Originally posted by vox2442
There`s a LOT to respond to here.

Am honored for whatever time you have to respond to any of it. Thanks much.

In other words, the article is misleading. In this instance, the failed system is the private insurance company, as opposed to the Canadian system in general.

Are you certain your info is up to date in that Province?

The sources were quite confident in their facts in the whole of that article. I'm sure they were still human and therefore possibly flawed, wrong. But they were extremely confident of their facts in my reading it.

Are all Provinces identical in drug plans? Didn't sound like it, to me.

Originally posted by BO XIAN But the cradle to the grave mentality of the BIG SOCIALIST/COMMUNIST/GLOBALIST OLIGARCHY FEDERAL NANNY STATE is largely an excuse for powermongering elites to subjegate yet more masses to their mindless machine; neuter the individuality of persons; neuter the creativity and initiative of persons and generally grind them to powder in the cogs of their GREED POWER-MONGERING Machiavellian contraptions that never work--except to tax at higher and higher rates; waste at higher and higher percentages; bloat bureaucracies to higher and higher degrees . . . and generally send satan into rousing fits of laughter at man's stupid inhumanity to man in the name of "compassion."

Greed, selfishness, laziness, indolence, insecurity based--imobile--cowering wailing and whining never had more faithful allies than the DOOOOO--DOO-GOODER POLITICIANS eager to enlarge the machine . . . "for the children."

None of that for me. I'll share what I have and can remotely sanely share with whomever God drops in my lap. But none for the ingrown traitorous bureaucracy so eagerly selling us down the river to the globalists.

Jeez...around these parts we refer to them as "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition"

If you get a flood of patients if you'd change into socialized health care what does that say about the current situation? It says that only the wealthy are getting the care, a system I'd hate to live in. Say whatever you say about the socialized health care but few isolated instances dont speak for the system. No system is perfect.
Do you have any reliable source to prove those '2 year waiting times' for surgery and 'months to see a doctor'?. That sounds way more like a error or situation that isn't because of the system but because of individual mistake or something like that.
Socialised medicine doesn't mean automatically that everyone has to wait and perhaps die, unless there's something wrong locally.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Yes it costs more. But healthcare costs put our payments with taxes at 50% anyways.

Could you elaborate and explain that, clearly, please--maybe with some examples?

We already have a partial national system. It is medicair/medicaid. It works quite well. Other then the fraud factor they are working on, it often gets better reviews then the private sector.

From folks I've talked to, I'm not so sure. Seems like there are enough horror stories of fraud as well as needs that went unmet which were not remotely reasonable or honorable. Yes, evidently a lot of folks get some care they would not otherwise get. I'm glad for that. But the cost per authentic need reasonably met vs the fraud and unmet needs seems excessive, to me. Just from my limited layman's perspective.

It has been reviewed many times and after the initial 5 year setup, it is found that going to a national healthcare system will actually save taxpayers billions of dollars a year.
[edit on 31-7-2007 by nixie_nox]

I'd love to see those reviews and the documentation. My understanding is that the waste is horrendous.

I was part of a national health plan the last 6 or so years I was in Asia. It was a new plan and jointly paid into by individuals and employers. Self-employed paid a huge fee but were heavily coerced to do so, if I recall accurately.

The care was reasonable. There were MD's outside the system who charged USA rates. Many of us went to them individualy for some things as we felt we'd get closer scrutiny. And, one time, the hospital declined to take care of a matter I felt warranted it but it was not life threatening and I didn't fuss about it or fight the decision.

But there was, even in that short 6 years, a lot of bothering the system about things that didn't need professional medical care. That culture seems to be somewhat full of hypocondriacs anyway . . . but it's like every sniffle or slightly elevated temp needs major intervention. MD's prescribe a plethera of placebos, vitamins and unneeded drugs because if the patient leaves the office with less than a handful of prescribed pills, the patient will think the MD is not paying attention; a quack or just not good enough for repeat patronage.

I think socialized medical care is not well equipped to deal with such common perversities of human nature.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

As I said on another thread, my wife recently went into emergency at 3:00 am with an allergic reaction. She was seen right away, hooked up to all monitors, oxygen, 2 IVs, all drugs, an ultrasound, given what they call the million dollar treatment, total 8 hours there...plus follow up and several trips to an allergist. Price? Zippity doo-dah! Flashed the OHIP card which, if you're working, represents about $400-600 annually(max) depending on what you earn. Under $20 k...you don't pay. Even that's new...blame the Provincial Liberals. I'll stick with that system, though, if you don't mind.

