Video: Noted “fearmonger” dares to doubt total superiority of Canadian health care

posted at 12:09 pm on August 1, 2009 by Allahpundit

Via the Right Scoop, libertarianism 101 from last night’s “20/20.” Not the most balanced piece on health care that you’ll ever see, but Stossel probably figures that if he’s going to get frozen out of ABC’s Obama infomercials, he ought to make his few minutes of screen time count. The lottery bit is my favorite, although I was disappointed that the part about how ObamaCare is a stealth single-payer program relied only on pundits and economists for that assertion. You could have gone straight to the top for an admission about that, Stoss.

We know from The One that people who worry about the unintended consequences of his program are ipso facto fearmongers, so I guess Stossel’s part of the club now. Along with most of the rest of America.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Not the most balanced piece on health care that you’ll ever see

No. You. Did. Not.

Balanced!?!?!? WTF, Allah…????

Ragspierre on August 1, 2009 at 12:12 PM

Wasn’t this suppose to be a full special a few weeks ago? I noticed Glen Beck remarked to Stossel that it was suppose to before but Stossel didn’t say much other than Jackson died. Well, if Jackson’s coverage preempted it why did it turn from a Special to a 5 mins segment at the end of 20/20?

taney71 on August 1, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Sligtht OT – but HA hasn’t posted many Health Care threads today so I will post this here.

Seattle Times

A campaign on conservative talk radio — fueled unintentionally by President Obama’s calls to control exorbitant medical bills — has sparked fear among senior citizens that the health-care overhaul bill moving through Congress will lead to end-of-life “rationing” and even “euthanasia.”

The controversy stems from a proposal to pay physicians who counsel elderly or terminally ill patients about what medical interventions they would prefer near the end of life and how to prepare instructions such as living wills. Under the plan, Medicare would reimburse doctors for one session every five years to confer with a patient about his or her wishes and how to ensure those preferences are followed.

Along with the new “Taxpayer Funded Abortions”; for a Health Care Bill, the Dems sure are including a lot of provisions for more efficient and more widely-available death for those at opposite poles of the human life-span.

ChrisB on August 1, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Stossel needs to be careful or Canada will send WCW wrestlers out after him. :)

Skywise on August 1, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Stossel moving to Fox?

d1carter on August 1, 2009 at 12:18 PM

This is an older Stossel piece that was recycled. I remember the parts about the lottery and the vet clinics from the first time it ran.

Illinidiva on August 1, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Stossel gets called a racist by the far left for pointing out the obvious about socialised health care and that Obama’s plan to implement it sucks in 5.4.3.2.1

Dreadnought223 on August 1, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Obamacare is all about socialism. It has nothing to do with health care. It just drives him crazy when someone makes a profit on something, even when that profit makes our health care superior.

Daggett on August 1, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Great!

Although I do have on major quibble – the healthcare in Canada is not ‘free as the air’. They pay more for it than we do. They pay more for food and they pay more for gas. We’re headed the same direction.

gwelf on August 1, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Is Frank a top?

exception on August 1, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Stossel is getting sweezed out by not being a “team player” at ABC, also known as supporting the Obama Administration and the Democratic Party.

Mr. Joe on August 1, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Game. Set. Match.

WisCon on August 1, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Yeah, the reason that Bawney Fwank didn’t make it in this piece is because the piece was made quite awhile ago.

Conservalicious on August 1, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Obamacare is all about socialism. It has nothing to do with health care. It just drives him crazy when someone makes a profit on something, even when that profit makes our health care superior.

Daggett on August 1, 2009 at 12:21 PM

I sickens me to see politicians demonize industries because ‘they make evil profits while everyone else suffers!!!’.

How about the profits that skeezy torte lawyers make and their role in the cost of healthcare?

Also, doctors have to pay a lot of money for malpractice insurance as well as pay to run their practice (equipment and staff) and when the government is only going to pay them Medicare rates + %5 in ObamaCare they won’t be able to stay in business. Most doctors enter the workforce with massive debt from going to expensive schools for ~10 years.

