How do we fix Canada's Healthcare crisis?

[jdobbin]

So those homeless people and people on reserves have to be screwed out of employment so Sanjay from pakistan can have his day?, no! Why should they be poor? Get those guys who are poor and don't have the opportunity out there working so they aren't a drain on social services, maybe the rate will drop to 4% with that I don't know, those reserves are a big problem, we cannot afford as a society to have an out of the way reserve like Kasechewan, where they don't contribute much to society and take tax dollars get them working and their poverty disappears.

Homeless people don't show on on unemployment lists unless they are seeking work. We have no idea of their qualifications or whether they are they employable. Many have mental or physical health issues.

Reserve unemployment is often a reflection of opportunities. It is hard to provide opportunities to 2000 people in a northern reserve.

Unemployment is many western Canadian cities has already dropped to 4%. Are you suggesting that Alberta not recruit police in other places in Canada or Britain (as they are doing now) until unemployment reaches less than 1% in Alberta? It is already a crisis level in many places in Calgary. Businesses have to close some days for lack of employees. Restaurant staff are flown in for a few days a week just to keep Tim Horton's going.

Some businesses have already relocated where they have a better supply of workers.

[Saturn]

When the unemployment rate drops to about 1-2% then yah, but how about the homeless people and those on reserves, get them to alberta pronto!!!

Most economists say when employment levels fall to 1%, you start getting inflation. You already see it in Alberta. Wages continue to go up, then costs start going up.

Most economists say that the "natural" rate of unemployment is 3-4%, some even say 5%. 1% unemployment is something that doesn't happen anywhere (unless you use some very, very restrictive definition of unemployment). As soon as you get to 3-4% you usually see quickly rising inflation. The reason we are not seeing double digit inflation in Alberta is because the rest of the country helps keep inflation down. If Alberta was an independent country, they would be looking at hyperinflation right now.

[blueblood]

And yes, this country is in dire need of immigrants.

When the unemployment rate drops to about 1-2% then yah, but how about the homeless people and those on reserves, get them to alberta pronto!!!

I can't figure out if you agree or disagree ?

You do know that 1-2% unemployment is impossible to achieve?

Homeless people and those on reserves...what does that mean?

Listen to dobbin....he knows.

So those homeless people and people on reserves have to be screwed out of employment so Sanjay from pakistan can have his day?, no! Why should they be poor? Get those guys who are poor and don't have the opportunity out there working so they aren't a drain on social services, maybe the rate will drop to 4% with that I don't know, those reserves are a big problem, we cannot afford as a society to have an out of the way reserve like Kasechewan, where they don't contribute much to society and take tax dollars get them working and their poverty disappears.

Ahh, now I get it.

Its the immigrants (sanjay from Pakistan) fault for having the initiative to get his butt out the door and find a job, but homeless people and those on reserves should have job opportunities brought to them.

So, should we wait for Oprah or Dr.Phil show to be over before we knock on the door and ask them if they will work?

As for reserves, dont muddy the message. Save that one for another post.

There are jobs begging to be filled in Alberta , but they can't find people to fill them. Well , except for Sanjay who might even work two jobs.

Against a foreigner, you bet, it's cheaper on the social system to give them a job than dole out cheques for doing nothing, sorry but i think our citizens deserve the first priority over the immigrants. the less people on social assistance the better and if that means shutting the door then great.

Those jobs in Alberta can be filled by the poor and those living on reserves, you can bet your ass they'd rather work than live in squalor. Jeez, with all of that tax money they'd be contributing instead of receiving maybe our medical system can get some help and our infrastructure will be able to keep up with economic growth, but yah lets flood the country and have things plugged up like they are now

[Saturn]

If you could hire a US programmer for $80K/year or a Spanish programmer for $40K/year, which would you choose?

This is a good example. The government has been saying we need more high tech workers, yet the market has been saturated with them. Does a GP have to be that much smarter than a computer programmer ?

GPs get $300-400K/year, which is 3-4 times more than a programmer with a Ph.D. in computer science. Somehow, I don't think that GPs are that much smarter and I don't think that they need to make even more.

First, GP's get paid to a business. Out of whioch comes all of their business expenses to pay their staff. Yes, that's right their receptionists, rent etc etc. Our GP's are grossly underpaid.

