View Poll Results: Is the left's war on health care doomed?

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    13 44.83%
  • No

    8 27.59%
  • Maybe

    8 27.59%
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

  1. #31
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,124

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    If I remember correctly Bill Gates alone contributes to charities twice as much as the US government does. How is that political?

    It's really funny to hear someone that doesn't live in the US try to talk smack about how Americans are greedy sob's that only care about themselves. If that was true then I wouldn't be against the UHCP. Know why? Because it would mean free medical for me at the expense of others. Sounds like a great idea to a selfish person. It would be wonderful to get Lasik surgery done on my eyes so I didn't have to wear glasses. It would be great to afford a dentist to get my teeth fixed. It would be great to get help with my acid reflux problem. It would be great to beable to afford help to quit smoking. I've tried on my own many a times. I'm one of those that need help with it.

    So why exactly am I against the current UHCP? Because the systems that we already have in place can be sufficent to do what needs to be done if it MUST be done. If fixed and modified a bit instead. Which would cost far less money. It would also, if done properly, not cost anyone their rights. I also believe in EARNING what you get and not making others pay for it. One reason why I don't have a credit card.

    Now tell me who is selfish? The ones that want others to pay for what they want? Or the ones that works their butts off to get what they want and believe in individual freedom?


    I agree with you completely.

    There are problems with our health care system, but this bill is NOT the way to fix them. In fact, it would likely just feed those problems more money, making them bigger.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    This is all assuming UHC would help accomplish those ends. Allowing the US government - the paragon of waste, corruption, and inefficiency - to assume control of twenty percent of our economy is pure madness.
    Corporate control over your health care is not doing such a great job either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    I never implied such a thing. I merely pointed out that our military might has been used to defeat the most evil movements in recent history. I find it terribly strange that a person from Canada has so little appreciation for American military prowess.
    This paragraph has nothing to do with what I said about the military budget.

    Please cite where I said I don't appreciate the U.S. military.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    America's domestic economic issues arise from too much government, period. More government isn't going to solve any of our problems.
    No, your economic issues arise from lack of regulation, thanks to the Reagan era and the successive administrations that followed; they also arise from the existence of your Federal Reserve. Clinton and Bush in particular contributed GROSSLY to deregulation which was what caused the most recent collapses on Wall Street.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    There's this thing, it's called health insurance, not sure if you've heard of it before. It's relatively inexpensive and can finance treatment for a wide array of illnesses and such.
    Thanks for the tutorial... Canada also has private health insurance. Not only is it cheaper thanks to the existence of UHC, it is far more regulated by healthy competition. You don't see insurance companies screwing over people with the fine print nearly as much as you see in the U.S. Also, private insurance has no right to tell me what doctor I can see, what procedures I can have done, and being forced to choose between the repair of an organ or the removal of an organ based on what kind of plan I have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Also, the Berlin Wall fell in the early nineties. The threat of Communism wasn't some abstract threat from a distant, distant past.
    You still fail to demonstrate why that has anything to do with the creation of UHC in the U.S.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Has any country with UHC demonstrated a decrease in costs, ever?
    I am tired of answering this question. Do your own research.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Yes, we're cry babies. Us people who don't run to the government every time we need or want something. Such whiners...
    It isn't the same as social welfare for people who can't find jobs or who are disabled. This is the health of the people, your fellow citizens. The fact that this goes right over your head demonstrates the gross cultural differences between your country and the countries with UHC. All you care about is yourselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    I find this distortion of logic disturbing actually. I'm asking to be left alone by people who would take what is rightfully mine and they call ME a whiner!?
    Point proven. What is "rightfully yours". The very attitude I was talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Then why do wealthy people come to America when they need a specialist or some exotic procedure performed? That's not usually an indication of a crappy health care system.
    This is a myth widely perpetuated by the anti-UHC activists in the United States. As I have already demonstrated with data in previous threads, a negligible number of people come from Canada to the U.S. for procedures. Even with the wait times, people would rather wait and get free treatment than get their treatment sooner at high cost.