Just remember that Pelosi and co. arguments about the evils of those who make profit apply to anyone and everyone who doesn’t want to give them money so they can solve all our problems – yeah, she’s talking about you.

gwelf on August 1, 2009 at 12:27 PM

In Canada, do the politicians and liberal elite have to us the National Healthcare System or is there another tier for them?

Tommy_G on August 1, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Stossel is going off the reservation…his masters will not like that.

Mr. Joe on August 1, 2009 at 12:30 PM

One issue I have been wondering about/trying to find addressed is how the Health Care reform will reconcile the costs of Medical School with the new govt. subsidized Doctor salaries.

In American, doesn’t med school run around $100,000+?

My cousin spent about $4000 for her entire university and med school in Italy.

Doctors graduating in America, with massive debt, I would assume expect to earn salaries that will allow them to repay their loans. Under a gov run plan, I don’t see that happening…?

sarainitaly on August 1, 2009 at 12:32 PM

FEAR MONGERERS!!! HEATHENS!!! PARANOID SCHITZOS!

heh. /sarc

scalleywag on August 1, 2009 at 12:33 PM

I’d rather be called a fear mongering heathen than a snake oil salesman, which is what Obama has become.

scalleywag on August 1, 2009 at 12:35 PM

That was a nice clip.

So what’s the consequence of Obama’s plan? Under his plan, there will be more prayer in lieu of care?

Spirit of 1776 on August 1, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Many of the best health practitioners in the world come to the US to make a lot of money. When we become socialized, they’ll stay in Taiwan and India and France. And some of our best will retire or emigrate or find other professions.

jgapinoy on August 1, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Eight lives left for Stossel’s cat.

whitetop on August 1, 2009 at 12:37 PM

In Canada, do the politicians and liberal elite have to us the National Healthcare System or is there another tier for them?

Tommy_G on August 1, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Yeah, that tier is called the U.S. At least for now :)

dave c on August 1, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Well, if Jackson’s coverage preempted it why did it turn from a Special to a 5 mins segment at the end of 20/20?

taney71 on August 1, 2009 at 12:15 PM

I’ve been wondering the same thing. My understanding was that his original “special” was 20+ minutes long.

petefrt on August 1, 2009 at 12:46 PM

So much of this is hard wired. Most of the libs know what is better for us (and them) so they’ll ignore whatever the little people say they want

People like Russ Carnanhan who was confronted with lots of teaparty people is hardd wired for Obama. He has the same seat as Gephardt did in MO so there will be no threats to his future.

Krauthammer thinks they’ll get a very weaken bill…but I’m not so sure….the ideology is very strong. Any and all tactics will be used on wavering Dems.

r keller on August 1, 2009 at 12:49 PM

The lottery bit is my favorite

Mine too. I told my wife about it as we passed a 24 hour walk in clinic, which was two blocks down from a doctor’s office that had a big sign out front that read, “Walk-ins Welcome.” Stupid American health system. The idea that you can just “walk-in” and get a doctor without the fun of a lottery. Tsk tsk.

Weight of Glory on August 1, 2009 at 12:53 PM

The reason the Canadian Health Care System has not failed is the American Health System is easily available to Canadians. Canadians should be equally alarmed at the direction our politicians are taking our health system.

Howcome on August 1, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Obamacare is sounding better and better!

Yippee!

/

ladyingray on August 1, 2009 at 12:54 PM

A compelling piece that won’t change a thing. Obama wants his socialist health care, he wants his place in the history books. And I’m sick and tired of hearing conservatives say “Once they get it, it can’t be reversed.” Bullsh*t! When the GOP gets control in Congress, reverse the GD thing.

Rational Thought on August 1, 2009 at 1:01 PM

And I’m sick and tired of hearing conservatives say “Once they get it, it can’t be reversed.” Bullsh*t! When the GOP gets control in Congress, reverse the GD thing.