[edit on 31-7-2007 by JohnnyCanuck]

So, I'm a right wing ideologue. Been called far worse.

In my book, it's a lot better than being a globalist stooge like Michael Moore et al.

I'm glad you had a good experience with your national health insurance.

Sounds like a lot of people don't experience it that way.

And, as I understand it from a number of thoughtful people skilled at economics as well as medical provider care . . . we could do tremendously better with the private system with some thoughtful and comprehensive reform AND STILL KEEP THE GOVERNMENT largely out of it.

Of course, we might have to ship many cruise ships full of lawyers off to Antarctica or Siberia or Mars or some such.

Maybe it's just me, but I figure that if you take the profit margin out of health care, that'll save you about 30% off the top. You know, that's the dough the HMOs make based upon your suffering. While Rudy doesn't see it as the American way, I don't see it as a particularly American to turn folks away from treatment 'cuz they can't pay...or not to see a doctor 'cuz they can't afford it. Y'all are better than that, and who knows that better than your upstairs neighbours, eh?

I think this is sooooo thoroughly misleading as to fall in the category of flagrantly lopsided propaganda.

I have NEVER observed nor heard of a government sponsored ANYTHING which did not exact far more than a generous profit margin from whatever enterprise it was involved in.

Bureaucracies are self-enhancing; self-bloating; self-aggrandizing; self-multiplying; self-enlarging; self-perpetuating; inherently power-mongering; inherently-enslaving; inherently wasteful; inherently corrupt.

The Soviet Union was ample proof. China is continuing proof. Government under the Klintoons for 8 years was additional proof--in a list of traitorous ways--thankfully the health care grab for additional enslaving power scheme of Shrillery was stopped--THAT TIME.

NO thanks. Not in my name. Not on my tax dollar.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
If you get a flood of patients if you'd change into socialized health care what does that say about the current situation? It says that only the wealthy are getting the care, a system I'd hate to live in.

NO. That's not the only explanation. I guess you didn't read all my posts. You didn't read the research about counseling and use of medical services vs no counseling and use of medical services. You evidently didn't read about the statistic cited by my cousin that half of all chiropractic patients basically have nothing wrong with them--they just want listened to; to be touched; to have some caring attention etc.

And that says nothing about the folks who live like they are suicidal fat mongerers; alcoholics; 3 pack a day smokers . . . with not a shred of an ability to pay for complications arising out of such and 100% expectation that everyone else will bail them out of their suicidal life styles.

No thanks, Sherlock.

Say whatever you say about the socialized health care but few isolated instances dont speak for the system. No system is perfect.
Do you have any reliable source to prove those '2 year waiting times' for surgery and 'months to see a doctor'?. That sounds way more like a error or situation that isn't because of the system but because of individual mistake or something like that.
Socialised medicine doesn't mean automatically that everyone has to wait and perhaps die, unless there's something wrong locally.

Welll, the last time I talked to my MD in Britain friend, She said such waiting times were fairly common. I understand it's worse since then but I haven't actually verified it. She asserted that such problems were system wide--not just local.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
Are all Provinces identical in drug plans?

No, not all provinces have identical drug treatment plans.

Suzanne Aucoin's story is an example that the same problems can exist in the US and Canadian systems - there are always going to be people who have exceptional needs that aren't covered. There are patients from Ontario that are having this treatment paid for, she's just not one of them. Because the drug is not approved for sale in Ontario yet, it doesn't show up on any of the 'covered' lists and the decision would have to be made on a case-by-case basis.

Most Canadians wouldn't even consider relying on the drug programs from the govt unless they were very low income - my province's doesn't kick in until I spend $600 a year. After that, I think I get 80% coverage. That's what we have extended medical (private insurance) for - prescriptions and dentists.

Originally posted by BO XIAN Of course, we might have to ship many cruise ships full of lawyers off to Antarctica or Siberia or Mars or some such.

Now yer talkin'!
Fact is, anecdotally, the system is precisely as good as your last experience. I haven't always ended up 100% chuffed, but I'll bet the HMOs can't claim that either. I'll tell you too, there's a bunch of US residents that hold on to their dual citizenships so that they can make the semi-annual trip to Canada to keep their health cards active...just in case they fall ill down there. It may be neither legal or fair...but it's indicative of where free choice ends up.

