Canada sending patients to US for treatment
posted at 2:18 pm on August 21, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Barack Obama has a high opinion of the Canadian single-payer health-care system. In March, he lamented that the only thing separating us from Canada’s system was our “legacy” of employer-based health care, and of course free markets and private contracting, neither of which have been allowed in Canada. That may account for why Canada’s system, in an effort to reduce wait times, now contracts with American providers across the border:
Hospitals in border cities, including Detroit, are forging lucrative arrangements with Canadian health agencies to provide care not widely available across the border.
Agreements between Detroit hospitals and the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care for heart, imaging tests, bariatric and other services provide access to some services not immediately available in the province, said ministry spokesman David Jensen.
The agreements show how a country with a national care system — a proposal not part of the health care changes under discussion in Congress — copes with demand for care with U.S. partnerships, rather than building new facilities.
The Detroit Free Press hasn’t paid much attention to the debate here in the US if it thinks single-payer isn’t part of the changes under discussion in Congress. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) has gone on television twice to push the idea of “Medicare for all Americans.” Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) says he’ll vote against his constituents’ wishes to get single-payer. Reps. Barney Frank, Jan Schakowsy, Carol Shea-Porter, and more have made on-camera public statements in support of single-payer.
For that matter, so has Barack Obama.
And we see what happens in a single-payer system. The system does not expand to meet the need, for a couple of reasons. First, the payer doesn’t want to spend the money necessary to meet the demand, because it would mean admitting that single-payer does not actually control costs; in fact, it sets in place an entitlement mentality, which increases demand and costs. Second, because of artificial price controls, the system does not generate enough supply to meet the demand, which increases rationing and shortages. All of this is Econ 101.
In this case, Canada has decided to contract with private services across the border to shunt off its excess demand. This costs more than reverting back to a private-market system, but it costs less politically. In the meantime, the ability to shorten wait times helps keep Canada from seriously addressing its problems, although probably not for very much longer.
And that’s good, too. Because when we adopt Canada’s system, we hope they’re smart enough to adopt ours, and those of us close enough to the border can slip across to get our health-care needs met.
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
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Where will Canadians go for health care, if we socialize it here?
Vashta.Nerada on August 21, 2009 at 2:19 PM
But Bush/Cheney! Halliburton! Big Oil!
cannonball on August 21, 2009 at 2:19 PM
“Canada sending patients to US for treatment”
While they still can…
Fuzzlenutter on August 21, 2009 at 2:19 PM
I guess us Arizonans will have to go across the other border to get our needs met.
jgapinoy on August 21, 2009 at 2:19 PM
Fixed your question for you. :-)
cannonball on August 21, 2009 at 2:19 PM
Obama was sick that year.
Daggett on August 21, 2009 at 2:20 PM
We’ll trade you Anne Murray for Ann in CA.
Chuck Schick on August 21, 2009 at 2:21 PM
Obama has never been proud of America’s health care system.
faraway on August 21, 2009 at 2:22 PM
I hear Tijuana has cheap medications without prescriptions.
Terrie on August 21, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Obama has never been proud of America
’s health care system.faraway on August 21, 2009 at 2:22 PM
Too easy.
elduende on August 21, 2009 at 2:23 PM
Damn skippy! Also it means that I’ll be having a major heart attack with every spicy burrito. Every mole, individualy, suspect. Every sneeze, H1N1. Covered, or not, it will cost Uncle Sugar to have some bureaucrat review my request and communicate back.
If Uncle Sugar wants to be my wet nurse then all I can say is I’m a hungry boy.
Limerick on August 21, 2009 at 2:25 PM
The Canadian American free health care plan.
fourdeucer on August 21, 2009 at 2:26 PM
I’m thinking there will be many American doctors setting up shop in northern Mexico. Thankfully, I’m in Texas where we’ll either reject Obamacare outright or we’ll just run for the border. I hear there are holes in the fence so it should be easy crossing.
txag92 on August 21, 2009 at 2:26 PM
My ENT is impossible to get into here in Minnesota because half of her appointments are Canadians. They have to wait for months to even be seen for simple ENT procedures that she does in the office.
