Democracy

[kimmy]

regarding healthcare: the proportion of the provincial budget going to healthcare has increased entirely due to decreased revenues as a consequences of tax cutting.

This sounds like revisionism. I believe it's a documented fact that federal CHST transfers to the provinces decreased during the Chretien years, and that Martin's efforts to eliminate the annual deficit were the cause of that, not tax cuts.

-kimmy

[Guest eureka]

I wrote of the Provincial budgets. The provinces got what they asked for as a block transfer. The transfers did not reduce the capacity of the Provinces to fund healthcare. The provinces chose to reduce the portion of the block transfer to levels lower than were directly allocated previously and to reduce their taxes.

The Martin transfer cuts were wrong and damaging but the provinces were given what they asked for and had the means to take corrective action: the tax base and power.

[Pateris]

The lefties on this board (caesar, eureka, et al) love to shoot down the proposals of the right on fixing health care, yet do nothing but stick their heads in the sand about the problems...

And completely fail to provide alternative proposals other than RAISE taxes.

That is just old bleeding-heart Liberal and socialist NDP welfare state crap. Nothing new from the left since Tommy Douglas...

[Argus]

Canadian

Want our public health Care.  Despite your insistence to the opposite.

I never said Canadians did not want public health care. I said that many had come to understand that the application of private money was not as evil as the shrill leftists keep insisting, that it might actually help the public health care system by diverting people into alternative - fee charting treatment centres.

  Why should we care what Europe or any other country has.  Thius system can be fixed if the politicians quit playing games.  Where did you get the idea that most Canadians are willing to accept privatized health care

We should care about Europe because it has generally superior health care systems and because we can learn from them.

Environics Poll

Leger survey

Refusing private health care is nothing more than the politics of resentment and jealousy.

[Argus]

You seem to have run out of ideas. Your posts are simply repetition of the same Reform inspired nonsense. If you have an inspiration or gather any information to support your non-argument, let me know.

Well gee, given I was talking about the early Reform Party I kind of thought their ideas and why they appealed to so many were pertinent.

Just to correct a coupkle of your supposed statements of "fact," regarding healthcare: the proportion of the provincial budget going to healthcare has increased entirely due to decreased revenues as a consequences of tax cutting.

To be true that would mean the budgets had to have shrunk - but they didn't, they increased. Health care funding increased as a percentage of provincial budgets because health care costs continue to rise far higher and faster than the rate of inflation. Or is that too complicated for you?

Your tirades on bilingualism are tiresome and have the same bigoted inspiration.

Hmm, well, given you are the guy who suggested referendums were anti-democratic I'm guessing you believe the "bigoted inspiration" in this case would be - ahm, fairness?

Your figures are an absurdity.

Yes, but true for all of that. You have no figures. You have nothing. You're spewing out a lot of emotional diahrea without any foundation, fact, or even argument. Your whole whiny post is nothing more than an indignant complaint that I'm voicing opinions you don't like. There is an answer for that. Leave.

You do not even seem to be aware that the requirements are only for designated positions

Yes, every senior Executive or managerial position in Ottawa - which means ALL the top positions where ALL the decisions are made and ALL the plans are laid.

The Aspers are right wingers pure and simple.

Well, I suppose if one is a Marxist lunatic even Fidel Catro can be termed "right wing". Tell me, what radio station do you get on your tinfoil cap?

Really, all your snivelling rant seems to amount to is that there are no legitimate arguments against anything you believe in, and furthermore, no one really opposes anything you support but a very few right wing cranks, probably out in the Alberta woods. This is such a blind, ignorant view that I'm not sure it's even possible to engage in any form of rational discussion with you.

[August1991]

It is an interesting debate between Argus and eureka but I can't help but notice that both disparage the Liberals. To some, the Liberals are too left and to others, they are too right.

Well, the Liberals are the Natural Governing party in Canada so I must conclude that many Canadians are not like Argus and eureka. IMV, Canadian politics are not ideological (despite the interesting debate here). They are regional.

Other countries (the US, France, the UK) have genuine political choices. We don't.

