Canadian doctor makes anti-Obamacare senator look like a buffoon

reply to post by macman


Fair point. The oath is for life saving, not bill paying. But because of that oath, or variations of it, taxpayers foot the bill for uninsured patients anyways after they walk out of the clinic/hospital. Just a point to consider. Also you didn't answer my question about the "govt forced guarantee" you mentioned earlier.

Back to the main topic, I have to agree with the member who stated the smirk on the mouth of Sen. Burr is inappropriate from the start. And he has that same grin for every question, like he knows it's going to go his way so who cares about the facts.

projectbane
Well, I think that US and Canadian medical could both do with some improvement.

US - way to expensive and forced upon us.
Canadian - Cheaper, but you get what you pay for, pretty poor!!

I know that US healthcare has been ruined by money and gov but Canadian Healthcare is pretty average at best and their price of medication makes up for cheaper healthcare.

Both have a long way to go!!

One thing Canada does better than everyone else is fudge and present false statistics on anything that could make them look bad. Lies from gov over there non stop!

Your an Idiot for saying our health care is poor, Im sorry but you are spreading false information based on a personal preference.

Umm.... who's government is the one that spreads lies? Im pretty sure thats the american government spreading false information. Some of the best doctors in the word are in Canada. Just because we dont believe that you should have to go broke to stay a live, does not mean that our health care is worse then yours.

You are the one that is spreading false information buddy, not our government.

One of our doctors caught your senators Spreading false information.... Did you not watch the video in the OP? or read the Transcripts provided in the OP?
Obviously not.

macman
And taking care of people is not stealing from me to give to someone else.
That is not caring for someone, because it is not caring about me, the one that has money removed from. It is truly the forgotten man played out in reality.

I have a couple of questions, if that's ok:

1. Are you mad because the ACA is a disaster, or because it even exists?

2. A nation's military exists, at least in part, to protect it's citizens. Military expenditures are paid for by taxes, so how is that stealing from you to care for other people? Aren't they similar principles?

apologies

masqua

NavyDoc
No, taking care of strangers yourself is the right thing to do. Making the government force strangers to take care of other strangers is an agenda.

Taking care of strangers is hard to do, simple because one rarely meets them.

Governments are responsible for to all the citizens of the nation. The competition for that responsibility between corporations and politicians is based on greed alone.

imho

edit on 17/3/14 by masqua because: (no reason given)

Governments are not responsible to take care of your every need and neither are corporations. YOU are responsible to take care of your needs. Why is their completion to provide a service "greedy" but a person's desire to have someone else pay for the service he/she consumes is "not greedy?"

reply to post by peck420


SO just a little bit of theft is okay...



No, no thank you.

reply to post by intelligenthoodlum33


Since when does empathy equate to taking from me to give to others?

thov420
Also you didn't answer my question about the "govt forced guarantee" you mentioned earlier.

Back to the main topic, I have to agree with the member who stated the smirk on the mouth of Sen. Burr is inappropriate from the start. And he has that same grin for every question, like he knows it's going to go his way so who cares about the facts.

What question would that be again?

Leonidas

NavyDoc

Leonidas
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

A culture that is full of people that has no problem paying more in taxes to make sure that everyone, no matter their circumstances, gets the best healthcare available is a culture that cares more about his fellow man than a culture that sees such an act as a government imposition and a negative.

Obviously their is enough of a groundswell of compassion within America to at least attempt to make that happen.

The fact that the US Government completely screwed up pretty much every aspect of trying - and failing - to fulfill that desire is not those people's fault. The desire to help is valid.

But to come out and repudiate that cultural desire pretty much identifies a mentality that only cares about the welfare of others if it doesn't cost them anything or cause inconvenience.

And yet to repudiate someone with a different take on that identifies the mentality of someone who "cares" for others enough to spend other people's money. It is wrong and ignorant to call someone selfish simply because they do not believe in coerced charity. It is easy to be generous with someone else's money, time, and labor and I would saw that your reply to me is quite indicative of that mindset.

"Compassion" is an excuse that the statists in America want to use to enable government takeover of healthcare. "Compassion" to them means "I want free stuff."

The fact that you would have to be "coerced" into charity is a very telling statement.

As I mentioned above, the pride in universal health-care isn't that *I* get it, the pride is in the fact that "EVERYBODY" does.

You share the cost of roads, schools, defense, infrastructure...is it that big a stretch to include healthcare?

See, you are wrong and have a bit of a reading comprehension. In the very post you quoted I mentioned I do extensive volunteer and charity work. I don't have to be coerced to do charity--I do a lot. The problem is that I dislike being forced to provide "charity" by the government which is really not about "charity" but about buying votes form the electorate and showing the people how much they "care". You said it yourself, no politician in Canada would be elected if they were to scale down this handout.

