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.
The journey to southerly climates can extend for upwards to six months, at least in the states, depending on the individual. I'm sure most people must understand the vulnerabilities that cold weather has to seniors. At temperatures going below 15°C they risk complications such as cardiovascular reduction, hypothermia, frostbite and inhibition with muscle efficiency. Now granted this is for people who have a consistent outdoor routine and you can bundle up but given that this is Canada we're talking about where most of the country is below 0°C throughout much of the colder season unless you're talking Victoria, any significant duration of time outside presents its share of bodily issues. Issues which evidently some of the population prefers to wait out in some place like Latin America, Spain, or the southern US. If that wasn't the case and economics was the chief motivator then you'd be hearing about Switzerland and Luxembourg as destinations next to the obvious ones like the British Virgin Islands or Bermuda as far as money and taxes is concerned.
Do you really not understand what's being argued here concerning the snowbirds? I'm not reciting formal healthcare policies these people receive. I'm talking about the motivations, transparently obvious motivations that have to do with health, with regards to these older folks and why they're seasonally migrating to selective environments. I refer to the above complications cited that older people have as it relates to the cold.
I understand the point you've now pivoted to just fine.
Travelling for the purpose of obtaining "medical care" was the first point you chose to debate with your contention being more Canadians leaving Canada than Americans were leaving the U.S. for that purpose. You even attempted using a right wing conservative Canadian think tank "secondstreet.org" "estimate" gleaned from a survey of "some" specialists in Canada asked how many of their clients may have travelled elsewhere to receive the care they specialized in. That survey was shown to have been very specious due to no effort being made to query any patients or citizens at large, no effort made to factor out those who might have gotten ill while travelling, and no effort whatsoever to determine if indeed the specialists queried had bothered to consider if the patients had gotten their procedure provided by another specialist within Canada. Canadians are free to obtain their healthcare wherever they may choose in the country without any of that 'in or out of network" nonsense Americans are forced to comply with.
When that falsehood didn't fly, you have now pivoted to the "generality" of Canadians leaving Canada for some unspecified, ethereal, presumptive imagined, made up, health related reasons while using the name "snowbirds", as if migratory birds are flying south to seek health care in Florida along with the added caveat of them being "older" thrown in for good measure in a futile attempt to compare that to Americans leaving the U.S. by the millions each year (pre- pandemic but, over 300,000 still left for that purpose) for the sole reason of obtaining some form of "actual" medical care/procedure.
You are even attempting to use an incorrect average temperature for the majority of Canada's population the bulk of which, as we are constantly reminded on here live within 100 miles of the 49th parallel and share the very same temperatures as your northern and mid western states throughout the winter months.
Your obvious pivot from your original point to this silly assertion is still a load of codswallop.
The journey to southerly climates can extend for upwards to six months, at least in the states, depending on the individual. I'm sure most people must understand the vulnerabilities that cold weather has to seniors. At temperatures going below 15°C they risk complications such as cardiovascular reduction, hypothermia, frostbite and inhibition with muscle efficiency. Now granted this is for people who have a consistent outdoor routine and you can bundle up but given that this is Canada we're talking about where most of the country is below 0°C throughout much of the colder season unless you're talking Victoria, any significant duration of time outside presents its share of bodily issues.
*snip*
I live in a Canadian city with an extreme climate, Winnipeg. A few days ago the temperature reached high of +99°F. In winter, particularly in January, the daytime temperature can be -32°F (and -40°F or lower after factoring in the windchill).
It’s no biggy. I’m fine living here in winter. I have never heard of anyone having health issues because of the cold. Too much common sense around to invite frost bite or hypothermia in winter or heat stroke in summer.
I understand the point you've now pivoted to just fine.
Travelling for the purpose of obtaining "medical care" was the first point you chose to debate with your contention being more Canadians leaving Canada than Americans were leaving the U.S. for that purpose. You even attempted using a right wing conservative Canadian think tank "secondstreet.org" "estimate" gleaned from a survey of "some" specialists in Canada asked how many of their clients may have travelled elsewhere to receive the care they specialized in. That survey was shown to have been very specious due to no effort being made to query any patients or citizens at large, no effort made to factor out those who might have gotten ill while travelling, and no effort whatsoever to determine if indeed the specialists queried had bothered to consider if the patients had gotten their procedure provided by another specialist within Canada. Canadians are free to obtain their healthcare wherever they may choose in the country without any of that 'in or out of network" nonsense Americans are forced to comply with.