    Again, do your research. You don't know what you are talking about.

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Please learn to use quotes properly... it is difficult to divide up the post since my previous comments are also included in your block paragraphs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Busted View Post

    To a certain extent, you are, at least, partially correct. When the will is there, we can accomplish anything. We, however, do not have the will to support those who do not wish to support themselves. We do not have the will to provide the mechanism for people to fail. We do not have the will to create a process that will enslave the poor to the government. We do not have the will to create a methodology for redistribution of assets based on lack of contribution to the overall societal good. We do not have a will to create a mechanism that will reward non-performance while penalizing those who are most responsible for the advancement of our society.
    Yes, the whole spiel about how your rights are being infringed upon because people expect their taxes to go towards their health. That is one way of looking at it.

    Or you could look at the advancement of your society being placed into the hands of everyone, and not just a select few. One method of accomplishing this is to ensure that everyone is HEALTHY. Wow, what a concept. A person who cannot afford a specific procedure to be performed to recover their health will be a drain to the system and their community anyway. A disabled family member has to apply to the government for benefits... their families have to take care of them, reducing their own productivity, etc.

    Even people WITH private insurance can be screwed over in this regard. If every single American didn't have to worry about the state of their health, then your society would advance hugely. Something similar can be said of your public education. America falls behind in both these departments compared to all the other developed nations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Busted View Post
    Your premise that the lack of "sharing" constitutes lack of "caring" is nothing more than a rhyme, and carries no logical weight whatsoever. Further, I would suggest that until such time as you consider the level of voluntary sharing, you really have no argument whatsoever.
    That's exactly what it means, and by sharing I don't just mean sharing money. Actually, throwing money at things tends to accomplish very little... but how many Americans volunteer their TIME to their local communities? Not very many. When Obama suggested mandatory community service as part of high school diplomas, everyone threw up their arms in outrage. Once again, people are selfish.

    Quote Originally Posted by Busted View Post

    I guess that would depend on YOUR definition of "successful", wouldn't it?
    The U.S. falls woefully behind in the health and education sectors. So yes, it is not succeeding in either of these departments.

    Quote Originally Posted by Busted View Post
    Thank you. You finally got it. I find it interesting, however, that you come from a country that exists simply by its good fortune of geography, that lives under the defense umbrella provided by the United States, and whose economy is so inextricably entwined with the US economy, a country whose "social" programs are funded with money saved from providing for their own common defense. Maybe being a leader allows us a clearer picture than that of being a follower ... "if you ain't the lead dog, the scenery is all the same."
    I would like to point out that Canada's guarantee of UHC is part of its charter of rights and freedoms, a document which has existed long before the U.S. and Canada became functional allies. So, regardless if the U.S. was there to protect us or not, our government would, by virtue of our constitution, HAVE to provide us with UHC.

    You also overlook the fact that, while the U.S. does indeed provide a lot of military support to Canada, so does NATO as a whole. Our block of countries provides a deterrent to prevent incursion from other states. Secondary to that, defense of Canada is in the mutual interest of the United States. Under NAFTA, many of our resources and assets are shared. If Canada is attacked, the U.S. loses also. Our defense is your defense, so let's not operate under some pretense and it's a one-way street.

    And finally, the U.S. is highly dependant upon Canada's pharmaceutical industry to provide cheaper drugs because your own health care industry is too busy ripping you off via the patent system, a system which your government refuses to refine. So before you arrogantly assume that Canada is some kind of leech whose communist/socialist utopia is protected by the almighty U.S., you might want to consider the bilateral relationship first. Thanks.
    Last edited by Orion; 07-29-09 at 02:02 AM.

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Corporate control over your health care is not doing such a great job either.
    This doesn't change the immutable fact that the US government is massively corrupt and inefficient. It's easy for you to advocate UHC in America when you don't actually have to worry about the vast empowerment and centralization of authority it represents.

