Harper's foreign and social policy vs. fiscal

[madmax]

Agreed. A healthcare policy that has some private options is not necessarily U.S.-style. But it is much easier for the left to summon the evil American demon than to actually come up with forward-thinking options that will save our health care system.

I find it interesting that the "right" solution to health care is using solutions that are "leftist, and Euro-Socialist"

You have a system, the federal government has lots of money in pocket and is not giving it to the provinces.

So, if the Feds are going to hold onto the money, you only have to ask yourself, how much are you willing to pay out of your own pocket.

And you cannot ignore the elephant in the room. The US is our next door neighbor. We have a trade agreement with them. They will participate in a market health care system in Canada.

[Ricki Bobbi]

So, if the Feds are going to hold onto the money, you only have to ask yourself, how much are you willing to pay out of your own pocket.

Ahhh, there is the rub. The only solution to the health care crisis is more money. Hmmm, Paul Martin threw cash at the problem to fix health care for a generation and that lasted what six months?

There are creative things that can be done to deal with the issues.

[mikedavid00]

America's private health "system" costs 50 per cent more than Canada's and delivers worse health outcomes for its population.

Lol.. yeah Canada's healthcare is better.... lol....

[Saturn]

Simple. You want American health-care - it costs 60% more than ours.

Because you say so?

Because the numbers say so. Or you haven't learned how to count yet?

[Canadian Blue]

Why does it always seem that the only people that keep on pushing for socialized healthcare have no idea what the world is like outside of North America. Why don't we see how other countries deal with health care and see what system might work best.

As for "American Health Care" it's a fallable argument meant to instill fear, most states have different health policies, and it simply shuts down debate. I don't see how the current system will fare when we have so many baby boomers retiring.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Because the numbers say so. Or you haven't learned how to count yet?

Why don't you provide these numbers? Or haven't you learned how to support your fallacies yet?

[Saturn]

Why does it always seem that the only people that keep on pushing for socialized healthcare have no idea what the world is like outside of North America. Why don't we see how other countries deal with health care and see what system might work best.

As for "American Health Care" it's a fallable argument meant to instill fear, most states have different health policies, and it simply shuts down debate. I don't see how the current system will fare when we have so many baby boomers retiring.

People have very good idea of what the world outside of North America is like. This is precisely why they know what any privatization will lead to a US style system. Because our system is the same as the US system in all respects (except for the part where the government pays for it) and is different from European systems in all respects (except for the part where the government pays for it). The way our system will get though the baby boom generation retirees is that once they retire and they need it, they will simply vote the younger generation to fund it properly.

[Saturn]

Because the numbers say so. Or you haven't learned how to count yet?

Why don't you provide these numbers? Or haven't you learned how to support your fallacies yet?

The numbers are well known to everyone except you apparently. Which is your own problem but you can easily rectify it by learning how to use google.

[Canuck E Stan]

The numbers are well known to everyone except you apparently. Which is your own problem but you can easily rectify it by learning how to use google.

Saturn,

As usual, in most of your liberal leftie posts, you make statements right out this world, and don't provide any kind of back-up to the spaced out bull you throw.

But hey,the Lefties know what's best for the country,don't they?Just have to take their word for it, why?, well, because they say so.

Never providing an answer, then calling it our problem because we should be looking for why you say so.

Thanks for nothing Saturn,you're only telling everyone you and your posts are full of it.

Spend some time and convince us, as your mentor would say,with some proof of the proof of the proof.

[Canadian Blue]

Saturn you have to prove your own point, nobody asks the person they are debating if they can provide them with some references.

People have very good idea of what the world outside of North America is like. This is precisely why they know what any privatization will lead to a US style system. Because our system is the same as the US system in all respects (except for the part where the government pays for it) and is different from European systems in all respects (except for the part where the government pays for it). The way our system will get though the baby boom generation retirees is that once they retire and they need it, they will simply vote the younger generation to fund it properly.

So all European systems are the same as the US style system, I highly doubt it. As well health care policies differ based on each state, Vermont has a different policy from South Carolina, Oregon, etc. I believe Oregon was actually having a vote to bring about a Canadian style system.

All your providing is leftist rhetoric which does absolutely nothing other than making bold statements with nothing to back them up. As for getting the younger generation to fund it properly, I personally don't want to see my taxes go up 30% so people can abuse our system of healthcare, look at how many people go to the ER who only have the flu, a bleeding nose, etc. Thing's which can be treated at home and relieve strain on the system. Besides I want to pay for post secondary, and I won't be able to do it if I'm throwing money at a healthcare system which isn't efficient simply because some liberal refused to look at other alternatives lest they be called "American".