When that falsehood didn't fly, you have now pivoted to the "generality" of Canadians leaving Canada for some unspecified, ethereal, presumptive imagined, made up, health related reasons while using the name "snowbirds", as if migratory birds are flying south to seek health care in Florida along with the added caveat of them being "older" thrown in for good measure in a futile attempt to compare that to Americans leaving the U.S. by the millions each year (pre- pandemic but, over 300,000 still left for that purpose) for the sole reason of obtaining some form of "actual" medical care/procedure.
You are even attempting to use an incorrect average temperature for the majority of Canada's population the bulk of which, as we are constantly reminded on here live within 100 miles of the 49th parallel and share the very same temperatures as your northern and mid western states throughout the winter months.
Your obvious pivot from your original point to this silly assertion is still a load of codswallop.
No, the purpose of citing the "think tank" was to point out the amount of international travellers leaving Canada for purposes that demonstrably have to do with their health during trying times of the year. The Fraser Institute's numbers was only part of the overall tallying. You keep trying to characterise the arguments I'm making here as though they were some sort of disjointed plethora of disorderly estimates while pretending there's no relevancy to be had or to discount the reasons, transparent reasons which you seem keen on ignoring, to southern climates by an age demographic who would be the most susceptible to the weather in your country for a large segment of the year. There's no misconstruing or fanciful misidentification here because the facts of who these people are, where they're going, where they're coming from, what the situational circumstances they're coming from are, and what organisations they're affiliating with all lead to the conclusion of their taking steps to mitigate their exposure to the rigours of their nation's climate during a particular time of the year when it would be most difficult for people like themselves. In addition to that point made, however, I never made any allusions to the idea that the United States was the lone nation of travel for these people; various other localities across the globe such as Latin America, the Caribbean, and nations on the Iberian Peninsula in Europe have been cited not just by myself but others too. The United States just happens to be a focal point for snowbirds due to factors like ease of linguistic engagement with locals and possibly the cost of travel since a passenger is only travelling across the North American continent and not oceans or several continents to get to their destination.
Stop ignoring the demography of these people, the obvious reference being made in their own organisation's title, and the destinations they're commonly travelling towards at specific points in the year. None of this is rocket science. It isn't 'ethereal' or 'presumptive'. They're not travelling to tropical islands, equatorial republics, Mediterranean hotspots, or a region of the United States colloquially referred to as the 'sunbelt' during a specific time of the year that's more trying for their health for the culture or the food, at least not as a primary justification.
The climate statistics I'm referencing stem from the ECCC's database. It's no secret that the warmest province in Canada is British Columbia but that even there the average winter temperatures is 6-7°C in its major cities. As a comparison Seattle, Washington's weather statistics have the city's January average as 8°C though the citizenry there is able to travel southward within the boundaries of the same country to circumvent the challenges with cold. You tried to draw an equivalency between the southern Canadian provinces and northerly states but that too neglects to account for Canada's greater exposure to the arctic winds and latitudinal positioning. Take Winnipeg in Manitoba compared to Minneapolis in Minnesota. One has a January average high of -11.3°C compared with -4.7°C. They're within the spectrum of each other but again the latter example's citizenry can migrate within the interior of their nation for a change of climate if they so choose. The only state that would fully compare to the Canadian inclemency is Alaska and they're in the northwestern most extremity of the continent and cut off from the mainland contiguos.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnirene
I live in a Canadian city with an extreme climate, Winnipeg. A few days ago the temperature reached high of +99°F. In winter, particularly in January, the daytime temperature can be -32°F (and -40°F or lower after factoring in the windchill).
It’s no biggy. I’m fine living here in winter. I have never heard of anyone having health issues because of the cold. Too much common sense around to invite frost bite or hypothermia in winter or heat stroke in summer.
Good for you? It's apparently not a universal sentiment though if the number of affiliates of the CSA and their choices of destination are any indicator.