    And what proof do you have that the current system is less efficient or effective than other systems?

    Are you going to wow me with the grossly exaggerated uninsured figure, or are you going to cite skewed statistics about infant mortality rates and average life expectancy vs. other modern nations? If so, do not waste your time because I will debunk any such arguments with alacrity.

    This paragraph has nothing to do with what I said about the military budget.

    Please cite where I said I don't appreciate the U.S. military.
    Whatever. My original point was that our massive military has provided the world with numerous tangible benefits. That's all. Anyway, I don't care to discuss the military any further, let's talk about UHC.

    No, your economic issues arise from lack of regulation, thanks to the Reagan era and the successive administrations that followed; they also arise from the existence of your Federal Reserve. Clinton and Bush in particular contributed GROSSLY to deregulation which was what caused the most recent collapses on Wall Street.
    Be more specific. These vague regurgitations of Keynesian talking points fail to communicate anything of substance.

    Thanks for the tutorial... Canada also has private health insurance. Not only is it cheaper thanks to the existence of UHC, it is far more regulated by healthy competition. You don't see insurance companies screwing over people with the fine print nearly as much as you see in the U.S. Also, private insurance has no right to tell me what doctor I can see, what procedures I can have done, and being forced to choose between the repair of an organ or the removal of an organ based on what kind of plan I have.
    What evidence do you have of insurance companies "screwing over" its customers with more regularity in America than Canada?

    What evidence do you have that private health insurance is less expensive in Canada than America?

    Or am I just supposed to take your word for it?

    I am tired of answering this question. Do your own research.
    Sorry, but your answering a question does nothing to prove the assertion. Show me proof that UHC systems reduce cost (whatever that means) over time.

    It isn't the same as social welfare for people who can't find jobs or who are disabled. This is the health of the people, your fellow citizens.
    Well, the way I help my fellow citizens is through charity. When I had some money to spare I donated it to St. Jude's children hospital every month of last year. You know, private organizations that are capable of distributing and managing their resources with efficiency and efficacy?

    The fact that this goes right over your head demonstrates the gross cultural differences between your country and the countries with UHC. All you care about is yourselves.
    Yup. I'm just a selfish bastard. I've never made any sort of sacrifice on behalf of others in my life. You got me so pegged.

    Point proven. What is "rightfully yours". The very attitude I was talking about.
    Explain to me how I'm wrong instead of baselessly accusing me of selfishness.

    I work and earn money, it is therefore rightfully mine. You want the government to take what is rightfully mine and give it to some stranger. What am I missing?

    This is a myth widely perpetuated by the anti-UHC activists in the United States. As I have already demonstrated with data in previous threads, a negligible number of people come from Canada to the U.S. for procedures. Even with the wait times, people would rather wait and get free treatment than get their treatment sooner at high cost.

    Again, do your research. You don't know what you are talking about.
    Of course, no one ever goes to Mayo Clinic or Johns Hopkins to receive cutting edge treatments that are unavailable any other place in the world. Silly me!

  5. #35
    Student Sammyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    08-29-09 @ 02:29 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    185

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    I work and earn money, it is therefore rightfully mine. You want the government to take what is rightfully mine and give it to some stranger. What am I missing?
    I'm not arguing with you in general, but doesn't it follow from the above statement that you don't agree with ANY taxation? If so, how would you propose paying for roads or emergency services. Thanks.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Quote Originally Posted by Sammyo View Post
    I'm not arguing with you in general, but doesn't it follow from the above statement that you don't agree with ANY taxation? If so, how would you propose paying for roads or emergency services. Thanks.
    Emergency services (police, fire) and most transit infrastructure are funded and managed locally, not nationally.