Bo, I hate to point out but do you really think that private insurance companies are any better than these corrupt bureaucracies?
I cant understand at all where this globalisation idea and slaving idea comes from? As far as I can tell that kind of thing hasn't happened in any countries where there is a socialized health care.
When it comes to "flagrantly lopsided propaganda" then I'd have to quote your own posts where you say "It seems like 98% of the comments hereon are blindly, blithely, uncritically, unthinkingly in behalf of socialism" and "From folks I've talked to, I'm not so sure. Seems like there are enough horror stories of fraud..." etc.
I dont stand for globalization or enslaving the individual, I stand for equality for all when it comes to the care they get. Is there any other method of achieving this I dont know, but to have your government take care of it has worked in many places. Any system in any place has it's weaknesses especially in the management. Corruption too sure, but as citizens you oughta be alert and if things look corrupt rise against that. Ideally you'd have a system where care is for everyone and problems like waiting in lines are aggressively solved.
I'd take a flawed socialized system over any private system at any time.

Originally posted by Duzey

Originally posted by BO XIAN
Are all Provinces identical in drug plans?

No, not all provinces have identical drug treatment plans.

Suzanne Aucoin's story is an example that the same problems can exist in the US and Canadian systems - there are always going to be people who have exceptional needs that aren't covered. There are patients from Ontario that are having this treatment paid for, she's just not one of them. Because the drug is not approved for sale in Ontario yet, it doesn't show up on any of the 'covered' lists and the decision would have to be made on a case-by-case basis.

Thanks tons for your kind reply.

I don't think it's the people "with exceptional needs" that are so concerning.

Virtually all the medical practitioners I've talked to in such systems have a list of horror stories of folks who had moderate, common needs--far too many of whom slid into the acute, dangerous even life-threatening category because of inherent systemic bureaucratic mindlessness and incapacities to overcome the inertia and clogged nature of the system in each of those cases.

And the medical practitioners I spoke with were utterly beside themselves and dismayed to the max--outraged--many even considering leaving medicine entirely because it kept them awake nights because of THEIR incapacities to help prevent worsening situations; care for urgent cases that needed it given their work load full of urgent cases etc. etc. etc.

My personal contacts lead me to believe that these cases are not isolated cases AT ALL.

Bo, you say you've talked to these people, could you provide names and details of the situations that have made them consider quitting?

this thread definatly seems misleading. there is not a lot of praise for the good of public health care.

the only time i ever hear about public health care being bad is in the media, never from people that rely on it.

One person i know had to wait 6 months to get disk fixed in his back, was it life threatening? hardly, if it was he would be operated on pronto, and would never see a bill for it. over half the country has a sore back, i didnt feel sorry for him at all.

I recently had a child, who had that luxery coming into this world surrounded by leather chairs, flat screen television and an onsuit bathroom the size of my living room. No charge.


a big help would be getting rid of these so called medical clinics that are no more than bonified administrators that are charging dortor fees for a scrible on a peice if paper. there waiting rooms are constantly full, and they are not treating anyone, just taking thier information and sending them to a REAL doctor. how much do paralegals make? cause they do a hell of a lot more than these clinical doctors. One of them tried to bill my lawyer $1600 to read an x-ray and write down what he saw.

I could never give you articles that back up what i say because they are only experiences and they dont go along with the obviouse motives to destroy canadain healthcare. Im sick of being threatened to take away a system that has not let anyone i know down completely once.


I suppose next someone will tell me that private prisons are better for the public too. less burdon on taxpayers right?

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Bo, I hate to point out but do you really think that private insurance companies are any better than these corrupt bureaucracies?

Every HMO I've ever belonged to gave me far better care for far less money than the government system I was a part of. And, I had options in terms of providers that don't seem to be an inherent part of government systems at all--certainly not often.

I cant understand at all where this globalisation idea and slaving idea comes from? As far as I can tell that kind of thing hasn't happened in any countries where there is a socialized health care.

Stay tuned. Shrillery Klintoon really did envision a mandatory health care system which would have used medical records and the monitoring of medical records to insure that corrupt traitorous folks like her and hubby could manipulate all and sundry to their destructive ends just like they used the FBI files on their enemies to do.

Perhaps you remember that she swore under oath that she didn't know anything about such files . . . only to have them found months to a year or 3 later in the private closet in her private quarters in the White House--and she incredulously insisted she didn't know how they got there. And she got away with it.