Good for you? It's apparently not a universal sentiment though if the number of affiliates of the CSA and their choices of destination are any indicator.
It’s rare to find anything in life that’s a universal sentiment.
I admit winter was somewhat annoying this year. Colder and more snow/shoveling then usual. The result was lots and lots of potholes come spring. Well, more like craters than potholes. Hard to dodge them when driving, particularly if rain had filled up the holes, disguising their depth. Lots of cracked car rims. One guy with a sense of humor posed with a fishing pole dangling into a pothole on a major thoroughfare, much to the amusement of passing traffic.
No, the purpose of citing the "think tank" was to point out the amount of international travellers leaving Canada for purposes that demonstrably have to do with their health during trying times of the year. The Fraser Institute's numbers was only part of the overall tallying. You keep trying to characterise the arguments I'm making here as though they were some sort of disjointed plethora of disorderly estimates while pretending there's no relevancy to be had or to discount the reasons, transparent reasons which you seem keen on ignoring, to southern climates by an age demographic who would be the most susceptible to the weather in your country for a large segment of the year. There's no misconstruing or fanciful misidentification here because the facts of who these people are, where they're going, where they're coming from, what the situational circumstances they're coming from are, and what organisations they're affiliating with all lead to the conclusion of their taking steps to mitigate their exposure to the rigours of their nation's climate during a particular time of the year when it would be most difficult for people like themselves. In addition to that point made, however, I never made any allusions to the idea that the United States was the lone nation of travel for these people; various other localities across the globe such as Latin America, the Caribbean, and nations on the Iberian Peninsula in Europe have been cited not just by myself but others too. The United States just happens to be a focal point for snowbirds due to factors like ease of linguistic engagement with locals and possibly the cost of travel since a passenger is only travelling across the North American continent and not oceans or several continents to get to their destination.
Stop ignoring the demography of these people, the obvious reference being made in their own organisation's title, and the destinations they're commonly travelling towards at specific points in the year. None of this is rocket science. It isn't 'ethereal' or 'presumptive'. They're not travelling to tropical islands, equatorial republics, Mediterranean hotspots, or a region of the United States colloquially referred to as the 'sunbelt' during a specific time of the year that's more trying for their health for the culture or the food, at least not as a primary justification.
The climate statistics I'm referencing stem from the ECCC's database. It's no secret that the warmest province in Canada is British Columbia but that even there the average winter temperatures is 6-7°C in its major cities. As a comparison Seattle, Washington's weather statistics have the city's January average as 8°C though the citizenry there is able to travel southward within the boundaries of the same country to circumvent the challenges with cold. You tried to draw an equivalency between the southern Canadian provinces and northerly states but that too neglects to account for Canada's greater exposure to the arctic winds and latitudinal positioning. Take Winnipeg in Manitoba compared to Minneapolis in Minnesota. One has a January average high of -11.3°C compared with -4.7°C. They're within the spectrum of each other but again the latter example's citizenry can migrate within the interior of their nation for a change of climate if they so choose. The only state that would fully compare to the Canadian inclemency is Alaska and they're in the northwestern most extremity of the continent and cut off from the mainland contiguos.
Good for you? It's apparently not a universal sentiment though if the number of affiliates of the CSA and their choices of destination are any indicator.
Nope it's an indicator of some Canadians affording themselves the opportunity to go play in the sun having nothing whatsoever to do with your initial point of Canadians leaving in numbers greater than Americans for the sole purpose of seeking medical care elsewhere.
ONCE AGAIN from the Center of Disease Control: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/yellowb...edical-tourism
"Surveillance data indicate that millions of US residents travel internationally for medical care each year. Ongoing reports of infections and other adverse events following medical or dental procedures abroad serve as reminders that medical tourism is not without risks.
Common categories of procedures that US medical tourists pursue include dental care, noncosmetic surgery (such as orthopedic surgery), cosmetic surgery, fertility treatments, organ and tissue transplantation, and cancer treatment. Medical tourism destinations for US residents include Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, Cuba, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Singapore, and Thailand. When reviewing the risks associated with medical tourism, travelers should consider both the procedure and destination.
