New Calgary Hospital

[jdobbin]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/08062007/3/cana...y-hospital.html

Holy smokes. That is a lot of money for a hospital.

The bye-election is next week in Calgary. What is the latest report on that?

[margrace]

No that seems to be the cost of a new hospital, seems North Bay's new hospital in Ontario will cost that much.

[geoffrey]

It can cost you that much for a condo in Calgary right now.

Labour is off the charts, materials are expensive. The hospital was to cost half that before. It looks nice though, should be ok. Not sure if it's any closer to me, but the traffic is better going that way compared to Rocky View.

I had to take my friend to the ER after he broke his arm biking last week. We decided to drive out to High River instead of dealing with waits in Calgary. Hearing the 12 hour horror stories, the 30 minute drive out of the city wasn't bad... ended up treated and out in 3 hours... wouldn't have seen a nurse in that time in Calgary.

We need the hospital. Or rather, we need to allow people to build hospitals.

[fellowtraveller]

Yes, hospitals cost a lot to build and maintain.

Albertans are a generous bunch though, they welcome the economic refugees from the Maritimes and Manitoba with open arms and the best medical care we can manage.

[jdobbin]

Yes, hospitals cost a lot to build and maintain.

Albertans are a generous bunch though, they welcome the economic refugees from the Maritimes and Manitoba with open arms and the best medical care we can manage.

Very funny. I think Statscan reported that Manitoba gained back from Alberta this year and will be one of the leading provinces for GDP growth as well. However, thanks for the plug.

[B. Max]

We need the hospital. Or rather, we need to allow people to build hospitals.

You need some roads in Calgary. I spent most of the week down there. Barlow Tr. and Deer Foot north turn into parking lots everyday at about four o'clock. That new construction on Glenmore looks like it it will be a good thing.

[geoffrey]

Barlow Tr. and Deer Foot north turn into parking lots everyday at about four o'clock. That new construction on Glenmore looks like it it will be a good thing.

That's why I ride my bike. The Glenmore construction will be nice.... when it's done in what, another 2 years? It's been going on in one stage or another since 2005 if I remember correctly.

[B. Max]

That's why I ride my bike. The Glenmore construction will be nice.... when it's done in what, another 2 years? It's been going on in one stage or another since 2005 if I remember correctly.

You wouldn't ride a bike on Deer foot, would you? It looks like a lot of work on Glenmore so I can see why it's taking a lot of time. One of the guys down there was telling me that Glenmore is suppose to hook up with the new north south road they are going to start building over on the east side.

[geoffrey]

You wouldn't ride a bike on Deer foot, would you?

I am worried about driving on Deerfoot, let alone riding a bike. That'd be suicide. Plus I think it's the only road in Calgary where it's illegal.

It looks like a lot of work on Glenmore so I can see why it's taking a lot of time. One of the guys down there was telling me that Glenmore is suppose to hook up with the new north south road they are going to start building over on the east side.

Kind of. Where Glenmore turns into Sarcee is where the connection is (hopefully) going to be made in the next many years. Unfortunately the Indian band is holding things up, and people are (rightfully) cautious about building a major road through the environmental fragile Weaslehead park space.

It would save alot of people alot of time to connect 37th St. SW with Sarcee.

Unfortunately, the new shinny bridge they built across Fish Creek on 37th is only wide enough for 2 lanes in each direction, so we'll never have a Deerfoot on this side of the city. Which is silly because there is enough room on all of the corridors for 4 lanes easy.

Oh well.

Sarcee also has 3 or 4 stop lights. That needs to change too.

[HistoryBuff44]

I was a little confused by that childrens hospital they just finished a while ago. My understanding is that it has just 20 more rooms than the one it replaced??? youd think they woulda went a little bigger so that we dont have t build another in 5 yrs.

Also, some of the nurses that work there and were at the old one dont like the layout as much... something about more walking around to get at things. course this one was a rumor i had heard and you know how they can be sometimes...

[Mad_Michael]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/08062007/3/cana...y-hospital.html

Holy smokes. That is a lot of money for a hospital.

The bye-election is next week in Calgary. What is the latest report on that?

Yeah, well, Mike Harris as Premier of Ontario back in the 1990's managed to figure out a way to close hospitals that actually cost more than running them. But hey, that's Mike Harris for ya! He decides - you pay the price!