Rational Thought on August 1, 2009 at 1:01 PM

That’s probably doable, since the thing doesn’t go into effect till 2013.

dave c on August 1, 2009 at 1:07 PM

So the progressives think they can fight BIG PHARMA and BIG INSURANCE? Who is a major consumer of pharmaceuticals in this country? Yeah right BIG PHARMA won’t fight a bogus health care plan that would kill off the majority of it’s consumers “The Elderly” same goes for the BIG INSURANCE COMPANIES and their lobbyist. Why does everyone think Nan threw a tantrum and called them Big Insurance Companies Evil? The thing is these entities probably donate to these dumb butts campaigns, if I were them I would let the money stream dry up For every Progressive running in 2010, and start contributing to Independents and Republican challengers to the 80 Progressive seats in the House “Prune them Back” They would be doing Obama a big favor then he wouldn’t be beholden to the lunatic fringe of the Democrat party.

Dr Evil on August 1, 2009 at 1:07 PM

I’ll never understand how these assclowns get to stand in judgement over anyone when they run $1-2 trillion deficits and even before when it was supposedly not as bad even then were always good for at least $100-200 Billion one.

gsherin on August 1, 2009 at 1:08 PM

We’re going to spend insane amounts of money and destroy our healthcare system (run both insurers and doctors out of business) in order to try and solve a problem that doesn’t really exist:

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/24/ramirez-meet-the-uninsured/

Even to the issue of reducing the cost of healthcare a truly free-market solution is the only way to do it. To a liberal every problem has the simple solution of government control.

gwelf on August 1, 2009 at 1:09 PM

That’s probably doable, since the thing doesn’t go into effect till 2013.

dave c on August 1, 2009 at 1:07 PM

But I believe the taxes kick in sooner.

ChrisB on August 1, 2009 at 1:09 PM

But I believe the taxes kick in sooner.

ChrisB on August 1, 2009 at 1:09 PM

Well, that’s just on more reason that the GOP could use to justify repealing ObamaCare.

dave c on August 1, 2009 at 1:13 PM

And I’m sick and tired of hearing conservatives say “Once they get it, it can’t be reversed.” Bullsh*t! When the GOP gets control in Congress, reverse the GD thing.

Rational Thought on August 1, 2009 at 1:01 PM
That’s probably doable, since the thing doesn’t go into effect till 2013.

dave c on August 1, 2009 at 1:07 PM

The problem will be fighting the liberal media spin. We can expect to hear how those mean Republicans want to take away your free healthcare.

redridinghood on August 1, 2009 at 1:25 PM

Such is the problem with supply and demand. If the guv is going to do health care, they have to supply the demand for everyone, including those who cannot even afford the price of the “insurance”. To do that, Obama must tax the hell out of 49% of the population, because if he taxes the hell out of 51%, his party will lose the next election.

Good luck, middle class; you are about to be divided in half.

unclesmrgol on August 1, 2009 at 1:28 PM

My brother died because of the canadian health care system. No colonoscopy for prevention, only if there is a problem. Well the problem turned up too late. Then no access to an oncologist – had to be taken to the states by his American Dr son. Too late!
I DON’T WANT THIS SYSTEM OR THE GOV’T IN EVERYTHING I DO ESPECIALLY IN SOMETHING SO PRIVATE AS MY PERSONAL HEALTH.
PEOPLE WAKE UP! The sr citizens had better understand before it’s too late, that they will be the ones on the other end of abortion. Euthanasia here we come!

Bambi on August 1, 2009 at 1:47 PM

The Canadians have been coming to the U.S. for years to get the better health care and urgent health care they need; They should be more alarmed than us citizens to see that Obama’s Mafioso wants to put in place a plan like their own. Where will they go after this?

Cybergeezer on August 1, 2009 at 1:53 PM

Obama may have let the cat out of the bag last week when he said “just take pain pills”. That’s what Congress has to be doing!

Cybergeezer on August 1, 2009 at 1:55 PM

And I’m sick and tired of hearing conservatives say “Once they get it, it can’t be reversed.” Bullsh*t! When the GOP gets control in Congress, reverse the GD thing.