Of course none of the libtards in Congress get that.
gophergirl on August 21, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Yeah Americans never go to Canada for health care.
The Calibur on August 21, 2009 at 2:30 PM
He was busy scoring some weed, and some blow, when he could afford it.
AZCoyote on August 21, 2009 at 2:31 PM
That patient and nurse in the pic don’t look very happy to see each other.
Brat on August 21, 2009 at 2:32 PM
When we socialize medicine here, where will WE go? To Mexico?
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on August 21, 2009 at 2:33 PM
This made me think of another angle… the free market built American hospitals and other medical facilities (and made them the best in the world).
What would drive the government to either build or maintain facilities at the highest levels? Nothing. They’d build cheap facilities (if they’d build at all) based, not on sound economic judgment, but on political assessments.
mankai on August 21, 2009 at 2:33 PM
Mexico, you can get anything done there and really cheap too.
Tommy_G on August 21, 2009 at 2:33 PM
Throw in Mike Myers for Piglosi and you’ve got a deal.
Laura in Maryland on August 21, 2009 at 2:34 PM
You might re-think this. Mexico, in another burst of intelligent government, has legalized possession of marijuana, cocaine, LSD, and methamphetimines.
No, I don’t want my MD doped up when I have an issue. Do you?
BobMbx on August 21, 2009 at 2:34 PM
Got into an argument on the health care topic yesterday with my boss (possibly not in my best interest, I know), and when I pointed out the fact that Canadians and others with similar nationalized healthcare come here, or are even sent here by their physicians, if they need specialists or time-sensitive care, he said it was untrue and accused me of spewing propaganda.
anglee99 on August 21, 2009 at 2:34 PM
He opted for the Sociology 101 and Cultural Studies 201 classes instead… since they don’t actually require any analysis and just about any opinion that results in America being evil is treated as “scholarly.”
mankai on August 21, 2009 at 2:35 PM
I’m thinking Jamaica…for the voodoo that they do so well.
Laura in Maryland on August 21, 2009 at 2:35 PM
You should see the lines of Canadians in Algadones, Mexico, just south of Yuma, AZ each winter season for health and dental care.
It is also well known for having over 100 pharmacies where many fill their RX for less than in the USA. I have friends who come down from Manitoba each winter and have procedures performed in Mexico because the wait in Manitoba is 15+ months.
Ghostbuster on August 21, 2009 at 2:36 PM
yeah, and many of those tiny Caribbean island nations and colonies will become ‘meccas’ for Americans seeking health care. They’ll be quickly built up with clinics and ‘care-seekers’ will be as plentiful as tourists
Janos Hunyadi on August 21, 2009 at 2:37 PM
No, I don’t want my MD doped up when I have an issue. Do you?
BobMbx on August 21, 2009 at 2:34 PM
I’m thinking AMERICAN doctors opening a for-profit clinic would be wee-weed up.
hottieinthehouse on August 21, 2009 at 2:38 PM
yeah, and many of those tiny Caribbean island nations and colonies will become ‘meccas’ for Americans seeking health care. They’ll be quickly built up with clinics and ‘care-seekers’ will be as plentiful as tourists
Janos Hunyadi on August 21, 2009 at 2:37 PM
The Caribbean sounds good to me.
txag92 on August 21, 2009 at 2:40 PM
I’m thinking AMERICAN doctors opening a for-profit clinic would be wee-weed up.
hottieinthehouse on August 21, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Your name should be idiotinthehouse.
txag92 on August 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM
My mom’s die-hard liberal neighbour had a brain tumour and went down to Boston for treatment. Ironically she still supports the single-payer system – that’s liberals for ya! As a Canadian, that’s what scares me about Obamacare – if I get sick and need health care that’s not available here, where will I go?!?!?