[Ricki Bobbi]

Never providing an answer, then calling it our problem because we should be looking for why you say so.

Thanks for nothing Saturn,you're only telling everyone you and your posts are full of it.

Public opinion seems to be running 3 to 1 against your fallacies Saturn. Time to put up or...

[Saturn]

The numbers are well known to everyone except you apparently. Which is your own problem but you can easily rectify it by learning how to use google.

Saturn,

As usual, in most of your liberal leftie posts, you make statements right out this world, and don't provide any kind of back-up to the spaced out bull you throw.

But hey,the Lefties know what's best for the country,don't they?Just have to take their word for it, why?, well, because they say so.

Never providing an answer, then calling it our problem because we should be looking for why you say so.

Thanks for nothing Saturn,you're only telling everyone you and your posts are full of it.

Spend some time and convince us, as your mentor would say,with some proof of the proof of the proof.

I won't spend any time convincing anyone that water is wet and grass is green. If you don't know facts as basic as how much the US health-care system costs and how much our system costs, then you are obviously very ill prepared for any sort of discussion and are here just to indulge in name calling.

[Ricki Bobbi]

I won't spend any time convincing anyone that water is wet and grass is green. If you don't know facts as basic as how much the US health-care system costs and how much our system costs, then you are obviously very ill prepared for any sort of discussion and are here just to indulge in name calling.

The cost of the US health care system is a basic fact?

Sounds like somebody has been caught up in their bluster. Remember when you find yourself in a hole the first rule is QUIT DIGGING.

[Saturn]

So all European systems are the same as the US style system, I highly doubt it.

You can't follow basic logic.

All your providing is leftist rhetoric which does absolutely nothing other than making bold statements with nothing to back them up. As for getting the younger generation to fund it properly, I personally don't want to see my taxes go up 30% so people can abuse our system of healthcare, look at how many people go to the ER who only have the flu, a bleeding nose, etc. Thing's which can be treated at home and relieve strain on the system. Besides I want to pay for post secondary, and I won't be able to do it if I'm throwing money at a healthcare system which isn't efficient simply because some liberal refused to look at other alternatives lest they be called "American".

Ignoring all your "leftist" and "liberal" nonsense, it's time for you to realize that in a democracy is the rule of the majority and that retirees are 4 times as likely to vote as your generation of recent high-school grads. Now, it was the Liberals and Conservatives alike who allowed (intentionally) health-care to deteriorate to its current state, so as far as I can tell the Liberals are on your side - time to stop spitting into the wind.

[Canuck E Stan]

- time to stop spitting into the wind.

time for you to stop shitting in your pants and claiming it's a good thing.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Ignoring all your "leftist" and "liberal" nonsense, it's time for you to realize that in a democracy is the rule of the majority and that retirees are 4 times as likely to vote as your generation of recent high-school grads. Now, it was the Liberals and Conservatives alike who allowed (intentionally) health-care to deteriorate to its current state, so as far as I can tell the Liberals are on your side - time to stop spitting into the wind.

Are you trying to back away from your claims about the costs of the US health care system?

[geoffrey]

Ignoring all your "leftist" and "liberal" nonsense, it's time for you to realize that in a democracy is the rule of the majority and that retirees are 4 times as likely to vote as your generation of recent high-school grads. Now, it was the Liberals and Conservatives alike who allowed (intentionally) health-care to deteriorate to its current state, so as far as I can tell the Liberals are on your side - time to stop spitting into the wind.

Are you trying to back away from your claims about the costs of the US health care system?

I agree with Saturn. US costs are more expensive. I contend though that it mostly has to do with malpractice insurance because of all the frivalous lawsuits.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news03/health_costs.html

[Ricki Bobbi]

I agree with Saturn. US costs are more expensive. I contend though that it mostly has to do with malpractice insurance because of all the frivalous lawsuits.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news03/health_costs.html

geoffrey read what you link to. This only talks about administrative costs. Doesn't deal with the comparative costs of provincial/state health ministries, or more importantly, the actual cost of care.

btw, even if these *facts* were taken at face value saturn's claims of 60% higher costs in the US still wouldn't hold water.

[madmax]

Are you trying to back away from your claims about the costs of the US health care system?

The costs of the US health care system are provided in this thread. I provided them on December 26th.

