Left versus right?

[RonnieWood]

We are tied for number one in spending on healthcare among OECD nations, but we're 16th in doctors per capita, 15th for access to advanced medical technology, 14th in percentage of total life expectancy disability free, 16th in infant mortality (one of the most important statistics in determining quality of life in a nation), 8th in mortality amenable to healthcare, 9th in potential years of life lost due to disease, and 6th in incidents of breast cancer mortality.

This post is a little bit dated but.......what's a couple days.

A country like Canada is going to have well above average costs for Health Care compared to the other OECD countries just because of our geographical size and also the insane cost of doing things across the north. Don't try to tab our #1 spot on our shabby system alone, because even with an improved system we'll still be spending more compared to other OECD nations.

I think almost everyone will agree something needs to be done about our Health Care system, and adding some private services would not be a bad start. There's a lot of people on waiting lists right now who would be willing to pay for their surgery, so why not let them? They get the fast service they are willing to pay for and the public system gets cleared up a little benefiting everyone still waiting there. Looks like a Win-Win situation to me. Actually you can add another Win for everyone who works at the private and public facilities as well.

Win-Win-Win

[err]

RonnieWood,Apr 29 2005, 03:26 AM

A two-tiered system is "the beginning of the end" for a universal system. When wealthier people have a choice to get faster treatment, they can pay, and get it more quickly with a two-tiered system.... Then the line-ups for the public system will be shorter, and it will just be those poor people who don't count quite as much... so they don't have to fund the public system with quite the urgency....

We don't have enough funding for our system, which, by the way is cheaper per capita than the US system, and it doesn't leave out 40 million people like the US system... do you know why....

There's no money left for health care after Paul Martin pays a few billion of the tax surplus to the deficit, and then lowers the federal tax revenue to get our corporate tax rates even a few more points below the US corporate tax rates. He's got his priorities... Corporate Canada. (and clinging on for dear life right now)

[RonnieWood]

A two-tiered system is "the beginning of the end" for a universal system. When wealthier people have a choice to get faster treatment, they can pay, and get it more quickly with a two-tiered system.... Then the line-ups for the public system will be shorter, and it will just be those poor people who don't count quite as much... so they don't have to fund the public system with quite the urgency....

So let me get this straight. You say that a two-tiered system would kill a universal system. Right? Then you repeat what I say about how rich people will be able to afford and pay for fast, reliable and available health care. Also you repeat what I said about the public system being less bogged down but you replace "public" with "poor".

Now that fist bit makes since but what is your basis for saying the public system would be full of poor people and therefore it won't get the proper funding it would need? GIVE ME A BREAK!! I certainly hope thinking like this isn't the norm in this country!!! The rich will be paying more of a share for the public system then the poor people would!!! (based on income tax rates in this country)

Not to mention that the middle class would be using more of the public system rather then the private system anyway...it wouldn't just be the poor.

I'd love to hear some arguments from the people who will suffer with MORE Health Care!

[err]

Ronnie Wood wrote:

The rich will be paying more of a share for the public system then the poor people would!!! (based on income tax rates in this country)

Your point might have a bit more credibility if there were similar numbers of rich and poor people. However, owing to the fact that 1% of our population holds 50% of the wealth in this country, your argument seems slightly flawed.

Just curious about what you think.... Should that 1% get 50 percent of the services ?....

Do you think that the 1% contributes even wildly close to 50% of the tax revenues... I think not... It is the lower and middle income earners that pay the lions share of the taxes in this country... simply because there are just so many of them.

[Argus]

A two-tiered system is "the beginning of the end" for a universal system. 

Odd how it works in Europe then.

When wealthier people have a choice to get faster treatment, they can pay, and get it more quickly with a two-tiered system....

Are you under the illusion they have no such choice now? Do you actually think to see limos parked outside emergency rooms as their owners wait for hours to get treated?

Then the line-ups for the public system will be shorter, and it will just be those poor people who don't count quite as much... so they don't have to fund the public system with quite the urgency....

Do you think they're funding the system with "urgency" now, given that no rich people use it?

There's no money left for health care after Paul Martin pays a few billion of the tax surplus to the deficit,

I dunno, he found over 4 billion for Jack Layton pretty easily.

[scribblet]

Cybercoma wrote this...I couldn't put it any better so i won't...don't go around supposedly accurately quoteing things you know nothing of...

The report calls for Canadians to have the freedom to decide for themselves where they want to get their healthcare from. It also says that most times you're going to enter into the system through public doctors, clinics and hospitals before you're referred to private facilities if that's what you choose.

This misconception about public healthcare and public health insurance being eliminated really gets under my skin, as I know it does for you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is true and one reason I get ticked off too, no one has ever said they want to get rid of the current system. Did anyone read the letter last week in the N.P. from Preston M. & Mike Harris saying "We do not support a U.S. style Health Care system" ? The sheeples believe what the liberal machine tells them, they buy into it lock stock and barrel.

[Guest eureka]

And you believe a letter written by Harris and Manning! One a nutcase and the other a man who has made a career out of lying and bullying!

Has it not occurred to you that what they propose is not a US style Healthcare system. It is, htough, a made-in-Canadian provinces hodge podge of profitable opportunities for the boys.