[Michael Hardner]

It is an interesting debate between Argus and eureka but I can't help but notice that both disparage the Liberals. To some, the Liberals are too left and to others, they are too right.

And this is why they win. Put three products on the shelf and the average shopper will grab at the one in the middle every time.

This thread started out as an apolitical question about our political institutions and has descended into a partisan cockfight once again.

Back to the main point:

I sense some dispair in you, Auguste. But don't be sad. Think instead about the best things that these forums have done.

On the surface, they seem to encourage ego-based argument and partisan backslapping, but even the most polarized of voters produces a better argument after being tested. I would submit that almost every regular poster will produce better thought out arguments after a few weeks or months on these boards. I know because I have seen it.

I have seen people of both political stripes receive a real education in the best way - by talking to like-minded and opposite-minded individuals (in text form) and asking questions, and in the end holding a real opinion.

I have also seen (although this is more rare) people of a political stripe modify or even change their own positions on major issues. This has happened to me.

You may think that all of this is for naught. That a few enlightened individuals in a mass of voters will have no effect, but I think that eventually something very good will come out of these types of forums. ( Possibly even Rabble, and Free Dominion where I have posted in the past. )

Finally...

I think you're right - that Democracy seems pointless today.

Democracy seems ill to us because it was designed eons ago, in an era where opinions were written with a Quill and only the elite voted. If we want to revitalize it, we need to look beyond partisan politics and design a new democratic engine suited to today.

I wrote an article on it here in response to an article by Allan Gregg of Decima research:

The Politic

[Guest eureka]

Nice article, Michael, but, of course, I would not agree with the Reform Party section. I do think, though, that you are saying something like I believe. That is, that democracy is a fantasy in the sense that people think of it. Large, modern societies can only demand leadership that is open and responsive. The masses will never be able to participate.

Democracy in any known political meaning is for the small communities - such as you say Reform originally appealed to. Those communities can only know of their own local interest and, when the "grievances" are transferred to the larger scene, they enter the theatre of the absurd: as Reform did.

There is worse, though. Those communities were seduced by the leaders of Reform into thinking that the "solutions" were practical and capable of general application. They built an angry, uninformed constituency with no program other than greed and selfishness.

[Guest eureka]

Argus, provincial budgets did not have to shrink to produce the new proportions. They simply had not to grow in revenues, which is what happened.

As I have said several times, the spending on healthcare is very close to the same proportion of GDP as it was in 1993 before the savaging of all social programs.

The two highest rated health systems in the World are Sweden and Switzerland. The former spends about 6% of GDP on health and the latter about 14%. Can you guess which has the highest proportion of its system in the Private sector.

Can you make sense for me of your linking of Official Bilingualism - which you still seem not to understand - with Referenda? This is cause for despair for Canada when you, as a concerned citizen are filled with the claptrap of the bigots. What hope is there that the general population - the masses - can ever know what they are protesting? It makes the point that democracy is not a realistic hope.

The duplicity of the Reform leaders and their successors is well shown in the constant harping on the need for decentralization. It is that because they know the facts: it cannot be otherwise.

Canada is the only country in the world where the central government does not exercise overall control of education. It is the only country where the central government does not have at least a joint jurisdiction in healthcare. I believe it is also the only country where civil rights are exclusively a regional jurisdiction.

The two models of decentralization that are usually cited in disparaging the Canadian "central" control are Switzerland and the USA. Both of those countries spend a larger share of their Federal budgets on regional affairs. When you factor in Canada's federal share of health spending, the difference is large

The proportion of National income spent by the Federal governnment of the USA is about 17 or 18%. I have forgotten the exact figures. The proportion spent by the states, reflecting the respective federal and state powers is about one third of that amount.

In Canada, the federal government also spends about 17 or 18%. The provinces spend about the same as the federal government; this reflects the much greater regional powers and responsibilities. That is about three times the proportion that states in the US spend.

With some not too large changes, the propoertional differnces have been constant for several decades. Where is the overwhelming central power in Canada?