Rational Thought on August 1, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Now I’m going to pay not only for my own family’s medical care, but your family’s medical care too. I don’t want to pay for your family’s medical care — I want my customary fall two-week vacation in Yosemite. Maybe Obama will see fit to do like the Europeans do and require my employer to pay me during my six week vacation.

You say we conservatives can halt and reverse the juggernaut once it starts rolling. Tell me how this happened with Social Security. Social Security is one of those things where I pay for your parents to have a nice retirement (I’m not paying for my parents, because my Mom died before she reached 55 and my Dad died six months after he turned 65 and started collecting). I’m not paying for my own retirement with Social Security (that would have been the right way to fund such a program), but for the previous generations. We hard-hearted conservatives have tried over and over to switch the program from pay-as-you-go to pay-in-advance (which is how the rest of our retirement plans work).

What FDR did with Social Security was at once a master stroke, and at the same time a catastrophe in the making. In order for current retirees to be covered, FDR had to make the program “pay-as-you-go”, which requires that the population be steadily increasing. Once started, such a program is impossible to stop, because every payer wants their chance to become a payee, because that’s the only way they have a chance to recover the money they’ve put into the system.

What does Social Security have to do with Obamacare? Answer: Once we start paying into the system, its got the same allure. Yet, at the same time, it’s doomed to failure — our population growth rate cannot sustain such a system for more than a couple of decades. When it collapses, someone is going to be left holding the bag, and my guess is that it will be people slightly older than Obama will be when that happens. Obama, who paid 3% of his income in taxes last year (one-tenth the relative amount that I paid), and who is President now, will have access to healthcare solutions the rest of us can only dream of, because he’ll have his own resources, and separate “some animals are more important than others” governmental resources, and he certainly won’t be a part of Obamacare.

unclesmrgol on August 1, 2009 at 2:03 PM

If ObamaCare is so wonderful and cost effective, why isn’t it good enough for the Congress Critters? We pay for their super-duper health care plan with our tax dollars…but we’re supposed to accept this garbage…doled out by bureaucrats?

Barb Dwyer on August 1, 2009 at 2:06 PM

What gets continuously ingnored is that there is, in fact, no such thing as “Canadian” health care. Unless you serve in the Armed Forces.

Otherwise, you are dealing with Newfoundland health care or Alberta health care or Ontario health care, etc. What we have are 10 provincial and 3 territorial health care systems.

Some provide this service, but not that, pay for this treatment but not that one. If you have a nervous system problem, these three provinces pay for full treatment, while those four provinces and two territories provide partial coverage for it, while the last three provinces and territory do not cover it at all.

Many are the storys of people having to pick and move to a different part of the country to receive the services they require.

Jim708 on August 1, 2009 at 2:15 PM

In HA fashion, we should also expose whom is doing what and why. Therefore, I present the following evidence from:
The Obama Forum, No Whites Allowed

A forum to support Barry Soetero’s Presidency

Author: Hotep
Rank: Obamatologist
Re: Making the white middle class pay for our health insurance.

The white middle class should bear the burden of not only healthcare costs,
but everything else in this country.

They’ve had it too good for too long in their little racist lap of luxury.
They’ve sat back and let the Black Man build this country, while they
just took and took and took.

It’s time for the racist white middle class in America to pay up!
__________________
The New Black Panther Party

Shh, there is no racism in this particular group, whatsoever. I am sure they were all just joking.

JP1986UM on August 1, 2009 at 2:17 PM

And I’m sick and tired of hearing conservatives say “Once they get it, it can’t be reversed.” Bullsh*t! When the GOP gets control in Congress, reverse the GD thing.

Rational Thought on August 1, 2009 at 1:01 PM

I don’t think it would be as simple as you make it sound. Once the socialized model is implemented and the private sector gets squeezed out, merely repealing legislation can’t undo all of the damage. Employers will go out of business, employees will have had to seek employment elsewhere. The infrastructure of the industry will be radically disrupted, so reassembly will take more than a Republican administration just calling a “do over.”

