Where should the money be spent?

[JLM]

Upon mulling over the bureaucratic healthcare crisis, I'm beginning to wonder if we shouldn't more or less pull the plug on that one (not withstanding the fact that we do have to attend to and ameliorate the suffering of many people) and direct more money into personal healthcare. I don't mean for it to suddenly happen in a day or a week or even a year, but I think getting people to exercise more, smoke and drink less and cut down on junk food would pay huge dividends. We know that more than half the population eventually succumbs to heart and artery disease, some at a relatively young age after $thousands have been spent on surgery. I think there are just so many upsides to this philosophy, one being that the more people who are healthy as opposed to patched up sickies, the more people will be able to contribute to society instead of being a burden. Health is the natural condition and sickness isn't, it's only running rampant now because of abusive lifestyles. With technology nowdays it wouldn't be hard to award people for positive activies (an hour on the treadmill, gets you a $1 credit with Revenue Canada.)

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Sorry JLM, but that is part of the problem with socialized health care. What you or I think should do to reduce our costs to the system is of no matter. What would eventually happen, and is happening as we speak, is social engineering, but only it'll get a lot worse with a stronger government mandate. We see that smoking is being banned almost everywhere, and in Peel county they are even trying to ban smoking in one's own home if it is in a multi dwelling unit. The neoabolishionists are also targeting booze and want a zero BAC for driving in NS. This is a province where every activity is regulated aside from walking. Helmets are required for every activity on wheels, including "heelies". Kids under 14 cannot drive motorized vehicles on their own property. Giving the health care nazis more power and ammunition is totally the wrong thing to do, they have too much already. Doctors Nova Scotia is one of the largest single banes to freedom we have here.

Aside from that, the biggest users of the system are the ones at the lower end of the income scale. They would be the ones having to pay more, not that I disagree that the more you use the more you should pay, I would use the same argument for other government services such as EI as well. It is the social engineering aspect that scares the willies out of me, I've seen enough of it and I know that the target audience will be missed entirely and the least deserving of their ire get penalized. I prefer the devil I know. But I would much prefer the state get the hell out of my life.

 

[JLM]

Sorry JLM, but that is part of the problem with socialized health care. What you or I think should do to reduce our costs to the system is of no matter. What would eventually happen, and is happening as we speak, is social engineering, but only it'll get a lot worse with a stronger government mandate. We see that smoking is being banned almost everywhere, and in Peel county they are even trying to ban smoking in one's own home if it is in a multi dwelling unit. The neoabolishionists are also targeting booze and want a zero BAC for driving in NS. This is a province where every activity is regulated aside from walking. Helmets are required for every activity on wheels, including "heelies". Kids under 14 cannot drive motorized vehicles on their own property. Giving the health care nazis more power and ammunition is totally the wrong thing to do, they have too much already. Doctors Nova Scotia is one of the largest single banes to freedom we have here.

Aside from that, the biggest users of the system are the ones at the lower end of the income scale. They would be the ones having to pay more, not that I disagree that the more you use the more you should pay, I would use the same argument for other government services such as EI as well. It is the social engineering aspect that scares the willies out of me, I've seen enough of it and I know that the target audience will be missed entirely and the least deserving of their ire get penalized. I prefer the devil I know. But I would much prefer the state get the hell out of my life.

I agree with much of what you say, especially the part of getting Gov't. out of our lives. One of the main problems with Gov't. is there are some people who feel they have to control everything, everything has to coincide with their morals, instead they should just direct their energy toward positive trends, like maybe happy if they can get the two pack a day smoker back to one pack. My main reason for writing the post was that I see this habitual increase to funding bureaucratic health is like dumping truck loads of money over a precipice.

 

[petros]

Our health care became far far beyond socialized when they were forced to become charities and run home raffles.

How many of you were aware that the IMF forced Canada to cut back on health care or they would drop our credit rating?

If you want someone to blame, blame the international banks that did this to YOUR health care.

Maybe they need more bail outs?

 

[petros]

Let's take a ride on Petro's magic time machine to the axe and slash era....


IMF pressing Ottawa to slash billions more in deficit fight

 

[Niflmir]

neoabolishionists

This more than anything in this thread made me nauseated. Honestly, the people trying to ban things throughout the ages are always using the same tactics. Why tack neo- onto it? The prohibitionists from over a century ago were far more invasive than anybody around today.

