Canuckistani

Is this it official Israeli position on this?

Load of crap. Per capita health care costs are almost double in the US vs Canada. Total crap. Canadians pay about 30% of total healthcare costs not thru the medicare system, whereas Americans pay about 53% privately.. But the cost per GDP or cost per capitat calculations are based on total healthcare expenditures. Where do you get this bs from?

If this land is owned by Palestinians, and they settlers have permission from the owners to settle there, I can't for the life of me see what justification Israel is using to prevent this.

Federal payments = 25% of healthcare costs. Healthcare is the province's biggest budget expenditure, not nearly covered by healthcare premiums.-------------------------------------

I did just that, but you don't want to see it, I guess: http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ing-canada.html http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ing-canada.html From wiki: How much would wages be able to rise if employers did not have to pay those healthcare costs? Some US employer's tried to sue Canada under NAFTA claiming our healthcare system was an unfair subsidy. And that doesn't take into account how much people in the US have to co-pay for insurance and treatment - many are forced into bankruptcy because of it. Also not considered are the number of people denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. That doesn't happen in Canada. http://www.healthref...rage/index.html

Wow. Really? The OECD takes the total expenditures on healthcare in a country and compares that as a percent of GDP. Who cares who's spending the money. In the US, about 47% of healthcare is government funded, in Canad it's about 70%, but no matter who funds it, it all comes out of the same pocket. All Canadians do have access to healthcare. Provinces differ in funding a few procedures, but it's only a few, marginal ones. You can go see your GP in any province, you can get cancer treatment in any province, etc. And no pre-existing condition denial of coverage. Provinces don't share certain common features and standards, they share the vast majority of them. Compare that to variation of coverage you get in the US of HMO vs PPO coverage. Canadians can see any doctor they choose, go to any hospital as required, unlike HMO coverage. You con't need medical insurance to travel within Canada, since your provincial coverage will cover in other provinces, just as your provincial coverage will cover when travelling in other countries. The reason people need insurance when travelling to the states is because the procedures cost so much more there vs Canada, and our health insurance only pays what would be paid in our province. When I got sick in New Zealand, my MSP paid for the full cost, I didn't get any benefit from the private insurance I had bought which only kicks in for excess over MSP coverage. Most provinces charge a montly premium. In BC, a family of 3 or more pays $133. month. Compare that to co-pays for coverage in the US if your employer happens to provide insurance, and compare that there are no co-pays for treatment.

Think again. Health care costs in Canada 11.4% of GDP, Healthcare costs in the US 17.6% of GDP. http://www.oecd.org/...eCANADA2012.pdf http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ing-canada.htmlFrom wiki: How much would wages be able to rise if employers did not have to pay those healthcare costs? Some US employer's tried to sue Canada under NAFTA claiming our healthcare system was an unfair subsidy. And that doesn't take into account how much people in the US have to co-pay for insurance and treatment - many are forced into bankruptcy because of it. Also not considered are the number of people denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. That doesn't happen in Canada. http://www.healthref...rage/index.html

You might actually want to read the article you are trying to refute:

Very true. We have to. If nothing else to know what danger lurks below.

Why would they? It's not their country, nor their form of government.

I know, eh? Normal Americans just don't care about Canada that much.

Taking your's and WIP's comments together would show that NP is fair and balanced.

You're right, I apologize. I was trying to shorten the headline, and when I hear health, I'm reflexively conditioned to think of healthcare. A lot of the factors mentioned are only peripherally about healthcare, and then it would be mental health care. Mental healthcare won't fix the US' mental health problems, since it would be the nuts healing the nuts.

The Feds sure didn't want to know at Caledonia, passed it off to the province. Ontario of course wanted the feds involved. Likely see the same thing this time.

Actually the report shows up the poor state of American society as much as it does their healthcare. Some of the biggest reason for this poor mortality rate are societal more than healthcare: Or maybe they're just a very clumsy people.

Is exactly what you said. You said who wants to live to 120 if you have no freedoms. The only freedom under discussion is not being able to avoid paying taxes for govt provided healthcare.

I guess when you've got nothing, you've got to pick nits. But you're right. Being forced to use government provided health care is a terrible scourge in Canada. As d_c, we live longer but wish we would die living under this horrible yoke of oppression. I'm sure the person dying in he US because they couldn't afford timely healthcare will do so proudly, knowing they were free to do so. Same with the person denied coverage because their illness is deemed preexisting.

Just don't step over it, or you'll die much sooner.

Take a look at my post - I edited it to show my recall is very much correct. It's one of the authors of this study saying it, and she and I are well aware of New Hampshire's motto - she's making a riff off it to make a point. Not all Americans will get it, of course.

That damn Atlantic magazine, always publishing that commie Canadian crap. And those people at the American Public Health Association who published the study - probably paid stooges of the commie Canadians.

Maybe, but it was an American.

As somebody said, their motto is "live free and die."

Maybe I'm missing the context here, but a hard line IMO wouldn't be about punishment but having a bottom line. If the other side then threatens or perpetrates violence, it needs to be dealt with the same way as any other criminal action. That may involve punishment at some point.