After all expenses, GPs still take $200K home. Most people with Ph.D.s make far less than that and average Canadians make about a quarter of that. This is not "grossly underpaid". This is paid "far too much". People who are grossly underpaid don't work 5 months a year like my former GP.

[White Doors]

It all comes down to this: the provincial medical associations are monopolies that do not want us to have good health care unless we give them a lot more money. It is extortion, nothing else!

The medical associations are nothing more than trade unions with special powers. In each province, the medical association sits down with the government at the barganing table every 3 years to negotiate a contract just like any other union whose members are paid by the government. Their business is not to provide health care or defend the interests of the health-care customers. Their business is to get more money and more priviledges for their members. And they have the power to restrict the number of their members so that the customers are forced to shell out more money. The law of supply and demand applies and the shorter the supply, the higher the price.

If the CAW had the power to licence every car dealership in every province and restrict the number of cars sold in the country to 20% less than what we need so that you had to sit on a waiting list for 8 months to get a car, you'd be going nuts and you'd want Buzz Hargrove hanged. But instead you are going "Oh, Canada is not rich enough to afford enough cars.", "The immigrants are using too many cars.", "Foreign cars are not up to our standards", "We should pay 60% more for cars. Then the CAW may be tempted to let us buy more cars and the waiting lists for cars may get shorter than 8 months.", "We demand the option to pay 60% more for a car, so that people who can pay extra do not have to wait so long to get a car." This is stupid, yet the medical associations and their friends have convinced you that the only way to solve the problem is to pay them more.

This privatization approach is absurd and it DOES NOT address the problem. Whether a MONOPOLY is public or private makes no difference whatsoever. What matters is that we a facing a monopoly and how far we are willing to let that monopoly go to mistreat us. Don't talk about economics here! What economic theory tells us is that competition is what's important if you want better service, not the type of ownership (public vs private). Don't confuse privatization with competition - a private monopoly is no better than a public one.

To put it midly - Your argument is flawed. At present we have ONE supplier. Two tiered increases the supply - we all win. You only need economic 101 to know this. We share a health care system in common only with stalinist countries. This is a needless waste of longetivity to only satisfy union needs. It is ridiculous and it is causing lives. And yet you still argue for the status quo. You want to handcuff medical practitioners with needless ideology. accesible medicare for those that need. Private for those that can pay. Both win. Competition breeds efficiency and yet you insist in 2006 that this is not the case.. why?

And please stop comparing two-tiered medical care to the USA. They have one-tiered as well - only it is on the other side. There are many many models that we can take best practises from without going to the US model which will have liberals in the streets.

Medical care is beyond ideology or midless, knee-jerk anti-americanism. Dr's are not the issue - it is the system and your typical far left ideology that is causing lives. think about it.

PS: there is not a monopoly in the auto industry. Your example is absurd.

[Saturn]

And yes, this country is in dire need of immigrants.

When the unemployment rate drops to about 1-2% then yah, but how about the homeless people and those on reserves, get them to alberta pronto!!!

I can't figure out if you agree or disagree ?

You do know that 1-2% unemployment is impossible to achieve?

Homeless people and those on reserves...what does that mean?

Listen to dobbin....he knows.

So those homeless people and people on reserves have to be screwed out of employment so Sanjay from pakistan can have his day?, no! Why should they be poor? Get those guys who are poor and don't have the opportunity out there working so they aren't a drain on social services, maybe the rate will drop to 4% with that I don't know, those reserves are a big problem, we cannot afford as a society to have an out of the way reserve like Kasechewan, where they don't contribute much to society and take tax dollars get them working and their poverty disappears.

Ahh, now I get it.

Its the immigrants (sanjay from Pakistan) fault for having the initiative to get his butt out the door and find a job, but homeless people and those on reserves should have job opportunities brought to them.

So, should we wait for Oprah or Dr.Phil show to be over before we knock on the door and ask them if they will work?

As for reserves, dont muddy the message. Save that one for another post.

There are jobs begging to be filled in Alberta , but they can't find people to fill them. Well , except for Sanjay who might even work two jobs.

