Senate bill fines people refusing health coverage, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 16 times


reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 12:39 AM by ElectricUniverse
Canadians Running to U.S. for Health Care
Canada, we are constantly being told by single-payer advocates, is a model social democracy with a medical delivery system that we should envy. Oddly, the people who make such claims never want to answer a question that Bill Steigerwald reiterates in a recent column:

If Canada’s national health care system is so dang wonderful, why are so many Canadians coming to America to pay for their own medical care?

And it’s not only pregnant women, like the one who recently had to drive to Montana to have her baby, who cross into the U.S. on a daily basis seeking health care. Thus, Steigerwald inquires further:

Why is the hip replacement center of Canada in Ohio–at the Cleveland Clinic, where 10% of its international patients are Canadians … Why is Brain and Spine Center in Buffalo serving about 10 border-crossing Canadians a week?

By way of answering his own questions, Steigerwald provides the following datum:

Number of Canadians on waiting lists for referrals to specialists or for medical services–875,000.

It would appear that Canadians with sufficient financial means are seeking medical treatment in a country where such waiting lists exist only in the the fond dreams of single-payer advocates.

And what about the Canadians who don’t have the money to come here for care? I guess they just pray that their illnesses don’t kill them before the vaunted Canadian system can fit them in.

www.healthcarebs.com...

But hey, i guess just because liberals CLAIM that a "free" Socialized healthcare system is perfect, it must be heh?

I wonder what sort of trees Canadians have that grow money? I mean, how do you pay for "free" Socialized healthcare?

Can a Canadian please send me one or two tree seedlings of these trees that grow money?

By Hilary White

OTTAWA, November 14, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A new study has revealed that the Canadian government will spend $171.9-billion this year on health care, or $5,170 per person. At this rate health care spending is expected to grow faster than Canada’s economy, outpacing inflation and population growth, according to Glenda Yeates, President and CEO of the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI), which released the study yesterday.

Demographers have warned that the aging and slow growth of the Canadian population is a direct threat to the long-term prognosis of its raft of expensive, publicly funded social services, including its health care system.

www.lifesitenews.com...


Ooops, I guess Canadians do not have trees that grow money, my bad....

Here is an example of a Canadian politician coming to the U.S. for medical treatment...

Stronach went to U.S. for cancer treatment: report
Updated Fri. Sep. 14 2007 7:57 AM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Liberal MP Belinda Stronach, who is battling breast cancer, travelled to California last June for an operation that was recommended as part of her treatment, says a report.

Stronach's spokesman, Greg MacEachern, told the Toronto Star that the MP for Newmarket-Aurora had a "later-stage" operation in the U.S. after a Toronto doctor referred her.

"Belinda had one of her later-stage operations in California, after referral from her personal physicians in Toronto. Prior to this, Belinda had surgery and treatment in Toronto, and continues to receive follow-up treatment there," said MacEachern.

www.ctv.ca...

But hey, I guess since the Obama administration claim that a "free" Socialized healthcare will work perfect here, it must be so right?

Even President Obama the Messiah claims that it will work perfectly....

Well, except when you read the fact that under President Obama's "free" Socialized healthcare the GOVERNMENT, and not doctors, will decide what sort of treatments patients will have, if they are economically affordable.

What about the elderly? Well, just forget about them, because under President Obama's "free" Socialized healthcare.

Obama Says We Shouldn't Treat Old Folks to Save Money And the Media Goes Deaf
By Warner Todd Huston (Bio | Archive)
June 26, 2009 - 01:19 ET

I am wondering when the euthanasia folks are going to start touting this one? I mean, it sure seemed to me as if the most caring, most civil, most intelligent president evah just said that healthcare could be cheaper if we don't give old folks and the infirm the full measure of care they now get. It appeared that Obama said we should just let them die or suffer because they aren't worth the effort. Imagine if Bush had said something like this? The left wouldn't have hesitated to call him any manner of names. Oddly, though, the Old Media have not had so much as a raised eyebrow over his statements on Wednesday.

Obama said during the ABC Special on Wednesday night that a way to save healthcare costs is to abandon the sort of care that "evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve" the patient's health. He went on to say that he had personal familiarity with such a situation when his grandmother broke her hip after she was diagnosed with terminal cancer.

[size=4]Obama offered a question on the efficacy of further care for his grandmother saying, "and the question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?[/size]"

But who is it that will present the "evidence" that will "show" that further care is futile? Are we to believe that Obama expects individual doctors will make that decision in his bold new government controlled healthcare future? If he is trying to make that claim it is a flat out untruth and he knows it.

newsbusters.org...

Phew, President Obama sure is a very compassionate man...even towards the elderly in his own family...

So who wants to cheer for President Obama's new "FREE" Socialized healthcare?....




[edit on 3-7-2009 by ElectricUniverse]


reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 01:13 AM by lagenese
reply to post by ElectricUniverse



I never said the canadian system was perfect. You did not understand what i wrote. The money system is to blame, we do not need that. We're probably the only planet in this galaxy, and maybe even the universe that uses currency... And we're probably the only planet that has such a low level of consciousness...


reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 01:19 AM by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by lagenese




Oh really? So you have visited other planes, and seen what sort of economic system they have?

