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.
among the 50 wealthiest countries on Earth, the U.S. is the only one without universal health care. Obamacare won’t get it there, but it will make insurance a little more available and affordable for some. Canadian medicare, for its part, is becoming less universal and affordable, but we don’t like to talk about that.
They have that in common with the U.S.'s Obamacare: The people pushing it, don't like to talk about what it really does, either.
About Canada's govt-provided health-insurance scheme:
Quote:
almost all provinces have an opt-out clause, though there is not much benefit in doing so because premiums (read: taxes) are not refunded.
I smiled when I read that one. Canada's opt-out plan is really only half an opt-out plan: they let you opt out of receiving their health insurance, but they don't let you opt out of paying for it anyway. Umm... isn't that (paying for it) really the part people WANTED to opt out of?
Quote:
One of the most puzzling aspects of the Obamacare debate is that it’s rarely, if ever, discussed in terms economic benefits and ensuring more equity. In Canada, we take those for granted.
A very revealing quote. You might wonder where this guy has been. Republicans, at least, have been discussing its level of economic benefit till they are blue in the face: Robbing Peter to pay Paul might benefit Paul, but certainly not Peter. And if Peter gets upset enough about it to quit his job so there's nothing left to rob from him, then nobody benefits. As for "equity"... well, again, ask Peter.
As for "In Canada, we take those for granted"... yes, this is actually from the same author, and in the very same article, where he said Canada's plan is becoming "less universal and affordable", just a minute before. George Orwell referred to this as "doublethink". For those who haven't read his "1984", it's not a compliment.
It also reveals why, as the author also said, they don't like to talk about that in Canada. Facing up to the truth is never comfortable to those who have been living a lie.
Harrier stopped reading the article after the first sentence.
The Democrats shut down the government.
Again... it's dumb to claim that the other side is to blame for the shutdown when it was your side that initiated use of the shutdown as leverage to achieve your unilateral demands. You can only "blame" the other side that they didn't agree to your hostage-taking terms.
Again... it's dumb to claim that the other side is to blame for the shutdown when it was your side that initiated use of the shutdown as leverage to achieve your unilateral demands.
But if they don't stick to the talking points, no matter how idiotic, then certain people on this forum might not get their astroturfing checks. I guess in that sense they might gain sympathy for furloughed government workers.
The author of the article is from Ontario, where they have been having some problems with their health care program....Bear in mind that it is the provinces not the federal govt. that run the health care plans in Canada, and every one is different.
A bunch of people who live in a socialized-medicine system are giving us an "unbiased" view of our new socialized-medicine system?
Yes. Because Canada doesn't have a dog in this fight. Unlike what most people arrogantly think, the rest of the world doesn't care too much about what is going on in the U.S., so a Canadian isn't going to get all wrapped up in the "us vs them" political nonsense. They are going to look at this from an experienced standpoint, since as you point out, they have socialized-medicine.
A Canadian friend asked me why Americans are so scared of the idea of socialized medicine when 90% of the world is on this type of program. I explained to him that we are always told that the people who live in the socialized medicine countries are miserable and poor, and many in the US actually buy that. We both laughed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
Ignore the peanut gallery here. The article is interesting.
I am rather surprised to hear that Canadians actually have private insurance, and that through revenues and cost savings, ObamaCare is estimated to lower the deficit. You would not know that by the howling conservative posters here. They act like it will cause an asteroid impact.
I think the howling may be because something that could shrink the deficit AND improve the equity in access to health care is just too politically frightening. They have painted themselves into a corner where they have to throw their fellow citizens under the bus for political gain.
The politics of big government vs little government have negated us from having good government.
The line's been drawn in the sand and depending on which side you fall on, it doesn't matter what "the other guys" do, they'll always be wrong. Because if they're not wrong, then YOU are wrong. It's arrogant, petty, and will get us absolutely nowhere, but that's the political game that many people in this country (most specifically those in charge) love to play.
Yes. Because Canada doesn't have a dog in this fight.
