I only say that for every measure of what 'health care' should be; cost, coverage, longevity and infant live birth rate; we have improved over the US system. So what if you can't afford a private room after you get a hip replaced? If you have supplemental insurance, you can get one or pay out of pocket. You will still get the surgery, and you will get no bill afterwards. You will live, and the quality of that life will improve. Socialized health care isn't a scary thing, and it's greatly improved the quality of our lives.

There has to be a way you guys can get the quality you are used to, at better prices with better results. And you guys are being lied to, by the people who's only motivation is to keep their gravy train running. We know, because we see them trying the same thing with our system. That's all I'm saying.

As far as big business is concerned the largest corporation in the world is Royal Dutch Shell and their annual sales are $458 Billion. The Federal Gov't in spends $3.6 Trillion! Big Gov't is way bigger than Big Business!

That's also not my point. The federal and provincial governments here are also the largest employers and spenders - but all other employers outnumber them employee and spending wise.

My point is, your health should not be subject to a profit margin, any more than a fire or police department should have a mandate to run in 'the black'. Imagine if the FBI's budget came from confiscated monies? Would there be a rush of FBI activity when the budget starts to run low? Why should Health care be delivered in the same way? The only way to increase profit margins then is to cut corners, and people suffer. Around here, that means people 'wait' longer for some things, but they will be looked after as soon as possible. But, they will be looked after. That's the price for controlling costs.

But, controlling costs in a socialized system also starts with prevention. We know that encouraging exercise, quitting smoking and educating people about their diet are far more effective in the long term at controlling costs. With a private system, how does the public get education on the best way to improve their own health? Are programs like Participaction or Canada's Food Guide even possible without government money?

Police, fire, military, roads, water, sewer access . . health care. These are things we demand in modern society, and we elect people to make sure these things are taken care of for us. They don't have to earn profit, they just have to fulfil their mandate and provide to us what we are paying for.
 
Sorry for my incorrect terminology. VAT = GST, and if I recall, it was somewhere around 13% plus added to any purchase I made up there. Call it whatever you like, that's how you're funding your "free" health care.

I'm having a hard time understanding how long waiting lists for health services doesn't qualify as rationing. And I KNOW that's not a lie, the majority of my relatives are Canadians, and have heard first-hand about the wait for services several of them have endured.

Like I said. We pay 5% federal GST. Not a penny in provincial taxes. Not 13%.

You answered your own question. Wait lists are not rationing. Wait lists ocurr for many reasons, including that there may only be a limited number of surgeons to perform the operation. Doctors aren't machines, and can only work so fast. And like I showed, wait lists are shrinking because we made the investment in more doctors.
 
What ever happened to Free Market competiton? Good grief!

I can drive across town and find 1,000's cars for sale from $250 all the way up to $70,000+. Any color you like. Any options you want. Even options you don't want. All because of the power of the Free Market.

With health care I don't get any choices. I'd like to buy a super cheap policy that covers broken bones, STD's from the town bike, and cancer coverage. But I can't. I have to buy a policy that covers a million and one things I'll never, ever need. I even have to do this for people I don't even know.

Now apparently the Constitution reads that there is some sort of mandatory "cover charge" just for living here. If I don't pay this "cover charge", a bouncer (IRS agent) will throw me out ( and into prison).

The party of choice has left us without any.
 
Having lived in the UK I can attest to "socialized medicine" and it is a disaster.

Looking at the Cancer Survival rates from several studies, having lived under the UK Socialized Med and my own parents experience if I had Cancer today I would only want to be treated in one country and that is the USA.

The city of Houston has more clincal trials than many countries.

I will take a private profit healthcare provider over a Gov't healthcare provider any time. I have used both.

Most things for "free" are not very good.
 
Really?


Tell me more.


Are you referring to JFK? If it's a different movie, then I have indeed forgetten it. Please expound on this idea.

I will not promote the "movie", it was made as a "documentary" with actual footage of Pres Bush through out.

You can easily do a search.

To imply that there is more "hate" on the right than the left is wrong. A search of "hate speech" yields far more on leftist sites than rightist sites. No matter there is always plenty of hate and no group has a fanchise on it.
 
What ever happened to Free Market competiton? Good grief!

I can drive across town and find 1,000's cars for sale from $250 all the way up to $70,000+. Any color you like. Any options you want. Even options you don't want. All because of the power of the Free Market.

