Conservative Type Healthcare

[THELIBERAL]

Oh yes give us some of this insurance driven healthcare!!!! Aw yes this is what we need to fix our system.

YEAH RIGHT!!!!!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ienceandHealth/

U.S. surgery costs found to be double those in Canada

One of the first studies to directly compare the costs of surgery in Canada and the United States has found Canada's single-payer system is far more cost efficient, but it still has a lot of room for improvement.

[kimmy]

Oh goody. Once again, the usual fallacy rears its head: If somebody's talking about changing Canadian healthcare, they must be talking about adopting a US model. Because after all, there's not more than 2 healthcare systems in the world.

-k

[THELIBERAL]

Oh goody. Once again, the usual fallacy rears its head: If somebody's talking about changing Canadian healthcare, they must be talking about adopting a US model.  Because after all, there's not more than 2 healthcare systems in the world.

-k

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well that's all I hear the Conservatives talking about! They want a U.S.A. type system to go along with our private system.

Wow we should be real excited about that possibilty!

[I miss Reagan]

Oh goody. Once again, the usual fallacy rears its head: If somebody's talking about changing Canadian healthcare, they must be talking about adopting a US model.  Because after all, there's not more than 2 healthcare systems in the world.

-k

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here here. The funny thing about Klein's "3rd way" is that nothing seems to have changed. It sounds like the same old system to me.

Well that's all I hear the Conservatives talking about! They want a U.S.A. type system to go along with our private system.

No. All you hear is the biased media telling you that Conservatives want a U.S.A. style of system.

[mcqueen625]

Oh yes give us some of this insurance driven healthcare!!!!  Aw yes this is what we need to fix our system.

YEAH RIGHT!!!!!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ienceandHealth/

U.S. surgery costs found to be double those in Canada

One of the first studies to directly compare the costs of surgery in Canada and the United States has found Canada's single-payer system is far more cost efficient, but it still has a lot of room for improvement.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you really naive enough to believe it isn't already here, especially with the revalations that our own federal government has been contracting private-for-profit healthcare services for Member's of Parlaiment, the RCMP, and our Military, while at the same time acting as if he (Martin) is the saviour of Medicare in Canada? What a joke on all Canadians, and many of us were stupid enough to believe that Martin really cares about the health of individual Canadians, so you marched our like good littel puppets and made your mark beside the Liberal candidate's name in your particular riding.

I was alive before Medicare, and I do remember my requiring expensive medication for asthema when I was a child, but the big difference between tehn and now is that most people were employed in full-time jobs, that provided healthcare, and prescription coverage to their employees. Our successive governments have allowed multinational corporations for ship much of our full-time work off-shore, and substitute a workplace where medical coverage is no longer the norm for employees, because many are working two and three part-time or term positions which provides no benefits, and low wages.

The signage of the FTA, and NAFTA has all but sdealed our destiny as not much better than third world status. The corporate agenda seems not to be to escalate wages and benefits of third world countries up to Western standards, but instead to bring wages and benefits down to the lowest common denominator, to allow them to maximize profits. Keep us all grateful just to have a job at all. That's the corporate way.

[Bro]

Once again the liberal party and their double standards prove they are in favor of public/private healthcare for themselves and the province of quebec,but in Ontario the situation is completely reversed.Dalton raised taxes for healthcare,yet improvements,still after a year,are yet to be observed.

[Big Blue Machine]

Canada should have a European style health care system, their system works...

[Chimera]

Canada should have a European style health care system, their system works...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If I understand correctly though, thanks to NAFTA, if we open up our health care system to private companies, US corporations will have a distinct advantage. Something about preferred country status? Correct me if I'm wrong (which I hope I am in this case )

[ConservativeJoe]

I for one am happy to see that medicare is opening up, for a few reasons.

Firstly, the liberal media will not be able to use the "They will destroy medicare!" scare tactic at election time anymore.

Secondly, we have had private clinics and labs here for years, and they speed things up. The only thing is we haven't been able to buy insurance for those. Klein's third way gets around the Liberal's roadblocks by adding choices. Kind of what you get in Ontario if you want an upgraded room.

Thirdly, the fear tactic that our doctors will leave the public system for a private system is hogwash. They have been leaving for years now, but they haven't gone to our pirvate system because we don't have one. No, they have gone south or to Europe and who could blame them. Would you let the government tell you how much you will make for your skills? I sure wouldn't.

Fourthly, I don't need the government to take care of me. I am not in favor of the massive social programs that we have now and are building, ie daycare. I think that socialism is a bad thing, and I am pretty sure that I can take care of myself without the government holding our hand. Paul Martin et al are shocked that they are going to lose control of our health care. Imagine, Canadians are going to be able to make decisions! How awful!