Tom_OC on August 1, 2009 at 2:23 PM

People live longer in Canada than the USA explain that please

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM

People live longer in Canada than the USA explain that please

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM

I don’t know brightboy, Why don’t you explain it.

dave c on August 1, 2009 at 2:44 PM

With the Blue Dogs caving, as predicted, we need a miracle during the August recess to stop this take over of 17% of the economy by the government.

Remind me again why this is any different then Chavez nationalizing the oil and gas industry in Venezuela or the Castro brothers taking over the Cuban economy. Different methods and excuses but the same end result.

If Cap and Trade passes that is another 10% of the economy under defacto government control. Obama and crew will have taken over 27% in the first year. Just yesterday the House passed a bill controlling pay and bonuses at financial institutions.

Obama and crew may be many things but they are not stupid. They have and will continue to get everything they want until millions take to the street. Meanwhile Ms. Pelosi will continue to use Repubs as tooth picks.

patrick neid on August 1, 2009 at 2:49 PM

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM
I’ll take that challenge; Canadians get much cheaper prescription drugs in their own country and come to America for urgent care. Doesn’t get any simpler than that!

Cybergeezer on August 1, 2009 at 2:57 PM

In addition; Congress may be counting the savings for their government run health care by not having Canadians and other countries’ citizens coming here anymore, for their expensive medical procedures!

Cybergeezer on August 1, 2009 at 3:00 PM

People live longer in Canada than the USA explain that please

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM

A controlled population of sheep is a safe population of sheep.

Skywise on August 1, 2009 at 3:19 PM

Not the most balanced piece on health care that you’ll ever see

 
Let me guess it would have been balances had he sung at least some of the praises of Medicare and Medicaid as well as shown some evil businessman who profited from some poor patients misery.
 
Whether you have a free market healthcare system or a socialized healthcare system there will be some level of corruption. The problem is with a socialized system as we are facing the potential of here currently and as Canadians have now there is absolutely NO RECOURSE or ALTERNATIVE as well as no means of weeding out corruption unlike the free market where there is resource and alternatives as well as means of weeding out and punishing corruption.
 
Knowing that and coming to grips with the fact that no level of direct government involvement is good since at any level it reduces those advantages of the free market systemm and you would realize that unlike your knee jerk reaction this was a very balanced and fair piece that was merely critical of direct government involvement.

woodythesingingcowboy on August 1, 2009 at 3:37 PM

People live longer in Canada than the USA explain that please

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM

Lies, da*m lies and statistics! Is it true? Can you prove it? I doubt it.

Even if a modicum of truth, could it be that they have the US health care system as a backup?

I wouldn’t have lived longer (cancer 1999; cured 1999).

rebuzz on August 1, 2009 at 3:45 PM

People live longer in Canada than the USA explain that please

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM

 
Once I stopped laughing. If you really truely believe that “fact” than maybe you should move there. See those numbers have more to do with sample size, lifestyle, and culture than they do with healthcare. And yet here we have another socialized healthcare believer trotting out this tired staple.
 
So sure the average Canadians drive fewer cars, eat a different diet, live a more reserved lifestyle than many in the American population. Between auto accidents and extreme lifestyle choices leading to fatalities our numbers will of course be less simply because many of our youth population make poor choices, but that is the nature of freedom.
 
So sure if you want socialized healthcare and government control of your lifestyle to ensure you do not make any poor choices you might live a few months longer, but would you really want to ??????
 
P.S. And you won’t get one without the other since cost control mandates government control of your lifestyle…..

woodythesingingcowboy on August 1, 2009 at 3:49 PM

Bambi on August 1, 2009 at 1:47 PM

Sorry about your brother, Bambi.

Blake on August 1, 2009 at 3:59 PM

People live longer in Canada than the USA explain that please

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM

Average life expectancy in Canada: 80.34 years male and female combined. Average life expectancy in the USA: 78.06 years male and female combined. Statistically it is not much of a difference. The Canadians live about two years longer, all of that time is spent in line waiting for healthcare.