The costs are there for those interested in discussing health care in this thread. The Canadian figures are in Canadian Dollars. The US figures are in US dollars.

I don't know what Saturn is Claiming for costs.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Nice debate going on here!

But what is the point? Do we want a beter healthcare system or one that costs less? What price do you put on your own health?

I will suggest that there is indeed room for private healthcare for those ble to afford it. In fact I would support private healthcare because I could afford to do so. However, the problem is that many people cannot afford to do so. Therefore the need for a public system is a foregone conclusion.

If we were to go down the road of a combined public and private delivery system for healthcare it must be understood that the funding for public care must be universaly acquired though federal levy in the form of taxation. Those funds must never be used to subsidize a private system in any way shape or form. In other words no shared facilities or assets, no transfer of public funds into private for profit hands.

[madmax]

If we were to go down the road of a combined public and private delivery system for healthcare it must be understood that the funding for public care must be universaly acquired though federal levy in the form of taxation. Those funds must never be used to subsidize a private system in any way shape or form. In other words no shared facilities or assets, no transfer of public funds into private for profit hands.

I too see this argument going round in circles. Regardless, isn't what you describe above, actually the system we have today? There are private facilities and doctors operating outside the system, for private cash.

Right now the trend is for the Private Sector to get ahold of public money. P3 hospitals in Ontario. Private Emergencies.

So, we will be using Public funds for Private Profit. But that is in Ontario. Each Province can run their Province there own way.

[Saturn]

http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp...AR31_2006high_e

Highlights

*Total health expenditure, in current dollars, was estimated at $131.4 billion in 2004, and is forecast to have reached $139.8 billion in 2005 and $148.0 billion in 2006.

* After adjusting for inflation, health care spending grew at an average annual rate of 3.8% between 1975 and 1991. From 1991 to 1996 total spending on health care edged up by the rate of 0.8% per year. It increased by 5.0% from 1996 to 2004. Real growth is expected to have been 3.7% in 2005 and 2006.

* Total health expenditure per capita was estimated at $4,109 in 2004 and is expected to have been $4,333 in 2005 and $4,548 in 2006.

* Total health care spending as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product was 10.2% in 2004; the ratio is forecast to have remained to be 10.2% in 2005 and is expected to have been 10.3% in 2006.

* The private sector share peaked in 2002 at 30.4%. It is expected to decrease to 29.7% in 2006.

* The category of drugs ranks second after hospitals in terms of its share of total health expenditure. In 1997, expenditure on drugs overtook spending on physician services. The share of total spending accounted for by drugs grew from a low of 8.4% in the late 1970s to 16.6% in 2004. In 2006, drugs are expected to remain ranked second with a share of 17.0%.

http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

In 2004 (the latest year data are available), total national health expenditures rose 7.9 percent -- over three times the rate of inflation (1). Total spending was $1.9 TRILLION in 2004, or $6,280 per person (1). Total health care spending represented 16 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

US health-care per capita in 2004 cost 52.8% more than health-care in Canada. Now, factor in the exchange rate and you are looking at a difference of 70%. You should read the two websites thoroughly and carefully before you come back with any comments.

[Saturn]

But what is the point? Do we want a beter healthcare system or one that costs less? What price do you put on your own health?

I will suggest that there is indeed room for private healthcare for those ble to afford it. In fact I would support private healthcare because I could afford to do so. However, the problem is that many people cannot afford to do so. Therefore the need for a public system is a foregone conclusion.

Those who can afford it already jump the queues by going outside the country. In addition 30% of health care in Canada is private money.

You may think you can afford it but your opinion will change when faced with at $650K bill for heart surgery. It is not a question of whether you can afford it, it's a question whether the Canadian economy can carry the weight of health-care that costs 60-70% more than what we currently have and what the impact of this weight will be. IMO, a 20% increase in the publicly funded health-care system will go further than a 70% increase in costs due to privatizing the system.

[Saturn]

geoffrey read what you link to. This only talks about administrative costs. Doesn't deal with the comparative costs of provincial/state health ministries, or more importantly, the actual cost of care.

btw, even if these *facts* were taken at face value saturn's claims of 60% higher costs in the US still wouldn't hold water.

Feel free to make comments on what geoffrey linked to when you are capable of finding information on your own. His point on the administrative costs (which make up 1/5) of all health care costs in the US is quite valid, your ignoramus comments are not..

[jbg]

- time to stop spitting into the wind.

time for you to stop shitting in your pants and claiming it's a good thing.

And his choice of places for defacation (even if true) have what to do with Canadian health care?