You want to trust that kind of globalist, socialist, communist champion with all your data in a national health care system--especially when they begin to insist that your health records and financial and tax records must be put on a rice sized computer chip and injected into your body to combat terrorism and for efficiency's sake . . . not to mention 24/7 monitoring's sake. ???

Count me out--very out. I'll choose death first.

When it comes to "flagrantly lopsided propaganda" then I'd have to quote your own posts where you say "It seems like 98% of the comments hereon are blindly, blithely, uncritically, unthinkingly in behalf of socialism" and "From folks I've talked to, I'm not so sure. Seems like there are enough horror stories of fraud..." etc..

Welllll, that's my personal EXPERIENCE.

Are you trying to tell me I didn't experience what I experienced?

Guess what--I'll trust my experience and my assessment and interpretation of my experience over your description of my experience any day, week, month, year, decade, century.

Prior to this thread, routhly 98% of the comments I'd read on ATS about such were glowingly in favor of national health insurance . . . seemingly, to my criteria--rather blindly, unthinkingly so. . . . and often rather uninformedly so, as far as I could tell.

And, similarly, my unscientific sampling of medical practitioner friends in national health care countries have all been on one side of the issue. Not out of greed--but out of anguish over the shoddy treatment they've seen countless patients have to endure.

I figure those medical practitioners in such roles for many years have a perspective and a view point that I'll trust considerably more than I'm ready to trust yours.


[edit on 31/7/2007 by BO XIAN]

Socialized medicine is not what people want you to think it is. Are you really willing to wait weeks or months just to be able to see a doctor?

I've been in and out of the Canadian health care system my whole life and when I call my General Practitioner the average wait time is about a couple of days(when I call she always bumps less urgent cases forward as I have chronic conditions that need constant monitoring). When I go for specialist checkups, the average wait time is a couple of weeks. For bloodwork, the results take a week to get back to me through regular means and through the hospitol it's the same day. The only bottleneck I ever encountered were in Triage waiting to see a Doctor to see you and in the MRI/Ultrasound department due to a shortage of trained personel at the time(I have not had this problem recently however so they must've hired more techs at my local hospitol). I hear the stories of people waiting months to see specialists but I have only ever knew one whom this happened too and when her condition got worse she got bumped up to the head of the list.

^^^^^^

thank you... finally someone possitive.

Originally posted by vox2442
Canadian health care does not cover drugs per se. Drugs are substantially cheaper overall thanks to government intervention, but reimbursement - the complaint in the article - is the responsibility of employee health plans and personal insurance policies and so forth.

All I know about Canadian health care is that a few Canadians I know come to the US for their medical needs. Too long a wait and from what I understood, the government decided whether of not you could get certain treatments.

My questions:
Why in the world would you need a private insurance if you have national health care
Excluding the drug issue.

How would you cut the head off the giant medical lobby to bring prices down? As it stands, there is no way for any kind of affordable health care in the US.
I would have to get a second job to offset the huge increase in my income tax to support this fiasco.

Bo, I wasn't trying to interpretatite your experience for you, just pointing out that you speak as if your posts aren't the same, with the opposite view
If the government abuses the socialised patient information somewhere that isn't the health systems fault. That's a form of corruption that has to be rooted out from the rest of the government too. I haven't heard of such abuse in any socialised system, but just as in a private system it could exist. Your personal data isn't any safer in a private hospital than it is in a government run hospital.
If you use that as an argument against the socialized system then you have to target the real problem, the government itself.

Well that's quite alot to respond to. I will say this though, anyone remember the story from about a month or so ago about the woman who died in an emergency room while nurses stood by watching? Anyone? Well I sure do, and I can tell you that # doesn't happen in Canada, sorry to burst your bubble, but its called HEALTHcare for a reason, because its about HEALTH. In the US, it should be called MONEYcare, because that's what its all about there, faceless corporations deciding who gets care and who doesn't.

Bo... after reading your last post, it seems to me that you just refuse to support anything on a federal level. I don t blame you but seriously... you would rather trust private insurace corps that will, because they can and have to in order to survive competitive business, try to manipulate you into viciouse treatment circles.

Yes the government tries to manipulate us (im talking about canada, the US straite violates its citizens) that is their job, and if we dont like, we know who to damand be replaced.

In the private sector, it will get to thick too fast and once it starts no politician is going to go up against the lobbies that support private healthcare, it only seems innocent now while we defend ourselves agaist them, but it will be a whole new ball game once we need to take it away from them.