Overseas facilities may not maintain accreditation or provider licensure, track patient outcome data, or maintain formal medical record privacy or security policies. Medical tourists should also be aware that the drugs and medical products and devices used in foreign countries might not be subject to the same regulatory scrutiny and oversight as in the United States. In addition, some drugs may be counterfeit or otherwise ineffective (for example, expired, contaminated, or improperly stored).
Most medical tourists pay for their care at time of service and often rely on private companies or medical concierge services to identify foreign health care facilities. Some US health insurance companies and large employers have formed alliances with health care facilities outside the United States to control costs."
The CSA membership is just over 100,000. Kinda hard to equate that paltry number to even those migratory birds you refer to, much less the millions of Americans the CDC determined through surveillance observation methods at points of exit were leaving the U.S. every year to have their knees replaced etc..
You can blather all you like about temperatures and the long term affects they might have on people but that has nothing whatsoever to do with your premise Canadians were coming south for the very same reason Americans are going all over the world - to obtain medical care. We're not.
In keeping with your chosen method of throwing everything and anything against the wall with the hope some of it sticks; I'll see your migratory birds and up the ante thusly:
Nor are we dropping like flies from all those vascular and other ailments you attribute to the aging in colder climes. Canadians are enjoying longer lifespans than Americans with Americans LOSING two full years of expected lifespan just since 2019. Heck; even the Finlanders are living longer than you poor folks.
"One of the reasons why life expectancy in the United States is lower than in other industrialized nations is because of an under-performing healthcare system, according to a report by the National Research Council. Drops in life expectancy are especially pronounced in US adults aged 50 years and older.Aug 17, 2020"
Nope it's an indicator of some Canadians affording themselves the opportunity to go play in the sun having nothing whatsoever to do with your initial point of Canadians leaving in numbers greater than Americans for the sole purpose of seeking medical care elsewhere.
ONCE AGAIN from the Center of Disease Control: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/yellowb...edical-tourism
"Surveillance data indicate that millions of US residents travel internationally for medical care each year. Ongoing reports of infections and other adverse events following medical or dental procedures abroad serve as reminders that medical tourism is not without risks.
Common categories of procedures that US medical tourists pursue include dental care, noncosmetic surgery (such as orthopedic surgery), cosmetic surgery, fertility treatments, organ and tissue transplantation, and cancer treatment. Medical tourism destinations for US residents include Argentina, Brazil, Costa Rica, Cuba, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Singapore, and Thailand. When reviewing the risks associated with medical tourism, travelers should consider both the procedure and destination.
Overseas facilities may not maintain accreditation or provider licensure, track patient outcome data, or maintain formal medical record privacy or security policies. Medical tourists should also be aware that the drugs and medical products and devices used in foreign countries might not be subject to the same regulatory scrutiny and oversight as in the United States. In addition, some drugs may be counterfeit or otherwise ineffective (for example, expired, contaminated, or improperly stored).
Most medical tourists pay for their care at time of service and often rely on private companies or medical concierge services to identify foreign health care facilities. Some US health insurance companies and large employers have formed alliances with health care facilities outside the United States to control costs."
The CSA membership is just over 100,000. Kinda hard to equate that paltry number to even those migratory birds you refer to, much less the millions of Americans the CDC determined through surveillance observation methods at points of exit were leaving the U.S. every year to have their knees replaced etc..
You can blather all you like about temperatures and the long term affects they might have on people but that has nothing whatsoever to do with your premise Canadians were coming south for the very same reason Americans are going all over the world - to obtain medical care. We're not.
In keeping with your chosen method of throwing everything and anything against the wall with the hope some of it sticks; I'll see your migratory birds and up the ante thusly:
Nor are we dropping like flies from all those vascular and other ailments you attribute to the aging in colder climes. Canadians are enjoying longer lifespans than Americans with Americans LOSING two full years of expected lifespan just since 2019. Heck; even the Finlanders are living longer than you poor folks.