[Guest eureka]

You are only too right! If we open up health care to private corporations, then, under NAFTA, there will be a flood of American Corporations coming in and we won't be able to stop them.

The good doctor Chaillou has already addressed American audiences inviting them to come to the party. The case was never about healthcare: it was all about lining the pockets of the doctor at the expense of the Canadian public.

[cybercoma]

Oh yes give us some of this insurance driven healthcare!!!!  Aw yes this is what we need to fix our system.

YEAH RIGHT!!!!!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ienceandHealth/

U.S. surgery costs found to be double those in Canada

One of the first studies to directly compare the costs of surgery in Canada and the United States has found Canada's single-payer system is far more cost efficient, but it still has a lot of room for improvement.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can you please clarify what you're talking about?

Conservative health care ideas and the US health care system are leaps and bounds apart.

[cybercoma]

You are only too right! If we open up health care to private corporations, then, under NAFTA, there will be a flood of American Corporations coming in and we won't be able to stop them.

The good doctor Chaillou has already addressed American audiences inviting them to come to the party. The case was never about healthcare: it was all about lining the pockets of the doctor at the expense of the Canadian public.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your bitter anti-Americanism obviously clouds your judgement. What's the problem with American Corporations coming in? They will still need to compete in the Canadian market which will be largely driven by the public healthcare system, and that's if they even want to bother. Most of them won't want to play the game in an arena with public care, something they don't have to deal with now.

You sound like the poster child for the anti-american anti-corporate activist groups that preach about freedom, but would much rather have government interference in every part of our lives.

[Guest eureka]

Where is the "anti-Americanism" in not wanting to allow their corporate style healthcare to feed off sick Canadians?

I said that under NAFTA, we will have no way of preventing that and that the doctor involved in the SCC case has already accepted speaking engagements in the US and actually invited and encouraged American corporations to move North of the border. That is fact.

Of course they will need to compete in the Canadian Market. But that market will not be publicly driven as you claim. It will, as everywhere that there is free private entry, force the public system to become a provider of last resort: an underfunded and inadequately system.

It appears that your eyes are too clouded to allow you to exercise any judgement if you can't read the commentaries and see the writing on the wall.

[Canuck E Stan]

Boy am I mad, I just heard on the radio that the Klein Cons in Alberta stole these "new" reforms from the BC'ers who had these reforms for some time now, and these reforms have also been used in Toronto for some time too. So these " American style" of health reforms the Alberta government presented to the public as the "third way" was really ripped off from the provincial Liberals in BC and Ontario. Doesn't that just tick you off?

[cybercoma]

Where is the "anti-Americanism" in not wanting to allow their corporate style healthcare to feed off sick Canadians?

I said that under NAFTA, we will have no way of preventing that and that the doctor involved in the SCC case has already accepted speaking engagements in the US and actually invited and encouraged American corporations to move North of the border. That is fact.

Of course they will need to compete in the Canadian Market. But that market will not be publicly driven as you claim. It will, as everywhere that there is free private entry, force the public system to become a provider of last resort: an underfunded and inadequately system.

It appears that your eyes are too clouded to allow you to exercise any judgement if you can't read the commentaries and see the writing on the wall.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're talking nonsense and obscuring the situation as usual.

"Feeding off sick Canadians" is a nice use of colourful language to bash the idea of corporate healthcare providers offering extended services to Canadians.

American corporations moving north and providing healthcare isn't necessarily a bad thing. The companies offering care aren't going to control the system, whereas in the United States they have no public system so they're free to do as they wish.

We already have american corporations providing pharmaceuticals to canadians at much cheaper prices than they offer them in the United States.

Most Canadians will still enter the healthcare system under public care, but they will have tests and other extended services done through private providers IF THEY CHOOSE to do so. OHIP and other public insurance will still cover the things they cover throughout the ENTIRE system private/public. Employer's benefits will still cover the same things they cover whether you go through private or public care.

There is no writing on the wall. There is a myth that we have the greatest healthcare system in the world, meanwhile NONE of the statistics show that and I encourage you to show me otherwise.

All of this nonsense about "we will have an AMERICAN SYSTEM" is just that, nonsense and fearmongering.

A conservative style healthcare system will provide the necessities we need through public providers and public insurance, which you may supplement through private insurance that you can either pay for or have paid to you by an employer. The public system will still be the doorway into healthcare and nothing I have heard or read has proven otherwise.

[Guest eureka]

Perhaps you should put your bias aside and do a little thinking. Have you not heard of NAFTA?

