Canada's Health Care System

[Kiraly]

Anyone with experience in our system wont find many surprises here.

Short Film on our Health Care System

About 25 minutes in length.

[Hicksey]

We lost my mohter in law to waiting lists. My own mother ended up having 2 extra surgeries because they delayed her first so long the cancer spread.

People like call what we get health care. I call it neglect.

It's pretty sad day when the health care your pets have access to is better than your own.

And people wonder why I object to the level of taxation in this country ...

[Kiraly]

We lost my mohter in law to waiting lists. My own mother ended up having 2 extra surgeries because they delayed her first so long the cancer spread.

People like call what we get health care. I call it neglect.

It's pretty sad day when the health care your pets have access to is better than your own.

And people wonder why I object to the level of taxation in this country ...

My girlfriend waited over a year to have her knee operated on. My father is currently waiting to have an operation.

I wonder if Harper has the will to really address this issue in the future - like introducing real reform in the next election campaign which may not be universally appealing.

The status quo is unacceptable and I don't think any of the measures the Conservatives plan to introduce in their current mandate will have any significant effect on our system.

[ktk]

I agree with the wait times and the level of accountability. It was a series of stories like the ones posted to this thread from friends and family that made me think about launching a website like I recently did.

MedicareStories.com allows you to register and record your medicare nightmares or successes. I would like to have a number of grass roots examples to demostrate to the current powers that be that the system is in need of much more accountability and improvements.

Have a visit or let me know if you have any questions...

Thanks!

[shoop]

I made it through about half the film.

As the old saying goes "you gotta consider the source".

Whenever I go to a Web site with links to Ayn Rand books I know where they are coming from and realize that I'm probably not going to agree with them.

To each their own though...

[shoop]

Oops, double post.

[sideshow]

ive never had a problem with the health care system. i got in to see a specialist within a month of seeing my doctor for my illness, and was diagnosed and continue to receive excellent treatment.

my mother was properly diagnosed with her terminal illness within a short time and is receiving the best care available under the circumstances.

and neither of us have paid a dime out of pocket. i understand this isnt everyones experience, but i believe that the system can work- unfortunately not all the time.

[willy]

Sideshow, I would ask if you think the service you recieved is sustainable.

Currently most provinces are spending around 40% of their budget on medicare.

With new technologies, increase drug costs, aging population, skilled worker shortage this number will go up.

Can we really keep doing the same thing and expecting a good result?

[Hicksey]

Sideshow, I would ask if you think the service you recieved is sustainable.

Currently most provinces are spending around 40% of their budget on medicare.

With new technologies, increase drug costs, aging population, skilled worker shortage this number will go up.

Can we really keep doing the same thing and expecting a good result?

IMO without a hybrid multiple payer/multiple provider system I highly doubt it. Not unless we don't have a problem with tax freedom day coming a couple of months later.

[sideshow]

Hello Willy. I really cant answer your question as I am not knowledgeable enough in the matter to debate the issue. I can give you my opinion though.

I dont believe that privatized, for purchase healthcare is the answer. In order to have private care, you have to have someone willing to provide the service at a profit. For example (and im just picking numbers out of the air), if it costs 1000 dollars to do an MRI (make payments on the equipment, pay the staff to operate, pay a portion of building costs/rent, etc.), then a private provider would have to charge more (for this example lets say 1100 dollars). That means the cost of the MRI is an inflated cost.

Now if a public system provided the same procedure at cost, it would be only the original 1000 dollars. Because the public system is meant as a non profit.

Either way, people are going to pay for their healthcare. Either pay now, or pay later, but you will pay. I have had many a discussion with my grandmother about this issue, and she tells me stories about how people, prior to our current public system, would either a) not receive healthcare when it was needed, or have to go on payment plans to pay off medical bills with their doctor.