"One of the reasons why life expectancy in the United States is lower than in other industrialized nations is because of an under-performing healthcare system, according to a report by the National Research Council. Drops in life expectancy are especially pronounced in US adults aged 50 years and older.Aug 17, 2020"
I believe it is the third time now that I've addressed the CDC's statistic abstractly defining the total as simply being 'millions' without thoroughly clarifying the amount. The American Journal of Medicine's projection gives a specific value of 1.4 million which falls within the parameters of the CDC's estimates and doesn't contradict it. These statistics were acknowledged twice already in relation to the AJM's estimates which they don't contradict. Similarly it's becoming blatant wilful mulishness on your part for why nationals from Canada are choosing select nations to head towards during select times of the year for significant periods of time.
The CSA's membership may seem small but per capita this comes out to 0.3% of the aggregate Canadian population when the tally was taken back in 2017, in addition to the 0.17% population estimated to have travelled outside of Canada for medical procedures in 2016 (some adjustments there would have to be made for the uptick in population between years), which runs in comparison to 0.4% that accounts for the 1.4 million projection of the AJM. Some of the CSA's membership numbers might overlap with the outbound Canadians who sought direct medical service. There would have to be measurable statistics which help determine by how much those two groups overlap.
Never said Canadians were 'dropping like flies'. Stop putting words in my mouth. I only stated that the complications brought upon by cardiovascular and muscular challenges it presents compels a number of older Canadians to seek warmer weather to wait it out. Didn't mention fatalities brought on by that anywhere. It doesn't have to be an imperative treatment for the person to seek out mitigation for things they might otherwise have a more difficult time handling back home.
So now we're onto comparative lifespans between nations now? The United States has an unhealthy lifestyle in many respects and that's not debatable. Probably doesn't help that we're one of the leading nations in the world in terms of drug use. In theory I honestly wouldn't mind a universal healthcare option here in the states because there's a lot of needy people through no fault of their own but then I look at estimates from a system that's becoming burdened like Sweden's and then apply that to the innumerable amounts pouring through the southern US border, they've been saying a dozen million for decades but it's likely closer to 30 million now, i.e closing in on nearly 10% of the total population in the USA. Doesn't make for a sustainable system when you have readily and frequently exploited loopholes which likely impacts the life expectancy projections in their own way.
I believe it is the third time now that I've addressed the CDC's statistic abstractly defining the total as simply being 'millions' without thoroughly clarifying the amount. The American Journal of Medicine's projection gives a specific value of 1.4 million which falls within the parameters of the CDC's estimates and doesn't contradict it. These statistics were acknowledged twice already in relation to the AJM's estimates which they don't contradict. Similarly it's becoming blatant wilful mulishness on your part for why nationals from Canada are choosing select nations to head towards during select times of the year for significant periods of time.
The CSA's membership may seem small but per capita this comes out to 0.3% of the aggregate Canadian population when the tally was taken back in 2017, in addition to the 0.17% population estimated to have travelled outside of Canada for medical procedures in 2016 (some adjustments there would have to be made for the uptick in population between years), which runs in comparison to 0.4% that accounts for the 1.4 million projection of the AJM. Some of the CSA's membership numbers might overlap with the outbound Canadians who sought direct medical service. There would have to be measurable statistics which help determine by how much those two groups overlap.
Never said Canadians were 'dropping like flies'. Stop putting words in my mouth. I only stated that the complications brought upon by cardiovascular and muscular challenges it presents compels a number of older Canadians to seek warmer weather to wait it out. Didn't mention fatalities brought on by that anywhere. It doesn't have to be an imperative treatment for the person to seek out mitigation for things they might otherwise have a more difficult time handling back home.
So now we're onto comparative lifespans between nations now? The United States has an unhealthy lifestyle in many respects and that's not debatable. Probably doesn't help that we're one of the leading nations in the world in terms of drug use. In theory I honestly wouldn't mind a universal healthcare option here in the states because there's a lot of needy people through no fault of their own but then I look at estimates from a system that's becoming burdened like Sweden's and then apply that to the innumerable amounts pouring through the southern US border, they've been saying a dozen million for decades but it's likely closer to 30 million now, i.e closing in on nearly 10% of the total population in the USA. Doesn't make for a sustainable system when you have readily and frequently exploited loopholes which likely impacts the life expectancy projections in their own way.