When is the next trip to one of those planets so i can see it myself?



reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 01:31 AM by lagenese
reply to post by ElectricUniverse



Well, i see that you don't believe, and that is good. You'll have to experiment on your own i guess.

Peace


reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 01:36 AM by drwizardphd
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

But hey, I guess since the Obama administration claim that a "free" Socialized healthcare will work perfect here, it must be so right?

Even President Obama the Messiah claims that it will work perfectly....

Well, except when you read the fact that under President Obama's "free" Socialized healthcare the GOVERNMENT, and not doctors, will decide what sort of treatments patients will have, if they are economically affordable.



I'm sorry if I sound offensive, but have you been paying attention at all?

Obama's plan is the farthest thing from Socialism you could imagine! (Believe me, I hate it too.)

It's not free (no healthcare system in any country is, mind you), and it's not run by the government at all. Read about the plan before you comment, because it's much worse than you think it is. Seriously, you will want to throw up.

The government won't decide anything, except how much to fine you when you don't buy insurance. The insurance companies, on the other hand, will still be making all of the decisions. This time, however, you will be forced to buy into it. The doctors have never had a say in America, it has always been the insurance industry and it always will be. They have so much money invested in our elected representatives, that the doctors will always play runner-up to the bureaucrats.

I know you have a major problem with universal healthcare, because you seem to spend a good deal of your time here dissing it, but there is no way an educated individual could possibly think the insurance companies are a more reliable decision.

I honestly want to know your opinion on this. Given the option between government-run healthcare, and insurance company-run healthcare, which would you prefer? (And please don't quote more right-wing sources denouncing Canadian healthcare. Most Canadians who actually live in Canada prefer their system, so outside opinions are relatively moot in that respect).


reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 01:50 AM by operation mindcrime



reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 01:56 AM by lagenese
reply to post by ElectricUniverse



Let it go dude. If i was to explain how i got this knowledge, you still would not believe. This will be my last reply to you by the way.


reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 02:11 AM by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by drwizardphd



It is SOCIALISM, and the Government will decide who gets treatment, and what sort of treatment people can get.

Nationalizing the healthcare, is Socializing it. Just like Nationalizing GM was Socializing it.

Obama discusses deathbed measures
At a healthcare town hall, he says stopping futile procedures for the terminally ill can lower costs.

By Peter Nicholas
June 25, 2009
Reporting from Washington -- President Obama suggested at a town hall event Wednesday night that one way to shave medical costs is to stop expensive and ultimately futile procedures performed on people who are about to die and dont stand to gain from the extra care.

In a nationally televised event at the White House, Obama said families need better information so they dont unthinkingly approve "additional tests or additional drugs that the evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve care."

He added: "Maybe youre better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller."

Obama said he has personal familiarity with such a dilemma. His grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, was diagnosed with terminal cancer and given less than nine months to live, he said.

She fell and broke her hip, "and the question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?"

Obama's grandmother died two days before he was elected president in November. It was unclear whether she underwent the hip-replacement surgery.

www.latimes.com...

That's coming from President Obama's mouth itself....




[edit on 3-7-2009 by ElectricUniverse]


reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 02:21 AM by drwizardphd
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to
post by drwizardphd



It is SOCIALISM, and the Government will decide who gets treatment, and what sort of treatment people can get.

Nationalizing the healthcare, is Socializing it. Just like Nationalizing GM was Socializing it.



Ok, I'm not going to bother replying any further since you are too freaking ignorant to read the bill before you go off a tirade about it.

www.whitehouse.gov...

It's a terrible, terrible plan. He is not nationalizing it, it is still privatized through the insurance companies. Health care will be no more nationalized than auto insurance. It will, however, be more expensive and less successful. You apparently do not want to read what the plan is, so when you call it 'SOCIALISM', you are only displaying your ignorance. You wouldn't know Socialism if somebody slapped you with the Communist Manifesto.

Have fun living in your own little world.


reply posted on 3-7-2009 @ 03:25 AM by stander
reply to post by MysterE


LOL. That's only the beginning. Obama will "restructure" the country from sea to shining sea the way that some folks would have a hard time to find Chicago on the map. Ahahaha . . .

This decision may impact the economy, coz the law will diminish the spending power of those mostly younger individuals who are confident about their health. The law could bring problems to low income families depending on what the Congress cooks up for them. The folks would be forcefully handed over to those medical insurance hawks who will teach the buyers a lesson about a fine print. No decent politician would force the people to do business with a private sector. Have the government handle the insurance; just don't force the folks to do business with crooked American corporate world. How about penalizing the people for not buying GM cars? Coming next?

Obama is on his way to invent new economy/political system -- some cross between hard capitalism and socialism. But the outcome would surely look like an offspring of zebra and tiger -- some kind of monster that the world will shake its head over.

I really wonder how the results of Obama's home improvement enthusiasm would look like around 2012. LOL.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^