They are not comparable. The job of government is not to take care of your every need from cradle to grave. Unlike and infrastructure project (an not all infrastructure projects need to be federal run and there is much graft, waste, and fraud in infrastructure too), this healthcare "reform" is yet another direct removal from one citizens' pocket to put in another.

You feel that your healthcare is available to all but you've already seen the limitations. Great if you have a hangnail, really bad if you need an MRI or a new hip or have cancer or something new. The drugs and technology that your system uses, our system developes. You don't want socialized medicine in the US because then you stop the sourch of most of the world's innovation and your system would suffer from it as well. You need to keep one bastion of free market, competitive medical technology out there to keep that from being stifled by the morass of socialism. Governments don't innovate. Evil greedy "capitalists" innovate.

NavyDoc
You feel that your healthcare is available to all but you've already seen the limitations. Great if you have a hangnail, really bad if you need an MRI or a new hip or have cancer or something new. The drugs and technology that your system uses, our system developes. You don't want socialized medicine in the US because then you stop the sourch of most of the world's innovation and your system would suffer from it as well. You need to keep one bastion of free market, competitive medical technology out there to keep that from being stifled by the morass of socialism. Governments don't innovate. Evil greedy "capitalists" innovate.

Doc, I know you're no dummy, so I suggest you really look into this. Do it from the point of "Why are Canadians so much happier with their health care than Americans?"

And you might want to check out some of the research and innovation coming out of our university and teaching hospitals before you say that government doesn't innovate.

Or not, and keep following that party line of yours.

reply to post by macman


You have been giving money since the first time you paid taxes. Why not have that money actually benefit yourself and others?

But if you are happy with the current system, by all means, keep on trucking.

It seems that this is an issue of party affiliation rather than doing what is best for the country.

reply to post by macman

The question comes from this post of yours on page 4:

JohnnyCanuck
Well, actually that Canadian doctor was invited down to testify. More to the point...about that TV comment...does that include her statement that 45000 Americans die annually because they have no insurance?

macman
I would really love to see the source of her stats.
I have yet to see anyone die, because they couldn't get treatment. That is the biggest farce out there.
I have seen hospitals go bankrupt because of this Govt forced guarantee.

I guess I'm confued about the "govt forced" part of your last statement. You obviously didn't mean the Hippocratic Oath in the forced part so I was curious if there was a codified US law pertaining to medical care and ability to pay?

NavyDoc
Governments are not responsible to take care of your every need and neither are corporations. YOU are responsible to take care of your needs.

By that reasoning, I should not have to pay municipal taxes for street lighting, policing, sewage disposal or sidewalks and garbage pick-up either. State or provincial taxes pay for roads, bridges, and multiple other national facilities, but health care should not be one of them by your reckoning.

Why is their completion to provide a service "greedy" but a person's desire to have someone else pay for the service he/she consumes is "not greedy?"

Because railways, airports/airlines and other such services are paid for by individuals through fees and other services, such as clean drinking water, highways and related infrastructure are paid for by three systems of government.

The competition I'm talking about is the desire of corporations to privatize services controlled by government. Governments try to control privatization of the services they provide through taxes in order to limit corporate greed. Health care is rife with corporate greed even in Canada and obvious in the exorbitant costs of hospital beds and drugs. At least here, we pay it all through taxes.

snypwsd
reply to post by hounddoghowlie

 

that is for elective surguries not life threatening surguries. Canadian government does not cover alot of elective surguries because your healthe is not at risk so it is a waste of taxpayer money. Elective surgeries include plastic surgery, tummy tucks, stapped stomaches ect. do not spread false info. For a normal doctors apointment most people have a family doctor that they can make an apointment to see their doctor in just a day or twoo. Also there are emergency rooms and free clinics too. All for the price of $50 a month.

Wow that's cheap! I'm not on Ocare, but I've heard it's a lot more than that! So 40 million Canadians pay $50 a month? So Canada receives 200 million a year to cover all their costs? That's not much. They must have to cut corners somewhere. Do they also treat foreigners for free? Does healthcare costs eat up the govt budget or what?

Just trying to understand how it all works.

macman
reply to post by peck420

 

SO just a little bit of theft is okay...
No, no thank you.

Then I am sure you are more then willing to shutdown the VA system as well?

Medicare
Medicaid
S-CHIP
VA

All publicly funded.

Navydoc

....The problem is that I dislike being forced to provide "charity" by the government which is really not about "charity" but about buying votes form the electorate and showing the people how much they "care". You said it yourself, no politician in Canada would be elected if they were to scale down this handout.