The decision is a Trojan Horse and once private participation is allowed, we cnnot stop American incursions. Pharmaceutical companies providing drugs have no relevance to the healthcare system. If they were part of the CHT, then the incursion would already be under way.

If you have read nothing about this, then I suggest that you read a little more catholically and, instead of accusing others of talking nonsense, learn what idiocy you are spouting.

To write of most Canadians entering through the public system really shows that you have paid no attention to all the arguments made on several threads. Wherever there is an actual component of private healthcare, there has been a deterioration of the public system. The references to that were given in some discussions.

[cybercoma]

Perhaps you should put your bias aside and do a little thinking. Have you not heard of NAFTA?

The decision is a Trojan Horse and once private participation is allowed, we cnnot stop American incursions. Pharmaceutical companies providing drugs have no relevance to the healthcare system. If they were part of the CHT, then the incursion would already be under way.

If you have read nothing about this, then I suggest that you read a little more catholically and, instead of accusing others of talking nonsense, learn what idiocy you are spouting.

To write of most Canadians entering through the public system really shows that you have paid no attention to all the arguments made on several threads. Wherever there is an actual component of private healthcare, there has been a deterioration of the public system. The references to that were given in some discussions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your entire argument is that "american corporations are EVIL," and that they'll somehow turn a two-tiered system into an American style privatized only type system.

Please, correct me if I'm misunderstanding you because if i am, then I apologize. Otherwise, you're talking nonsense because there isn't a single politician in Canadian politics that wants to eliminate public healthcare. I highly doubt they'd allow the public system to be destroyed.

You do know I can go to Detroit and get healthcare services at a private hospital with my OHIP card, right?

[theloniusfleabag]

IMR,

Here here. The funny thing about Klein's "3rd way" is that nothing seems to have changed. It sounds like the same old system to me.

Funny, Ralphie likes it for health care, but doesn't want people to get married who like 'the third way' in the bedroom.

I am all in favour of a 'blended system' because the present one isn't working. I heard from my own doctor that people are now dying on waiting lists. Besides, we already have a 'multiple-tiered system'...those that can afford it already go to the US for treatment, professional athletes and politicians have their own teams of private doctors, etc.

Dear eureka,

I agree that when I heard of changes to health care I was worried that we Canadians were going to be 'thrown to the wolves' with having to rely on private insurance companies (who only work to make a profit for themselves) and the fact that the majority of private bankruptcies in the US are due to huge medical bills is scary. However, what is more scary is the present Canadian system. Change desperately needs to be made.

[Guest eureka]

Thank you for telling me what my "entire argument" is. That takes a great weight of doubt from my mind.

Now, if you look at the decision and look at the relevant clauses of NAFTA, then your "entire argument" may be modified.

The door is opened and our politicians cannot do a thing to close it other than renegotiating the Trade Agreements.

How do we keep those "evil" American Corporations from tearing large holes in the healthcare sstem? This is not just about the capacity to insure extras,

[BHS]

Canada should have a European style health care system, their system works...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If I understand correctly though, thanks to NAFTA, if we open up our health care system to private companies, US corporations will have a distinct advantage. Something about preferred country status? Correct me if I'm wrong (which I hope I am in this case )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is a good point, that I hadn't considered before. A privately run hospital owned by a US company might have a case that a publicly run hospital providing treatment for free was a form of government-subsidized competition, and therefore illegal under NAFTA.

The solution to this problem would be to negotiate an exemption clause in NAFTA for medical treatment, which I can't see the American's refusing. They also have free clinics and an enormous amount of government subsidy under Medicaid that would just as easily become illegal for the same reason, and I don't see the American public approving of that any more than ours would.

UPDATE: reading further, I note that eureka is making more or less the same point.

[Renegade]

One of the first studies to directly compare the costs of surgery in Canada and the United States has found Canada's single-payer system is far more cost efficient, but it still has a lot of room for improvement.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True, medical costs in Canada are less than the US, however part of the reason is that the government as sole payer can dictate the labour cost. While this is beneficial to the general health care consumer, it is not of benefit to the labour which makes up the health care industry. Is it any wonder that the best ones leave for the US? The other issue in comparing costs of medical procedures it that it does not evaluate the entire experience for the medical consumer. Which is of more value to you: a bypass surgery which you had to wait 10 months for and costs $10,373, or one you can book within a week and cost $20,673. If you didn't have 10 months to live, it might be the latter.