Against a foreigner, you bet, it's cheaper on the social system to give them a job than dole out cheques for doing nothing, sorry but i think our citizens deserve the first priority over the immigrants. the less people on social assistance the better and if that means shutting the door then great.

Those jobs in Alberta can be filled by the poor and those living on reserves, you can bet your ass they'd rather work than live in squalor. Jeez, with all of that tax money they'd be contributing instead of receiving maybe our medical system can get some help and our infrastructure will be able to keep up with economic growth, but yah lets flood the country and have things plugged up like they are now

Wishful thinking. If all immigrants suddenly disappeared, not a thing would change on reserves. If people on reserves really wanted jobs, they would move where the jobs are. The jobs won't move to the reserves.

[White Doors]

When the unemployment rate drops to about 1-2% then yah, but how about the homeless people and those on reserves, get them to alberta pronto!!!

Most economists say when employment levels fall to 1%, you start getting inflation. You already see it in Alberta. Wages continue to go up, then costs start going up.

Most economists say that the "natural" rate of unemployment is 3-4%, some even say 5%. 1% unemployment is something that doesn't happen anywhere (unless you use some very, very restrictive definition of unemployment). As soon as you get to 3-4% you usually see quickly rising inflation. The reason we are not seeing double digit inflation in Alberta is because the rest of the country helps keep inflation down. If Alberta was an independent country, they would be looking at hyperinflation right now.

That doesn't even make economic sense! clearly you are out of your element here. The term is 'structural' unemployment, not 'natural'. my goodness. The better measurement of REAL employment statistics is the 'participation rate'. Of which you have demonstrated here you have clearly no idea about.

I pity you - as opposed to debate you.

[blueblood]

And yes, this country is in dire need of immigrants.

When the unemployment rate drops to about 1-2% then yah, but how about the homeless people and those on reserves, get them to alberta pronto!!!

I can't figure out if you agree or disagree ?

You do know that 1-2% unemployment is impossible to achieve?

Homeless people and those on reserves...what does that mean?

Listen to dobbin....he knows.

So those homeless people and people on reserves have to be screwed out of employment so Sanjay from pakistan can have his day?, no! Why should they be poor? Get those guys who are poor and don't have the opportunity out there working so they aren't a drain on social services, maybe the rate will drop to 4% with that I don't know, those reserves are a big problem, we cannot afford as a society to have an out of the way reserve like Kasechewan, where they don't contribute much to society and take tax dollars get them working and their poverty disappears.

Ahh, now I get it.

Its the immigrants (sanjay from Pakistan) fault for having the initiative to get his butt out the door and find a job, but homeless people and those on reserves should have job opportunities brought to them.

So, should we wait for Oprah or Dr.Phil show to be over before we knock on the door and ask them if they will work?

As for reserves, dont muddy the message. Save that one for another post.

There are jobs begging to be filled in Alberta , but they can't find people to fill them. Well , except for Sanjay who might even work two jobs.

Against a foreigner, you bet, it's cheaper on the social system to give them a job than dole out cheques for doing nothing, sorry but i think our citizens deserve the first priority over the immigrants. the less people on social assistance the better and if that means shutting the door then great.

Those jobs in Alberta can be filled by the poor and those living on reserves, you can bet your ass they'd rather work than live in squalor. Jeez, with all of that tax money they'd be contributing instead of receiving maybe our medical system can get some help and our infrastructure will be able to keep up with economic growth, but yah lets flood the country and have things plugged up like they are now

Wishful thinking. If all immigrants suddenly disappeared, not a thing would change on reserves. If people on reserves really wanted jobs, they would move where the jobs are. The jobs won't move to the reserves.

They can't even afford to move, they live in third world conditions, there is no excuse for that here, they need help getting to the jobs and they get the jobs before immigrants

[White Doors]

Those jobs in Alberta can be filled by the poor and those living on reserves, you can bet your ass they'd rather work than live in squalor. Jeez, with all of that tax money they'd be contributing instead of receiving maybe our medical system can get some help and our infrastructure will be able to keep up with economic growth, but yah lets flood the country and have things plugged up like they are now

Sorry, I agree with your premise - but this is not a good theory. There will always be people who are 'poor'. One only needs to look at the ANY stalinist state to see this. You cannot help those who refuse to help themselves EVEN if you force them. That is human nature and is the epitomy of 'freedom'.