With health care I don't get any choices. I'd like to buy a super cheap policy that covers broken bones, STD's from the town bike, and cancer coverage. But I can't. I have to buy a policy that covers a million and one things I'll never, ever need. I even have to do this for people I don't even know.

Now apparently the Constitution reads that there is some sort of mandatory "cover charge" just for living here. If I don't pay this "cover charge", a bouncer (IRS agent) will throw me out ( and into prison).

The party of choice has left us without any.


So.... how do you like "change" now? This seems to be what people were saying before the "chosen one" got elected, but hey, what did we know?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I am safe!

Obama Admin. Declares 'The End of Favoring Motorized Transportation'

CNSNews.com) - Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has announced that federal transportation policies will no longer favor “motorized” transportation, such as cars and trucks, over “non-motorized” transportation, such as walking and bicycling...

“Today, I want to announce a sea change,” LaHood wrote. “People across America who value bicycling should have a voice when it comes to transportation planning. This is the end of favoring motorized transportation at the expense of non-motorized.”


Flood gates are open, folks. C.Y.C.B.I...:shake:

See MotorCoach (bus) is safe so my job is OK :)

See you all on the bus:banana: :lol:
 
Socialized Medicine

Socialized medicine is a pejorative term used primarily in the United States to refer to certain kinds of publicly-funded health care. The term is used most frequently, and often pejoratively, in the U.S. political debate concerning health care. The term was first widely used in the United States by advocates of the American Medical Association in opposition to President Harry S Truman's 1947 health-care initiative.

Jonathan Oberlander, a professor of health policy at the University of North Carolina, maintains that the term does not mean anything at all. Exact definitions vary, but the term can refer to any system of medical care that is publicly financed, government administered, or both.

The original meaning was confined to systems in which the government operates health care facilities and employs health care professionals. This narrower usage would apply to the British National Health Service hospital trusts and health systems that operate in other countries as diverse as Finland, Spain, Israel, and Cuba. The United States' Veterans Health Administration, and the medical departments of the US Army, Navy, and Air Force would also fall under this narrow definition. When used in this way, the narrow definition permits a clear distinction from single payer health insurance systems, in which the government finances health care but is not involved in care delivery.

More recently, a few have used the term more broadly to any publicly funded system. Canada's Medicare system, most of the UK's NHS general practitioner and dental services, which are all systems where health care is delivered by private business with partial or total government funding, fit this broader definition, as do the health care systems of most of Western Europe. In the United States, Medicare, Medicaid, and the US military's TRICARE fall under this definition.

Most industrialized countries, and many developing countries, operate some form of publicly-funded health care with universal coverage as the goal. According to the Institute of Medicine and others, the United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not provide universal health care.

The term is often used in the U.S to create an understanding that the health care system would be run by the government, thereby associating it with socialism, which has negative connotations in American political culture.
 
Last edited:
The government is obviously much better equipped to provide medical care than private companies, just look at the dental care in the UK.
 
Fyi

Just an interesting statistic.
There are more MRI's within a 5 mile radius of Indianapolis than the entire country of Canada
 
This just in:

"...While everyone else in the United States -- from the top corporate executives to the grocery store checkout clerk -- will be forced to buy their insurance through heavily regulated state-run exchanges, the health care bill excludes one group: the leadership and committee staff. Yes, that’s right. The very people who wrote up this bill are refusing to be included themselves. Given the narrow definition of “congressional staff” on page 158 of the health care bill, the Congressional Research Service memo believes that courts will not require “professional committee staff, joint committee staff, some shared staff, as well as potentially those staff employed by leadership offices” to go through the exchanges. President Obama and his family are also exempt from the law..."

C.Y.C.B.I. = BOHICA
 
This just in:

"...While everyone else in the United States -- from the top corporate executives to the grocery store checkout clerk -- will be forced to buy their insurance through heavily regulated state-run exchanges, the health care bill excludes one group: the leadership and committee staff. Yes, that’s right. The very people who wrote up this bill are refusing to be included themselves. Given the narrow definition of “congressional staff” on page 158 of the health care bill, the Congressional Research Service memo believes that courts will not require “professional committee staff, joint committee staff, some shared staff, as well as potentially those staff employed by leadership offices” to go through the exchanges. President Obama and his family are also exempt from the law..."

C.Y.C.B.I. = BOHICA

Singling out the pres like that is racist!
 
Back
Top