And of course, the only hospitals that were closed were in opposition held ridings... how typical.

Anyway, $1.25 billion for a new hospital doesn't sound like too much if you factor in the cost of the real estate, construction and all that fancy equipment they put inside.

Its the $2.5 billion final price tag that annoys me.

Oh yeah - if any hosptial is being bulldozed, don't listen to the propaganda - the real reason is that hospital was a breeding ground for 'super-bugs' resistent to all forms of treatment.

In many cases, the most dangerous place you can ever go to expose yourself to life-threatening illnesses is your local hospital.

[fellowtraveller]

Yes, hospitals cost a lot to build and maintain.

Albertans are a generous bunch though, they welcome the economic refugees from the Maritimes and Manitoba with open arms and the best medical care we can manage.

Very funny. I think Statscan reported that Manitoba gained back from Alberta this year and will be one of the leading provinces for GDP growth as well. However, thanks for the plug.

That is all easily explained. Every group of peopple has a few misfits who can't cut it, even in a spociety as open and welcoming and prosperous as Alberta. We are happy that you will look after them from now on, very generous of you. The smart, ambitious and successful will remain of course.

Of course, all those billions of handouts from the feds help both the repatriation of the less abled, and to help the province pretend that Manitoba is anything but a financial basket case..

[jdobbin]

That is all easily explained. Every group of peopple has a few misfits who can't cut it, even in a spociety as open and welcoming and prosperous as Alberta. We are happy that you will look after them from now on, very generous of you. The smart, ambitious and successful will remain of course.

Of course, all those billions of handouts from the feds help both the repatriation of the less abled, and to help the province pretend that Manitoba is anything but a financial basket case..

Your baiting really doesn't cut it, honestly. Try to calm down and relax a little.

[Topaz]

Alberta has the money to build a couple of these hospitals and if the people keeping coming out there to work they will need all of them. We hear about the pollution with the oil sands. I just wonder how many people down the road will be affect with cancer or other respiratory diseases, from all the pollution?

[geoffrey]

I just wonder how many people down the road will be affect with cancer or other respiratory diseases, from all the pollution?

Few people live within the range of the pollution, maybe 20,000 tops.

Small amount compared to the many millions that live within the toxic cancer cloud that hovers over southern Ontario most months of the year.

I wouldn't be too worried about us. While we have a terrible GHG emissions record, we're pretty clean in all other ways.

[Mad_Michael]

I just wonder how many people down the road will be affect with cancer or other respiratory diseases, from all the pollution?

Few people live within the range of the pollution, maybe 20,000 tops.

Small amount compared to the many millions that live within the toxic cancer cloud that hovers over southern Ontario most months of the year.

I wouldn't be too worried about us. While we have a terrible GHG emissions record, we're pretty clean in all other ways.

In case you are curious, multiple (and reputable) studies have found that somewhere between half and two-thirds of Toronto's summer smog is a gift from the Ohio Valley Generating Authority - where they burn coal for electricity.

[BornAlbertan]

I just wonder how many people down the road will be affect with cancer or other respiratory diseases, from all the pollution?

Few people live within the range of the pollution, maybe 20,000 tops.

Small amount compared to the many millions that live within the toxic cancer cloud that hovers over southern Ontario most months of the year.

I wouldn't be too worried about us. While we have a terrible GHG emissions record, we're pretty clean in all other ways.

In case you are curious, multiple (and reputable) studies have found that somewhere between half and two-thirds of Toronto's summer smog is a gift from the Ohio Valley Generating Authority - where they burn coal for electricity.

What does all this have to do with a Calgary hospital?

[Mad_Michael]

What does all this have to do with a Calgary hospital?

It was in reference to your comment about Southern Ontario air quality.

What does Southern Ontario air quality have to do with a Calgary hospital?

[BornAlbertan]

What does all this have to do with a Calgary hospital?

It was in reference to your comment about Southern Ontario air quality.

What does Southern Ontario air quality have to do with a Calgary hospital?

I made no such comment. But perhaps if every Ontarian blew as hard as they could at 7:00 every morning it might blow it back to Ohio

[Mad_Michael]

What does all this have to do with a Calgary hospital?

It was in reference to your comment about Southern Ontario air quality.

