I am completely confused when it comes to this health care situation, and I was wondering if anyone can help me sort it all out. I live in Canada. I have universal health care. I had though that the original idea was to make your health care more like ours, but i think that its gotten all skewed somewhere along the line. Here in Canada I have a health card that I show at the doctor's or at a hospital, I can go see any doctor i choose, go to any hospital I choose, and get help without having to pay. We do have to pay for prescriptions, but they're not obscene amounts of money or anything, working people are able to pay, and if you're not working and receiving public assistance, your costs are totally covered. Employers have "benefits" packages available to employees at very very low costs (my last job it was around 15 bucks a month). i had the majority of prescription prices covered, eye care covered, dental...i've never seen anyone in need of immediate or urgent care have to wait, I have NEVER felt as though my freedom is being taken away or jeopardized in any way. i just have some questions i guess...

1) is the new proposed idea for health care supposed to be similar to the care here in Canada?

2) Why are so many people opposed to this type of health care?

I've been hearing that taxes will be going up, mandatory vaccines...also a lot of what im hearing is that people would love this type of health care but they dont want it to come at their expense or their freedom. you already pay high taxes, so i cant understand why they're charging more. I mean, in my train of thought...people in the US i think pay higher taxes than canadians right? so not only should your health care already be free, but you should have more perks than we do!

but this type of health care would mean that people who are unable to pay would get help. this would, well, *theoretically* it would mean more people being treated and less people dying, and less control from the insurance companies. it does seem to mean however, that people who make higher incomes will have to pay higher rates to help out fellow americans who are unable to pay...so people are angry because their being asked to help someone else out? i really hope thats not the real reason people are against this, because that makes me very sad. Being asked to help out a person in need shouldnt be cause for someone to get angry...it should be cause to get out there and help people. but dont get me wrong...i firmly believe that the people in power who have more money than god need to be taking some pay cuts and helping out their fellow americans too. i just think that everyone who is able to help financially should be helping and everyone who needs help financially should be getting help. the concepts of "look out for yourself first" and "every man for himself" need to be done away with. that way of thinking is what caused all this mess in the first place...

Thank you!

Not touching this with a ten foot pole. In fact, could someone come to my house RIGHT NOW and remove my hands from the keys so I can't even post THIS? If you are "truly" from Canada, (Get ready to prove it, otherwise they will not give you even a chance at your original questions), I don't even know where to start. Tax is a dirty word here in the U.S., and short of taxes, there is nothing to pay for a public option. America as a "Government" is really giving, AMERICANS as people are......well...really damned selfish.

:: slaps his cheating hands..... ::

I see you joined in march of this year.

First thread huh?

Canadian just wondering why we stupid Americans are so against the almighty government plan huh?

Do not feed the TROLLS PEOPLE!


edit to add-look at this person's posts it will give you an idea of their positions on everything

[edit on 11/9/2009 by endisnighe]

"less control from the insurance companies" as you stated and less profit by the pharmaceutical corporations are the main reasons we don't have
decent healthcare here now and as far as I can tell it's THEIR puppets objecting....not us!!

Originally posted by devilishlyangelic23
1) is the new proposed idea for health care supposed to be similar to the care here in Canada?

2) Why are so many people opposed to this type of health care?

Originally posted by endisnighe
[minisnip]
Canadian just wondering why we stupid Americans are so against the almighty government plan huh?

Do not feed the TROLLS PEOPLE!

edit to add-look at this person's posts it will give you an idea of their positions on everything
[edit on 11/9/2009 by endisnighe]

It doesn't surprise me that you're confused - to me, it seems you've just tried to pose your questions as clear as possible, but the above poster seems to judge your intention by the way you posed the questions. Confusing, indeed; but also a part of the answer.
If you'll allow for me exaggerating a 'bit', I think part of the fuss made about the 'socialist' kind of health care is purely socio-emotional in nature. For example, America has had a tradition of cultivating anti-socialist sentiments in many of it's subcultures, and any change that makes America more 'socialist' will in first instance be viewed as a change for the worse. In a lesser way, the same goes for 'helping others'; the 'American dream' is not about becoming Mother Theresa - it's about becoming famous, or rich, or begetting any other such egotastical attribute. It's not that the average American is appalled by the thought of helping another human being; it's the way it's portrayed socio-emotionally in his or her subculture. Some subcultures might reject the idea by focusing on the aspect of 'throwing money at illegal aliens' while others may actually argue that those who cannot take care of themselves should perish; but of course when their best pal happens to be a broke illegal alien with appendicitis, they'd be happy to spend a dime to save his life. Although their arguments can very well be valid, I feel like most of the fuss is more of a socio-emotional thing than a cognitive thing; in addition, when asked, people probably give an emotional response a lot easier than a well-formulated logical conclusion and/or argument to what is wrong with the idea, as shown above by endisnighe.