[White Doors]

If you could hire a US programmer for $80K/year or a Spanish programmer for $40K/year, which would you choose?

This is a good example. The government has been saying we need more high tech workers, yet the market has been saturated with them. Does a GP have to be that much smarter than a computer programmer ?

GPs get $300-400K/year, which is 3-4 times more than a programmer with a Ph.D. in computer science. Somehow, I don't think that GPs are that much smarter and I don't think that they need to make even more.

First, GP's get paid to a business. Out of whioch comes all of their business expenses to pay their staff. Yes, that's right their receptionists, rent etc etc. Our GP's are grossly underpaid.

After all expenses, GPs still take $200K home. Most people with Ph.D.s make far less than that and average Canadians make about a quarter of that. This is not "grossly underpaid". This is paid "far too much". People who are grossly underpaid don't work 5 months a year like my former GP.

Really? How much do you get paid and how long did you have to go to school for? And are you working in your studied field?

I doubt it.

And your pissed. That is what is driving this dribble.

[blueblood]

Those jobs in Alberta can be filled by the poor and those living on reserves, you can bet your ass they'd rather work than live in squalor. Jeez, with all of that tax money they'd be contributing instead of receiving maybe our medical system can get some help and our infrastructure will be able to keep up with economic growth, but yah lets flood the country and have things plugged up like they are now

Sorry, I agree with your premise - but this is not a good theory. There will always be people who are 'poor'. One only needs to look at the ANY stalinist state to see this. You cannot help those who refuse to help themselves EVEN if you force them. That is human nature and is the epitomy of 'freedom'.

I'm not saying force them, there are some that just don't have the opportunity and they should at least get that. I'll bet a person living in squalor would take a job as a leasehand for around 20 bucks an hour to sweep and paint.

[Saturn]

It all comes down to this: the provincial medical associations are monopolies that do not want us to have good health care unless we give them a lot more money. It is extortion, nothing else!

The medical associations are nothing more than trade unions with special powers. In each province, the medical association sits down with the government at the barganing table every 3 years to negotiate a contract just like any other union whose members are paid by the government. Their business is not to provide health care or defend the interests of the health-care customers. Their business is to get more money and more priviledges for their members. And they have the power to restrict the number of their members so that the customers are forced to shell out more money. The law of supply and demand applies and the shorter the supply, the higher the price.

If the CAW had the power to licence every car dealership in every province and restrict the number of cars sold in the country to 20% less than what we need so that you had to sit on a waiting list for 8 months to get a car, you'd be going nuts and you'd want Buzz Hargrove hanged. But instead you are going "Oh, Canada is not rich enough to afford enough cars.", "The immigrants are using too many cars.", "Foreign cars are not up to our standards", "We should pay 60% more for cars. Then the CAW may be tempted to let us buy more cars and the waiting lists for cars may get shorter than 8 months.", "We demand the option to pay 60% more for a car, so that people who can pay extra do not have to wait so long to get a car." This is stupid, yet the medical associations and their friends have convinced you that the only way to solve the problem is to pay them more.

This privatization approach is absurd and it DOES NOT address the problem. Whether a MONOPOLY is public or private makes no difference whatsoever. What matters is that we a facing a monopoly and how far we are willing to let that monopoly go to mistreat us. Don't talk about economics here! What economic theory tells us is that competition is what's important if you want better service, not the type of ownership (public vs private). Don't confuse privatization with competition - a private monopoly is no better than a public one.

To put it midly - Your argument is flawed. At present we have ONE supplier. Two tiered increases the supply - we all win. You only need economic 101 to know this. We share a health care system in common only with stalinist countries. This is a needless waste of longetivity to only satisfy union needs. It is ridiculous and it is causing lives. And yet you still argue for the status quo. You want to handcuff medical practitioners with needless ideology. accesible medicare for those that need. Private for those that can pay. Both win. Competition breeds efficiency and yet you insist in 2006 that this is not the case.. why?

And please stop comparing two-tiered medical care to the USA. They have one-tiered as well - only it is on the other side. There are many many models that we can take best practises from without going to the US model which will have liberals in the streets.