What does Southern Ontario air quality have to do with a Calgary hospital?

I made no such comment. But perhaps if every Ontarian blew as hard as they could at 7:00 every morning it might blow it back to Ohio

And this has what to do with a Calgary hospital?

[geoffrey]

And this has what to do with a Calgary hospital?

About as much as Topaz's comment about Calgary pollution (which is non-existent).

[August1991]

Holy smokes. That is a lot of money for a hospital.

$1.25 billion?

Quebec plans to build two superhospitals in Montreal and they will be about $1.8 billion each. (They are controversial because the Liberal government refers to them as PPP. The private sector will be under contract to build and maintain them for 30 years or so.)

What bothers me in this question is that bureaucracy typically prefers to build big since bureaucrats think a single project will be easier to administer. Bureaucrats like to standardize. So, we wind up with huge hospitals.

The Soviet Union is littered with mammoth plants and institutions, largely now derelict. Many were never even finished. All of them are testaments to the faulty logic of bureaucrats.

I'm not sure large hospitals are the best way to deliver health care. They are vulnerable to infectious diseases. They are hard to administer and I doubt there are any economies of scale beyond a certain size.

One question to ask is if we didn't have large provincial ministries of health, what would our health delivery system look like?

I suspect that in the year 2075, people will look back at these huge hospitals and wonder why people so foolishly built them around 2010.

Meanwhile, another error of bureaucrats is the misallocation of resources. Quebec is suffering from a shortage of medical personnel and is closing health centres for lack of staff while the government is planning to spend more money on hospital infrastructure. Go figure.

[jdobbin]

$1.25 billion?

Quebec plans to build two superhospitals in Montreal and they will be about $1.8 billion each. (They are controversial because the Liberal government refers to them as PPP. The private sector will be under contract to build and maintain them for 30 years or so.)

What bothers me in this question is that bureaucracy typically prefers to build big since bureaucrats think a single project will be easier to administer. Bureaucrats like to standardize. So, we wind up with huge hospitals.

The Soviet Union is littered with mammoth plants and institutions, largely now derelict. Many were never even finished. All of them are testaments to the faulty logic of bureaucrats.

I'm not sure large hospitals are the best way to deliver health care. They are vulnerable to infectious diseases. They are hard to administer and I doubt there are any economies of scale beyond a certain size.

One question to ask is if we didn't have large provincial ministries of health, what would our health delivery system look like?

I suspect that in the year 2075, people will look back at these huge hospitals and wonder why people so foolishly built them around 2010.

Meanwhile, another error of bureaucrats is the misallocation of resources. Quebec is suffering from a shortage of medical personnel and is closing health centres for lack of staff while the government is planning to spend more money on hospital infrastructure. Go figure.

What do you think the private sector would do instead? Is this advocacy for privatizing the health system?

As for my comment about the price, it wasn't a criticism so much as as observation as to how high the cost for facilities such as this are amounting to.

[August1991]

What do you think the private sector would do instead? Is this advocacy for privatizing the health system?

I think the private sector would build smaller hospitals, but more of them. The private sector would know what size to build because it would have a clear understanding of how best to manage the hospital and how to provide health services to patients. The internal cost signals would be clear.

For bureaucrats, these cost signals are either non-existent or severely distorted. Bureaucrats have access to other people's money through tax revenue. The end result is that bureaucrats prefer big projects and justify this by arguing to politicians that there will be economies of scale.

I'm in favour of a single public payer and many private providers. IOW, I'm in favour of State health insurance but private-for-profit delivery of health services. This is exactly how a family practioner with a small clinic operates now in Canada.

[jdobbin]

I think the private sector would build smaller hospitals, but more of them. The private sector would know what size to build because it would have a clear understanding of how best to manage the hospital and how to provide health services to patients. The internal cost signals would be clear.

For bureaucrats, these cost signals are either non-existent or severely distorted. Bureaucrats have access to other people's money through tax revenue. The end result is that bureaucrats prefer big projects and justify this by arguing to politicians that there will be economies of scale.

I'm in favour of a single public payer and many private providers. IOW, I'm in favour of State health insurance but private-for-profit delivery of health services. This is exactly how a family practioner with a small clinic operates now in Canada.

The tendency for the private sector has been to build smaller? Is there any evidence of this when it comes to hospitals?