Of course I'm not implying that there are no valid arguments against this type of health care - don't be offended, I'm just reporting back what I think I'm seeing
Does that sparkle with you?

Ok I'll tell you right up front the real reason people are so against this plan.

First off it was supposed to be universal health care, (Back during Clinton's term) Now, it's become Health Care Reform with a Public Option. The reasons that the right is so against this is because the left supports it. Now if it were that simple people would have maybe a 20 page bill to mull over, the elected representatives would debate, get input from their constituents and make an informed bi partisan decision whether or not this is the way that America should go.

Unfortunately in this country we have companies that for some reason feel that they should have a larger say so to our congress than the voter. So they send lobbyists, they also bribe our legislative branch by way of "Campaign Contributions" So each member is wrestling with all these conflicting viewpoints, and they also have re elections to think about, so it's a tough decision, but they make it in the best interest of their corporate masters most of the time. This is how a simple 20 page bill can balloon into a 2000 page monster, with amendments tacked onto it for the sole purpose of making it presumably insane to vote for.

Now corporations can't rely on lobbyists alone to do the dirty deed. They also need public opinion to sway the voters to tell their representatives to vote against this. So they do nifty PSA's they "leak" information to trustworthy news outlets, they use stacked public opinion polls, they throw everything including the kitchen sink and some yesterdays news failed politician at this just to sway public opinion to go their way.

News organizations are fundamental in the bill passage process. They give the public a clear view on how the politicians want the public to think about the bill. People already have chosen their poison in the form of pundits on whatever network they feel they can trust. (In my opinion the word Pundit is a Greek word meaning bull poo artist) They will make up useless polls to try and justify their claims. Now the funny thing about polls is, they target the people they are polling. If they want the poll to show in favor of the legislation they will poll in areas that would be more favorable to that legislation, and just the opposite if they want the poll to show that the "majority" are against it. So in all reality polls are a completely made up number. Completely useless and garbage air time to make it look like news reporters are doing something.

The best you can hope for in a bill situation is a protest. News media LOVES protesters. Now media uses protesters in a couple different ways, if the protest is leaning the way the media wants to portray the bill at hand, they will find the most informed person (or at least the most brainwashed person) in the crowd to repeat the talking points the news organization has already been spewing. On the other side of the political media isle, they will try and find the biggest idiot with the largest sign they can so they can publicly humiliate him and therefore drive home their point.

(See Joe the Plumber for more information)

Now congressmen are going to vote whichever way they want anyway, they after all are paid liars and are really only interested in getting re elected. So they tend to vote their party line. Especially the minority party which is only there to really make the majority look bad. But to keep up the illusion of a two party system, the opposition lately has thrown one of their own to the wolves to vote against the party.

This last vote in the House was perfect political theater at it's best. We had Blue Dog democrats voting against the bill but miraculously just enough to pass the legislation with that Maverick Republican voting for it. I suspect you will see the same thing when it gets to the Senate It's going to be the same damn thing and I predict that this legislation will just squeak by.

Once the Senate version passes, then it's time for the House and Senate to come up with a compromise bill, (which indecently will be nothing like either bill and the real legislation will be voted on) This bill of course will in all reality really screw Americans by forcing each and every one of us to purchase Health insurance from a private company as if we were automobiles. Now it's not going to allow insurance companies to cut their losses by dropping people that are high risk or have pre-existing conditions, so it will of course allow the insurance companies to jack up your rates as much as they want, and so the public option comes into play which is more or less medicare, and everyone's taxes will be hiked because of it.

But once it becomes law, people will of course forget about it till the 2010 elections where each senator and representative that is up for office will have to defend his position against the opposition which will use their vote against them, telling you that what they did was wrong and when they get into office they will do things differently, which of course is a complete and total lie. But they put people in there that you will believe and the most convincing liar wins.

Then it will go away again until the presidential elections and no matter how it turns out Obama's opponent will try and show that Obama dropped the ball on it. Obama will then again be painted in the most horrific light possible and then the people vote.

Ain't American politics AWESOME!

Originally posted by crmanager

The basis of your post is that Americans DO leave ours behind....This idea that "No fear of medical cost driving you bankrupt" is fanciful at best. It is bankrupting your nation.

