If we adopted Canada's national health care system, where would sick Canadians go?

[DrWho]

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/...l?id=110010266

TORONTO--"I haven't seen 'Sicko,' " says Avril Allen about the new Michael Moore documentary, which advocates socialized medicine for the United States. The film, which has been widely viewed on the Internet, and which will officially open in the U.S. and Canada on Friday, has been getting rave reviews. But Ms. Allen, a lawyer, has no plans to watch it. She's just too busy preparing to file suit against Ontario's provincial government about its health-care system next month.

Her client, Lindsay McCreith, would have had to wait for four months just to get an MRI, and then months more to see a neurologist for his malignant brain tumor. Instead, frustrated and ill, the retired auto-body shop owner traveled to Buffalo, N.Y., for a lifesaving surgery. Now he's suing for the right to opt out of Canada's government-run health care, which he considers dangerous.

Ms. Allen figures the lawsuit has a fighting chance: In 2005, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that "access to wait lists is not access to health care," striking down key Quebec laws that prohibited private medicine and private health insurance.

It is abundantly clear that people who know what they are talking about and support national health care are doing it because they want us to be more socialistic and not because they want to help people have access to health care.

 

[PLC1]

It is abundantly clear that people who know what they are talking about and support national health care are doing it because they want us to be more socialistic and not because they want to help people have access to health care.

Or, just maybe because they realize that the US is spending more of its GDP on health care than any of the nations with universal care, and that the cost keeps going up much faster than inflation.

Back to the tax situation, how do you feel about the fair tax?

 

[DrWho]

Or, just maybe because they realize that the US is spending more of its GDP on health care than any of the nations with universal care, and that the cost keeps going up much faster than inflation.

Its all about choice. You can live in a nation with universal health care and you do not get to choose how much you pay in premiums or what level of care you will get. When enough choice is taken away it becomes slavery.

Or you can live in a country where you buy your own health insurance and then your choices are only limited by what is available in a huge market.

Americans are rich idiots. I know lots of people who buy more expensive insurance because they assume it is better than the less expensive. In contrast I evaluate all the options available to me and while it takes a lot of time I find that the best choice is not usually the cheapest or most expensive.

Americans are also addicted to their doctors. When I am sick I often stay home and treat myself. Sometimes I go to the doctor to find that I have a virus. The doctor will sometimes offer an antibiotic. When I ask what use an antibiotic will do against a virus they tell me that it will do no good but it will make me feel like something is being done. Actual story.

Americans have been hoodwinked by the system. Most people get their Insurance from their employer. This limits how many insurance companies you can select from and keeps prices up. The system limits the amount of competition that insurance companies and doctors have to endure and without competition prices rise.

 

[PLC1]

Its all about choice. You can live in a nation with universal health care and you do not get to choose how much you pay in premiums or what level of care you will get. When enough choice is taken away it becomes slavery.

Or you can live in a country where you buy your own health insurance and then your choices are only limited by what is available in a huge market.

Americans are rich idiots. I know lots of people who buy more expensive insurance because they assume it is better than the less expensive. In contrast I evaluate all the options available to me and while it takes a lot of time I find that the best choice is not usually the cheapest or most expensive.

Americans are also addicted to their doctors. When I am sick I often stay home and treat myself. Sometimes I go to the doctor to find that I have a virus. The doctor will sometimes offer an antibiotic. When I ask what use an antibiotic will do against a virus they tell me that it will do no good but it will make me feel like something is being done. Actual story.

Americans have been hoodwinked by the system. Most people get their Insurance from their employer. This limits how many insurance companies you can select from and keeps prices up. The system limits the amount of competition that insurance companies and doctors have to endure and without competition prices rise.

We have competition with rising prices now.

It's like the California's Governor Wilson and his energy deregulation plan about ten or so years ago. Before deregulation, the PG and E had a monopoly on the power in Northern California, and Southern California Edison had one in the south. The state regulated prices so that the monopoly didn't become a license to steal, and the system worked very well. When the system was deregulated in the name of competition, it opened the door to Enron, which came in pillaging and stealing and cost the residents of the Golden state a golden ransome.

 

[vyo476]

I opened this up the other night on Yahoo News and thought it might be relevant to the discussion.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20070706/hl_hsn/medicaltourismtakesflight

 

[DrWho]

We have competition with rising prices now.

In a competitive system each person who wanted to see a doctor would shop around making the doctors compete with each other. We do not have that. The closest we get to that, in general, is when people shop around from one doctor to another doctor who are in the book that their insurer provided.

In a competitive system each person who wanted insurance would shop around from one insurer to another making them compete with each other. We do not have that. The closest we get to that, in general, is when a person's employer shops around for an insurer. Does you employer have the same desires as you do when it comes to picking an insurer?

Yes prices are rising. Some of the increase in price is due to the fact that there are more items and more expensive items on the menu now. 50 years ago a whole bunch of the treatments, medicines, and technologies were not even available. if you want to go back 50 years and only get the kind of treatments that were available then I assure you that treatment would cost a whole lot less.

some of the increase in prices is just inflation. some is due to the fact that a doctor needs more schooling than in the past, and nurses, and hospitals have more regulation...