You are losing the eloquent obfuscation that I admired earlier when you are reduced to calling logical argument a "snivelling rant." I expected better from you. Perhaps my hopes where too high and I was thinking of all those really capable disputers that I have had these arguments with in the past. They, also, are always reduced to sputtering when they are faced with the truth.

[Michael Hardner]

There is worse, though. Those communities were seduced by the leaders of Reform into thinking that the "solutions" were practical and capable of general application. They built an angry, uninformed constituency with no program other than greed and selfishness.

I think that this emotion is real, though, and it needs to be channelled somewhere. Politics, as we have seen on these boards, is related to identity and it needs to make people feel that they have a voice.

I think that it may be time to reduce the role of the governing party in the day-to-day operation of many government operations. Good management might be better achieved if government operations were more open to more parties: political parties, and the interested public, ie. type of people who post on these boards. The governing party would still have the right to pass new laws.

This idea addresses one of the chief complaints about the central government, that they are unaccountable and corrupt. It also would address a problem that has never been successfully tackled: our democracies were never intended to act as the giant service corporations they have become.

Added:

And to reiterate, it's important that these things be discussed outside the playing field of partisan politics. If we can do so, I believe we can agree on ways to have our cake and eat it too.

[Pateris]

You do know that Sweden is PRIVATIZING it's hospitals right?

Because the state decided the system would be more affordable if there was competition and profit motive in the provision of health care. The state still provides the insurance, but not the actual operation of the hospitals.

And guess what: The labour unions LIKE IT, because their workers are getting paid more.

[Michael Hardner]

And guess what: The labour unions LIKE IT, because their workers are getting paid more.

I'm sure if the Unions here thought their jobs were safe, and their wages would go up they would favour it too.

[Guest eureka]

Don't just say that Sweden is privatizing its hospitals as though it meant something. Sweden has the rated best system in the world for one of the lowest costs in the world.

If it is "privatizing its hospitals (I would need to see evidence of that), then it is either going into a more costly mode or the privatization is a conditional one.

If the workers are to be paid more, then it will cost more. It will also move labour in the opposote direction to privatization anywhere else. You do know that hospital services that have been outsourced here have brought lower wages for workers, don't you.

[Argus]

Can you make sense for me of your linking of Official Bilingualism - which you still seem not to understand - with Referenda? This is cause for despair for Canada when you, as a concerned citizen are filled with the claptrap of the bigots.

If I had linked Referendums and Bilingualism this question might have some measure of purpose. As I never did I can only assume it's yet another attempt by you to throw up straw men because you don't know anything about the actual items under discussion. As for bilingualism, you clearly know nothing about the way it has been implimented by the government, especially as it pertains to the public service, and are placidly content with whatever the Liberals do so long as they claim it is to benefit Francophones.

Your accusation of "bigotry" is nothing more than the reflexive ad hominems hurled by the most morally and intellectually bankrupt on the left at anyone who challenges their world view.

The duplicity of the Reform leaders and their successors is well shown in the constant harping on the need for decentralization. It is that because they know the facts: it cannot be otherwise.

Of course they cannot be right. To be right, even a little bit right, you would have to be at least a little bit wrong. And I think your head would explode if you even tried to consider the possibility your far left political beliefs were anything other than perfect.

Your intollerence is so wild I have to wonder if you are even truly sane. It is the wild-eyed raving hatred of extremist ideologues which tolerates no disagreement, which condemns the morality, even the humanity of those who dare to disagree with them.

There is no point in trying to discuss anything with such people.

[Guest eureka]

You are quite right that there is no point in further discussion. There will be none until you can find some argument.

I have been dealing with and fighting language legislation in Canada for 30 years now: you can tell me nothing about it. It was I and colleagues that made the Official Language Commissioner (Keith Spicer at the time) withdraw some of the initiatives he proposed. Particularly the printing of a map for mass distribution that was to show all the alleged sins of English speaking Canadians against the French.

I have had many run-ins with politicians and officialdom over the Official Languages Act and much more intense activities against Quebec's "laws."

