Liberals talk Gutting health care

[eyeball]

I'm not really saying that they do a bad job of recruiting, specifically, but that management is generally not challenged - and that the entire system is managed with politics at the very top of the pyramid. So recruiting is one example, but a challenge from somewhere else would be helpful.

I'm telling you, better more focused public scrutiny of the top of the pyramid is worth trying before we try turning the pyramid upside down. That's where the challenge should come from.

[Shady]

You are just not getting it. The same people pay for it, no matter if it's in the form of taxes or premiums or payments. This doesn't help decrease costs and this is what you aren't getting.

Wow, it's like talking to a brick wall. Yes, some of the same people pay. With their own money. Not government money. So government costs go down, because they don't need to treat as many people, but the tax revenue base remains the same. How can you not understand this?

As for people using the private clinics. The costs for them may not go down. In fact, they'll probably pay more for their private care. But THATS THEIR CHOICE. Give people a choice. Some people will want to pay more, for quicker care. That in turn means less people in line for government care. Which means quicker care there as well.

Seriously. Some of you need an apology from public education. They've clearly failed you miserably.

[Smallc]

It just stands to reason. They have to be more motivated, or they will fail.

That makes no sense at all. It stands to reason that if the not for profit hospitals don't do a good job of being efficient, they will run out of money to provide services.

[Smallc]

Wow, it's like talking to a brick wall. Yes, some of the same people pay. With their own money. Not government money. So government costs go down, because they don't need to treat as many people, but the tax revenue base remains the same. How can you not understand this?

That doesn't change the fact that the costs are growing faster than the economy. Simply moving it from government to private doesn't fix anything.

Seriously. Some of you need an apology from public education. They've clearly failed you miserably.

Clearly, it's not me they need to apologize to.

[eyeball]

Then the entire discussion is a non-starter. We're basically saying "let's not discuss two-tier because it will favour the rich and provide less services to low income patients".

If that's the case, then how are we ever going to improve one-tier healthcare ? Propose a way to do that, because one-tier has had ten years to improve things since this debate started and they haven't done it.

By improving its political management. You've said yourself this is where the problem lies. Why look or go elsewhere?

[Smallc]

If that's the case, then how are we ever going to improve one-tier healthcare ? Propose a way to do that, because one-tier has had ten years to improve things since this debate started and they haven't done it.

They have done it, you just don't acknowledge that they have. You dismiss any evidence that they have, and you go on about the way you think that things are. How to improve it? Further increase efficiency by lowering administration costs across the country to the level of the lower administration provinces, introduce more personnel by increasing training spaces and fast tracking immigration of medical professionals, and continue to invest in new technology. Study whether or not increased private care within the public system is viable and cost friendly. There are many things that can be looked at.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm telling you, better more focused public scrutiny of the top of the pyramid is worth trying before we try turning the pyramid upside down. That's where the challenge should come from.

Yeah, but there wasn't even interest in the topic here on MLW. In the public sphere, it's been discussed for 10 years, and still eHealth happened.

I was arguing for one-tier ten years ago. ( I'm not sure why I'm picking that number, btw, maybe Mike Harris. ) I'm not arguing for that anymore. It's time to move the discussion forward.

[Michael Hardner]

That makes no sense at all. It stands to reason that if the not for profit hospitals don't do a good job of being efficient, they will run out of money to provide services.

That doesn't happen, which is clearly demonstratable.

[Smallc]

That doesn't happen, which is clearly demonstratable.

Clearly demonstrate it then. I don't agree that it doesn't happen.

[Michael Hardner]

They have done it, you just don't acknowledge that they have. You dismiss any evidence that they have, and you go on about the way you think that things are. How to improve it? Further increase efficiency by lowering administration costs across the country to the level of the lower administration provinces, introduce more personnel by increasing training spaces and fast tracking immigration of medical professionals, and continue to invest in new technology. Study whether or not increased private care within the public system is viable and cost friendly. There are many things that can be looked at.

Actually, I provided a link. If you go to that link, you'll start to get an idea of the scope of the problem. Believe me, I was arguing for one-tier for many years and was enthusiastic with CIHI arrived. None of it has done enough good. Governments will never self-report on their own performance, and people don't care enough to make them do it: they just shrug their shoulders, or debate this along the same emotional lines.

The time for two-tier healthcare has come.

[Shady]

That doesn't change the fact that the costs are growing faster than the economy. Simply moving it from government to private doesn't fix anything.

Yes it does fix somethings. It helps lower the amount of money governments have to pay for healthcare treatment. Which in turn helps deficit and debt situations. It also helps cut down wait times for certain tests and procedures. How you can characterize that as not fixing anything is pathetic.

In terms of individual costs, yes, they may not go down. But the primary customers of private clinics will be the wealthy and or middle class. Give them the choice as to if they want to spend their own money on healthcare for themselves or their families. If they want to pay the cost, it's up to them. Give them the choice.

Like I said, even if costs for them don't go down, it'll still save the government money, and cut down wait times in government lines. Why are you against that?

[Smallc]

Like I said, even if costs for them don't go down, it'll still save the government money, and cut down wait times in government lines. Why are you against that?

Because it isn't necessarily the best or only way, and because it doesn't necessarily do what you claim. As I said, it doesn't address costs. I'm glad you finally admit that.

Edited March 28, 2010 by Smallc

[Smallc]

The time for two-tier healthcare has come.

In your opinion. The canadian public favour further public health solutions.

[Michael Hardner]

In your opinion. The canadian public favour further public health solutions.