We don't consider it a handout. We consider it a shared value that we are happy to contribute to. A politician that didn't share the values of the electorate would not be elected.

They are not comparable. The job of government is not to take care of your every need from cradle to grave. Unlike and infrastructure project (an not all infrastructure projects need to be federal run and there is much graft, waste, and fraud in infrastructure too), this healthcare "reform" is yet another direct removal from one citizens' pocket to put in another.


If a people consider healthcare essential, it is part of the infrastructure. Just like a bridge or a fighter-jet.

You feel that your healthcare is available to all but you've already seen the limitations. Great if you have a hangnail, really bad if you need an MRI or a new hip or have cancer or something new. The drugs and technology that your system uses, our system developes. You don't want socialized medicine in the US because then you stop the sourch of most of the world's innovation and your system would suffer from it as well. You need to keep one bastion of free market, competitive medical technology out there to keep that from being stifled by the morass of socialism. Governments don't innovate. Evil greedy "capitalists" innovate.

MRI's and all other forms of diagnostic tools and techniques are included.

Cancer is covered and covered extremely well. Transplants, Surgery, Radiation, Chemo, alternative therapies are all covered and dealt with in a priority fashion. As is any required hospital stays, transfers etc.

If a new treatment for a medical problem is not available, we send you to where they provide that service. America and Europe included.

The Federal government funds research done by private companies and Universities wherever that research is done and whoever owns the company doing the research. Many major American companies doing research in Canadian faculties receive funding to complete that research from Federal coffers.

Yes, wait times are too long in some places for NON-ESSENTIAL things like knee operations or hip replacements that are inconvenient but not life threatening. They receive treatment while waiting. We have private clinics that you can go to if you have the money and don't want to wait. Some have a problem with that, calling it a two-tier health care system. Others think it is a way to get people out of the waiting line for non-essential services, shortening the wait for others.

You are absolutely right that entrepreneurs innovate and should be handsomely rewarded for it. And they are.

Our system is not perfect. Not by a long shot. And things like prescription meds are only subsidized. Private Insurance is a part of our system.

Government is never as efficient as the private sector, ever. And while our system is far from perfect, it provides excellent health care to every citizen. And you never have to worry about the cost of life saving treatment for you or someone you love. You will never have to choose between losing your house or getting an organ transplant or cancer treatment.

That is the imperfect choice we have made.

And continue to make, all across the country.

The "Government" is "US". When someone says "The Government should do X" what they are really saying is "I should do X, and I am willing to fund it with my tax dollars".

"WE" are paying for our healthcare system. We choose taxes be spent there. It is a priority and something we find valuable and worth paying for.

intelligenthoodlum33
reply to post by macman

 

You have been giving money since the first time you paid taxes. Why not have that money actually benefit yourself and others?

But if you are happy with the current system, by all means, keep on trucking.

It seems that this is an issue of party affiliation rather than doing what is best for the country.

This is not about parties, please. It's a liberty stealing new piece of legislation. It should have been simple and directly about health, but its been weighed down with greed, and ulterior motives. It's expensive to the middle class, free to the minimum wagers, and unavailable to the unemployed. Granted, it won't be free to anyone. We will all pay for this, whether we use it or not. I've read that employer paid premiums are going to be taxed as income next. Just one more thing to take from us. Next thing we'll see is employers enmass paying fines over insurance. They'll pay $2000 a year in a fine, rather than premiums for employees. The govt will love this. Income from 2 places for one thing.

SunnyDee

snypwsd
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
[more

Wow that's cheap! I'm not on Ocare, but I've heard it's a lot more than that! So 40 million Canadians pay $50 a month? So Canada receives 200 million a year to cover all their costs? That's not much. They must have to cut corners somewhere. Do they also treat foreigners for free? Does healthcare costs eat up the govt budget or what?

Just trying to understand how it all works.

We pay a lot more than $50 a month.

It is a Federally Funded Mandate. Taxes. We pay for it via taxation. The Provinces run the Healthcare system themselves, but the funding comes from the Federal Government.

Some Provinces charge a monthly Health-Care-Premium on top of what they receive from the Feds., some provinces - like mine - don't charge healthcare premiums.

Non-citizens are responsible for the costs of their treatment. Typically via their own insurance, or in the case of the UK, the NHS pays for it.

But the doctors and the hospital are not part of that process. After you are treated, you deal with the province.

reply to post by SunnyDee


Saying it's not about parties doesn't make it automatically true.

Just to add: I am not a supporter of the current "Obamacare"...however, I do believe that a nationalized healthcare system works. In fact, the place I live now has it and I have no complaints.