I have no objection to the purpose of the federal legislation.

[Black Dog]

You do know that Sweden is PRIVATIZING it's hospitals right?

Ahem.

The truth about Sweden.

Many of the press accounts from last summer regrettably confused "Swedish" with "socialist."

Most stories featured the decision of Stockholm County Council to turn over operation of St. Goran's hospital to a private firm and to contract out an increasing volume of care to other private facilities. However, few of the stories noted that Stockholm County was governed by a coalition of parties led by the Moderates (Sweden's equivalent of our Canadian Alliance party). Shut out of power nationally and in most local councils, the  Moderates chose to use their position in Stockholm, where they won control of both the county and city councils, to showcase their agenda of public restraint and privatization.

...

So how has the Stockholm county experiment turned out? The financial world has certainly not been impressed by the Moderate-led council. Standard and Poor's lowered Stockholm county's debt rating last fall.

In terms of patient care, there have also been worrying signs. There have been allegations that the private hospitals and clinics in Stockholm are predisposed to cream-skimming, making it more difficult for seriously ill patients to get care. Politically, the decision has turned out even worse for the Moderates.

Far from attracting voters with its Stockholm showcase, the party suffered its worst performance since 1973 in the Sept. 15 election. Meanwhile, the Social Democrats strengthened their grip on power at the national level and ousted the Moderates and their allies from control of both Stockholm county and Stockholm city

councils.

[Argus]

I have been dealing with and fighting language legislation in Canada for 30 years now: you can tell me nothing about it. It was I and colleagues that made the Official Language Commissioner (Keith Spicer at the time) withdraw some of the initiatives he proposed. Particularly the printing of a map for mass distribution that was to show all the alleged sins of English speaking Canadians against the French.

I have had many run-ins with politicians and officialdom over the Official Languages Act and much more intense activities against Quebec's "laws."

I have no objection to the purpose of the federal legislation.

If that were true your ranting defence of Official Bilingualism, accepting no criticism whatever, would make you either schitzophrenic or someone with a multi-personality disorder.

[Pateris]

Eureka,

One of the problems in Canada's medical system is that we pay nurses and doctors too little, and support staff too much. Should a janitor get paid more than $20/hr?

I don't think so. But they do. And we have too many administrators for what they do.

And we CANNOT TELL HOW MUCH IT COSTS TO TREAT AN INDIVIDUAL PATIENT. If we aren't MEASURING the costs, how can we possibly hope to control them?

[Guest eureka]

Possibly I do have some personality disorder: possibly multi. I sometimes think it must be so when I keep thinking that the light will someday penetrate the fog around the "Right."

Pateris, I will not pass judgement on the wage scales. Presumably you have also done research on this and have the truth in your fingertips.

Now if you could just convince me that some truth has also entered your head.

[Guest eureka]

Michael!

In the May/June issue of Philosophy Now magazine, there is an article entitled "Democracy Now" that you would find interesting: I think you would. This issue is in Chapters at the present time.

It starts "A major problem with democracy is how opinion can be organized and measured so that something resembling a general will, or a majority, or a consensus, can be identified. How can one possibly establish all the relevant opinions and values people hold? It then goes into the subversion of representation.

Another little tidbit relates to Freedom of the Press and Freedom of expresion. These "no doubt are are necessary for a functioning democracy, but their prevalence doesn't necessarily mean that there is a functioning democracy. The freedom to speak out does not mean the right to be heard."

I won't get into the rest, but it seems to be one that you might like to read given your obvious interest. I think this issue is in Chapters at the present time. You can read it without buying!

[August1991]

You do know that Sweden is PRIVATIZING it's hospitals right?

Ahem.

BD, you may know more about Sweden's health system than I do but I'm willing to bet that we'd have trouble filling a single page with our combined knowledge.

But BD, why does the government alone sell alcohol at the retail level? By the same logic, the government should alone sell vinegar, salt and bottled water. Would you be in favour of a Alberta Vinegar Control agency?

Now then, should medical services be provided that way too? In fact, they're not. Most doctors are not government employees and instead, they work as independent free-lancers who bill the government health insurance scheme.

