Why Conservatives Suck!


Cliffy
#61
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

The tube video in the OP I would wager...

Well, I thought so too. The point is that it wasn't clear. He could just as easily been responding to the previous post.
 
mentalfloss
#62
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

The tube video in the OP I would wager...

Yes.

Got to the part where he said everyone hates the fact that Conservatives need to break the news about how nothing in life is free; lol'd and then hit the x button.

What's really stupid is that modern conservatives are actually libertarians that hate liberals.
Last edited by mentalfloss; Feb 11th, 2012 at 09:02 PM..
 
Walter
#63
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Just because few can attain the best care possible, does not mean it is the best model...

I have brothers living in the States, one of them a GP, and I know of what I speak. Most people in the States get the best healthcare in the world. US deniers will not believe that but that is their predjudice.
 
mentalfloss
#64
Quote: Originally Posted by WalterView Post

I have brothers living in the States, one of them a GP, and I know of what I speak. Most people in the States get the best healthcare in the world. US deniers will not believe that but that is their predjudice.

The U.S. and Canada are ranked pretty poorly in terms of healthcare anyway.
 
CDNBear
+1
#65
Quote: Originally Posted by WalterView Post

I have brothers living in the States, one of them a GP, and I know of what I speak. Most people in the States get the best healthcare in the world. US deniers will not believe that but that is their predjudice.

C'mon Walter, you've seen "Sicko". Moore says we get better free health care in Canada. And Cuba too.

That must be why some Canadians have to go south to get quicker service, and why Fidel had to leave Cuba to have his aliments taken care of.

Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

The U.S. and Canada are ranked pretty poorly in terms of healthcare anyway.

An Ill-Conceived Health-Care Ranking - WSJ.com (external - login to view)
 
mentalfloss
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

An Ill-Conceived Health-Care Ranking - WSJ.com (external - login to view)

Yea, WHO's ranking is from 2000 and I have no idea why we don't have a consistent analysis on this. The newsweek top 100 countries ranking is pretty recent and shows neither of us are doing so hot either.
 
CDNBear
#67
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Yea, WHO's ranking is from 2000 and I have no idea why we don't have a consistent analysis on this.

Quote:

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems was last produced in 2000, and the WHO no longer produces such a ranking table, because of the complexity of the task.

PR-2000-43/ WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION : ASSESSES THE WORLD'S HEALTH SYSTEMS (external - login to view)

Which of course was the premise of the original article I posted.
 
Tonington
#68
Quote: Originally Posted by WalterView Post

Most people in the States get the best healthcare in the world.

That's debatable, when 50 million don't even have health insurance. Maybe they do have the best, but what metric would you use objectively to provide evidence for such a claim? There are plenty of places in the world where people live longer. There are plenty of places where well being and satisfaction surveys return higher scores. There are plenty of places in the world where nobody has to claim bankruptcy because they can't pay a medical bill.

Put down the free market koolaid.

Quote:

US deniers will not believe that but that is their predjudice.

I simply deny they have the best healthcare system. It is not the most accessible at all. It doesn't produce the best results. Unless you have lots of money.
 
CDNBear
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

I simply deny they have the best healthcare system. It is not the most accessible at all. It doesn't produce the best results. Unless you have lots of money.

I have a self procured insurance package, reasonably priced, that made getting medical attention in the States, fast and efficient. While here at home, I was still on a waiting list, just to get an MRI (That I couldn't physically have anyways, due to the metal in my body). Just to finish the diagnosis.

It took about three days in the States, to do what would have taken months in Canada. That there is my problem with the Canadian system.

I've never received medical attention in other countries, other than the odd stitch, so I can only base my opinion on my experiences between the US and Canada.
 
mentalfloss
#70
Here's the newsweek rankings.. we're around 14 or 15th and the U.S. is 27th.

Interactive Infographic of the World's Best Countries - The Daily Beast (external - login to view)

The Japanese have a pretty commendable record.
 
CDNBear
+1
#71
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Here's the newsweek rankings.. we're around 14 or 15th and the U.S. is 27th.

Interactive Infographic of the World's Best Countries - The Daily Beast (external - login to view)

The Japanese have a pretty commendable record.

Ya, I looked it up when you mentioned it the first time.

Where did you get those ranks from? I see Canada ranked at 7 for health and the US at 26.

I read the metrics and methodology link from that page. The section on health, leaves a lot to be desired.
 
mentalfloss
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Ya, I looked it up when you mentioned it the first time.

Where did you get those ranks from? I see Canada ranked at 7 for health and the US at 26.

I counted the dots as there are tie-rankings in between. I gave the U.S. the benefit of the doubt.

Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

I read the metrics and methodology link from that page. The section on health, leaves a lot to be desired.

Healthy life expectancy is a decent enough starting point.
 
CDNBear
#73
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Healthy life expectancy is a decent enough starting point.

That's one of the reasons WHO abandoned the task. There are far to many variables to track. To come to an accurate conclusion.

These sort of charts only make for happy (Or not so happy, depending on where your country ranks) nationalists.
 
captain morgan
#74
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Any idea what the difference in tax rates is during this exodus of jobs out of the country?

Lower tax rates and in addition to lower wage scales, better access to labour markets, etc..

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Are you sure trade agreements and removing trade barriers isn't more responsible?

It plays a role but most of the nation's that Canada trades with have similar economies and the difference in those critical areas are nt dramatic (I'm thinking Europe, America, etc).


Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Once trade barriers are removed, producers benefit from lower input costs such as the cost of labour.

Labour is one significant component. Also consider raw materials and/or energy to produce or transport your product.

Trade barriers (in my view) are a form of protectionism and to a degree, they are needed. However, when a domestic sector relies on those barriers as a dedicated competitive edge, then I see the practice as non-productive.

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Like you say, lots of pieces in the puzzle. Conservatives and liberals do suck, because they only want to consider talking points on their edge of the puzzle. There are far more puzzle pieces in the middle of any puzzle, and only when the puzzle pieces are connected does the big picture become clear.

No doubt. In my view, this topic regarding companies moving offshore has little to do with differing political ideologies.
 
DaSleeper
+2
#75
I always thought that individual or collective style of life in this case....diet, execise ect...decided your healthy life expectancy, not your hospital system....unless you are one of those who wants big brother to control your life of course
 
CDNBear
+2
#76
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeperView Post

I always thought that individual or collective style of life in this case....diet, execise ect...decided your healthy life expectancy, not your hospital system..

They both play their respective part, along with several other factors.

Quote:

..unless you are one of those who wants big brother to control your life of course

They'd have to, to control diet, recreational activities, and so on. To make ranking as easy and accurate as some people think it is.
 
Tonington
#77
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Lower tax rates and in addition to lower wage scales, better access to labour markets, etc..

I was hoping for something more empirical.
 
mentalfloss
#78
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

I was hoping for something more empirical.

Reaganomics isn't empirical?

It's a proven fact!

Just look at the U.S.
 
Tonington
+1
#79
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

I have a self procured insurance package, reasonably priced, that made getting medical attention in the States, fast and efficient. While here at home, I was still on a waiting list, just to get an MRI (That I couldn't physically have anyways, due to the metal in my body). Just to finish the diagnosis.

It took about three days in the States, to do what would have taken months in Canada. That there is my problem with the Canadian system.

I've never received medical attention in other countries, other than the odd stitch, so I can only base my opinion on my experiences between the US and Canada.

Hey, I'm not one against more options here in Canada, in fact I would like to see more private insurance options available...but Walter is making claims about the US system as a whole, when there is a very clear class effect. The wait times for Medicaid are longer than for some treatment options in Canada. Some Doctors won't even accept Medicaid coverage. Medication is not as accessible for Americans either. It's not a cut and dry claim Walter is making.
 
CDNBear
+2
#80
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Reaganomics isn't empirical?

It's a proven fact!

Just look at the U.S.

Quick! Look over there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
Walter
+1
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

C'mon Walter, you've seen "Sicko". Moore says we get better free health care in Canada. And Cuba too.

That must be why some Canadians have to go south to get quicker service, and why Fidel had to leave Cuba to have his aliments taken care of.

An Ill-Conceived Health-Care Ranking - WSJ.com (external - login to view)

And don't forget that Moore is a hypocritcal asshole.
 
CDNBear
+1
#82
Quote: Originally Posted by WalterView Post

And don't forget that Moore is a hypocritical asshole.

Without a doubt.
 
Walter
#83
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Hey, I'm not one against more options here in Canada, in fact I would like to see more private insurance options available...but Walter is making claims about the US system as a whole, when there is a very clear class effect. The wait times for Medicaid are longer than for some treatment options in Canada. Some Doctors won't even accept Medicaid coverage. Medication is not as accessible for Americans either. It's not a cut and dry claim Walter is making.

Which wait times are longer in the US?
 
Tonington
#84
Quote: Originally Posted by WalterView Post

Which wait times are longer in the US?