Who is trying to sell you on another medical care delivery system, not I. This is your applied fantasy thread, not mine. In any attempt to install a universal or single payer model I would caution to be very wary of whom you put in charge of it's funding as it will be subject to the whims of those covered by a fully paid Platinum plan seeking to raid the budget for some pork.
Remember the topic was Trudeau's stating American women prevented from obtaining abortions would be welcomed in Canada?
The Center for Disease Control compiled it's assessment stating multiple millions from actually observing those who specifically left to obtain medical care out of country, hence the mention of "surveilance" in their study. Perhaps the American Journal of Medicine has a prejudiced dog in the medical insurance hunt?
If you can insist on "speculating" that a membership amounting to .3% of Canada's entire pop. is leaving for the sole purpose of equating to those Americans actively "seeking medical care" out of country then I can introduce "lifespan" figures for the comparator countries.
And since you keep bringing up the mitigation of adverse climate effects on a person's health ; what then do you say about the millions more Americans traveling to the same warmer climate regions? By using your comparator metric; that puts us right back to square one of millions MORE Americans leaving for reasons of healthcare.
You refrained from addressing another governmental site stating those Americans dying younger were doing so due to the failures within America's healthcare system, both for it's lack of being accessible to all, and for it's outrageous cost . . so . . I would opine that those who would be leaving a country to actively seek medical treatment out of country would do so in greater numbers from such a country than those from any country with a universal or single payer model covering everyone from cradle to grave.
Those people leaving to enjoy the fruits of their labours in a warmer clime do not in any way equate in numbers or the false equivalency to those getting their knees replaced.
Every time you introduce another periphery issue such as illegal immigrants you inadvertently add to the list of why Americans in very significant numbers would be actively seeking medical care /procedures elsewhere that would not apply to Canadians.
We can agree to disagree and put a stop to this nonsensical off-topic exchange you introduced into the thread having nothing whatsoever to do with abortions being available in one country and perhaps encouraging some to travel there due to them not being able to obtain one in another.
Who is trying to sell you on another medical care delivery system, not I. This is your applied fantasy thread, not mine. In any attempt to install a universal or single payer model I would caution to be very wary of whom you put in charge of it's funding as it will be subject to the whims of those covered by a fully paid Platinum plan seeking to raid the budget for some pork.
Remember the topic was Trudeau's stating American women prevented from obtaining abortions would be welcomed in Canada?
The Center for Disease Control compiled it's assessment stating multiple millions from actually observing those who specifically left to obtain medical care out of country, hence the mention of "surveilance" in their study. Perhaps the American Journal of Medicine has a prejudiced dog in the medical insurance hunt?
If you can insist on "speculating" that a membership amounting to .3% of Canada's entire pop. is leaving for the sole purpose of equating to those Americans actively "seeking medical care" out of country then I can introduce "lifespan" figures for the comparator countries.
And since you keep bringing up the mitigation of adverse climate effects on a person's health ; what then do you say about the millions more Americans traveling to the same warmer climate regions? By using your comparator metric; that puts us right back to square one of millions MORE Americans leaving for reasons of healthcare.
You refrained from addressing another governmental site stating those Americans dying younger were doing so due to the failures within America's healthcare system, both for it's lack of being accessible to all, and for it's outrageous cost . . so . . I would opine that those who would be leaving a country to actively seek medical treatment out of country would do so in greater numbers from such a country than those from any country with a universal or single payer model covering everyone from cradle to grave.
Those people leaving to enjoy the fruits of their labours in a warmer clime do not in any way equate in numbers or the false equivalency to those getting their knees replaced.
Every time you introduce another periphery issue such as illegal immigrants you inadvertently add to the list of why Americans in very significant numbers would be actively seeking medical care /procedures elsewhere that would not apply to Canadians.
We can agree to disagree and put a stop to this nonsensical off-topic exchange you introduced into the thread having nothing whatsoever to do with abortions being available in one country and perhaps encouraging some to travel there due to them not being able to obtain one in another.
Your call.
Stop projecting your arbitrary characterisations of people onto others. It's unseemly and doesn't really serve a purpose here. As to the original topic, it seemed to quickly expand into general conversations about the relative outbound numbers of citizens seeking foreign health related accommodations not too late into the whole matter. Started with one user's humour based remark on page 3 which you directly quoted on page 4 and continued in a secondary topic until I offered a remark on page 5.