CityFish on August 21, 2009 at 2:42 PM
how about we just send Obama to Canada?
search4truth on August 21, 2009 at 2:44 PM
OH GREAT!!!
With a shortage of health care providers already, now I have to wait in line behind the Canuke’s under Obamacare?
PappaMac on August 21, 2009 at 2:44 PM
anglee99 @2:34PM
I hope your numbskull of a boss is over 55 and takes part in the public option – he’ll feel the ‘pinch’ soon enough.
Anybody know or heard rumors of (other than the IRS penalty) what they’ll do to you if you try to cross borders for medical procedures? It will be next to impossible to go on vacation and come home all fixed when the gubmint has your medical records online.
24K lady on August 21, 2009 at 2:45 PM
From the article you link: “And for years Canadians widely believed that their country was rich enough to look after all those who entered its portals.
But times are changing. In an era of mammoth budget deficits, to which free health care is a leading contributor, politicians of all stripes are eagerly seizing on ways to save money.”
The Canadians were apparently foolish enough to think they could cover “all those who entered its portals.” The so-called 46-50 million uninsured that gets quoted to death that reform is supposed to cure? Includes illegal aliens, ya know. No worries though, right? My two sons and their peers will pay for our miscalculations and foolishness.
The article is also 16 years old and makes reference to mammoth budget deficits. Taken a look at ours lately and the projections? Where are the cuts going to come from by those “eagerly seizing on ways to save money?” What’s the word? Oh yeah. It’s called rationing.
anglee99 on August 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM
That would be a more cost-effective alternative, and one that would benefit the republic. I like the way you think.
amerpundit on August 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Here’s a fun thought…
*IF* we go to single payer, it’s conceivable that those contracts which exist between Canada and US providers will be honored while US citizens get turned away from care…depending on how the contracts are written and if they have stated periods of performance.
JohnTant on August 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM
If their (Canada)’s system is over burdened now, and we go this socialist route…where do we turn? Nowhere. There will be nowhere to go.
I have a friend in Ontario, and she told a mutual friend who lives in the U.S., that to gain access to Canada Care, one must live in the country for 3 years to be eligible. So…there goes that.
Either way….we’re screwed.
capejasmine on August 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM
So what’s the most your point could be? That neither system is better than another? Great. Then we’ll keep the one we have now, seeing as there’s no benefit to changing it.
amerpundit on August 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM
Americans already go somewhat regularly to Costa Rica for significant cosmetic surgery. Even with a plane ticket, the all-in-cost is usually over 50% cheaper than in the US and the quality (measured by successful results) are as good as the US. Some Americans are also starting to go to parts of India for other significant surgeries (hip replacements, for example) for the same reasons and some employer health plans actually pay employees to have some work done overseas.
There’s no reason the US shouldn’t outsource some high-cost, elective surgeries to some countries as a way to control costs. It’s a way to avoid additional capital costs and reduce waiting times without affecting the end result.
Jimbo3 on August 21, 2009 at 2:52 PM
BobMx, it’s a smart move on Mexico’s part. It may ultimately cut down on the drug-related gang killings.
BTW, doctors, pilots, etc. are probably covered by other laws or regulations that prohibit them from giving services when high.
Jimbo3 on August 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM
now now – you know logic confuses the wee-wee liberals – play nice
Ris4victory on August 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Your link is from a 1993 article AND mentions the unsustainable nature of the Canadian health care system.
Double facepalm.
BadgerHawk on August 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Question:
If we go to Canada, we’d be charged for services rendered. If they come here, they get it free, because that’s how the bill is written, and it’s our moral duty?
capejasmine on August 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Jimbo3 on August 21, 2009 at 2:52 PM
some of us really like the idea of buy american….
SHARPTOOTH on August 21, 2009 at 3:00 PM
Does anyone else wonder what effect Obamacare would have on the development of future medical technology?
While R&D is cited as adding to health care costs,could it not in the future actually reduce them?Many procedures that today that require an overnight,or in-and out,in the past required lenghthy hospital stays.Who knows what the future may hold?
