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.
I thought I saw a number of posts saying how good it was (Canada health care) and how happy a few posters were with it.
Or maybe it was UK healthcare ??
Can't remember what thread it was in though.
Neither system is perfect, but in both countries there medical coverage and satisfaction of their medical coverage is much greater than it is here. There are many countries that have some form of UHC and some are priate and some are public, some are a mix of public and private. All of those that have UHC have significantly better healthcare than we do. Some of those systems would not work here and make the situation worse and some would make it significantly better.
It happens in the US under the current system, too. I tried to schedule an appointment with my PP and was told that I couldn't get an appointment unless it was an emergency until September.
What makes you think that the current system is so good?
Yes, but you could have called another pp, correct? There was no option for the Canadian parents.
Neither system is perfect, but in both countries there medical coverage and satisfaction of their medical coverage is much greater than it is here. There are many countries that have some form of UHC and some are priate and some are public, some are a mix of public and private. All of those that have UHC have significantly better healthcare than we do. Some of those systems would not work here and make the situation worse and some would make it significantly better.
Countries other than Canada and the UK which have some form of nationalized health care include: Argentina, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Oman, Portugal, Russia, Spain and Sweden. Very few of these operate under Socialism and, as lamexican points out, there are
several models to blend to suit a country's needs. IMHO, it's odd that people in the US are not demanding that we lead the world in terms of quality health care for our citizens. This article discusses various forms of
nationalized health care, so posters can see how these systems work.
News, Canadian Health Care: The End of Innovation?
President Obama said that the government is going to "fix what is broken about health care in America." It sounds like a great idea, but often what sounds good has unintended consequences.
When the government takes over, many critics say that you may not get the care and breakthroughs you need to save your life.
President Obama said that the government is going to "fix what is broken about health care in America." It sounds like a great idea, but often what sounds good has unintended consequences.
When the government takes over, many critics say that you may not get the care and breakthroughs you need to save your life.
Yep, it's going to be terrible, but it doesn't matter because this is the new Medi-scare for the Democrats. Once they take away all our private health care options, they will be the hand that feeds us. This isn't about care, cost or accessibility. All those things can be taken care of with simple changes to the existing system. Votes for Democrats come by scrapping the best system in the world and replacing it with one that people will come to depend on because all the alternatives will be taken away. This is the beginning of political slavery in the US.
President Obama said that the government is going to "fix what is broken about health care in America." It sounds like a great idea, but often what sounds good has unintended consequences.
When the government takes over, many critics say that you may not get the care and breakthroughs you need to save your life.
Areas that have crappy health care will still have crappy health care. But it will be affordable, and might prevent people from waiting till it gets so bad, that they end up in the ER, instead of having it taken care of earlier. Or people using the ER for colds (and getting sent home - since it isn't yet life threating).
Badly run facilities will still be badly run and underfunded.
I always love quotes about "Canada". Each province manages and runs their care, not their federal government. So while in Ontario, it might take a week to get a non-life threating service, in BC you can get it the same day.
It's always easy to pick apart someone elses system, when you pick and choose the examples.
Areas that have crappy health care will still have crappy health care. But it will be affordable, and might prevent people from waiting till it gets so bad, that they end up in the ER, instead of having it taken care of earlier. Or people using the ER for colds (and getting sent home).
Badly run facilities will still be badly run and underfunded.
I always love quotes about "Canada". Each province manages and runs their care, not their federal government. So while in Ontario, it might take a week to get a non-life threating service, in BC you can get it the same day.
It's always easy to pick apart someone elses system, when you pick and choose the examples.
Nobody has even touched on the fact that the poor will end up getting the shaft on this too. When you are in poor neighborhoods you get the lowest quality of almost everything. It is just a fact. A crime ridden, poor area will attract the less qualified doctors, staff, etc.. The facilities will be sub-par, etc..
I used to live in Hamilton. The province of Ontario is BIG. Yet their stellar Universal Health Care System could not come up with ONE bed for a premature infant?
This is what happens when government runs things.
while I do agree that there are problems with Canada's UHC I would add that the same sorts of problems happen with our own system. There is no perfect system and one can point at any system out there and find flaws. I would also note that I find it strange that if Canada's system is so bad that there is not a major push to dump it in favor of another system.
All that said, I am not one of those that wants to change our system dramtically, I would prefer keeping the current system but providing a means where citizens can join a Group Insurance Plan so that the rates they pay are affordable for the average family. It would save us all money in that not nearly as many would be uninsured and fewer unpaid bills would be passed on to the rest of us. I have extensive experience with hospitals, doctors and insurance issues due to a family members health issues and over the years have found that not all hospitals and doctors are created equal. If you feel that the doctor you are seeing or the hospital you use is not doing a good job, change doctors and/or hospitals. Never forget YOU are the employeer and can fire them if you believe they are not perform at the level you believe they should. I have done it more than once and now have doctors and a hospital that does an excellent job and guess what the price is the same.
Casper
Nobody has even touched on the fact that the poor will end up getting the shaft on this too. When you are in poor neighborhoods you get the lowest quality of almost everything. It is just a fact. A crime ridden, poor area will attract the less qualified doctors, staff, etc.. The facilities will be sub-par, etc..
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.