Maybe so, but it doesn't mean that it's right to continue down the path of complacency. Americans have been giving Obama bad poll numbers for his healthcare initiative, but luckily he is pressing forward anyway and providing leadership.

[Smallc]

Maybe so, but it doesn't mean that it's right to continue down the path of complacency. Americans have been giving Obama bad poll numbers for his healthcare initiative, but luckily he is pressing forward anyway and providing leadership.

Right, but that doesn't really say anything. It doesn't say that private care is better.

[Michael Hardner]

Right, but that doesn't really say anything. It doesn't say that private care is better.

No, but it says that the general population can't be counted on to provide leadership when faced with challenges. On issues like Global Warming, Healthcare, National Security our leaders have moved forward when faced with challenges, even when the public supported the status quo.

[Smallc]

On issues like Global Warming, Healthcare, National Security our leaders have moved forward when faced with challenges, even when the public supported the status quo.

Right, but our health care system is something that we deal with every day. People seem to like it and want to improve it on a similar foundation.

[blueblood]

The time for two-tier healthcare has come.

I agree, well in effect we already have 2 tier health care, we just book it to the USA and BC2004 counts off license plates.

2 tier would help ramp up the demand for employees, which would increase spaces at Universities/community colleges.

Also look at private insurance companies getting on board with this. 2 tier would be a dream for them, all the premiums and none of the risk.

For those that say 2 tier health can't work, why does 2 tier education working? It's provincially funded and requires a lot of gov't intervention, and so on and so forth.

The fact that we lose millions of dollars by people going to the US for care they want because of some soviet ideology is madness.

[bush_cheney2004]

I agree, well in effect we already have 2 tier health care, we just book it to the USA and BC2004 counts off license plates.

Right....seeing a funky license plate from Canada always sticks out on Minnesota highways!

I like this curious nugget aboot costs that are measured and "immeasurable" in the same statement:

.....Bernstein noted the United States

spends 18 per cent of its gross domestic product

each year on strictly private health care, compared to 12 or 13 per cent in Canada. Even so, 30-40 million Americans are uninsured.

"Their costs are

immeasurably

higher than ours for a much worse product."

Edited March 28, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[wyly]

some time ago I was researching through the various Canadian/provincial health policies if I recall correctly there are two provinces that allow private facilities already Manitoba and Saskatchewan...and in neither province has private care built any hospitals,why? because they can't compete with a public system...if there is an opportunity for business to operate and make a profit they'll jump in, that they don't should tell us something about how efficient UHC is...

in Alberta there are private clinic$ but they attract only a tiny percentage of the market and do nothing to alleviate the problem, taking an already scarce resource (MD's) out of the system does nothing for the rest of us...a private system will increase wait times for those in the public system and let the wealthy jump the cue...

France has a better system than us?...no they pay about the same amount as we do and their lifespan is about the same so similar results...what France has is more hospital beds and medical personnel...

we have to keep things in perspective we still pay much less than the US for better end results(lifespan) if we need to pay a bit more taxes to improve services so be it, we'll end up with the best healthcare in the world and still less costs than the US...

the problem is not what is the best system in the world(ours is) it's politicians having the guts to say it will cost more and the public to suck it up and pay what it costs...as it is now politicians are afraid to allocate taxes possibly raising them for fear of being punished at the polls, we like to complain but when it comes to actually paying for it we fight it...

[Guest TrueMetis]

Nope. That's not correct at all. Leave the medical professionals in their current public sector jobs. Let private clinics operate and invest in the education and training of additional medical professionals. This doesn't have to be a finite pie we deal with. We can expand the pie, without government money.

So what private clinics would have to wait 8 years to get doctors? They also take away public doctors because the ones they train would have went into the public service.

You could provide regulations to deal with that.

Which would increase cost.

[punked]

I wanted too point out too people who say costs are growing. They aren't, they have been steady at around 40% of all levels of government for about 40 years now, costs are going up on medicines. WHICH ARE A PRIVATE INDUSTRY.

[Smallc]

costs are going up on medicines. WHICH ARE A PRIVATE INDUSTRY.

The problem is medication in hospitals, which is part of the public system.

[punked]

some time ago I was researching through the various Canadian/provincial health policies if I recall correctly there are two provinces that allow private facilities already Manitoba and Saskatchewan...and in neither province has private care built any hospitals,why? because they can't compete with a public system...if there is an opportunity for business to operate and make a profit they'll jump in, that they don't should tell us something about how efficient UHC is...

in Alberta there are private clinic$ but they attract only a tiny percentage of the market and do nothing to alleviate the problem, taking an already scarce resource (MD's) out of the system does nothing for the rest of us...a private system will increase wait times for those in the public system and let the wealthy jump the cue...

France has a better system than us?...no they pay about the same amount as we do and their lifespan is about the same so similar results...what France has is more hospital beds and medical personnel...

we have to keep things in perspective we still pay much less than the US for better end results(lifespan) if we need to pay a bit more taxes to improve services so be it, we'll end up with the best healthcare in the world and still less costs than the US...

the problem is not what is the best system in the world(ours is) it's politicians having the guts to say it will cost more and the public to suck it up and pay what it costs...as it is now politicians are afraid to allocate taxes possibly raising them for fear of being punished at the polls, we like to complain but when it comes to actually paying for it we fight it...

Best thing I have read all week.

[bush_cheney2004]

...we have to keep things in perspective we still pay much less than the US for better end results(lifespan) if we need to pay a bit more taxes to improve services so be it, we'll end up with the best healthcare in the world and still less costs than the US...

One way to reduce costs and continue to be the "best health care system in the world" would be to stop sending Canadians from provinces to the United States for better, available, and much more expensive care! LOL!