[cybercoma]

And you believe a letter written by Harris and Manning! One a nutcase and the other a man who has made a career out of lying and bullying!

Has it not occurred to you that what they propose is not a US style Healthcare system. It is, htough, a made-in-Canadian provinces hodge podge of profitable opportunities for the boys.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Personal insults, now that's the way to sway voters. One is a nutcase and the other is a liar and bully. Does it get anymore sophomoric than this?

And since when did profit become this evil thing to be avoided? You insult people's intelligence by saying they don't understand recent history and in the next breath you completely advocate socialist/communist ideas as if they haven't caused the collapse of many nations.

[RonnieWood]

Ronnie Wood wrote:

The rich will be paying more of a share for the public system then the poor people would!!! (based on income tax rates in this country)

Your point might have a bit more credibility if there were similar numbers of rich and poor people. However, owing to the fact that 1% of our population holds 50% of the wealth in this country, your argument seems slightly flawed.

Just curious about what you think.... Should that 1% get 50 percent of the services ?....

Do you think that the 1% contributes even wildly close to 50% of the tax revenues... I think not... It is the lower and middle income earners that pay the lions share of the taxes in this country... simply because there are just so many of them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK let's see here:

Your point might have a bit more credibility if there were similar numbers of rich and poor people.  However, owing to the fact that 1% of our population holds 50% of the wealth in this country, your argument seems slightly flawed.

Here's link I should have posted earlier.....

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Pag...rce_login=false

This article is locked now, but if you have a membership you can see the whole thing.....

'Canada's top 10% pay 52% of total tax bill'

By TAVIA GRANT

Saturday, April 23, 2005, Page A1

They used to say make the rich pay. Well, they do.

The top 10 per cent of Canadian wage earners carried more than half the nation's federal personal income tax load in 2002 -- 52.6 per cent -- up significantly from 1990, according to a Statistics Canada report released yesterday.

So that's where I was coming from when I said the rich in this country will be paying the lions share of health care costs.

Just curious about what you think.... Should that 1% get 50 percent of the services ?....

Don't know where this came from but to answer your question......NO

Do you think that the 1% contributes even wildly close to 50% of the tax revenues... I think not... It is the lower and middle income earners that pay the lions share of the taxes in this country... simply because there are just so many of them.

No I don't think the top 1% contributes anywhere near 50% of tax revenues, and I never said I did. You said:

"owing to the fact that 1% of our population holds 50% of the wealth in this country...."

I said:

"The rich will be paying more of a share for the public system then the poor people would!!! (based on income tax rates in this country) "

You substituted the word rich with the top 1% business...

So I'll stick with what I said, but change it slightly.....

"The rich (top 10%) will be paying more of a share for the public system then the poor people would!!! (based on income tax rates in this country) "

[Guest eureka]

Can't you do a little better than that?

Personal insults, indeed. The man who probably convinced Day that the world was created in October, 4004 B.C. He is a bona fide nut who pushed hard for the destruction of Canada.

The other is likely before this year is out to have to answer for many of his lies: in particular the ones relating to the assassination of an unarmed Indian.

Profit is not an "evil thing to be avoided" in my opinion though there have been cultures where it was considered so. That is your invention in this context.

Caring about the health of our healthcare system is a "communistic/socialist" concern. That is a new one you should copyright. Caring about the health of the nation has led to the collapse of many states is also a dilly you should nurture for entertainment purposes.

[Argus]

And you believe a letter written by Harris and Manning! One a nutcase and the other a man who has made a career out of lying and bullying!

Aside from having political ideas which differ from your own often childish, simplistic and poorly thought-out beliefs in what way was Preston Manning "a nut case"?

[Argus]

Personal insults, indeed. The man who probably convinced Day that the world was created in October, 4004 B.C. He is a bona fide nut who pushed hard for the destruction of Canada.

Do you believe all religious people are insane? Including all Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, etc?

The other is likely before this year is out to have to answer for many of his lies: in particular the ones relating to the assassination of an unarmed Indian.

From all available evidence, the very most Harris can be accused of in the killing of Dudley George, is having urged the OPP to hurry up and end the natives' illegal occupation of a park. Your tendency towards rabid, hate-driven hyperbole grows worse by the day.

[err]

There's no money left for health care after Paul Martin pays a few billion of the tax surplus to the deficit,

I dunno, he found over 4 billion for Jack Layton pretty easily.

Isn't it funny how he can find lots of money when his position of power is threatened. Not really.... Paul Martin is a fiscal Conservative, and doesn't seem to mind that our medical system is deteriorating, as long as he pays down his deficit and gives his golfing partners their tax breaks.

How about another reason why our health care system costs so much. A huge chunk of our health care costs are prescription drugs. Brian Mulroney, in his bid to satisfy his golfing partners who own drug companies, set the time limit before a drug can be copied by a generic drug manufacturer to 20 years from what it used to be (7 years). Do you think that this move has put any downward pressure on drug prices.... How many billions of dollars a year has that increased our health costs ????

(Brian Mulroney should be considered a TRAITOR by Canadians.)