The GOP: The Party of pain, punishment, misery, and death

[Guest American Woman]

About as profound as when you said it I guess.

Ummm. No. I gave reasons why; I explained my reasoning. So no, not nearly as profound.

a thousand times

[Guest American Woman]

Actually his origional plan wasnt too bad.

Without getting into his original plan, his "original plan" isn't what he ultimately approved and passed, is it?

And we dont have to take wild guesses as to why people voted the way they did. Thats what exit polls are for. We know what the big issues of the day were.

Yeah, the all-telling, totally accurate exit polls. Got'cha.

[dre]

Without getting into his original plan, his "original plan" isn't what he ultimately approved and passed, is it?

Yeah, the all-telling, totally accurate exit polls. Got'cha.

Without getting into his original plan, his "original plan" isn't what he ultimately approved and passed, is it?

Thats irrelevent in a conversation about what voters wanted.

Yeah, the all-telling, totally accurate exit polls. Got'cha.

Polling is a better way of guaging public opinion than you rubbing your tummy and farting the answers out of your ass

[bush_cheney2004]

...Yeah, the all-telling, totally accurate exit polls. Got'cha.

Yes...the same ones that said Gore and Kerry were on their way to victory!

[Guest American Woman]

Yes...the same ones that said Gore and Kerry were on their way to victory!

Exactly. Suddenly they become all-telling.

But just for fun, I decided to revisit the exit polls in light of dre's enlightening comment: In fact the main reason you have your current president is because he promised a public healthcare option.

Looking at the exit polls: On the major issues,

63 percent of voters said the economy was the most important

, six times more than cited the war in Iraq (10 percent), health care (9 percent), terrorism (9 percent) or energy (7 percent).

Exit polls: How Obama won

Yeah, it was the healthcare.

Edited November 24, 2011 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

Exactly. Suddenly they become all-telling.

...Yeah, it was the healthcare.

I just consider the source....they live and die for "free" health care (pun intended). Then go to the USA anyway.

[Guest American Woman]

I just consider the source....they live and die for "free" health care (pun intended). Then go to the USA anyway.

At least they can go to the U.S., and this is an issue for Americans; we cannot go to a neighboring country as a 'safety net' to our system. When we get a national healthcare option, it best be just an option, as otherwise I see the level of our care/availability of services going from superior to not being adequate. If Canada could not rely on the U.S. in such instances, where would their health care system ultimately be? Surely they'd have to spend more money; that's a given.

This idea among some Canadians that getting public health care is the most important issue to Americans exists solely in their heads; that it's something "the majority of Americans want" is also a myth unless one adds "but ........" to the statement. There are conditions, and even the conditions aren't the same among all Americans. It will take some doing to come up with a plan that pleases and accommodates the majority of Americans - which is why this hasn't been an easy issue to deal with and solve, since most Americans don't want a half-ass solution; that's obvious from the "we want it, but...." mindset.

[guyser]

At least they can go to the U.S., and this is an issue for Americans; we cannot go to a neighboring country as a 'safety net' to our system.

Not sure I understand this point. You can go to a neighbouring country, and Americans do come here for treatment, some go to Mexico or other points on this planet.

As for the safety net aspect, that too is a bit of a misnomer. The over capacity that exists in your country is quite happy to take the money from our healthcare payors. It is purely an economic venture.It makes prudent sense to pay the freight on a per basis when needed.

If Canada could not rely on the U.S. in such instances, where would their health care system ultimately be? Surely they'd have to spend more money; that's a given.

.

Its the 'rely' portion of this that is once again, a bit of a misnomer.

The use of the American medical facility is in many cases the closest facility available, assuming they have room. If not, then the person is flown to another region in this country for the treatment.

Again, economics drives this.

[Guest American Woman]

Not sure I understand this point. You can go to a neighbouring country, and Americans do come here for treatment, some go to Mexico or other points on this planet.

I'm referring to emergency situations; situations where Canada doesn't have the procedure available or the necessary facilities available. In such instances, one doesn't have time to trek from one country to another unless one is as close to the American border as most Canadians are.

As for the safety net aspect, that too is a bit of a misnomer. The over capacity that exists in your country is quite happy to take the money from our healthcare payors. It is purely an economic venture.It makes prudent sense to pay the freight on a per basis when needed.

I think you misunderstood my point. I have no problem with your government sending people here rather than putting the money into more facilities in Canada/making sure Canada can provide all needed services. My point is that Americans are concerned that if we mess with our present system too much, we will reach the point where we no longer have the services/facilities needed available. Since Canada is already sending people here, our government would hardly be able to send them to Canada - and I'm guessing Mexico wouldn't be able to handle the overflow. But again, I live in the North - going to Mexico for an emergency situation wouldn't cut it for people that far from the border even if Mexico were to surpass our medical care.