    When my tax dollars are going to a police officer who protects me or a road that I use then it is a just arrangement - nationalized welfare and spending programs, on the other hand, represent a forcible confiscation of my money in order to pay for something I do not benefit from in anyway. That is, I believe, the difference between a just and an unjust tax.

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    This doesn't change the immutable fact that the US government is massively corrupt and inefficient. It's easy for you to advocate UHC in America when you don't actually have to worry about the vast empowerment and centralization of authority it represents.
    And private control of health care isn't corrupt? Please tell me you aren't this naive. Not only are there thousands of stories out there about denied coverage based on last-minute "reassessment" of plans, but I personally know people living in the U.S. who have had major operations denied for things that were essentially made up on the fly.

    So yes, I think the government can manage it better. Even if there is corruption in the government, at least there are mechanisms like the branches of power (i.e. SCOTUS), and popular protest that could manage it. Private companies are answerable to no one. You try to sue them, and they sick a team of 10 lawyers on you. The individual can't fight huge corporate power.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    And what proof do you have that the current system is less efficient or effective than other systems?
    I can get any essential procedure done in Canada for free. You can't, at least not with a lot of bureaucratic hassle. The same goes for every other Canadian. We are all entitled. That makes it more effective.

    As for what is efficient... if you want more efficiency, you have to sacrifice effectiveness. As an example from earlier, a diseased body part may be removed instead of treated in the U.S., all because of insurance policy. The private companies get to tell you what doctors you can see, and what procedures you are entitled to. You may call that efficient, but it is wholy ineffective. I much prefer a system where you have the right to the treatment that an unbiased physician thinks you should have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Are you going to wow me with the grossly exaggerated uninsured figure, or are you going to cite skewed statistics about infant mortality rates and average life expectancy vs. other modern nations? If so, do not waste your time because I will debunk any such arguments with alacrity.
    Bait and ignore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Whatever. My original point was that our massive military has provided the world with numerous tangible benefits. That's all. Anyway, I don't care to discuss the military any further, let's talk about UHC.
    And all I was saying is that the chicken littles who are running around crying about overspending are overlooking the areas of government which could, collectively, take minor cutbacks in order to pay for affordable healthcare. The military is one such department.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Be more specific. These vague regurgitations of Keynesian talking points fail to communicate anything of substance.
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    What evidence do you have of insurance companies "screwing over" its customers with more regularity in America than Canada?
    In Canada, private insurance is largely supplemental. For example, UHC means you are entitled to a hospital bed if needed, but private insurance could guarantee you private room. It's more of a luxury insurance. It also covers things like dental care, eye glasses, para practitioners, etc... all of which are supplementary to the public system. So, you see, Canada's health care system is not identical to the UK's. Our government doesn't pay for everything imaginable, but it does cover all the bases, and especially urgent care.

    So, in short, it's simple logic that people get screwed over less, because by virtue of the Canadian constitution, they are entitled to way more than Americans are. Private insurance has less opportunity to screw people over in Canada, because it is illegal for them to cover procedures that public health care covers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    What evidence do you have that private health insurance is less expensive in Canada than America?
    Simple observation. I have many American friends and we've already compared notes. You can always pay more in Canada for a supreme deluxe private health care plan if you want, but most people don't because it doesn't make sense. Plus, most people get insurance through their employers, easy peasy. In the U.S., private insurance covers care that would be covered by public care in Canada. This automatically makes your plans more expensive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Or am I just supposed to take your word for it?
    I could look up specific plans for you if you want, but really it just takes simple logic to deduce which country, on average, has the more expensive private insurance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Sorry, but your answering a question does nothing to prove the assertion. Show me proof that UHC systems reduce cost (whatever that means) over time.
    Cost of what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Well, the way I help my fellow citizens is through charity. When I had some money to spare I donated it to St. Jude's children hospital every month of last year. You know, private organizations that are capable of distributing and managing their resources with efficiency and efficacy?
    The donations of people, while nice, are not enough to cover major health costs. If a kid has cancer, his parents could sell their home, their family and community could donate money, and still it will not be enough. People in Canada donate to hospitals too... so I don't see what that has to do with supporting UHC or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Yup. I'm just a selfish bastard. I've never made any sort of sacrifice on behalf of others in my life. You got me so pegged.
    In your own words.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Explain to me how I'm wrong instead of baselessly accusing me of selfishness.
    It is a fundamental difference in our cultures, apparently. You know, I often hear Americans say there is not much of a difference between Canada and the U.S., but there is. People here happily pay taxes to support UHC. It's one of those things that is grossly blown out of proportion in the U.S. because people exaggerate the potential consequences based on their political agendas, but once the system is in place you see why it's a good thing.