Hugo finds state intervention in the health insurance business intolerable and wasteful. I am willing to make an argument that it makes sense.

But I see no reason that the government should be involved in managing hospitals, anymore than it should be involved in managing service stations.

How is this related to democracy?

It starts "A major problem with democracy is how opinion can be organized and measured so that something resembling a general will, or a majority, or a consensus, can be identified. How can one possibly establish all the relevant opinions and values people hold? It then goes into the subversion of representation.

eureka, I haven't read this article but if I remember, I'll take a peak the next time I'm in my local news shop.

The problem with democracy is obvious.

First, one man, one vote means that people cannot express the strength of their feelings for an issue or a candidate. Some people feel strongly about the environment, others merely care about it. Unfortunately, there is no functioning way to get people to reveal their true feelings honestly in a vote.

Second, my vote matters not a wit for the overall result. Hence, I don't bother to find out which candidates are good and I don't even bother to vote. People spend hours and hours figuring what car to buy or what house to buy. They negotiate, ask questions, look at their budget. Many of those same people pay as much or more in taxes yet never vote.

These people are not fools. They are not dupes. They know that an hour devoted to choosing a better RRSP has a much better return than an hour devoted to choosing the best candidate.

Forget everything you learned in high school civic classes. It's idealistic claptrap.

-----

Governments are useful (see above for health insurance) but they have a tendency to become tyrannical and make a mess of things.

So, we hem our leaders in. One way to do this is to roll the die every few years to pick new leaders. (We call that an election - it causes problems of its own but it makes politicians at least appear to be polite.) We also create independent judges and police (but that only works sort of). In Canada, we have a federal state so that the potential tyrants squabble with each other.

----

It is possible to make collective decisions based on individual votes but first, you have to devise a way to let people express their feelings about an issue and second, you have to devise a way to ensure that they tell the truth. No one has so far devised a voting mechanism to do that and no one can. The solution must be sought elsewhere.

I sense some dispair in you, Auguste. But don't be sad. Think instead about the best things that these forums have done.

I think these forums are a curious version of the local barber shop or hair salon. They are places where people gossip.

There's no doubt that the forums have replaced the letters' page and the Internet is in the process of radically alter newspapers.

I don't know what the forums mean for democracy.

There was a reference at the beginning of this thread to a Foreign Policy forum (now closed). It may have been interesting for participants but I can imagine what the bureaucrats did with the results. (No, they didn't file them under G. Instead, they picked and chose whatever they wanted to promote. The Minister was probably even more cavalier.)

I guess I sound cynical. I don't mean to.

[caesar]

One of the problems in Canada's medical system is that we pay nurses and doctors too little, and support staff too much. Should a janitor get paid more than $20/hr?

A "janitor" in a hospital may not need to make 20 per hour ; depending on his duties; but cleaning staff do need to be better trained than those in a shopping mall or other establishment. They need to be knowledgeable in avoiding picking up infections themselves and to clean properly to ensure infections do not spread.

BC replace our janitorial staff with a cheaper alternative. Seven women having caesareans ended up with a flesh eating type of disease. Some may never be able to have another child; some nearly died. There is, also, concern that these staff members may not have the training to ensure they are knowledgeable in avoiding infecting themselves with bacterial infections present in hospitals.

[caesar]

But BD, why does the government alone sell alcohol at the retail level? By the same logic, the government should alone sell vinegar, salt and bottled water. Would you be in favour of a Alberta Vinegar Control agency?

To better control that alcohol does not get sold to minors. Vinegar does not have that problem. Your logic is lacking logic.

[Guest eureka]

August, I would be interested in your views on the article. I have not drawn on it in discussion since I am not sure how I feel about some of it. It is interesting and wide ranging.

[Pateris]

caesar:

To better control that alcohol does not get sold to minors.

So, should cigarettes be sold ONLY in government run stores?

What about prescription drugs?

On that topic, how come the government doesn't nationalize the drug companies? That's part of health care that makes a profit... do you have a problem with that?