Its the 'rely' portion of this that is once again, a bit of a misnomer.

The Canadian government admittedly relies on the U.S. rather than putting money into more facilities et al in Canada.

The use of the American medical facility is in many cases the closest facility available, assuming they have room. If not, then the person is flown to another region in this country for the treatment.

The U.S. has always had room, and in some instances where there was no room available in Canada. I've cited examples more than once. In other instances, the procedure wasn't available in Canada.

Again, economics drives this.

I'm not arguing that. Again, I'm saying that if we aren't careful, we could make changes that would negatively affect what we have, and most Americans understandably don't want to see that happen. And if that were to happen, it would affect Canada too.

[cybercoma]

some go to Mexico or other points on this planet.

A lot of Americans go to Mexico. There's an entire industry around it: Medical Tourism.

There are even US employers that have sought to [url="Medical Tourism"]cut costs by sending employees abroad for care[/url].

Funny. I don't know of any Canadian companies that do that.

More to the point, there's no such medical tourism industry in the United States for Canadians. In fact, it even sounds absurd.

The use of the American medical facility is in many cases the closest facility available, assuming they have room. If not, then the person is flown to another region in this country for the treatment.

Again, economics drives this.

That's only for a dire emergency. The waiting lists in Canada are regulated in a way that provides urgent care for those who need it without having to wait, while others who do not require immediate attention--ie, hip replacements, cataracts surgery, etc--may need to wait on average 9.5 weeks for their surgeries. In other words, there is not a single Canadian that is required to go to the United States for care. On the other hand, many Americans can't afford care without going into bankruptcy or crippling debt. This is forcing them to Mexico and in many cases Canada, since care here costs less, even if someone paid out of their pocket. Edited November 25, 2011 by cybercoma

[bush_cheney2004]

...I'm not arguing that. Again, I'm saying that if we aren't careful, we could make changes that would negatively affect what we have, and most Americans understandably don't want to see that happen. And if that were to happen, it would affect Canada too.

This point is lost on many Canadians....they feel that Americans should gladly accept the limitations of their system in exchange for the ideology of "universal access" and state mandated compensation for a catalog of procedures. Yet it is this very excess (and expensive) American capacity that the provinces have come to economically rely on in a pinch. Americans of means won't easily accept universal mediocrity and wait times for the benefit of all, just as some Canadians don't either, choosing to pay out of pocket for a faster solution.

[bush_cheney2004]

That's only for a dire emergency. The waiting lists in Canada are regulated in a way that provides urgent care for those who need it without having to wait, while others who do not require immediate attention--ie, hip replacements, cataracts surgery, etc--may need to wait on average 9.5 weeks for their surgeries.

Why are they waiting so long? Why aren't resources available sooner?

In other words, there is not a single Canadian that is required to go to the United States for care.

This is false....as examples for neo-natal care, bariatric surgery, and other procedures have demonstrated.

Ava Isabella Stinson was born at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Hamilton, Ontario on Thursday of last week. Ava was 13 weeks premature. She weighed only two-pounds, four-ounces at birth. Ava needed special care and equipment to keep her alive. Unfortunately, there were no open neonatal intensive care beds for her at St. Joesph’s Hospital. In fact there were no open neonatal care beds in her entire Canadian province. Ava had to be transferred to the United States.

[cybercoma]

I'm referring to emergency situations; situations where Canada doesn't have the procedure available or the necessary facilities available.

You mean those situations that you completely make up that don't exist?

My point is that Americans are concerned that if we mess with our present system too much, we will reach the point where we no longer have the services/facilities needed available.

You don't have the services available. That's why people are going to Mexico for care. That's why people are going bankrupt and losing everything when they get sick. Your care is limited to those who can afford it. Those who can't either go bankrupt or wait until there's severe complications from their illnesses. You have an access problem in your system right now. No matter how hard you try to pretend there's an access problem here, there isn't. Even if there were that still wouldn't change the fact that your system is completely unethical and causes unnecessary suffering and hardship for people.

Since Canada is already sending people here, our government would hardly be able to send them to Canada - and I'm guessing Mexico wouldn't be able to handle the overflow.

The sooner you stop making crap up, the sooner people might actually begin respecting your opinion. In 2007, nearly three quarters of a million people from the United States went to Mexico for healthcare. They seem to be handling the overflow just fine.

Canada does not send people to the United States for lack of services here. And there are barely any Canadians that seek out healthcare in the United States. Of 17276 people surveyed, 0.5% had medical treatment in the US. Out of that 0.5% less than 1/4 went to the United States specifically to get care (the others probably got ill while they were travelling). That means 1/8 of 1% of Canadians expressly went to the United States for healthcare. These numbers don't even indicate what the type of care was that they went to get. I'm guessing out of that 0.125% of respondents many of them were non-urgent or cosmetic surgeries. [source]

When I lived in Windsor, the Lasek Centre relied on clients from Michigan, Ohio, Indiana and Illinois. They spent more money advertising in the US than they did in Canada. They literally saw hundreds of clients from the United States every year.