The problem is not with the system itself in my opinion-i truly believe it is the best system overall. I think that some abuse it (seeking medical attention for every minor ache and pain), and that it is mismanaged in many respects. I think that some of the administration staff (which remember is a public service) are paid much too richly (and i am not talking about doctors, nurses, technicians, etc. who i believe deserve every penny that they make), purchases for equipment are not made properly (why not buy things nationally, in bulk and end the provincial splitting), and i think that perhaps some specialty services should be centralized in a portion of the country and all major tests for certain things could be done under one roof to ensure speedy access (rather than having to wait 6 months between tests).

Another issue (and i am sure this one will receive flak) is that i think the government should create, purchase or nationalize a drug company. The costs are going up, due to ridiculous profits to drug manufacturers. If the government had a drug company operating not for profit, but for the people, perhaps it could create drugs at a reasonable cost to the tax payers.

And to be perfectly honest, i would pay MORE taxes to ensure a public, not for profit, fully accessable healthcare system was in place-but i would need assurances that the extra money was 100% dedicated to healthcare-which i dont believe any of the current political parties could/would do.

Thats just my two cents.

[margrace]

Hello Willy. I really cant answer your question as I am not knowledgeable enough in the matter to debate the issue. I can give you my opinion though.

I dont believe that privatized, for purchase healthcare is the answer. In order to have private care, you have to have someone willing to provide the service at a profit. For example (and im just picking numbers out of the air), if it costs 1000 dollars to do an MRI (make payments on the equipment, pay the staff to operate, pay a portion of building costs/rent, etc.), then a private provider would have to charge more (for this example lets say 1100 dollars). That means the cost of the MRI is an inflated cost.

Now if a public system provided the same procedure at cost, it would be only the original 1000 dollars. Because the public system is meant as a non profit.

Either way, people are going to pay for their healthcare. Either pay now, or pay later, but you will pay. I have had many a discussion with my grandmother about this issue, and she tells me stories about how people, prior to our current public system, would either a) not receive healthcare when it was needed, or have to go on payment plans to pay off medical bills with their doctor.

The problem is not with the system itself in my opinion-i truly believe it is the best system overall. I think that some abuse it (seeking medical attention for every minor ache and pain), and that it is mismanaged in many respects. I think that some of the administration staff (which remember is a public service) are paid much too richly (and i am not talking about doctors, nurses, technicians, etc. who i believe deserve every penny that they make), purchases for equipment are not made properly (why not buy things nationally, in bulk and end the provincial splitting), and i think that perhaps some specialty services should be centralized in a portion of the country and all major tests for certain things could be done under one roof to ensure speedy access (rather than having to wait 6 months between tests).

Another issue (and i am sure this one will receive flak) is that i think the government should create, purchase or nationalize a drug company. The costs are going up, due to ridiculous profits to drug manufacturers. If the government had a drug company operating not for profit, but for the people, perhaps it could create drugs at a reasonable cost to the tax payers.

And to be perfectly honest, i would pay MORE taxes to ensure a public, not for profit, fully accessable healthcare system was in place-but i would need assurances that the extra money was 100% dedicated to healthcare-which i dont believe any of the current political parties could/would do.

Thats just my two cents.

Sideshow I agree with you. We have a great system where everyone is treated equaly. What it appears to me is the like the big Texan I saw coming out of our open clinic, he was furious because he had to wait his turn. It that was public health care, he wanted nothing to do with it. He stood at the door and yelled about having to wait his turn.

[Michael Hardner]

Sideshow I agree with you. We have a great system where everyone is treated equaly. What it appears to me is the like the big Texan I saw coming out of our open clinic, he was furious because he had to wait his turn. It that was public health care, he wanted nothing to do with it. He stood at the door and yelled about having to wait his turn.

That's just silly. Queueing is a fact of life for any service - public or private. This person was highly immature, that's all.

[Hicksey]

Hello Willy. I really cant answer your question as I am not knowledgeable enough in the matter to debate the issue. I can give you my opinion though.

I dont believe that privatized, for purchase healthcare is the answer. In order to have private care, you have to have someone willing to provide the service at a profit. For example (and im just picking numbers out of the air), if it costs 1000 dollars to do an MRI (make payments on the equipment, pay the staff to operate, pay a portion of building costs/rent, etc.), then a private provider would have to charge more (for this example lets say 1100 dollars). That means the cost of the MRI is an inflated cost.