Tommy_G on August 1, 2009 at 4:17 PM

The One’s prime time press conference was “not the most balanced piece you will ever see,” either.

We need a lot more prime time 100% counterarguments to ObamaCare just to GET to “balance” in the media-industrial-complex’s Propaganda Dissemination Organ errrr the MSM.

Edouard on August 1, 2009 at 4:24 PM

Jobs, first.

Insurance follows.

Obama and his cronies could simply have given the insurers tax breaks for covering the legitimate numbers who cannot afford current policy prices, or have pre-existing conditions that make them inelligible for regular coverage, and who are thus frozen out by the quirks of the present system, and avoided this bloated anti-capitalistic power grab.

But that would have cost FAR less, covered more people, and been infinitely simpler.

Can’t have that with these slavering weasels.

profitsbeard on August 1, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Tommy_G on August 1, 2009 at 4:17 PM

yep, all too true. Mark Steyn has some Good Stuff on this, including the 21-year-old Quebecker who showed up at the ER with severe abdominal pain but no ‘health care card’. He went home to get it, was in too much pain to get back to the ER and died before the ambulance arrived

Ambulances, in an odd quick of Up North Health Care, are not included. You drive yourself to the ER, or pay out of pocket for the ambulance.

The life span for White and Asian Americans is higher than the life span of Canadians……..

Janos Hunyadi on August 1, 2009 at 5:29 PM

‘quirk’, not “quick”

Janos Hunyadi on August 1, 2009 at 5:30 PM

People live longer in Canada than the USA explain that please

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM

I dunno mr simplistic

From medicinenet.com

The gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in 1994 by country were as follows:

* U.S.A. 14.24
* Brazil 12.95
* Mexico 12.69
* Estonia 12.26
* Argentina 8.93
* Northern Ireland 6.63
* Finland 6.46
* Switzerland 5.31
* France 5.15
* Canada 4.31

It is from 94 but likely the same today

CWforFreedom on August 1, 2009 at 5:44 PM

liberal

Could the lower “at birth” numbers for the US reflect the point that’s been made about US-Cuba comparison, namely that because our superior technology for premature births allows more babies to be born who then don’t survive beyond a short period, but who never would been born alive at all in other countries, it “drags down” our overall expectancy?

That argument is consistent with both the data and with the claim that US healthcare is still superior across the board.

Posted by: Steve Horwitz at Aug 1, 2009

Hmmm not so simple eh?

CWforFreedom on August 1, 2009 at 6:09 PM

John Stossel and Jake Tapper are the two bright stars at ABC. The network would be wise to raise their profile in the coming years if they want to avoid becoming irrelevant.

Stickeehands on August 1, 2009 at 6:28 PM

What? A man making money helping people get to the US for care? How reprehensible. Oh, wait, it save their lives? Nevermind then, I guess they see it as being well worth the cost. Otherwise they’d stay in Candada, right?

boomer on August 1, 2009 at 6:48 PM

John Stossel and Jake Tapper are the two bright stars at ABC. The network would be wise to raise their profile in the coming years if they want to avoid becoming irrelevant.

Stickeehands on August 1, 2009 at 6:28 PM

And get rid of a few: Charles Gibson, Terry Moran and Diane Sawyer.

Christian Conservative on August 1, 2009 at 7:29 PM

John Stossel is a brave, brave man. At least ABC let him run the spot.

Hope there’s some room at Fox for him.

yoda on August 1, 2009 at 7:30 PM

Balanced!?!?!? WTF, Allah…????

Ragspierre on August 1, 2009 at 12:12 PM

Ragspierre, ignore the troll named Allah.

WoosterOh on August 1, 2009 at 8:06 PM

AP, not balanced? WTF? When you pair this up with Obama’s propaganda there’s your balance…And yes it would have been nice to haf BF saying he wants single payer but you did have The One say it in Stossel’s piece so that certainly is good..

crazywater on August 1, 2009 at 8:26 PM

Stossel moving to Fox?

d1carter on August 1, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Yeah, give him O’Reilly’s job!