    You continually cry about expansion of government power, but you already pay taxes to support that power. Why is it such a big deal to know that some of those taxes would in turn go towards a system that would provide health care to every single American? To me, if you are really so offended, you should just stop paying taxes altogether... since clearly your government's power is expanding anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    I work and earn money, it is therefore rightfully mine. You want the government to take what is rightfully mine and give it to some stranger. What am I missing?
    What you're missing is that it is already happening. All that matters is which systems you lend your support to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Of course, no one ever goes to Mayo Clinic or Johns Hopkins to receive cutting edge treatments that are unavailable any other place in the world. Silly me!
    Now you are changing the goalposts. Coming to the U.S. for specialized, innovative treatment is NOT the same as coming to the U.S. for treatment because the UHC system in Canada is not delivering; this is a claim that MANY Americans think. Toronto's Sick Kids Hospital also receives visitors from around the world for experimental procedures, as does Vancouver General Hospital. Both our countries contribute hugely to innovative procedures.

    However, it is indeed a myth that Canadians flock South to get typical treatments because of lack of opportunity in Canada.

  8. #38
    King Of The Dog Pound

    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    30,783

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    However, it is indeed a myth that Canadians flock South to get typical treatments because of lack of opportunity in Canada.
    According to the news it is pretty prevalent.

    "Michael Gabriel, 38, a landscape contractor, needed help fast. His life, a blur of cocaine and alcohol, was a shambles. Now broke, he longed to be admitted to a hospital treatment program for drug addicts.

    But the Toronto resident faced a three- to four-month wait for a hospital bed
    in Canada, where the socialized medical system is short of treatment facilities to counter a burgeoning drug problem.

    Then a counseling agency suggested that he go to the United States for treatment.
    " - Canadians Flock to U.S. Hospitals That Aid Addicts - Health care: Strapped U.S. facilities welcome the business, but the practice is controversial north of the border. - Los Angeles Times

    "TORONTO -- Canadian doctors are heading south in record numbers to practice in the United States, complaining that their country's once-vaunted national health system is denying them the freedom, technological resources and funding to provide top-notch medical care.

    Most depart more in sadness than in anger, praising Canada's guarantee of free health care to all citizens -- but fed up with a system that is desperately strapped for cash and is a constant target for politicians seeking to rein in government spending.
    " - Disgruntled Canadian physicians flock to US - The Boston Globe | Encyclopedia.com

    "As waitlists grow ever longer, surgical tourism has become an option for many Canadians who are in pain and frustrated with the country's chronically overburdened medical system." - The Epoch Times | Canadians Seeking Medical Treatment in the Developing World


    No Lives Matter

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 05:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Democrats admit they are losing the war on health care

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    According to the news it is pretty prevalent.

    "Michael Gabriel, 38, a landscape contractor, needed help fast. His life, a blur of cocaine and alcohol, was a shambles. Now broke, he longed to be admitted to a hospital treatment program for drug addicts.

    But the Toronto resident faced a three- to four-month wait for a hospital bed
    in Canada, where the socialized medical system is short of treatment facilities to counter a burgeoning drug problem.