Now if a public system provided the same procedure at cost, it would be only the original 1000 dollars. Because the public system is meant as a non profit.

Either way, people are going to pay for their healthcare. Either pay now, or pay later, but you will pay. I have had many a discussion with my grandmother about this issue, and she tells me stories about how people, prior to our current public system, would either a) not receive healthcare when it was needed, or have to go on payment plans to pay off medical bills with their doctor.

The problem is not with the system itself in my opinion-i truly believe it is the best system overall. I think that some abuse it (seeking medical attention for every minor ache and pain), and that it is mismanaged in many respects. I think that some of the administration staff (which remember is a public service) are paid much too richly (and i am not talking about doctors, nurses, technicians, etc. who i believe deserve every penny that they make), purchases for equipment are not made properly (why not buy things nationally, in bulk and end the provincial splitting), and i think that perhaps some specialty services should be centralized in a portion of the country and all major tests for certain things could be done under one roof to ensure speedy access (rather than having to wait 6 months between tests).

Another issue (and i am sure this one will receive flak) is that i think the government should create, purchase or nationalize a drug company. The costs are going up, due to ridiculous profits to drug manufacturers. If the government had a drug company operating not for profit, but for the people, perhaps it could create drugs at a reasonable cost to the tax payers.

And to be perfectly honest, i would pay MORE taxes to ensure a public, not for profit, fully accessable healthcare system was in place-but i would need assurances that the extra money was 100% dedicated to healthcare-which i dont believe any of the current political parties could/would do.

Thats just my two cents.

Sideshow I agree with you. We have a great system where everyone is treated equaly. What it appears to me is the like the big Texan I saw coming out of our open clinic, he was furious because he had to wait his turn. It that was public health care, he wanted nothing to do with it. He stood at the door and yelled about having to wait his turn.

I have no problem waiting in line either. But when waiting in line means taking entire days off work because of the wait times for a 5 minute consult in an emergency room, years waiting for surgery, extra surgery because the initial surgery you waited for was put off too long, death because you waited altogether too long -- I think its as much health care as neglect. I wouldn't mind paying for the system if it actually gave us good health care. I don't know why people value a system where people can overtax it by going to the hospital for every little thing that could wait for a doctor's appointment. We're farther off to pay some nominal co-pay for those services in return for timely surgeries and other life saving medicines. We should also be letting in multiple providers but not funding them any more than the public system is so that people that have the money/insurance and want to pay can go there which I believe will shorten lines up for the rest of us who cannot afford that option. We'll keep publicly owned clinics and hospitals public and open up to private clinics for those can afford that option.

[sideshow]

I'm unclear of the issue with private clinics. If someone has the money, can they not just go to the United States or elsewhere (which provide for pay for use services) and receive their healthcare instantly if they want to anyways? Why such an ache for private (or i should say MORE private healthcare) here in Canada? If I want to go to Disney land, I head south-but Im not too worried about Canada not having one here.

I think the issue that people on the con side of private medicine have is that there will be leeching (and I am very sure of the fact that this will happen as can be seen by the tax dollars given to TONS of other private industries) of dollars from the public system to the private one. I dont think that anyone truly cares if the rich spend money and receive their healthcare instantly-it would just seem that the inevitable result of allowing the two systems to operate side by side would be the general decline of one (the public that provides for the many that cant afford to purchase their own) because of the other (the private that would provide for the priveleged few that could afford it).

I feel quite confident that the private medical industry would be looking for tax breaks, free water waste services, a portion of tax dollars, etc. to provide their system-which inevitably would be subsidized by all tax payers, but used by the few.

As a side note, I think that business as a whole (and this is my opinion mind you) may not be too pleased with a change in system. Because inevitably, their costs will rise as employees push for expenses to be paid by the employer (see US of A), but (also predictably), the current amount of taxes they pay will NOT decrease (our political parties of all stripes will find alternate uses for the money-see child care, military, scandals , etc.).