You've repeated the pluralism several times now. I'm asking you to provide something that clarifies what the amount is. Having something besides your good word to demonstrate what the contradiction is between the CDC and the American Journal of Medicine's statistics which happens to classify under the designation of 'millions' falls on you. In addition to that, now we're questioning the authenticity and merit of sources again? The CDC has systematically been pushing for stringent lockdown measures regardless of judicial rulings to the contrary. There have been allegations of data collection through smart devices like the apparatus called Cue. Still taking their statistics into account, however.
It's an apples to oranges comparison. This isn't a discussion of internal life expectancy statistics. It's about outward-bound citizenry pursuing health treatment and accommodations in foreign nations relative to an adjacent nation peer of theirs. I've already clarified that my previous citation of the complications faced by elderly citizens had nothing to do with gauging the morality rate but elaborating on the causal factors behind why they would choose to seek out an alternate environment to seasonally circumvent those difficulties. As to Americans doing it, it's their same country and one which they're able to make their way towards without having to cross international boundaries. I wouldn't use that anymore than acknowledge someone from Newfoundland going to British Columbia or Ontario for better healthcare treatment in relation to what might be available in their home province.
Which youth based government statistics would you like me to point out? The CDC's own numbers have vehicular accidents as the leading cause of death for youths at 48% with suicide and homicide cumulatively making for an additional 24% of deaths. Health related fatalities amount to a small percentage of the overall statistics.
Yeah, it's kind of a severe dilemma and shortcoming that the United States is faced with. Illegal aliens burdening the healthcare system doesn't make for conducive leeway into affordability and managerial improvements. If you want to witness the implications of such socioeconomic upheaval then petition Trudeau to raise the number of Latin American migrants from 4000 to 3 million.
Stop projecting your arbitrary characterisations of people onto others. It's unseemly and doesn't really serve a purpose here. As to the original topic, it seemed to quickly expand into general conversations about the relative outbound numbers of citizens seeking foreign health related accommodations not too late into the whole matter. Started with one user's humour based remark on page 3 which you directly quoted on page 4 and continued in a secondary topic until I offered a remark on page 5.
You've repeated the pluralism several times now. I'm asking you to provide something that clarifies what the amount is. Having something besides your good word to demonstrate what the contradiction is between the CDC and the American Journal of Medicine's statistics which happens to classify under the designation of 'millions' falls on you. In addition to that, now we're questioning the authenticity and merit of sources again? The CDC has systematically been pushing for stringent lockdown measures regardless of judicial rulings to the contrary. There have been allegations of data collection through smart devices like the apparatus called Cue. Still taking their statistics into account, however.
It's an apples to oranges comparison. This isn't a discussion of internal life expectancy statistics. It's about outward-bound citizenry pursuing health treatment and accommodations in foreign nations relative to an adjacent nation peer of theirs. I've already clarified that my previous citation of the complications faced by elderly citizens had nothing to do with gauging the morality rate but elaborating on the causal factors behind why they would choose to seek out an alternate environment to seasonally circumvent those difficulties. As to Americans doing it, it's their same country and one which they're able to make their way towards without having to cross international boundaries. I wouldn't use that anymore than acknowledge someone from Newfoundland going to British Columbia or Ontario for better healthcare treatment in relation to what might be available in their home province.
Which youth based government statistics would you like me to point out? The CDC's own numbers have vehicular accidents as the leading cause of death for youths at 48% with suicide and homicide cumulatively making for an additional 24% of deaths. Health related fatalities amount to a small percentage of the overall statistics.
Yeah, it's kind of a severe dilemma and shortcoming that the United States is faced with. Illegal aliens burdening the healthcare system doesn't make for conducive leeway into affordability and managerial improvements. If you want to witness the implications of such socioeconomic upheaval then petition Trudeau to raise the number of Latin American migrants from 4000 to 3 million.
I've repeated the Center for Disease Control stated pluralism of "millions" many times because you have many times suggested it is incorrect. It doesn't fall to me to provide your research for you. Find an accurate number using the same criteria of "surveilling" outgoing citizens as to their reasons for leaving and we'll be fine.