Medical care is beyond ideology or midless, knee-jerk anti-americanism. Dr's are not the issue - it is the system and your typical far left ideology that is causing lives. think about it.

PS: there is not a monopoly in the auto industry. Your example is absurd.

And you aren't reading or you aren't thinking. The example is absurd and that's exactly the absurdity we are facing in our health-care system. If you had taken Econ 101, you'd know that a monopoly doesn't set its level of output to please you but it sets it to a level that maximizes its profit. The medical associations have set the supply of doctors to levels that are far lower than necessary, so that people like you would be willing to pay them far more than they deserve.

Medical care is a matter of life and death and is above profiteering and greed. Mindless conservative ideology dictates that people should be dying on the street, so that doctors and health-care investors can make more money. In fact, many conservatives are simply driven by hatred for those who supposedly live on their backs and would pay extra just to see these evil people suffer.

[Biblio Bibuli]

In the NP today I read that ... "In Ontario, 80% of people over 45 have at least one chronic condition, 70% have more than one."

Poor Teddy, we have to get him out of Mississauga. PRONTO!!

[geoffrey]

That's economics from a book Saturn. In the real world, there is another dimension to monopoly pricing... keeping that price reasonable enough to prevent the government from forcing it's hand.

Microeconomics is done in the absence of irrational thought which is generally the will of the people. In the real world it doesn't turn out that way, at least not in the short term.

[Saturn]

When the unemployment rate drops to about 1-2% then yah, but how about the homeless people and those on reserves, get them to alberta pronto!!!

Most economists say when employment levels fall to 1%, you start getting inflation. You already see it in Alberta. Wages continue to go up, then costs start going up.

Most economists say that the "natural" rate of unemployment is 3-4%, some even say 5%. 1% unemployment is something that doesn't happen anywhere (unless you use some very, very restrictive definition of unemployment). As soon as you get to 3-4% you usually see quickly rising inflation. The reason we are not seeing double digit inflation in Alberta is because the rest of the country helps keep inflation down. If Alberta was an independent country, they would be looking at hyperinflation right now.

That doesn't even make economic sense! clearly you are out of your element here. The term is 'structural' unemployment, not 'natural'. my goodness. The better measurement of REAL employment statistics is the 'participation rate'. Of which you have demonstrated here you have clearly no idea about.

I pity you - as opposed to debate you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rate_of_unemployment

Ok, Einstein. "Natural unemployment" is also referred to as the "non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment" which is what was being discussed here. Now go back to your Econ101 textbook and read up on the definition of structural unemployment. Now keep your arrogant nose down because you can debate economics with me only when you get a grad degree in economics. Until then happy studies!

[Biblio Bibuli]

In the NP today I read that ... "In Ontario, 80% of people over 45 have at least one chronic condition, 70% have more than one."

Poor Teddy, we have to get him out of Mississauga. PRONTO!!

Two chronic conditions are better than one when one wants to get on the dole.

But I agree, we have to get old Ballgame out quick, just in case.

[geoffrey]

Now keep your arrogant nose down because you can debate economics with me only when you get a grad degree in economics. Until then happy studies!

You have a grad degree in econ? Only people with grad degrees can debate you?

[Saturn]

That's economics from a book Saturn. In the real world, there is another dimension to monopoly pricing... keeping that price reasonable enough to prevent the government from forcing it's hand.

Microeconomics is done in the absence of irrational thought which is generally the will of the people. In the real world it doesn't turn out that way, at least not in the short term.

There are many dimensions to everything and in the real world people do whatever they believe is best for them and whatever they think they can get away with. In this case, the medical associations have positioned themselves well to get away with quite a bit. I just find it rediculous when people are so inconsistent on similar issues and will argue on different sides simply for ideological reasons.

[Saturn]

Now keep your arrogant nose down because you can debate economics with me only when you get a grad degree in economics. Until then happy studies!

You have a grad degree in econ? Only people with grad degrees can debate you?

Yes, I happen to have a grad degree in econ. I will debate anyone who shows some respect for a reasonably educated opinion. This falls outside that category: "That doesn't even make economic sense! clearly you are out of your element here. The term is 'structural' unemployment, not 'natural'. my goodness. The better measurement of REAL employment statistics is the 'participation rate'. Of which you have demonstrated here you have clearly no idea about. I pity you - as opposed to debate you."