Only the free market can support the kind of expensive research needed for medical advances.
Of course,the Friends of Obama can’t look beyond this moment,to see that they are bringing about a new Dark Ages.Or they can see it ,and want America to mave backward 800 years.
DDT on August 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Yeah, SHARPTOOTH, but with a significant cost premium (even with a two week enforced vacation in Costa Rica before you can return to the US) and the same result, you have to think about it long and hard.
Jimbo3 on August 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM
Only the free market can support the kind of expensive research needed for medical advances.
–The problem is that most studies suggest that the US essentially underwrites the development costs for all the world’s drugs (not sure about the minimally invasive procedures you mentioned, though).
I understand this is because other governments negotiate drug prices directly with the pharma companies. But I don’t understand why the US government ought not to do the same thing, and force the pharma companies to raise their prices elsewhere in the world to equalize things more.
Does anyone understand why the US government, as a large purchaser of an item (like Wal-Mart), shouldn’t negotiate directly with the pharma companies?
Jimbo3 on August 21, 2009 at 3:18 PM
As someone who’s going to college up in Canada, I must say that the Canada health care system has treated me very well.
For a very reasonable payment of $400 dollars I’ve been to the hospital multiple times for various maladies. Most recently for severe back spasms so bad I could hardly walk for a couple of days. If I was in the states, I would not of seen a doctor. Since I’m a poor college student and wouldn’t have been able to afford it.
There’s been no excessive wait time I‘m usually in and out a couple of hours. Now if you need to get a MRI or surgery, and its not life threatening, then yes the wait time is very long as compared to the US. No system is perfect, but I much rather have a system that if I’m unemployed, and I get cancer or some other expensive disease I won’t go broke just trying to stay alive. To me that peace of mind is worth the higher taxes and longer wait times.
I think the ideal system would to have public and private option. So that if a person does have money and doesn’t want to wait, that they can get quick and expedient care.
Ric on August 21, 2009 at 3:22 PM
You have that here. They are called charity hospitals.
chicagotrauma on August 21, 2009 at 3:28 PM
You do realize you’re talking about Mexico, right? Rules? We don’t need no stinking rules…..
Cut back? Not a chance. They just took the sting out of being a user, which will have the effect of increased demand (at least in Mexico), which will then lead to increased production/trafficking by the drug cartels, which wil bring in more money. More money in the trade will only bring more violence.
Duh.
BobMbx on August 21, 2009 at 3:28 PM
An interesting statistic I saw in this publication.
Xiphos on August 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM
The article is from 1993. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Thats pretty hilarious.
chicagotrauma on August 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM
We do lag the world in some imnportant aspects of medical procedure research, e.g; genital mutilation, castration, and beheadings.
If HR 3200 doesn’t provide for an investment in these areas, I simply can’t support it.
BobMbx on August 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM
And the bogus propaganda against the Canadian health care system continues. Just when I think liberals are going down the wrong path, I only need to look at the right wing brainwashing effort of health care issues. So sad and pathetic.
MrX on August 21, 2009 at 3:32 PM
There’s some law that limits their ability to do so. I don’t have a very clear understanding of it, but will go searching for a link.
It would be nice if they could negotiate for lower prices, but I think it would be tough for drug companies to just raise their prices overseas. Once they apply for a patent (good for 20 years I believe) the formula of the drug is known. People can immediately start manufacturing the generic.
If not for the intellectual property rights and the explicit backing that they will get to sell those drugs at a high price for a set period of time, many companies would stop doing research into all but the most profitable of drugs. It costs billions and billions of dollars to even get a drug to market, and most aren’t profitable. The ones that are offset all the products that don’t pan out.
BadgerHawk on August 21, 2009 at 3:34 PM
Yeah, I’ve thought about this often. It’ll be interesting when the one place that actually has lots of incentives to create new technology ceases to do so. And by interesting I mean awful.
BadgerHawk on August 21, 2009 at 3:36 PM
While I was going to school health services were provided as part of our student fees. I got sick to the point of needing IVs and it didn’t cost me a dime (apart from the fees).
