Health care reform: A simple explanation

[suv_guy_19]

To put it another way....many are saying that health in the US has already imploded. Do you believe that? Canadians have been told that their system is imploding every year for over a decade. Guess what. It's still here.

[fmccap]

To put it another way....many are saying that health in the US has already imploded. Do you believe that? Canadians have been told that their system is imploding every year for over a decade. Guess what. It's still here.

I believe it and we have been told that for quite some time also. Guess what? It's still here.

[suv_guy_19]

Yes it is. Your system isn't a complete failure. The only real failure is that it doesn't cover everyone and it doesn't cover others well. In Canada, we have failed in that some people wait too long. The trick is fixing the systems. It's easier said than done for various reasons.

[BlackHorse]

LMAO, Some things never change. SUV guy is still defending that crappy Canadian medical system even when many of Canada's doctors are openly calling it a failure and demanding serious reform.

 

Sorry SUV, but for anyone with a modicum of common sense you lose this argument. On the one hand we have a large number of actual doctors in Canada saying "Hey, this system is junk, it doesn't work, and we need to change it." On the other hand we have you insisting that everything is just fine.

 

So, actual doctors, versus some guy (thats you SUV) on the internet. Whom should we believe? hmmmm

 

What is it SUV, you just can't admit that you are wrong? Too much pride? Ego? Maybe, just maybe, you have an agenda too? Is that it?

 

Socialised medicine is a failure, compeletly and totally. It always has been. It cuts lives shorts, causing suffering and generally yields substandard care. That's just the way it is man.

Edited August 18, 2009 by BlackHorse

[suv_guy_19]

Socialized medicine? Were we talking about the United Kingdom?

 

You can think what you want. I really don't care. Canadians aren't having a debate over healthcare. Americans are. We'll stick with our life cutting system (that somehow results in us living two years longer than Americans) and you can keep yours.

 

The CMA opposed medicare in the 1960s and the Canada Health Act in the 1980s. This is nothing new from them. The quality of the system varies from province to province, but there is little evidence that any are imploding. In fact, there is proof that they have gotten better over the last 10 years...and that Canadians are very supportive.

Edited August 18, 2009 by suv_guy_19

[BlackHorse]

Socialized medicine? Were we talking about the United Kingdom?

 

You can think what you want. I really don't care. Canadians aren't having a debate over healthcare. Americans are. We'll stick with our life cutting system (that somehow results in us living two years longer than Americans) and you can keep yours.

 

The CMA opposed medicare in the 1960s and the Canada Health Act in the 1980s. This is nothing new from them. The quality of the system varies from province to province, but there is little evidence that any are imploding. In fact, there is proof that they have gotten better over the last 10 years...and that Canadians are very supportive.

 

Yeah I've seen the data too man and what you always fail to post while you're painting your rosey picture of Canadian health care is that the two years on average that Canadians live longer has almost nothing to do with the quality of care you recieve in Canada and more to do with the lifestyle choices of Americans. America has a larger and much more culturally diverse population for one thing. Additionally, more Americans per capita drink, smoke and are obese than are Canadians. These are lifestyle choices that can and do shorten lifespans. So Canadians living two years longer really is just a result of Americans making different lifestyle choices, not because you have better health care. Canadians with heart disease and certain types of cancer have a much higher mortality rate than do Americans with the same conditions. That actually is a reflection of the kind of care you recieve there. I suspect Canadians as a general rule make it a point to keep themselves in better shape than do Americans for the simple reason that they know if they get sick they will not be well looked after by the government run health care system that you have. I mean even with the much healther lifestyles that Canadians lead, the best your system can manage to give you is two additional years. If more Americans made it a point to stay healthy and fit and we retained our curent health care system you can bet we would be living much longer than Canadians on average.

Edited August 18, 2009 by BlackHorse

[suv_guy_19]

Actually, I think we drink more, but other than that you're correct....though you still mischaracterize our system. I can also turn what you have just said around. Canadians on average are older. As a result, they would be less likely to survive things like heart attacks and certain forms of cancer. The latest data shows very mixed results on those types of things though. The numbers are pretty close to equal in many cases with the US doing slightly better in some areas (heart attack - though there is a statical tie now) and Canada doing better in other areas (diabetes, kidney problems, etc). The US is better with many forms of cancer though. No question. There is more technology in the US. You spend twice as much per person and your government even spends more per person than ours.

Edited August 18, 2009 by suv_guy_19

[suv_guy_19]

Oh, and if my grandma had wheels, she'd be a tractor.

[suv_guy_19]

But I'm not here to get into a debate about systems...I'm simply here because some people seem to think health care in Canada looks like this:

 

[napfirst]

Maybe these politicians are waking up and beginning to listen:

 

Blue Dog: 'Excellent idea' to start over on health care reform

 

Acknowledging his amazement at the crowds gathered to debate health care at his town halls, Rep. Allen Boyd, D-Florida, faced three large gatherings on Monday with many questioners voicing skepticism about the proposals being debated in Washington.