No, the basis for my post is that we do not consider it to be 'free'...and to suggest we don't know that is rather disingenuous. It's insurance...without a 30% profit margin built in for Big Health and Wall Street. I pay about $500 a year for my family in a recent surcharge...hidden in tax credits so it doesn't show or hurt, on top of my regular income tax. It ain't perfect, and it requires responsible management which is often tough to manage...

But the only folks telling us how un-sustainable the system is are the folks who are aching to make money out of the system.

Bottom line? My cancer cured for $32 out-of-pocket. Stack that up against my mother-in-law's former job at a New Jersey hospital...arranging mortgages so patients could pay their bills.

That, mon ami, is why we just don't get it...which is the nature of the Original Post.

Originally posted by crmanager
The fact that you believe that removing profit is good is in fact offensive.

Not here...why should we enrich Bay Street (our Wall Street) at the expense of our illness? Does everything have to make money? That is the difference between our two countries, and that is...once again...the point of the original post. That is why the poster is 'completely confused.'

self edit to add that the $32 to cure my cancer was for parking at the Cancer Centre.

[edit on 9-11-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]

Firstly, thank you to all the people who have helped me with the responses explaining the systems and how the whole process works. i very much appreciate it.

secondly. how am i supposed to "prove" to you that im canadian? photo copy my birth certificate just so some random person believes me? thats silly. also. im not a "troll" yes i only joined the site this year. i had been searching through threads and reading things here for at least a year prior. and why is this my first thread? well...i was curious and i wasnt able to find the answer. but thank you to everyone who have now made me feel bad for posting this. and thank you for your intimidation. i dont get intimidated. so call "troll" all you want. I am also aware that its not "technically free" i was just stating that if i have to go to the doctor, or the emergency room *of my choice* i can leave there, having gotten the help i needed, and never have to see a bill for it. so for me...the average Canadian, its free. i do not have to pay for a doctors visit. if i need x-rays, i dont pay, if i needed surgery i dont pay. It comes straight from our taxes. thats how our health care is paid.

and I can agree with what JohnnyCanuck has said. $32 bucks out of pocket to cure cancer here. and THAT was for parking. thats the way it is. if we need medical help we get it...done. no questions asked. i guess i'll just never understand why other people wouldnt want that. to know that if you need help its there at no extra cost to you.

again, thank you everyone for the replies!

]

That is the point. You truly believe that CANCER was cured for a total cost of $32. SOMEONE PAID FOR YOUR MEDICINE. Other Canadians took time from their families, sweat and hungered so YOU were not financially inconvenienced. YOU took from others so YOUR life was eased.

How much could have been done with the staggering taxes taken from your nations people. Why couldn't YOU prepare for trouble? Why couldn't YOU have catastrophic insurance? Why must OTHERS pay for you?

And why have so many of your fellow citizens crossed the border to America to receive the care you were given so promptly and inexpensively? Why was the lack of expense NOT an issue to people who were in prompt need? You are Happy? Great. I am willing to forward a supposition...Many Canadians dispise paying YOUR medical bills.

yes. the nations taxes contributed toward that cure for cancer. we dont have that mentality here of "you take care of your own because no one else will take care of you" we take care of each other. canadians are well aware that what comes out of our taxes is to help the country and all the people in it. my tax money could end up helping another person in another province on the other side of the country. thats fine with me. because i know that if i ever need care, that i can get the same care from the same taxes without any hassle. i know that i personally dont mind paying for this in my taxes. and actually...i dont know any other canadians personally that see a problem with their tax money going toward a person in need. because they all also understand that one day they're going to need that same care. and that they're going to get that care without a dent in their bank account. I personally do not know anyone that has gone across the border for medical care. yes, im sure that people do that...i just haven't ever met anyone that *needed* to do that. and i know a lot of people who've had a plethora of serious medical issues.

sure his cancer was cured by money collected from others. we know this. we are ok with this. because one day...the people who paid for us will need to have their procedure paid for. and we'll be the ones paying. thats just the way it is...we help each other out. i guess that the mentalities in the countries are just too different to find some sort of understanding regarding this issue. because i cant understand the idea of only taking care of yourself and it seems some in the US cant understand our mentality of providing help to others. so i guess we'll all have to agree to disagree

Originally posted by devilishlyangelic23
sure his cancer was cured by money collected from others. we know this. we are ok with this. because one day...the people who paid for us will need to have their procedure paid for. and we'll be the ones paying.

Good comments, well said.

Let's not forget that I have been working for over 35 years, myself, and paying taxes all the while.

thats just the way it is...we help each other out. i guess that the mentalities in the countries are just too different to find some sort of understanding regarding this issue.

Jeez, if they get this wound up over Universal Health Care, they'ed really bust a nut over Provincial Equalisation Payments...