Your contention that people travelling as snowbirds are primarily doing so for health reasons in direct parallel comparison to those who travel out of country seeking medical care/procedures is what got us into this silly discussion. That is categorically false.
The apples and oranges comparison is purely of your own making by equating those Canadians travelling south during winter months to Americans travelling anywhere at any time of the year for the express purpose of obtaining some medical procedure or treatment they cannot or choose not to avail themselves of at home. Now you're attempting to pivot once again by entering the codicil of a border crossing being some form of special indicator.
More Americans are leaving their country to obtain affordable medical care than are Canadians.
Why would I suggest Trudeau invite illegals to enter as the U.S. has done for over a hundred years by giving them jobs, schooling and other benefits, even driver's licenses, regardless of being fully aware of their illegal status?
That would be a stupid thing for any country to do, wouldn't it?
Stop projecting your arbitrary characterisations of people onto others. It's unseemly and doesn't really serve a purpose here. As to the original topic, it seemed to quickly expand into general conversations about the relative outbound numbers of citizens seeking foreign health related accommodations not too late into the whole matter. Started with one user's humour based remark on page 3 which you directly quoted on page 4 and continued in a secondary topic until I offered a remark on page 5.
You've repeated the pluralism several times now. I'm asking you to provide something that clarifies what the amount is. Having something besides your good word to demonstrate what the contradiction is between the CDC and the American Journal of Medicine's statistics which happens to classify under the designation of 'millions' falls on you. In addition to that, now we're questioning the authenticity and merit of sources again? The CDC has systematically been pushing for stringent lockdown measures regardless of judicial rulings to the contrary. There have been allegations of data collection through smart devices like the apparatus called Cue. Still taking their statistics into account, however.
It's an apples to oranges comparison. This isn't a discussion of internal life expectancy statistics. It's about outward-bound citizenry pursuing health treatment and accommodations in foreign nations relative to an adjacent nation peer of theirs. I've already clarified that my previous citation of the complications faced by elderly citizens had nothing to do with gauging the morality rate but elaborating on the causal factors behind why they would choose to seek out an alternate environment to seasonally circumvent those difficulties. As to Americans doing it, it's their same country and one which they're able to make their way towards without having to cross international boundaries. I wouldn't use that anymore than acknowledge someone from Newfoundland going to British Columbia or Ontario for better healthcare treatment in relation to what might be available in their home province.
Which youth based government statistics would you like me to point out? The CDC's own numbers have vehicular accidents as the leading cause of death for youths at 48% with suicide and homicide cumulatively making for an additional 24% of deaths. Health related fatalities amount to a small percentage of the overall statistics.
Yeah, it's kind of a severe dilemma and shortcoming that the United States is faced with. Illegal aliens burdening the healthcare system doesn't make for conducive leeway into affordability and managerial improvements. If you want to witness the implications of such socioeconomic upheaval then petition Trudeau to raise the number of Latin American migrants from 4000 to 3 million.
I've repeated the Center for Disease Control stated pluralism of "millions" many times because you have many times suggested it being the single reason for discounting it. It doesn't fall to me to provide your research for you. Find an accurate number using the same criteria of "surveilling" outgoing citizens as to their reasons for leaving and we'll be fine.
Your contention that people travelling as snowbirds are primarily doing so for health reasons in direct parallel comparison to those who travel out of country seeking medical care/procedures is what got us into this silly discussion. That is categorically false.
The apples and oranges comparison is purely of your own making by equating those Canadians travelling south during winter months to Americans travelling anywhere at any time of the year for the express purpose of obtaining some medical procedure or treatment they cannot or choose not to avail themselves of at home. Now you're attempting to pivot once again by entering the codicil of a border crossing being some form of special indicator.
More Americans per-capita are leaving their country to obtain affordable medical care elsewhere than are Canadians leaving Canada for that single reason.
Why would I suggest Trudeau invite illegals to enter as the U.S. has done for over a hundred years by giving them jobs, schooling and other benefits, even driver's licenses, regardless of being fully aware of their illegal status?
That would be a stupid thing for any country to do, wouldn't it?
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.