BadgerHawk on August 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM
BadgerHawk, I just don’t understand why the US, as a large consumer, shouldn’t use it’s power to negotiate better prices with its suppliers. I don’t see Wal-Mart behaving that way with General Foods, etc. and just don’t conceptually understand it. Any help you can provide is appreciated–it just seems to make no sense to me.
Jimbo3 on August 21, 2009 at 3:43 PM
BobMx, you’re assuming that the Mexican police weren’t shaking down casual users. Many of the Mexican police are honest and hard working, but others aren’t. Certainly no police in the US would ever shake down casual users, right?
Jimbo3 on August 21, 2009 at 3:46 PM
The Calibur on August 21, 2009 at 2:30 PM
Did you read the article you linked? This paragraph was interesting.
cs89 on August 21, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Wow! With those sage words, and wisdom you have provided in your comments….I am renewed, and have decided to change my allegiance from conservative, to liberal. Oh…you’re so grand, and wonderful, and I just can’t contain my elation!!! You are THE ONE! You have convinced me, to turn my back on everything I believed in, and follow Obama down this path!
NOT!!!!!!
capejasmine on August 21, 2009 at 3:47 PM
That’s Dick Durbin speaking, so take it with a grain of salt. My search also yielded something from MediaMatters, which was pretty much garbage, and lots of stuff (from HuffPo and the NYT no less) on President Obama’s secret deal with the drug companies to limit price reductions.
Still looking…
BadgerHawk on August 21, 2009 at 3:51 PM
I live in Texas, and there’s no way in hell I’m going to Mexico for medical care… yet.
realityunwound on August 21, 2009 at 3:52 PM
Best I can tell from about 8 or 9 articles is the argument that the drug companies need to be able to make a healthy profit here (because they’re bid down so low overseas, and undersold by generics) in order to fund future research won out over the argument that the government should be able to bid drug prices lower here at home.
I’m not sure if I’m won over by that argument, but my concern would be the Democrats forcing drug prices so low that the risk to reward ration becomes so lopsided that companies just giving up R&D on most products.
BadgerHawk on August 21, 2009 at 4:04 PM
The basic point being that we subsize the rest of the world’s cheap drug prices just like we subsidize their national security.
BadgerHawk on August 21, 2009 at 4:18 PM
but I much rather have a system that if I’m unemployed, and I get cancer or some other expensive disease I won’t go broke just trying to stay alive. To me that peace of mind is worth the higher taxes and longer wait times.
I think the ideal system would to have public and private option. So that if a person does have money and doesn’t want to wait, that they can get quick and expedient care.
Ric on August 21, 2009 at 3:22 PM
Well, Ric, fortunately for you, if you get cancer you can go home to the U.S. and get treatment immediately. I live in Ontario, and I can tell you that you can wait weeks, if not months for chemo. One of my husband’s clients was recently diagnosed with prostate cancer that has metastasized, and even so, has had surgery postponed twice by the surgeon. He’s on his way to the Cleveland Clinic this weekend, where he’ll be operated on (at his own expense, but he’s interested in living) early next week.
suzeecue on August 21, 2009 at 4:25 PM
And the bogus propaganda against the Canadian health care system continues. Just when I think liberals are going down the wrong path, I only need to look at the right wing brainwashing effort of health care issues. So sad and pathetic.
MrX on August 21, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Do you actually live in Canada, MrX?
Did you happen to read in the last week that the outgoing president of the Canadian Medical Ass’n. said that the Canadian system is imploding?
I live in Canada, and I can tell you that what you’re reading is not misinformation or right wing lies.
suzeecue on August 21, 2009 at 4:31 PM
I think someone has been reading and “believing” far too much propaganda. I know of no large University in the U.S. that does not have a student health center that provides medical care for all students of the university. This is essentially, medical insurance paid for by student fees, so no worries for students.
In addition to that, there are free or low-cost clinics in any significant population area, so even if you weren’t a student, you could still get free/low-cost care if you qualified for it (made little to no money).
Then there are several states that have publicly funded health coverage for the poor (Oregon being one of those – of course they are all going broke, reducing the people covered, reducing the conditions covered, etc. – which shows that such “single-payer” government provided health care doesn’t work!!) Oh and for anyone who understands the federalist system, just serves to prove how superior such a system is to an all-powerful central government like we are progressing towards. 50 States experimenting with 50 different approaches to a problem and then adapting and adopting their approaches to mimic those which work is a better way to do things then simply have an “answer” (regardless of how successful it is or how badly it fails) dictated to you by a central government.
Not to mention the favorite of the illegals – the hospital emergency room where you can get care and just skip out on the bill!
Fatal on August 21, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Remember when W was still in the White House and we had a President. With Obama, it’s like you hired a “token” trainee that you had to hire and don’t expect really anything from him.
Jeff from WI on August 21, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Jeff from WI on August 21, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Wow, watch yourself. ou better look at the trouble Beck got into for calling The Annointed One a racist!
CVS treated me like garbage for taking up Beck’s cause. It is nuts out there.
I can only imagine what GE is up to…
IlikedAUH2O on August 21, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Can they just adopt our president?
He’s been looking for a daddy all of his life.
NoDonkey on August 21, 2009 at 5:02 PM
HOLY CRAP. Is this proof that the free market and choice work?
What a novel concept!
madmonkphotog on August 21, 2009 at 5:11 PM
I’ve pointed this out multiple times to my Canadian relatives when they talk about how much their system ROCKS!!11!!!eleventy!!! I get more blank stares and “yeah, but our system is free!” Then I explain their system to them and they tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about.
apparently farmers and teachers know more about healthcare than someone who has worked in the systems for 10 years. Good to know.
mjk on August 21, 2009 at 5:31 PM
I’ve worked in both systems. I can guarantee you that the American system is superior.
What do you do for a living that makes your knowledge of health care better than mine? Or is it just your “right wing propaganda” line something I’m supposed to believe?
mjk on August 21, 2009 at 5:33 PM
Thanks, Badgerhawk. Looks like the government can negotiate directly in some situations but not in others. I still am mystified about why.
Wal-Mart doesn’t worry about whether Sony or Samsung will have to sell at a price that’s too low for it to develop the next generation TV.
And other countries (Ireland, for instance) do make it desirable for companies to conduct R&D there. So I’m not convinced.
Jimbo3 on August 21, 2009 at 5:47 PM
American free enterprise invents many new medicines.
We will be stuck with fewer new medicines if Obama Government Care passes Congress as virus and bacteria will continue to develop.
Another way for the Death Care to kill off the old and disabled faster.
ama on August 21, 2009 at 6:21 PM
Truth to the people!
Yoop on August 21, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Americans should be wary of single-payer but, let me tell you, it gets even worse;
Imagine that government also effectively controls the delivery of services. Privately-owned hospitals? hah! We mustn’t have greedy corporations fleecing the public system.
Welcome to Canada, eh? Our cemeteries are nice.
landshark on August 21, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Not to mention the favorite of the illegals – the hospital emergency room where you can get care and just skip out on the bill!
Fatal on August 21, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Oh, he was aware of it. Judging from his description that’s exactly what he’s been doing up here…using emerg as a GP and tying up the system even further.
If we go to Canada, we’d be charged for services rendered. If they come here, they get it free, because that’s how the bill is written, and it’s our moral duty?
capejasmine on August 21, 2009 at 2:58 PM
Hmm, not sure what ta make of this. I think you’re talking about the way it works currently. If so:
No, the services are paid for by the provincial systems when they ship patients south. ie The bill is presented directly to OHIP or whatever.
If the patient rather than the province initiates the US treatment, the patient pays out-of-pocket.
taboo on August 21, 2009 at 7:25 PM
The reason that people go to Canada to fill RX’s is that Canada is defined as a Third World country, thus by law, Pharmaceutical companies have to sell to Canada at the same price as Nigeria. The American people subsidize the Canadian system with free drugs and advanced research and new drug discoveries and then sell them to Canada as though Canada was Africa. Then idiots can “run up to Canada” and buy drugs cheap. Can you imagine how much we could cut taxes if all the areas where we waste and screw ourselves were identified and eliminated?
GunRunner on August 21, 2009 at 7:46 PM
Higher taxes would mean, even for you, you’re constantly paying into the system whether you’re sick or not. Raising taxes means businesses raise prices. Your cost of living increases while at best income stagnates or most often decreases (as in dollar value-inflation when the fed decides to print more cash). Because of this you (we all) experience a significant decline in disposable income. That decline will be (is always) vastly greater than if your disposable income went to either buying insurance or paying each and every time you need health care.
That’s exactly what we have now. And it is the public part of it that is complicit in the rising of cost. Thinking is mandatory.
anuts on August 21, 2009 at 8:06 PM
Some more quotes from the article: >
Bill Blizzard on August 21, 2009 at 10:25 PM
Grand Strategy.
This healthcare shaft is just another piece of overspending, liberal driftwood that most of the proponents explain only with moot generalities and undetailed exhortations. And, like Porkulous, it must be signed into law immediately. Nobody has defined the exact problem (except the numbers of uninsured — who already have coverage but not the Cadillac model)and even The Annointed One has not yet given us the exact solution of the as yet undefined crisis.
And even FOX calls this guy brilliant?
IlikedAUH2O on August 22, 2009 at 12:23 AM
Ric, even if your US college did not have a health center where care is paid for by student fees and if you couldn’t have remained on your parent’s health care because you were a full-time student, you personally could have purchased a “student” policy for less than $400 that would have covered what you described and probably additional services as well.
Rose from Ohio on August 22, 2009 at 11:12 AM
How to punish Canada: deny them access to the US health care system. They would surrender faster than the French!
KillerKane on August 22, 2009 at 1:03 PM
You all just don’t it. I work in the N.H.S, well versed in it’s problems.
Health care and benefits are different here. It’s not because everyone is entitled to health and want big government.
It’s the ideology that health shouldn’t if possible be based on ability to pay.
It is not a left wing policy,even Thatcher didn’t abolish it.
It is widely supported here. Policy reflects society. We have a fundamental humanitarian approach to health.
We are not bothered what health system you have ,we object to the mis-representation of our’s.
If anybody wants to know more i am willing to address question’s.
It seems ignorance isn’t the problem it is the illusion of knowledge.
mags on August 22, 2009 at 2:14 PM
Mags,
I agree with you.
In your post, you made several references that indicate that you are less than knowledgeable about the US health care system. In other words you misrepresented our (the US) health care system.
Frankly, I am not bothered by your health care system but am tired of hearing misstatements about mine.
I am reminded of Stephen Covey who said “Seek first to understand, then to be understood”.
I appreciate your willingness to educate and, had you not made those several negative (and less than accurate) references about the US system, I would have taken you up on your expertise.
Rose from Ohio on August 22, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Rose,
Sorry what negative and less then accurate references have i made about the U.S system?
I have not said ours is better, it’s obviously up to you all what healthcare you have.
In recent months i have had to read ill informed posting about ‘death squads’ and a lack of insight to the workings of the N.H.S.(waiting times,rations).
I am not claiming to be an expert in U.S healthcare and Obama’s plan,of which i have no interest.
If i did i would ask you and respect your insight because that is what education is about.
I am knowledgeable about the N.H.S ,i just think some may benefit from hearing all sides before passing judgement.
mags on August 22, 2009 at 5:48 PM
Mags,
But you ALREADY passed judgement.
You said:
Then you said:
You said health care and benefits are different here – WE have a fundamental HUMANITARIAN approach to health.
(Capitalization mine)
Do you seriously want to try and make the case that Americans never engage in humanitarian health care?
And that is just one of the suspect references.
I would be more than happy to read your comments on YOUR health care system, however.
Rose from Ohio on August 22, 2009 at 9:02 PM
Ok Rose,
So any comment about our system implies you do the opposite,a bit sensitive are we?
Death squads? Passing judgements,i have read such ill informed rubbish about so called ‘socialised medicine’ daily here,so it is laughable to charge me with passing judgement.I am responding to you lot passing judgement!
The difference between health and benefits is as follows.We do not think everybody has a right to health,like nobody has a right to have ten kids by five different fathers and think the tax payer should pay for it.
There is a strong work ethic here.When it comes to health it’s part of the fabric of our culture and pysche(which we are mostly united on) that if possible it is not based on ability to pay.
We go on and on about the problems with the N.H.S if you really are interested i could explain about the problems we are having with immigrants.
mags on August 23, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Well, Mags, I was hoping you wouldn’t say it, but you did.
What was your original post except being oversensive? So, you can play that card because others don’t say EXACTLY like you think it should be said, but, heaven help them if they object to your mistatements about their system?
Given the choice between believing the Canadians and the clients of the NHS that I know personally and being “educated” by an online stranger who is unwilling to even entertain the idea that she should live up to the standard that she is demanding of others ….
I will stick with what I am told by the people that I know.
Rose from Ohio on August 23, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Rose,is all this because you don’t think i recognise how humanitarian you are in the U.S. with healthcare?
I don’t care! I was explaining why we want everyone covered,here.It has nothing to do with comparing ourselves to you.
I have not said we are better or you should all copy us.
However considering your replies you need intense education
and maybe widen your knowledge,say when somebody works in the system you are discussing tries to explain issues,give them a chance ,you might learn more.
Rose from Ohio only wants to talk to people you know personally because if they know you they must be correct.
What a strange world you inhabit.
mags on August 23, 2009 at 2:18 PM
No, Mags, you are mistaken.
I was excited to see your comments – originally. It is always good to get information wherever you can find it.
And when someone just wants to tell me about their country, I will always listen. I started doing that when I lived overseas in my early 20′s. I lived with families in the country rather than do the “tourist” thing so that I could learn first hand. Since then I have always taken the opportunity to talk with people from other countries – which may be why I know so many people from so many different countries personally.
However, when someone tells me that they are offended by the misinformation about their own country – while dispensing misinformation about mine – I will call them on it. After all, IF THEY ARE SINCERE, they will not get huffy about it and call it laughable. They will take if for what it was – an opportunity for them to learn as well.
And if they aren’t …. well, why should I waste my time?
Rose from Ohio on August 23, 2009 at 7:05 PM
Rose,
You have got a bit deep about comments,i was not meaning to offend or compare you and your country.
Again i know you have medi-care and charity hospital’s and everyone has to be seen in an emergency.
Again ,i am not bothered.
I think by using the word humanitarian you took that to mean you are not,that was not my point ,so sorry.
I was trying to explain that it isn’t that we believe everyone has a ‘right to health’.It’s health not based on ability to pay.
We have lazy git’s here,and our welfare system is too generous .
So i think the majority here would stop all this benefit and drag these lowlifes to work.
When it comes to health we don’t mind as much that our tax money is offering health free at point of deliver.
People take the piss,and as i have said immigrants are swamping us.
The debates here have been on other countries health system.
Nobody here is dicussing the U.S approach to health,we are annoyed that we are being dragged in to it.
mags on August 25, 2009 at 1:18 PM
,You said health care and benefits are different here – WE have a fundamental HUMANITARIAN approach to health
I was saying tha benefit system v health are different HERE, I was comparing our different views we seen have on the welfare state and health
I was comparing these two policy’s here from eachother ,not to the U.S
We the tax payer don’t want our money going to lazy gits,the same as you.
We don’t mind providing health care to same oeople.It’s about us and our values,that people health shouln’t be based on ability to pay.
Where do i say your country has
mags on August 26, 2009 at 3:21 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »