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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

But you ALREADY passed judgement.

You said:

Health care and benefits are different here.

Then you said:

We have a fundamental humanitarian approach to health.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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?

“Dr. Uwe Reinhardt, a Princeton University health economist who has studied the U.S. and Canadian health systems, said arrangements with cities like Detroit “are a terrific way to manage capacity” given Canada’s smaller health care budget. “This is efficient,” he said. “At least in Canada, you don’t worry about going broke to pay for health care. You do here.””

“Michael Vujovich, 61, of Windsor was taken to Detroit’s Henry Ford Hospital for an angioplasty procedure after he went to a Windsor hospital in April. Vujovich said the U.S. backup doesn’t show a gap in Canada’s system, but shows how it works .”I go to the hospital in Windsor and two hours later, I’m done having angioplasty in Detroit,” he said. His $38,000 bill was covered by the Ontario health ministry.”

“Dany Mercado, a leukemia patient from Kitchener, Ontario, is cancer-free after getting a bone marrow transplant at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute in Detroit.
Told by Canadian doctors in 2007 he couldn’t have the procedure there, Mercado’s family and doctor appealed to Ontario health officials, who agreed to let him have the transplant in Detroit in January 2008. Mercado, 26, faced a longer wait because he could not find a matching blood donor, even though his family conducted a broad search.
He said doctors told him money was limited for transplants, particularly ones using unmatched donors, which are riskier. After his family’s doctor wrote the Ontario ministry, the agency agreed to pay $200,000 for the operation.”

Canada sending patients to US for treatment
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……

To me that peace of mind is worth the higher taxes and longer wait times.

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.

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

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.

It is also well known for having over 100 pharmacies where many fill their RX for less than in the USA.

Ghostbuster on August 21, 2009 at 2:36 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?

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.

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.