So how much of the rising prices is due to things that would be fixed by moving to socialized medicine?

It's like the California's Governor Wilson and his energy deregulation plan about ten or so years ago. Before deregulation, the PG and E had a monopoly on the power in Northern California, and Southern California Edison had one in the south. The state regulated prices so that the monopoly didn't become a license to steal, and the system worked very well. When the system was deregulated in the name of competition, it opened the door to Enron, which came in pillaging and stealing and cost the residents of the Golden state a golden ransome

I don't understand that situation enough to comment specifically but it does not seem applicable to compare a monopoly changed to a deregulated state to the current health care situation as we do not have a monopoly now and no one is suggesting deregulation.

 

[PLC1]

I don't understand that situation enough to comment specifically but it does not seem applicable to compare a monopoly changed to a deregulated state to the current health care situation as we do not have a monopoly now and no one is suggesting deregulation.

The health care system is like the deregulated energy market that lead to Enron and its abuses. Whats being suggested is a change to a state regulated monopoly, such as we had before the market was deregulated.

 

[invest07]

dahermit

And you believe the World Health Organization because? Aren't they an arm of the UN?

 

[invest07]

Canada vs US health systems

This forum compares the US and Canadian Health care systems. The following statistics are from the World Health Organization:

Per 1000 population
Dentists - Canada .59 US 1.63
Doctors - Canada 2.14 US 2.56
Nurses - Canada 9.95 US 9.37
Pharmacists - Canada .67 US .88

The US has 2.7 times as many dentists per capita as Canada.
The US has 20% more doctors per capita
Canada has 6% more nurses than the US per capita
The US has 31% more pharmacists per capita

This chart says it all. The US has far more practitioners per capita except for nurses. Are the Canadians relying on nurses to do the work of doctors?

There is no comparison between the Canadian and US systems.

Screw the Canadian system.

 

[9sublime]

Well there kind of is Invest, its called National Government Funded Healthcare, something any country that calls themselves developed, let alone best in the world should have.

it doesn't matter how many doctors you have if many people dont have access to them.

screw your system, because your system is screwing more people over than canadas system in terms of them getting healthcare.

maybe you should divert some of your money out of bombing and injuring Iraqis and your own troops and put some more into healthcare so you can help your own. Maybe you should start taxing religion, so that you dont have to complain about the taxes of national healthcare screwing you over.

 

[palerider]

Like i want a 10% Sales Tax on Luxery items like Jewlery,Boats,Homes over $500,000,Private Jets,Limos Cars over $50,000 and on Luxery Condos.

They tried that. It put the people who make expensive jewelry, boats, private jets, limos, etc and the people who sell them out of work. The regular joes who make their living providing luxuries for the rich lost their jobs in droves when the rich decided that they would go offshore to get their goodies. They recinded the luxury tax in less than a year.

Thinking like that is why liberals are the kings of unintended consequences.

 

[palerider]

I want the wealthy to pay their fair share! But its a drop in the bucket to the wealthy. You heard what Randy Moss said to the press when he had to pay a $10,000 fine to the NFL. He said,, Quote,, WHATS $10,000 TO ME? I want taxes stick it to the rich so it will mean something to em.

What you don't seem to grasp is that the very wealthy have options. You lay high taxes on them and they will move their money and their business to a location that is more friendly. They are rich because they are, for the most part, smarter, and three steps ahead of the politicians who are trying to "stick it to them".

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Well there kind of is Invest, its called National Government Funded Healthcare, something any country that calls themselves developed, let alone best in the world should have.

9sublime, I don't agree at all that because a country is well-developed it should have a socialized healthcare system. In fact, one could make the argument that any country that calls themselves free should not have a socialized healthcare system.

maybe you should divert some of your money out of bombing and injuring Iraqis and your own troops and put some more into healthcare so you can help your own. Maybe you should start taxing religion, so that you dont have to complain about the taxes of national healthcare screwing you over.

There are much better places to divert money from, starting with Social Security.

 

[9sublime]

9sublime, I don't agree at all that because a country is well-developed it should have a socialized healthcare system. In fact, one could make the argument that any country that calls themselves free should not have a socialized healthcare system.

Please make that argument. I dont see how any country that believes itself to be the most developed in the world cant care for its poorest citizens health.

There are much better places to divert money from, starting with Social Security.

Theres plenty of places, I was just giving a few examples.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Please make that argument. I dont see how any country that believes itself to be the most developed in the world cant care for its poorest citizens health.

Because in today's world with the contemorary views on the role of government, a nationalized healthcare would include massive tax hikes. And to me, the removal of choice (so long as it does not harm anyone) and taking more money out of my pocket equals a decrease in personal freedom.

9sublime, this comes down to the fundamental, core disagreement between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives, traditionally, believe in individual liberty, self-responsiblity, and voluntary charity in the Jeffersonian model whereas liberals tend to buy into the Marxist "for the greater good" philosophy where the government takes care of you from cradle to grave. Personally, I just don't have that much faith in government bureaucracy that I am anxious to put them in charge of my health. I believe government is the problem. You think it is the solution.