Not the most balanced piece on health care that you’ll ever see

You know, sometimes things are so bad or so evil that being balanced really isn’t called for. You’re so worried about balance, are you one of those who say, “Well, yeah, Hitler killed a lot of people but he created jobs and loved his dog.” That’s balanced, eh?

Special K on August 1, 2009 at 8:27 PM

Love Stos. He’s the man, get him his own show. podcast. blog. Whatever. Need more of him.

Dash on August 1, 2009 at 8:39 PM

Love how you put “fearmonger” in quotes for Stossel, but is every bit “true” with Beck in your eyes, AP.

jjraines on August 1, 2009 at 10:42 PM

In Canada, do the politicians and liberal elite have to us the National Healthcare System or is there another tier for them?

Federal Cabinet Ministers (in Canada, the Cabinet is equal in power to the U.S. President) have access to the Armed Forces health services rather than the provincial plans.

Ironically, the best place to be in Canada if you want excellent health care can be in one of the three territories, which do not have the major hospitals of the provinces. If you need immediate medical attention in a territory, you’re flown to one of the major cities, where you may end up bumping someone who may have been on a waiting list for some time.

itobo on August 2, 2009 at 4:52 AM

” Not the most balanced piece on health care that you’ll ever see

No. You. Did. Not.

Balanced!?!?!? WTF, Allah…????”

I gotta concur. What the heck do you mean, AllahPundit? What would you have preferred to see — what would have been “balanced” in your view. Heck Stossel completely left out any discussion of how the “free as the air” *isn’t* free because the pay much more in taxes than we do. I recall having a conversation with a colleague of mine from France who kept talking about the “free” healthcare the French get, and what a pity Americans have to pay for healthcare. I pointed out to her that France has roughly twice the personal income tax rate of the US, and payroll taxes something like 4x over the US….all to get that “free” healthcare.

EasyEight on August 2, 2009 at 12:19 PM

Let’s try to look at the bright side here, folks. If this health care bill passes, old people won’t get the care that would extend their lives. Fewer old people = saving Social Security. Heck, it might even be able to break even eventually.

darwin-t on August 2, 2009 at 6:47 PM

“You Voted for Me, Now I am going to fundamentally Fuck Change this country!

– Barack Obama
Manchurian Candidate
Commander in Thief

BillaryMcBush on August 2, 2009 at 8:06 PM

People live longer in Canada than the USA explain that please

liberal343 on August 1, 2009 at 2:31 PM

In addition to the other numbers that already have shown you a fool; the obesity rate in the US is astronomical which leads to a great number of heart and respiratory problems that no amount of for pay or ‘free’(re: taxed to death for the illusion of free) health care will fix. It’s a cultural issue and basically illustrates the concept of a people who are victims of their own success as we have become increasingly sedentary due to growing wealth and the economy becoming less industrialized and move customer service based.

Further to the gun deaths cited added to this downward trend, it is a well known fact that societies that tend to be more homogeneous (like Canada is aside from Toronto) culturally, violent crime and murders are lower. Again, we are victims of our own tolerance of other people. (not that I think that attribute of Americans should be sacrificed for an additional 2 years on the life expectancy. 78 years is a pretty good go at it)
So looking at a mere number in such simplistic terms as you have will only lead to you false conclusions and oases in the desert rather than actual knowledge or understanding of an issue. Something tells me, with all due respect, that isn’t an uncommon occurrence with you.

MannyT-vA on August 3, 2009 at 1:28 AM

The gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in 1994 and 1997(UN Stats)
1994 1997
* U.S.A. 14.24 14.05
* Brazil 12.95 26.97
* Mexico 12.69 Did not provide data
* Estonia 12.26 10.15
* Argentina 8.93 incomplete data
* Northern Ireland 6.63 not included
* Finland 6.46 6.77
* Switzerland 5.31 not included
* France 5.15 not included
* Canada 4.31 4.08

davod on August 3, 2009 at 8:52 AM