In ccase you're having trouble reading between the lines, your system is crap and nobody in their right mind from Canada goes there specifically to get care.

The Canadian government admittedly relies on the U.S. rather than putting money into more facilities et al in Canada.

Do you have a source that the Canadian government relies on the US system? Because judging by the numbers 0.125% of patients doesn't sound anything even remotely close to relying by anybody's definition.

The U.S. has always had room, and in some instances where there was no room available in Canada. I've cited examples more than once. In other instances, the procedure wasn't available in Canada.

The United States has room because people don't seek care when they can't afford it and still others are leaving your country for care in Mexico or anywhere else that it's more affordable.

Saying care isn't available here is total BS. Again, less than 1/8 of 1% of Canadians went to the United States for the sole purpose of getting care.

Again, I'm saying that if we aren't careful, we could make changes that would negatively affect what we have, and most Americans understandably don't want to see that happen. And if that were to happen, it would affect Canada too.

A change to the American healthcare system would barely even be noticed by healthcare providers in Canada, save for clinics like the Lasek clinic in Windsor who relies on American patients that would be stupid spending more on care in the US.

[cybercoma]

Why are they waiting so long? Why aren't resources available sooner?

This is false....as examples for neo-natal care, bariatric surgery, and other procedures have demonstrated.

Ava Isabella Stinson was born at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Hamilton, Ontario on Thursday of last week. Ava was 13 weeks premature. She weighed only two-pounds, four-ounces at birth. Ava needed special care and equipment to keep her alive. Unfortunately, there were no open neonatal intensive care beds for her at St. Joesph’s Hospital. In fact there were no open neonatal care beds in her entire Canadian province. Ava had to be transferred to the United States.

That's a nice anecdotal story. How many Americans ended up mortgaging their homes when they were in this situation?

What you fail to mention is that Buffalo is much closer than sending the child to Montreal or Halifax. That was likely the primary consideration for using the US, not that there were no beds in Canada.

[bush_cheney2004]

That's a nice anecdotal story. How many Americans ended up mortgaging their homes when they were in this situation?

But you said no Canadians had to seek care in the United States, when obviously some do. Americans mortgage their homes for lots of things.

What you fail to mention is that Buffalo is much closer than sending the child to Montreal or Halifax. That was likely the primary consideration for using the US, not that there were no beds in Canada.

I will not question the facts as stated...Ontario is a big province to be lacking such facilities. There were similar issues in BC over the past few years, so many in fact, the babies grow up to be lifelong Seahawks fans.

[cybercoma]

You Americans seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about healthcare in Canada, as well. Which isn't suprising, since you're American and it has absolutely nothing to do with you.

1. There is no Canadian healthcare system. Health is a provincial jursidiction.

2. Delivery of care is private. We have a single-payer system.

[cybercoma]

But you said no Canadians had to seek care in the United States, when obviously some do. Americans mortgage their homes for lots of things.

You're being pedantic. I posted the survey. An eighth of one percent sought care in the United States.

I will not question the facts as stated...Ontario is a big province to be lacking such facilities. There were similar issues in BC over the past few years, so many in fact, the babies grow up to be lifelong Seahawks fans.

Neonatal intensive care is a very specialized practice. Without even looking, I'm absolutely certain there are communities in the United States with the exact same problem.

[jacee]

People who can afford it and don't want to wait go wwherever they can for medical care, US, mexico, India, China, etc. There are world experts in certain fields throughout the world, and some people seek them out.

Big deal.

Canada is not dependent on the US.

Nor are Canadians a burden on the US. US facilities advertise to attract medical 'tourists' so there is profit in it.

Here are some other destinations.

What Op Where?

Particular countries are getting reputations for particular types of medical treatment. Here’s a sample of which destinations are targets for medical tourists:

-Colombia has highly skilled medical staff but low salaries, so it has been a popular destination for a long time for people wanting cosmetic surgery, eye operations, cardiovascular surgery and even transplants – because donated organs there are even available to foreigners.

-Hungary is a good place to go for dental treatment, where the dentists are extremely well trained and procedures would cost about 30% of what a British person would have to pay at home. India also has good training but low labor costs, and US citizens regularly fly there for heart surgery and other high-end operations.

-Thailand is so proficient at medical tourism that several hospitals have special wings for foreigners and numerous translators, and travelers from Asia, Australia and further afield flock there for pretty much any kind of medical treatment you can imagine.