Even assuming we retained our single-payor system, healthcare can be overhauled by:

1. Rethinking how the system is funded. The system is currently funded from general taxes. IMO, the system should be funded just like any other insurance system (ie based upon risk and propensity to use the system)

2. Adding disincentives to overuse the system. This would include requiring users to pay a portion of the costs and a yearly deductable. IMO the intent of a healthcare system is to make healthcare affordable (not necessarily to make it free)

3. Adding a yearly maximium. Virtually all insurance has defined maximiums, and healthcare should be no different. To make the most efficient use of healthcare funds, it makes no sense to spend huge sums on one individual when the same funds can be used more effectively on a larger number.

yes, I know this is my first post, so feel free to bash away.

[cybercoma]

Thank you for telling me what my "entire argument" is. That takes a great weight of doubt from my mind.

Now, if you look at the decision and look at the relevant clauses of NAFTA, then your "entire argument" may be modified.

The door is opened and our politicians cannot do a thing to close it other than renegotiating the Trade Agreements.

How do we keep those "evil" American Corporations from tearing large holes in the healthcare sstem? This is not just about the capacity to insure extras,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

blah blah blah, what's the problem with american healthcare providers when we will still have a public system with public insurance that will cover the necessities?

That's right, nothing.

Do you hold the same contempt for American farmers, pharmaceutical companies, car manufacturers and every other americacn company you come across in a day?

Apparently you have seen the future and know that when these companies come in they will somehow do away with the public healthcare system.

I'm still waiting for you to point me in the right direction to show me the evidence of this. NAFTA will allow them in, but I don't recall where in NAFTA it says they can stop public funding for public healthcare.

[canuckcat]

....

Your bitter anti-Americanism obviously clouds your judgement.  What's the problem with American Corporations coming in?  They will still need to compete in the Canadian market which will be largely driven by the public healthcare system, and that's if they even want to bother.  Most of them won't want to play the game in an arena with public care, something they don't have to deal with now.

...

Oh geesh... you played the "Anti-American" card... nowadays it trumps the race card in chat... or comparing someone to Hitler ... LOL... I think Canadians can solve their problems on their own... There are very few areas where Americans have anything at all to teach us... I know that despite the weak Supreme Court ruling re Quebec, we will no doubt continue on the current course improving as we go. Deep structural change within our healthcare system is beginning to happen (extended roles for nurses, public education on disease prevention, etc). Canadians can lead the world in universal healthcare - but only if we stop listening to people without vision. On a more pragmatic note, bear in mind that single-tier universal healthcare is a cental plank of the Liberal Party's dogma... without it, people may vote otherwise... I suspect that Canada will continue to offer a similar but much improved system as time goes on...

[Melanie_]

Even assuming we retained our single-payor system, healthcare can be overhauled by:

1. Rethinking how the system is funded. The system is currently funded from general taxes. IMO, the system should be funded just like any other insurance system (ie based upon risk and propensity to use the system)

2. Adding disincentives to overuse the system. This would include requiring users to pay a portion of the costs and a yearly deductable. IMO the intent of a healthcare system is to make healthcare affordable (not necessarily to make it free)

3. Adding a yearly maximium. Virtually all insurance has defined maximiums, and healthcare should be no different. To make the most efficient use of healthcare funds, it makes no sense to spend huge sums on one individual when the same funds can be used more effectively on a larger number.

yes, I know this is my first post, so feel free to bash away.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Renegade - don't worry, our collective bark is worse than our bite.

I think your ideas would require a change in the basic philosophy behind our universal health care system. Right now, it operates on the premise that collectively we share the costs of care for all Canadians - no one is expected to bear the full financial burden of health care for a child born with cystic fibrosis, for example. Your suggestions would have this family pay based on risk (=high, as this child will likely die by the time s/he is 15), and usage (again, high, for ongoing treatment of a chronic disability), and would have them cut off after a certain point, regardless of the need for further care. On the other hand, this family will likely be down to one income, as someone needs to spend a great deal of time managing and monitoring the child's health, and would therefore be less likely to be able to afford any care over and above what you would allot.

Your point about not spending huge sums of money on one person, when the funds can be used more effectively for many, might make sense from a purely economic view, but not from a humanitarian view. That is the fundamental question we have to ask ourselves as Canadians - do we want a health care system based on economics, or based on social principles?

[Renegade]

Melanie,

Thank-you for your thoughtful response!!

Yes I agree with you that there are going to be cases such as the example you cite where a family cannot afford the cost of paying for their own health coverage, however this case is analogous to the case of a family's house burning down and they couldn't afford fire insurance. These are exceptional situations, and we generally handle situations such as this by voluntary charitable giving.

I believe it is impossible to create a workable system based purely on social principles. If the economic principles do not support the system, it will collapse as our system is doing now. As well, a system based purely upon social principles while morally commendable, will economically penalize those who contribute to its funding. This would be ok if the funding was voluntary, but in our system it is not