 

Link

[grbeck]

With the exception of some marginal wingnuts on the far left, I don't remember anyone with any clout comparing Bush to Hitler. Not Olbermann, Maddow, Matthews or anyone on CNN. When the Right correctly took the wingnuts to task they were indignant over using Hitler as part of political discussion. Now the same guys on the Right doing this. They have clout like Limbaugh and the Stars of Fox. That is a big difference. They made many of the most outrageous claims about Clinton as well. Bush wasn't Hitler and neither is Obama. If Beck wants to talk himself right out of his sponsorships, I say, let him, he won't be missed.

 

There were several mainstream Democrats and liberals who used the "Bush-Hitler" theme.

 

Both Senator Robert Byrd and billionaire Democrat George Soros said Bush reminded them of Herman Goering.

 

During the 2004 presidential campaign, Al Gore used the term "brownshirts" (Nazi street thugs) to refer to Republican computer teams assigned to respond to criticism of Bush and the Iraq war.

 

Vanity Fair magazine nominated Richard Perle for the Goebbels role, running photos of both men under the headline "Separated at Birth?"

 

The New York Times columnist Frank Rich managed to work in a reference to a famous Nazi filmmaker. He said a Showtime program on 9/11 was so favorable to Bush that it is "best viewed as a fitting memorial to Leni Riefenstahl."

 

The Rev. Andrew Greeley, sociologist and novelist, depicted Bush as a Hitler figure who carried American over to "the dark side."

 

Federal appeals judge Guido Calabresi offered a comparatively mild Nazi reference, saying the Bush's rise to power was reminiscent of the rise of Hitler and Mussolini, with the Supreme Court pushing him into the presidency with the Bush v. Gore decision.

 

Bush reminded the left of non-Nazi villains as well. He was depicted as Attila the Hun, serial killer Ted Bundy, Mussolini, Ahab, Hannibal Lecter, the Anti-Christ and Frankenstein's monster (on the cover of the British edition of book by New York Times columnist Paul Krugman).

 

They have been a little more clever in their insinuations than Glenn Beck, but the idea and intent were the same.

 

And that's without reviewing what was said on college campuses by professors and student leaders.

 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi never complained about any of this when it was happening.

 

I looked with disdain upon the tactics used against Clinton (Vince Foster was killed by Hillary; Bill Clinton was responsible for many deaths in Arkansas while he was governor, etc.). Yet the other side didn't hesitate to use them against Bush. So, while I don't think that Obama was born in Kenya, or is a secret Muslim, I can't get too worked up when Speaker Nancy Pelosi suddenly rediscovers the value of civility in the discussion over important issues. The complaints of Obama supporters ring hollow at this point...

Edited August 18, 2009 by grbeck

[mikem12]

Socialized medicine? Were we talking about the United Kingdom?

 

You can think what you want. I really don't care. Canadians aren't having a debate over healthcare. Americans are. We'll stick with our life cutting system (that somehow results in us living two years longer than Americans) and you can keep yours.

 

The CMA opposed medicare in the 1960s and the Canada Health Act in the 1980s. This is nothing new from them. The quality of the system varies from province to province, but there is little evidence that any are imploding. In fact, there is proof that they have gotten better over the last 10 years...and that Canadians are very supportive.

 

 

I don't know much about the Canadian HC other than what I have read in the news so I will offer this one up. You say it's different in each province, since it is ran by the central government wouldn't it stand to reason that the problems cross the provincial boundries?

 

try this new article.

 

http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print.ht...506&sponsor

[suv_guy_19]

since it is ran by the central government

 

It isn't. Healthcare is run by the provinces. It's regulated by the federal government. BC and Alberta are cutting budgets right now during the recession, and my province has been increasing them because we aren't facing the same shortfall.

 

By the way, that story is about what a private corporation that operates within the system is planning to do. Vancouver Costal isn't a government body. The health authority responsible for the public funding of those facilities isis partly government.

Edited August 18, 2009 by suv_guy_19

[mikem12]

It isn't. Healthcare is run by the provinces. It's regulated by the federal government. BC and Alberta are cutting budgets right now during the recession, and my province has been increasing them because we aren't facing the same shortfall.

 

By the way, that story is about what a private corporation that operates within the system is planning to do. Vancouver Costal isn't a government body. The health authority responsible for the public funding of those facilities isis partly government.

 

it is still very much a part of the system is it not. They get paid some how and if they don't services get cut. Just like it will here in the states. The US will regulate HC as well thus, will call the shots. The state will have to adjust from there. sounds pretty similar to me.

[suv_guy_19]

Most funding for the system also is provincial. Also, the private corporations that operate under public funding have other avenues to make money, such as donations and lotteries. They'll make u the shortfall somehow, and it certainly won't be the way in the story now that people know.

[napfirst]

Most funding for the system also is provincial. Also, the private corporations that operate under public funding have other avenues to make money, such as donations and lotteries. They'll make u the shortfall somehow, and it certainly won't be the way in the story now that people know.