[mikedavid00]

It all comes down to this: the provincial medical associations are monopolies that do not want us to have good health care unless we give them a lot more money. It is extortion, nothing else!

You are getting into conspirasy theories now. The mark of a true left winger. You are dreamy, wishing, and out of touch with reality.

Listen. I'm the only one here bringing reality into this. Healthcare is like insurance, if people are using the services that they don't pay into, then the service DOESN'T WORK. Over the years, the system has slowly crumbled because there are MORE PEOPLE USING IT THAN WE HAVE ENOUGH RESOURCES TO SUPPLY CARE. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. STOP OVER COMPLICATING IT.

We don't have enough resources because we don't have the money to expand the system. Why? Because people that are using it that HAVE NOT PAID INTO IT.

Healthcare insurance is made to be paid into your whole life, NOT 10 years, NOT 15 years, NOT from 35 years old with jobs here and there until they get old age welfare. It's meant to be paid into your whole life of paying taxes. The same is for the US.

When you sponsor in family members from other countries who have not paid into the system, then eventually over time you end up with waiting lists and insuficient care.

I agree that there are other problems, but it's not the MAIN problem that is causing our problems.

When's the last time you've seen a hospital get built? They don't get built because we can't afford it.

[mikedavid00]

Those jobs in Alberta can be filled by the poor and those living on reserves, you can bet your ass they'd rather work than live in squalor. Jeez, with all of that tax money they'd be contributing instead of receiving maybe our medical system can get some help and our infrastructure will be able to keep up with economic growth, but yah lets flood the country and have things plugged up like they are now

FWIW, I little while ago I went on Workoplis and looked at jobs in Alberta. I dind't find that manh listings as compared to Ottawa and the jobs seemed to have impossibly high credentials for simple work with fairly low pay.

Back during the tech bubble, everyone though that Ottawa was some silicon valley. I guess that's why we were all sitting in Ottawa unemployed wondering where this magical silicon valley was.

[Who's Doing What?]

It all comes down to this: the provincial medical associations are monopolies that do not want us to have good health care unless we give them a lot more money. It is extortion, nothing else!

You are getting into conspirasy theories now. The mark of a true left winger. You are dreamy, wishing, and out of touch with reality.

Listen. I'm the only one here bringing reality into this. Healthcare is like insurance, if people are using the services that they don't pay into, then the service DOESN'T WORK. Over the years, the system has slowly crumbled because there are MORE PEOPLE USING IT THAN WE HAVE ENOUGH RESOURCES TO SUPPLY CARE. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. STOP OVER COMPLICATING IT.

We don't have enough resources because we don't have the money to expand the system. Why? Because people that are using it that HAVE NOT PAID INTO IT.

Healthcare insurance is made to be paid into your whole life, NOT 10 years, NOT 15 years, NOT from 35 years old with jobs here and there until they get old age welfare. It's meant to be paid into your whole life of paying taxes. The same is for the US.

When you sponsor in family members from other countries who have not paid into the system, then eventually over time you end up with waiting lists and insuficient care.

I agree that there are other problems, but it's not the MAIN problem that is causing our problems.

When's the last time you've seen a hospital get built? They don't get built because we can't afford it.

I can see where you are coming from in the whole pay-into-the-system point. It is true that when people who haven't payed into the system use $100,000 of services the system is doomed to fail. I am also sure there is a small minority of immigrants who know they are sick or have some degenerative disease and come to this country because of the health care.

Perhaps we need to give each person X ammount of free healthcare per year of citizenship.

[Michael Hardner]

Mikedavid:

Where do you get your facts ? Provide a link, PLEASE.

[jdobbin]

When's the last time you've seen a hospital get built? They don't get built because we can't afford it.

New hospitals have been just completed in Manitoba and Alberta. A new hospital is being planned for Quebec.

[mikedavid00]

Medical care is beyond ideology or midless, knee-jerk anti-americanism. Dr's are not the issue - it is the system and your typical far left ideology that is causing lives. think about it.

PS: there is not a monopoly in the auto industry. Your example is absurd.

Finally someone with basic, basic, logic and intelligence.