We completed 546 paired calls to 273 specialty clinics and found significant disparities in provider acceptance of Medicaid–CHIP versus private insurance across all tested specialties. Overall, 66% of Medicaid–CHIP callers (179 of 273) were denied an appointment as compared with 11% of privately insured callers (29 of 273) (relative risk, 6.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3 to 8.8; P<0.001). Among 89 clinics that accepted both insurance types, the average wait time for Medicaid–CHIP enrollees was 22 days longer than that for privately insured children (95% CI, 6.8 to 37.5; P=0.005).
(external - login to view)

(external - login to view)Auditing Access to Specialty Care for Children with Public Insurance (external - login to view)

66% denied an appointment. How long of a wait is that if you're denied? The specialties included in the study were for diabetes, asthma, severe fractures, seizures, depression, severe atopic dermatitis, severe depression, obstructive sleep apnea, and chronic bilateral otitis media.

Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Reaganomics isn't empirical?

It's a proven fact!

Just look at the U.S.


The combined Federal and Provincial corporate income tax rate in Ontario in 2005 is 65% of what it was in 1960.
www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/displ...74421&lang=eng (external - login to view)
Last edited by Tonington; Feb 12th, 2012 at 11:47 AM..
 
captain morgan
#85
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

I was hoping for something more empirical.

It's a variety of factors that also include 'unknowns'.

Access to markets, seeking to sell directly into a domestic market (ie. China), labour, materials and/or the incentives in terms of tax holidays that might be negotiated in the back room.

In the end, what we do know is that there are a multitude of 'western' companies that have made the move for very tangible reasons, tax treatment being one of the factors.

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post




The combined Federal and Provincial corporate income tax rate in Ontario in 2005 is 65% of what it was in 1960.
Corporate Income Tax Rate Database - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) (external - login to view)

The world is a very different place today as compared to 1965.... I don't think that the Japanese were evening exporting into North America at that time (any significant trade that is)
 
Tonington
#86
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Any idea why the jobs are going offshore?.. Any clue at all?

Hint: It has to do with my previous post regarding punitive taxes.

Try and put the pieces of the puzzle togther - it ain't hard, there is only 1 piece.

Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

It's a variety of factors that also include 'unknowns'.

Access to markets, seeking to sell directly into a domestic market (ie. China), labour, materials and/or the incentives in terms of tax holidays that might be negotiated in the back room.

In the end, what we do know is that there are a multitude of 'western' companies that have made the move for very tangible reasons, tax treatment being one of the factors.



The world is a very different place today as compared to 1965.... I don't think that the Japanese were evening exporting into North America at that time (any significant trade that is)

Glad to see you recognize there is more than one piece to the puzzle now. The fact is that tax rates have decreased concurrently with a decline in manufacturing.
 
captain morgan
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Glad to see you recognize there is more than one piece to the puzzle now.


Punitive taxes nail all of the elements that I listed.

Payroll taxes, corp taxes, sales-related taxes, etc.. Add in the indirect taxes dealing with licensing, regulatory, etc and that number increases yet again.

The taxation environment, as a whole, is what I was driving at.


Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

The fact is that tax rates have decreased concurrently with a decline in manufacturing.

The question here is why did they decrease?

On that note, the capital investment is not easily moved, especially for high cost ventures like building a plant, etc.. Once that money moves, it will take years and/or dramatic changes to justify that movement again.

The decrease in tax rates (in North America I assume) is changing because the private sector has spoken via actions to move capital, jobs, etc elsewhere.
 
Spade
+1
#88
It happens when bridles are removed; the horses not longer serve their purpose.
 
Tonington
#89
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Punitive taxes nail all of the elements that I listed.

What is a non-punative tax rate? The tax rate was dropping...if tax rates were a good predictor of manufacturing production moving then you should have said we would have more production now, not less.
 
captain morgan
#90
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

It happens when bridles are removed; the horses not longer serve their purpose.


Hobbling the horse has an even more detrimental effect

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

What is a non-punative tax rate? The tax rate was dropping...if tax rates were a good predictor of manufacturing production moving then you should have said we would have more production now, not less.


It's a comparative measure.. Case in point, CPR moved their H.O. and 2500 jobs from Montreal to Calgary and the reason that AB was chosen had much to do with the tax enviro being around 1/2 that of Quebec.

In comparison, with respect to the options available, Que's tax environment was punitive relative to AB... Same comparative analysis exists between nations.
 

Similar Threads

32
Wow, the Penguins sure do suck
by Avro | Dec 9th, 2010
no new posts