It gets govt. funding....then the govt. regulates it......

[suv_guy_19]

Yes, the government regulate them, but they don't make operational decisions. They are still doing surgeries that the government wants, but they won't be doing as many as they had been. That's up to the hospitals. A corporation has less money, and so they have to cut costs. Are US companies any different?

Edited August 18, 2009 by suv_guy_19

[napfirst]

Yes, the government regulate them, but they don't make operational decisions. They are still doing surgeries that the government wants, but they won't be doing as many as they had been. That's up to the hospitals. A corporation has less money, and so they have to cut costs. Are US companies any different?

Different?...yes, the govt. don't regulate most US companies

[Deanh]

www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf ( Hope the link works )

Edited August 18, 2009 by Deanh

[Ron W.]

www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf ( Hope the link works )

It doesn't but here

 

http://www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf

 

This will.

[Deanh]

It doesn't but here

 

http://www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf

 

This will.

thx Ron....classic. Cheers.

[Ron W.]

thx Ron....classic. Cheers.

 

You're welcome.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

I don't know much about the Canadian HC other than what I have read in the news so I will offer this one up. You say it's different in each province, since it is ran by the central government wouldn't it stand to reason that the problems cross the provincial boundries?

 

try this new article.

 

http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print.ht...506&sponsor

 

Chinese Macau have the highest life expectancy in the world.

 

Aussies are No7, Canada No8, France No9 (70% drive diesels), Brits No36 and USA No50.

Why is the USA so low with all that money you spend on private health care?

 

Life expectancy by country

LINK

[Ralph Greene]

I paid a visit today to the family GP. He's a friend of mine as well. He's an old Doc, with many years of family practice.

 

After our business was concluded, we chatted a while. He thinks the US system is badly in need of reform. While he isn't in favor of anything that cuts into his practice or personal income (naturally), he thinks the current way we pay for health care in our country makes no sense.

 

If a homeless person falls in the streets of a heart attack, with maybe a $200,000 bill, state medicade pays for that thru higher state taxes, which we all pay. A form of socialized medicine.

 

If a well off person wants to totally self insure or partially self insure thru a high deductible, he can't do that because Medicare and the insurance companies only pay a fraction of what a cash payer would have to pay. making his cost of any illness off the charts expensive if paying with cash.

 

The uninsured now get medical care thru private clinics and ER rooms, paid for by tax payers, a form of socialized medicine. In his view.....the very thing opponents of health care reform fear the most....socialized medicine....we already have. The problem is the cost of our current un official national health care system is not fairly spread out over all citizens.

 

His view is we really need some change, and the very people most opposed to the change are mostly the ones who don't understand how our current system works. They think it's based on some private free enterprise system....it hasn't been that for years. Too many people with too little info, fearful of change. And BTW....he's not in favor of a single pay system for all US. He's just an old conservative (philosophically) Doc who doesn't think the current system is fair. He also thinks the current system is not sustaibable much longer.

Edited August 18, 2009 by Ralph Greene

[NLPRacing]

I paid a visit today to the family GP. He's a friend of mine as well. He's an old Doc, with many years of family practice.

 

After our business was concluded, we chatted a while. He thinks the US system is badly in need of reform. While he isn't in favor of anything that cuts into his practice or personal income (naturally), he thinks the current way we pay for health care in our country makes no sense.

 

If a homeless person falls in the streets of a heart attack, with maybe a $200,000 bill, state Medicaid pays for that thru higher state taxes, which we all pay. A form of socialized medicine.

 

If a well off person wants to totally self insure or partially self insure thru a high deductible, he can't do that because Medicare and the insurance companies only pay a fraction of what a cash payer would have to pay. making his cost of any illness off the charts expensive if paying with cash.

 

The uninsured now get medical care thru private clinics and ER rooms, paid for by tax payers, a form of socialized medicine. In his view.....the very thing opponents of health care reform fear the most....socialized medicine....we already have. The problem is the cost of our current un official national health care system is not fairly spread out over all citizens.

 

His view is we really need some change, and the very people most opposed to the change are mostly the ones who don't understand how our current system works. They think it's based on some private free enterprise system....it hasn't been that for years. Too many people with too little info, fearful of change. And BTW....he's not in favor of a single pay system for all US. He's just an old conservative (philosophically) Doc who doesn't think the current system is fair. He also thinks the current system is not sustainable much longer.

 

Thanks for sharing. I wish more people would educate themselves about our current broken health care system before shouting Fox News talking points at their Senators & Representatives. We need reform & need it now. I am disappointed that the public option may not pass, but I hope they pass a bill that does enough to make a difference. My biggest fear is that it doesn't go far enough therefore making it fail and have all these people that were yelling "I don't want Obamacare" & "I don't want government in my Medicare" saying, "I told you it wouldn't work".

 

People really have no clue do they: LINK - Keep Your Goddamn Government Hands Off My Medicare!