    Then a counseling agency suggested that he go to the United States for treatment.
    " - Canadians Flock to U.S. Hospitals That Aid Addicts - Health care: Strapped U.S. facilities welcome the business, but the practice is controversial north of the border. - Los Angeles Times
    The LA Times... I'm not usually the first one to attack a source like this, but they have got to be among the lowest of sources in terms of credentials. Nonetheless, I'll address the points.

    The word "flock" is a gross exaggeration. I've never known anyone to "flock" to the U.S. for treatment, and I myself am a doctor based out of Canada. By far and large, the Canadians who seek treatment in the U.S. are already there on tourism, and they use their private insurance to accomplish this. These statistics are routinely abused by the anti-UHC crowd to make it appear as though Canadians are actually in the U.S. exclusively for treatment, and not other travel activities.

    The drug problem in Toronto is complicated, just like anywhere else. Most of the public facilities for addicts are already full or overwhelmed. A series of conservative governments has seen facilities for treating addicts shutdown entirely. Since they are in favor of punitive measurements and not rehab, it only makes sense that they would attack treatment centers. The article makes it seem like UHC is not providing enough options, when in fact it is government removing actual facilities that has caused the shortages. It's a combination of cut backs and simply a sea of addicts that have increased in recent years. When the Canadian Constitution was made, no one could have known about the modern drugs that would be damaging the health of Canadians. UHC will pay for the public bed, if you can find one, and if you can find one depends on what government is in power. As an aside, targetting drug addiction as a venue for attacking UHC in Canada is a poor choice. Drugs are so political... how addiction is managed really depends on the administration in power.

    Furthermore, there are private clinics in Canada for drug addicts... so the article fails to address why he chose to go to a private U.S. clinic instead? He could have even gone to a private clinic in Canada and may have gotten some basic reimbursement from the government. Those kinds of avenues exist. But of course the LA Times will never mention that. It's a right wing news paper with a constant agenda.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    "TORONTO -- Canadian doctors are heading south in record numbers to practice in the United States, complaining that their country's once-vaunted national health system is denying them the freedom, technological resources and funding to provide top-notch medical care.

    Most depart more in sadness than in anger, praising Canada's guarantee of free health care to all citizens -- but fed up with a system that is desperately strapped for cash and is a constant target for politicians seeking to rein in government spending.
    " - Disgruntled Canadian physicians flock to US - The Boston Globe | Encyclopedia.com
    The article neglects to mention that the doctors don't just flee to the private system of the U.S., they also flee to the public UHC systems in the UK and Europe. It's not about choosing between public vs. private as the article implies, but about wanting to exist in a system that offers competitive salaries while being resource driven.

    These other UHC nations remain viable because their governments are dedicated to sustaining the health care systems, as opposed to Canada whose sovereignty is continually challenged by U.S. lobbying, some of which has contributed to an increasingly two-tier system in Canada. So, it's rather ironic that Americans accuse our health care system of being ineffectual, when it is their own people who have been hammering away at our system for years, particularly when we have conservatives in power. Your companies would rake in a lot of money if they could make offices in a new, private Canadian health care system.

    I also challenge you to find real statistics, not just op-eds, that demonstrate the vast majority of Canadian medical graduates flee to the U.S. instead of staying in the Canadian public system or setting up private practices in Canada.

    Another thing that that article conveniently neglects to mention is that doctors aren't just fleeing Canada, but big cities in general. They go to smaller communities where the patient in-flow is smaller, yet still on the public system. They can make their salary while still having a relatively paced work life.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    "As waitlists grow ever longer, surgical tourism has become an option for many Canadians who are in pain and frustrated with the country's chronically overburdened medical system." - The Epoch Times | Canadians Seeking Medical Treatment in the Developing World
    I call BS on this claim. On the health Canada website there are articles that dismiss this kind of crap time and time again. Even our own Tories have dismissed rumors that Canadians flock to the U.S. for health care. Please find a better source.
    Last edited by Orion; 07-30-09 at 12:37 PM.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •