madmax Posted November 22, 2009 Report Posted November 22, 2009 Still should have the audit and study, lots of waste in the world of bureaucrats, they probably could be a Little more efficient. Nonsense. We increased Health Care spending in Ontario. $1 Billion went to Liberal Friendly Consultants. There is no recommendations available from these consultants. But they did bring back the brochures of some of the finest restaurants and luxury hotels in Ontario, and Alberta. Yes, nothing like a nice flight to friendly Alberta to investigate your Restaurants and Hotels.. I mean health care system. Apparently lost the minutes on the flight back. :angry: "they probably could be a little more efficient" theres an understatement Quote
bjre Posted November 22, 2009 Author Report Posted November 22, 2009 I don't even know what you are saying I mean the $8000 per person US health cost is totally rely on their debt. They use their children's money to pay their cost, if not, they have only one other choice, rob more from the world through wars, and IMF, World Bank, WTO. Is Canada able to do these? Quote "The more laws, the less freedom" -- bjre "There are so many laws that nearly everybody breaks some, even when you just stay at home do nothing, the only question left is how thugs can use laws to attack you" -- bjre "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
punked Posted November 22, 2009 Report Posted November 22, 2009 I mean the $8000 per person US health cost is totally rely on their debt. They use their children's money to pay their cost, if not, they have only one other choice, rob more from the world through wars, and IMF, World Bank, WTO. Is Canada able to do these? Again what are you talking about? The US being in debt has nothing to do with Canada. All you have to do is make tough decisions. If Canada wants to spend 8000 per person on health care, (which isn't the goal, the goal was to increase health care spending to an sustainable level while making the service better) they could however that might mean a cut in military spending, or in Social housing or hopefully an increase in public revenues. I suggest you read the 10 year plan to make health care better. Quote
Topaz Posted November 22, 2009 Report Posted November 22, 2009 Are those cost also included the operating cost to running a hospital? Wages? Are we going to starting union bash in this industry too? As far as I'm concern you can't be a PRICE on HEALTH. Cancer treatments are expensive and I think you are going to see the governments say more to the people if you want cheaper health care then start take better care of yourself. Smoking, air pollution, eating too many unhealthy foods etc. Yes, people don't like being told what we can and can't do but hey,not doing a better job of looking after ourselves DOES COST! Quote
Gabriel Posted November 22, 2009 Report Posted November 22, 2009 The government isn't spending over 5000 per person. They're spending about 3800, or 70% of the total. Thanks for that clarification, I would have overlooked that had you not reminded me. Not that I don't trust you, but where did you learn that government spending portion of total health care costs in Canada is about 70%? I'm just curious, it's an important detail that for some reason has never occurred to me! Thanks again. Quote
Gabriel Posted November 22, 2009 Report Posted November 22, 2009 Are those cost also included the operating cost to running a hospital? Wages? Are we going to starting union bash in this industry too? As far as I'm concern you can't be a PRICE on HEALTH. Cancer treatments are expensive and I think you are going to see the governments say more to the people if you want cheaper health care then start take better care of yourself. Smoking, air pollution, eating too many unhealthy foods etc. Yes, people don't like being told what we can and can't do but hey,not doing a better job of looking after ourselves DOES COST! Of course you're unconcerned about costs - you probably don't earn any money. Nobody is suggesting that we DON'T spend money on health care. What IS being suggested is that value for money be emphasized. This emphasis can manifest itself in various ways. For example, careful auditing of ordered treatments by doctors to identify possible frivolous use of resources, and appropriate disciplinary actions. On the other hand, an audit could also reveal that a doctor didn't request a diagnostic that would have reduced the likelihood of a patient's development of an illness, and therefore led to increased hardship for the patient as well as an increased financial burden on the public purse due to potentially higher costs associated with advanced stages of an illness. The bottom line - high standards need to be enforced. Quote
Smallc Posted November 22, 2009 Report Posted November 22, 2009 where did you learn that government spending portion of total health care costs in Canada is about 70%? I'm just curious, it's an important detail that for some reason has never occurred to me! Thanks again. Over the last 10 years, the public-private split in health spending has stayed about the same, with government contributing about 70 per cent and private providers paying about 30 per cent. CBC Story Quote
Michael Hardner Posted November 22, 2009 Report Posted November 22, 2009 It would be good for us to have consistent, regular breakdowns of these costs across provinces in a graphical format. Also, it would be good to get consistent, regular breakdowns of service levels across provinces in a graphical format. Ontario has been trying... and this is part of the eHealth fiasco too... Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.