Hopefully, someone in charge (who exactly IS running this country anyways? ) will figure these things out. Unfortunately, nobody has yet.

[Hicksey]

I'm unclear of the issue with private clinics. If someone has the money, can they not just go to the United States or elsewhere (which provide for pay for use services) and receive their healthcare instantly if they want to anyways? Why such an ache for private (or i should say MORE private healthcare) here in Canada? If I want to go to Disney land, I head south-but Im not too worried about Canada not having one here.

I think the issue that people on the con side of private medicine have is that there will be leeching (and I am very sure of the fact that this will happen as can be seen by the tax dollars given to TONS of other private industries) of dollars from the public system to the private one. I dont think that anyone truly cares if the rich spend money and receive their healthcare instantly-it would just seem that the inevitable result of allowing the two systems to operate side by side would be the general decline of one (the public that provides for the many that cant afford to purchase their own) because of the other (the private that would provide for the priveleged few that could afford it).

I feel quite confident that the private medical industry would be looking for tax breaks, free water waste services, a portion of tax dollars, etc. to provide their system-which inevitably would be subsidized by all tax payers, but used by the few.

As a side note, I think that business as a whole (and this is my opinion mind you) may not be too pleased with a change in system. Because inevitably, their costs will rise as employees push for expenses to be paid by the employer (see US of A), but (also predictably), the current amount of taxes they pay will NOT decrease (our political parties of all stripes will find alternate uses for the money-see child care, military, scandals , etc.).

Hopefully, someone in charge (who exactly IS running this country anyways? ) will figure these things out. Unfortunately, nobody has yet.

I think they can coexist with well-thought out and strict legistation on the maximum funding to private clinics. In my ideal system it just allows people willing to pay the price to get care quicker to take the money we would have paid to the hospital to the clinic. I don't want to raise the budget. We don't pay operating budgets, we only pay cost of procedure and medically necessary aftertreatment to private clinics. And when enough of those people make the change it will shorten the lines for us all. I also would like insurance like the USA, BUT ONLY FOR PREVENTATIVE AND ROUTINE CARE THAT CAN HAPPEN IN A DOCTORS OFFICE. I think where we would be better served is for public run health care focusing on providing life saving and reconstructive medicine like major organ surgeries and joint replacements in a timely and thorough manner, and of course emergency medicine.

[sideshow]

this is out there, but, being a health conscience person, there could be some sort of incentives, via taxes, or whatever for people that work to stay healthy. as someone who eats right, exercises, and doesnt go to the doctor unless it is necessary (and i might add i dont miss work unless i cant physically drag my butt in the door), i find it frustrating to watch others smoke, drink to excess, get very overweight, and then spend all the time in the doctors office looking for the "fix" to get better. not every cold needs a visit to the doctor (caveat being if its children with their underdeveloped systems, parents should be safe rather than sorry).

im not ideologically against private medicine as a whole (i mean we pay to go to the dentist, eye doctor, etc.), but i do think it is a VERY slippery slope to go down.

[margrace]

I'm unclear of the issue with private clinics. If someone has the money, can they not just go to the United States or elsewhere (which provide for pay for use services) and receive their healthcare instantly if they want to anyways? Why such an ache for private (or i should say MORE private healthcare) here in Canada? If I want to go to Disney land, I head south-but Im not too worried about Canada not having one here.

I think the issue that people on the con side of private medicine have is that there will be leeching (and I am very sure of the fact that this will happen as can be seen by the tax dollars given to TONS of other private industries) of dollars from the public system to the private one. I dont think that anyone truly cares if the rich spend money and receive their healthcare instantly-it would just seem that the inevitable result of allowing the two systems to operate side by side would be the general decline of one (the public that provides for the many that cant afford to purchase their own) because of the other (the private that would provide for the priveleged few that could afford it).

I feel quite confident that the private medical industry would be looking for tax breaks, free water waste services, a portion of tax dollars, etc. to provide their system-which inevitably would be subsidized by all tax payers, but used by the few.

As a side note, I think that business as a whole (and this is my opinion mind you) may not be too pleased with a change in system. Because inevitably, their costs will rise as employees push for expenses to be paid by the employer (see US of A), but (also predictably), the current amount of taxes they pay will NOT decrease (our political parties of all stripes will find alternate uses for the money-see child care, military, scandals , etc.).

Hopefully, someone in charge (who exactly IS running this country anyways? ) will figure these things out. Unfortunately, nobody has yet.

I think they can coexist with well-thought out and strict legistation on the maximum funding to private clinics. In my ideal system it just allows people willing to pay the price to get care quicker to take the money we would have paid to the hospital to the clinic. I don't want to raise the budget. We don't pay operating budgets, we only pay cost of procedure and medically necessary aftertreatment to private clinics. And when enough of those people make the change it will shorten the lines for us all. I also would like insurance like the USA, BUT ONLY FOR PREVENTATIVE AND ROUTINE CARE THAT CAN HAPPEN IN A DOCTORS OFFICE. I think where we would be better served is for public run health care focusing on providing life saving and reconstructive medicine like major organ surgeries and joint replacements in a timely and thorough manner, and of course emergency medicine.

Better watch what you ask for. I have known people who went to the US for better job opportunities and so called health care and had to come home when a baby developed sever problems and their health care was cut off. Private companies have that option you know.

[margrace]

this is out there, but, being a health conscience person, there could be some sort of incentives, via taxes, or whatever for people that work to stay healthy. as someone who eats right, exercises, and doesnt go to the doctor unless it is necessary (and i might add i dont miss work unless i cant physically drag my butt in the door), i find it frustrating to watch others smoke, drink to excess, get very overweight, and then spend all the time in the doctors office looking for the "fix" to get better. not every cold needs a visit to the doctor (caveat being if its children with their underdeveloped systems, parents should be safe rather than sorry).

im not ideologically against private medicine as a whole (i mean we pay to go to the dentist, eye doctor, etc.), but i do think it is a VERY slippery slope to go down.

Yes and if it wasn't such a lucrative thing why are the American Health insurance people trying so hard to break into our market.

[Hicksey]

I'm unclear of the issue with private clinics. If someone has the money, can they not just go to the United States or elsewhere (which provide for pay for use services) and receive their healthcare instantly if they want to anyways? Why such an ache for private (or i should say MORE private healthcare) here in Canada? If I want to go to Disney land, I head south-but Im not too worried about Canada not having one here.

I think the issue that people on the con side of private medicine have is that there will be leeching (and I am very sure of the fact that this will happen as can be seen by the tax dollars given to TONS of other private industries) of dollars from the public system to the private one. I dont think that anyone truly cares if the rich spend money and receive their healthcare instantly-it would just seem that the inevitable result of allowing the two systems to operate side by side would be the general decline of one (the public that provides for the many that cant afford to purchase their own) because of the other (the private that would provide for the priveleged few that could afford it).

I feel quite confident that the private medical industry would be looking for tax breaks, free water waste services, a portion of tax dollars, etc. to provide their system-which inevitably would be subsidized by all tax payers, but used by the few.

As a side note, I think that business as a whole (and this is my opinion mind you) may not be too pleased with a change in system. Because inevitably, their costs will rise as employees push for expenses to be paid by the employer (see US of A), but (also predictably), the current amount of taxes they pay will NOT decrease (our political parties of all stripes will find alternate uses for the money-see child care, military, scandals , etc.).

Hopefully, someone in charge (who exactly IS running this country anyways? ) will figure these things out. Unfortunately, nobody has yet.

I think they can coexist with well-thought out and strict legistation on the maximum funding to private clinics. In my ideal system it just allows people willing to pay the price to get care quicker to take the money we would have paid to the hospital to the clinic. I don't want to raise the budget. We don't pay operating budgets, we only pay cost of procedure and medically necessary aftertreatment to private clinics. And when enough of those people make the change it will shorten the lines for us all. I also would like insurance like the USA, BUT ONLY FOR PREVENTATIVE AND ROUTINE CARE THAT CAN HAPPEN IN A DOCTORS OFFICE. I think where we would be better served is for public run health care focusing on providing life saving and reconstructive medicine like major organ surgeries and joint replacements in a timely and thorough manner, and of course emergency medicine.

Better watch what you ask for. I have known people who went to the US for better job opportunities and so called health care and had to come home when a baby developed sever problems and their health care was cut off. Private companies have that option you know.

That's the great thing about applying such a system after being able to watch it from afar -- you can correct where others went wrong.

[Duke]

[

Sideshow I agree with you. We have a great system where everyone is treated equaly. What it appears to me is the like the big Texan I saw coming out of our open clinic, he was furious because he had to wait his turn. It that was public health care, he wanted nothing to do with it. He stood at the door and yelled about having to wait his turn.

Good grief MARGOOSE are you still convinced we have a great system because those of you in Burk's Fall's get some service. Open you eyes and mind to the rest of the country will you.

[scribblet]

im not ideologically against private medicine as a whole (i mean we pay to go to the dentist, eye doctor, etc.), but i do think it is a VERY slippery slope to go down.

Yes and if it wasn't such a lucrative thing why are the American Health insurance people trying so hard to break into our market.

Well, they are not running a charity you know. Besides why should you care what someone else does, if they want to purchase insurance let them, no sweat off your back.

[Hicksey]

Question to everyone participating in this discussion:

I think it is pretty obvious that we cannot afford to provide great and timely healthcare without significant tax increases to pay for both increased facilities, and increased salaries to lure back enough quality people to man them.

If given a choice between the following two options and you had to choose one, which one of the following two choices would you choose and why?

1) Raise taxes to whatever level it took to get healthcare to the levels most of us feel it should be and to max out waiting times at 4 weeks. In doing this we would do away with all third party providers and prevent HMOs from entering the system. This would be an entirely government run institution.

2) On regular everyday visits to the hospital, we would pay for the services we receive as we use them up to a certain affordable amount like say $100 or $200 to help free up funds so that under the current budget we can do much better without such a large tax increase. For Canadians that want to, we would allow them to insure themselves for the co-pay. But to make sure the system is fair to them we would require that the HMO would have to return up to half of their premiums if they did not use the services and there would be a premium ceiling. Third party providers would be allowed to help alleviate waiting times, but subject to strict standards and not funded over or above cost of procedure.

In either situation the goal is to improve the health care system top to bottom from waiting times to availability to quality. The difference between the two would be how it is paid for. I know these two are probably the not the only solutions that might work, but I am asking if you had to choose which one would you choose?

So,

From each equally no matter much we use

OR

From each compared to how much we use?

People argue we should have to pay for not just the cost to produce but include the true cost for resources consumed like hydro and gasoline. Can this approach be applied to health care? Should we be paying true cost of what we use? And if we stay healthy and do not access the services should we not get a break from the costs?

The amounts I'm talking aren't astronomical.

What are your thoughts?

[sideshow]

I think you offer some interesting choices. I cant really decide 100% to be honest. I prefer answer number one at lets say a 51% ratio though, so I will go with it.

[margrace]

im not ideologically against private medicine as a whole (i mean we pay to go to the dentist, eye doctor, etc.), but i do think it is a VERY slippery slope to go down.

Yes and if it wasn't such a lucrative thing why are the American Health insurance people trying so hard to break into our market.

Well, they are not running a charity you know. Besides why should you care what someone else does, if they want to purchase insurance let them, no sweat off your back.

And how would a lot of us even afford that insurance. Be sensible, there are a lot of people out there on mack jobs, how would they pay. Why do I care because I was brought up as a Christian with Christian ideals.

[margrace]

I think you offer some interesting choices. I cant really decide 100% to be honest. I prefer answer number one at lets say a 51% ratio though, so I will go with it.

waiting list are there because mainly we have a shortage of doctors, how would this help if doctors are syponed off into the private sector.