-Costa Rica is a popular spot for Americans to get dental treatment (it’s 80% cheaper than in the US), and orthopedic surgery like getting a knee replacement, as well as cosmetic surgery, is also common.

-The Czech Republic is well-located for Western Europeans to visit for surgeries, and cosmetic surgeries including breast enlargements are popular here, as they’re still considerably cheaper than in the western neighbors.

-Mexico, being nice and close to the United States, is also popular for dental treatment, and was long a destination of choice for patients wanting lap band surgery to help them lose weight.

ETC ETC

Apparently the US has extra capacity for sale, and there are buyers. It's a profit-making enterprise.

Too bad the US doesn't take care of all of its own people first, or use the profits to provide care for the almost half of the US population that can't afford it.

And I'm quite certain there are wealthy Americans who come to Canada to see specific experts too. Medical research and specialization is an inter-national world, where a doctor's closest colleagues are usually in another country.

There is nothing unusual at all about medical tourism, and nobody is taking advantage of anyone else, but contributing profits to their economy.

It's just another global industry.

But the failure to take care of US citizens first is another example of the GOP penchant for "pain, punishment, misery and death".

Why are right-wingers so paranoid and punitive? Seems to me there are some people who trust other people until given reason not to, and others who trust no one. Of course, the acquisitive hoarders end up with the most toys ... but virtue eludes them.

Strange that traditional religious beliefs are associated with the GOP, when Christian values are more evident in those who trust and have empathy for others. There should be a different name for religions based on old testament eye-for-an-eye concepts than 'Christ-ian', which is a new testament religion.

Jesus was a revolutionary. The GOP is reactionary.

Makes no sense.

Edited November 25, 2011 by jacee

[bush_cheney2004]

You're being pedantic. I posted the survey. An eighth of one percent sought care in the United States.

It's worth it just to prove you wrong.

Neonatal intensive care is a very specialized practice. Without even looking, I'm absolutely certain there are communities in the United States with the exact same problem.

Yea....small "communities" like Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal. If it is so specialized and in demand why wasn't the investment been made earlier? (It is being made now because of the political embarrassment.)

You are long on excuses and wait times.

[bush_cheney2004]

You Americans seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about healthcare in Canada, as well. Which isn't suprising, since you're American and it has absolutely nothing to do with you.

Let's hope it stays that way...best to just let the Canadians whine about "American style" health care while they wait in line, suffering patriotically.

[bush_cheney2004]

....There is nothing unusual at all about medical tourism, and nobody is taking advantage of anyone else, but contributing profits to their economy.

It's just another global industry.

Not in a political context....Canadians have the most expensive and one of the lowest performing universal access HC "systems" among OECD nations. Americans can do far better if they choose to do so.

[Guest American Woman]

You Americans seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about healthcare in Canada, as well. Which isn't suprising, since you're American and it has absolutely nothing to do with you.

1. There is no Canadian healthcare system. Health is a provincial jursidiction.

2. Delivery of care is private. We have a single-payer system.

Your health care system is a national program; the responsibility is shared between federal and provincial - this it is Canada's health care system, or the Canadian health care system.

[bush_cheney2004]

Your health care system is a national program; the responsibility is shared between federal and provincial - this it is Canada's health care system, or the Canadian health care system.

That's affirmative....just go back to the 1990's federal budget cuts to provinces and see all the health care moaning and groaning (pun intended). They are still trying to recover from the massive cuts to staffing and facilities, not to mention the medical professional brain drain to other countries.

[Guest American Woman]

People who can afford it and don't want to wait go wwherever they can for medical care, US, mexico, India, China, etc. There are world experts in certain fields throughout the world, and some people seek them out.

Big deal.

It is a big deal if you're giving birth or have just given birth and there are no beds and/or neo-natal care available. It's also a big deal if you're having a heart attack. I could go on, but if you're still not getting it, you likely never will. It's been clearly stated that we are referring to emergency situations or procedures that aren't available in Canada. Evidently the government prefers sending such patients to the U.S. over Mexico, India, China, etc. and I'm guessing the patients in question prefer it too.

Canada is not dependent on the US.

At times it is/has been. That's a fact.

Nor are Canadians a burden on the US. US facilities advertise to attract medical 'tourists' so there is profit in it.

Who has argued otherwise?

There is nothing unusual at all about medical tourism, and nobody is taking advantage of anyone else, but contributing profits to their economy.

It's just another global industry.

Good grief. There's a huge difference between needing immediate care and medical tourism, and no one has accused any one of "taking advantage."

Talk about a lengthy response that had absolutely nothing to do with anything that's actually been said; ie: any of the actual issues that have been raised.

[guyser]

In ccase you're having trouble reading between the lines, your system is crap and nobody in their right mind from Canada goes there specifically to get care.

Its not an insult if its true....but it isnt true, thus its insulting.