Well, considering that they have already lost the fight, I suppose you could say that's true. Sort of like saying that the Japanese don't have a "dog in the fight" of WWII.
Quote:
Unlike what most people arrogantly think, the rest of the world doesn't care too much about what is going on in the U.S.
So, let me get this straight.
Some Canadian writes an article about what Canadians think of something going on the U.S.
Then you come busting in thumping your chest, and say the rest of the world (I assume you are pointing to Canada in this instance) doesn't care about what goes on in the U.S.
In the same breath, you say that some people are arrogant.
Have you addressed your sentiments to the author, who apparently DOES care enough to write an article about it?
When you do, be sure to explain whether "most people arrogantly think", refers to him, or yourself.
Well, considering that they have already lost the fight, I suppose you could say that's true. Sort of like saying that the Japanese don't have a "dog in the fight" of WWII..
What fight did they lose?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn
So, let me get this straight.
Some Canadian writes an article about what Canadians think of something going on the U.S.
Then you come busting in thumping your chest, and say the rest of the world (I assume you are pointing to Canada in this instance) doesn't care about what goes on in the U.S.
In the same breath, you say that some people are arrogant.
Have you addressed your sentiments to the author, who apparently DOES care enough to write an article about it?
When you do, be sure to explain whether "most people arrogantly think", refers to him, or yourself.
Taking my quote out of context, you sure got me didn't you?
Now putting it back into context, I was quoting a post where you alluded to the idea that Canadians are, as you put it "unbiased". Clearly saying that they in fact are biased, and I was pointing out that since they don't have a dog in this fight (our healthcare doesn't affect them) they don't have any reason to be biased (our healthcare doesn't affect them)
Our healthcare doesn't affect them because *thumps chest* the rest of the world doesn't care what we do.
Some interesting quotes from the article:
They have that in common with the U.S.'s Obamacare: The people pushing it, don't like to talk about what it really does, either.
About Canada's govt-provided health-insurance scheme:
I smiled when I read that one. Canada's opt-out plan is really only half an opt-out plan: they let you opt out of receiving their health insurance, but they don't let you opt out of paying for it anyway. Umm... isn't that (paying for it) really the part people WANTED to opt out of?
A very revealing quote. You might wonder where this guy has been. Republicans, at least, have been discussing its level of economic benefit till they are blue in the face: Robbing Peter to pay Paul might benefit Paul, but certainly not Peter. And if Peter gets upset enough about it to quit his job so there's nothing left to rob from him, then nobody benefits. As for "equity"... well, again, ask Peter.
As for "In Canada, we take those for granted"... yes, this is actually from the same author, and in the very same article, where he said Canada's plan is becoming "less universal and affordable", just a minute before. George Orwell referred to this as "doublethink". For those who haven't read his "1984", it's not a compliment.
It also reveals why, as the author also said, they don't like to talk about that in Canada. Facing up to the truth is never comfortable to those who have been living a lie.
Aah; you take what is written and apply your own optics to it so I guess that makes you an authority on our regard for our sytem up here, eh?
Firstly you're categorically wrong when you suggest the opting-out is for reasons of "not wanting to pay" as most could not tell your what they're paying for it. The opting out is done for reasons of government tampering with the system , either Federal of Provincial, so funds can be diverted elsewhere which ultimatley results in lowering of quantity or quality.
Now on to the George Orewell 1984 reference in a less than flattering reference to our double-thinking.
We are well aware of the challenges ahead of us vis-a-vis rising costs of our system, especially as it would apply towards our aging population's demands on care. We are however, not concerned because we know that ultimately the fact we've had universal healthcare in practice a full twenty years before George even published his missive and almost fifty years ahead of your arrival at the starting line gives us the experience and committment to sustainability.
Our lack of concern is based upon our firm belief that the majority of Canadians will not tolerate any Governmental attempts to drag us back into the nineteenth century.
Canadian medicare, for its part, is becoming less universal and affordable, but we don’t like to talk about that.
Anything else you've already read, that you need pointed out to you?
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.
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.
