U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-26-2008, 06:55 PM
 
4,657 posts, read 7,611,673 times
Reputation: 1347

Advertisements

This was buried in the "sicko" thread, so I made it it's own.

In socialized healthcare everyone pays for everyone else, even if everyone isn't contributing, correct? For example 3 Canadians are very hard working upstanding citizens who contribute to the system through their taxes. A fourth Canadian sits on the couch, watches tv, eats chips and smokes dope all day. He contributes nothing to the system since he doesn't work. Yet in your system he is covered as much as the 3 hard working, upstanding Canadians. 3 are paying for 4. Well, since the most basic law of economics says that in order to be solvent one must make more then they spend, this example doesn't work. So the government must raise taxes somewhere in order to offset the delinquents who leech off of the system and don't add anything to it. When does it end? how does it end? Does it make you guys mad?

Another question:

Do you guys think it is fair that a Canadian who drinks in moderation, doesn't smoke, take drugs and exercises regularly should pay for people who engage in destructive behavior, i.e drug abuse, alcoholism, morbidly obese? In other words, there's no penalty/reprecussions for people who engage in self destructive behavior in regards to their healthcare, correct? Thanks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-26-2008, 07:11 PM
 
1,723 posts, read 4,990,868 times
Reputation: 1349
The penalty for unhealthy behavior is the adverse effect on your health as a result of those activities. The health care itself is a basic human right and is not denied to you based on your poor decisions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2008, 07:39 PM
 
Location: Manitoba
793 posts, read 1,949,916 times
Reputation: 253
lets put it the other way around. In the USA, a single man has a very good wage $100K+, good health and can afford every benefit of health care system. On another hand a man is married with 3 children. He has 2 jobs, the mom is working too, but still can't afford the paying for health care. They are just above the poor level. The mom falls sick and needs extended care, where she can't get where she is, but she can't afford it. Those people are good citizen and work hard for their money. But the broken health care system can't help here without her paying huge amount of money. She eventually dies and those children are without a mom. She would have survived if she had that extended care she needed, but wasn't given to her.

Don't you see a major problem there?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2008, 07:49 PM
 
2 posts, read 18,257 times
Reputation: 11
@Sonrise, the example you give is not the real problem with socialized health care as practiced in Canada.

Any social program is going to involve transfers of wealth, either from those who have it, or those who are earning it, to those who don't. Medicare and Medicaid in the US have exactly the same 'feature'.

Moreover, the plain reality (though I'm not sure many will admit this, and I expect many to argue vehemently against the notion) is that someone who abuses his body and is not gainfully employed is going to very quietly tend to slip lower on the priority list.

In Canada, the health care system runs on the basis of who you know, and how valued you are perceived to be. While everyone will get decent basic care, if you are a powerful politician, you'll get outstanding care. If you're an ordinary citizen, take a number.

You can look at the former Prime Minister, who had some heart problems, and, rather than waiting six to twenty-four months like his fellow citizens was treated in approximately 24 hours. Or the Health Minister who developed prostate cancer and was treated within a week. (A close (hard-working) friend had a much more advanced case at the time, and had to wait nine months. At the same hospital.).

As you can imagine, the unemployed guy who's overweight and comes in smelling of pot... he's going to get an even lower priority for anything that's got a queue, which is pretty much the entire health-care system.

Sure, no one will say that, but if there is an emergency case that takes up two operating slots, and four people are scheduled for surgery -- a politician, a wealthy donor, a young mother, and the layabout... it's not going to be the politician who gets bumped, and it probably won't be the donor. It'll be the layabout getting rescheduled two months down the road, and the young mother getting scheduled a week down the road.

No, the biggest problems with the Canadian system are:
-foolish government attempts to centrally control, e.g. Ontario's Conservative government deciding that they had 'too many doctors'.
-negligible market discipline. Free markets aren't very good at allocating care, but they are good at running things efficiently. Central planning doesn't work well.
-no one pays anything up front -- at all -- and people are left with the illusion that the system is "free". As a result, massive queues occur, and triage is needed.

The French system (I know, anathema for an American to hear) and some of the Scandinavian systems are all examples of socialized systems that work much better than the Canadian system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2008, 08:27 PM
 
40 posts, read 179,643 times
Reputation: 28
MY brother is dying from cancer and the one thing that really ticks him off is Canadians spending our money everywhere but Canada..without the taxes we will not have our medical expenses paid and there has been cuts in what is paid for...so is he right..he sure thinks so!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2008, 08:41 PM
 
4,285 posts, read 14,139,390 times
Reputation: 3839
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarp View Post
The penalty for unhealthy behavior is the adverse effect on your health as a result of those activities. The health care itself is a basic human right and is not denied to you based on your poor decisions.


Not much left to add other than "Yup".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2008, 09:51 PM
 
4,657 posts, read 7,611,673 times
Reputation: 1347
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarp View Post
The penalty for unhealthy behavior is the adverse effect on your health as a result of those activities. The health care itself is a basic human right and is not denied to you based on your poor decisions.
Which you're paying for. BTW, your second sentence is very telling in how we think differently. I don't for a second believe that health care is a basic human right. One needs food, water, clothing and shelter to survive, going by your supposition, those are basic human rights. Should the government provide those things?

For the record, no one thus far has really answered my questions directly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-26-2008, 11:07 PM
 
4,285 posts, read 14,139,390 times
Reputation: 3839
I would have thought several of the posters had clearly answered the questions, but here's a second attempt.


Quote:
So the government must raise taxes somewhere in order to offset the delinquents who leech off of the system and don't add anything to it. When does it end? how does it end? Does it make you guys mad?
The same questions could be applied to a private insurance system wherein participants who require medical attention as a result of self-injurious behaviour must have their medical expenses subsidized by those plan participants who are more prudent in their lifestyle.

Seems foolish to get mad when the object behind any insurance plan (private or government) is to use the resources of all particpants to offset the needs of the portion of particpants who will actually need to avail themselves of the plan.

There is a fundamental belief amongst the majority of Canadians that something as essential as health care should be assigned according to need rather than ability to pay.

While systems advocating universal access to health care aren't perfect, they are in place in all member states of the G7 except for the US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2008, 09:47 AM
 
207 posts, read 671,809 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonrise View Post
Which you're paying for. BTW, your second sentence is very telling in how we think differently. I don't for a second believe that health care is a basic human right. One needs food, water, clothing and shelter to survive, going by your supposition, those are basic human rights. Should the government provide those things?

For the record, no one thus far has really answered my questions directly.
Yes we called it Welfare. Few hundred a month to cover those need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-28-2008, 01:03 PM
 
136 posts, read 812,049 times
Reputation: 71
And I don't see how the American way works any better for your question. You have 3 hard working Americans paying into their company health care plan and using its benefits. You have one lazy unemployed American living on welfare making use of medicaid or whatever you call it. The three hard working ones are paying for the medicaid guy through their taxes same as here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top