The most effective thing to buffer our healthcare system, as always, is to increase taxes: in a targetted fashion. Just tax people who buy junk food. It is already done with drugs and alcohol.

Since we are never going to arrive at a car accident and say, "Oh, look, they were not wearing their seatbelt! No treatment for them," before walking away and letting them bleed to death, it seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to do to fine people who do not wear their seatbelts.

You can simply look at it as a tax for not wearing your seatbelt. They should not give demerit points for it, however; that is my opinion.

 

[TenPenny]

Aside from that, the biggest users of the system are the ones at the lower end of the income scale.

So the solution would be to put low-income people on the payroll of the dept of health.

 

[JLM]

Our health care became far far beyond socialized when they were forced to become charities and run home raffles.

How many of you were aware that the IMF forced Canada to cut back on health care or they would drop our credit rating?

If you want someone to blame, blame the international banks that did this to YOUR health care.

Maybe they need more bail outs?

This problem can be approached from many different angles, including finding places to place blame. I'm not interested in that nearly as much as I am in fixing the system. And if you are interested in fixing the system you have to contribute to the fix. We know dumping money on it does NOT work, actually it exacerbates it. A person may ask what can one person do to help? Very simple, cutting sugar, salt and trans fat intake in half would help a lot and walking for an hour a day would help a lot more. We have to concentrate on maintaining health, not patching up the ravages of disease. It's just like with your car, you can drive it properly and do the regular maintenance, or you can drive it like a mad man over pot holes and curbs and not bother changing oil or rotating the tires or lubricating the chassis. But like with the human body it's going to cost far more in the long run.

 

[Tonington]

Smoking is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, preventable cost in health care. Nova Scotia in the past 9 years has gone from the worst, to best with respect to youth smoker rates in this country. In 2000 it was 31 percent of teens between the ages of 15-19, and last year it was down to 12 per cent. In the same period, overall rates dropped from 30% down to 20%, 1 percentage point above the national average.

Proactive approaches save money, prevent productivity losses, and improve public health. That's win-win-win. The cantankerous don't seem to have any suggestions for improving quality of life. That's the real tell in these discussions.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

This more than anything in this thread made me nauseated. Honestly, the people trying to ban things throughout the ages are always using the same tactics. Why tack neo- onto it? The prohibitionists from over a century ago were far more invasive than anybody around today.

I had just woken up and and hadn't had my coffee yet, but I did mean neo-prohibitionist, I am also tagged with a neo prefix, as in conservative, but I'm not. But if you don't think they are just as invasive as in the past you are mistaken, they are just as virulent, although more sneaky in taking a back door approach, the end result will be the same.

The most effective thing to buffer our healthcare system, as always, is to increase taxes: in a targetted fashion. Just tax people who buy junk food. It is already done with drugs and alcohol.

And where does it stop? Social engineering has no end.

You can simply look at it as a tax for not wearing your seatbelt. They should not give demerit points for it, however; that is my opinion.

They do in Nova Scotia, even if you're not driving, again where does it end?

 

[petros]

Smoking is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, preventable cost in health care.

Smoking doesn't even come close to sugar for killing and maiming.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

So the solution would be to put low-income people on the payroll of the dept of health.

Maybe your solution, what I stated was fact, those with the least ability to pay are the ones who use it the most. You can't get blood from stone so the government will get it from the most obvious source, the middle class. In the end it will be nothing more than a tax grab with the optics of good intentions that merely keeps the governing party in power by buying votes with our own money, that's politics.

 

[petros]

what I stated was fact, those with the least ability to pay are the ones who use it the most.

Ever tried to work when you're sick or worn out from working?

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Smoking is one of the biggest, if not the biggest, preventable cost in health care. Nova Scotia in the past 9 years has gone from the worst, to best with respect to youth smoker rates in this country. In 2000 it was 31 percent of teens between the ages of 15-19, and last year it was down to 12 per cent. In the same period, overall rates dropped from 30% down to 20%, 1 percentage point above the national average.

That is if you believe statistics. There is no way to accurately tell if that is, in fact, correct. Statistics are gathered to either show a need for action, or to show that corrective action has had its effect, and they are biased, I've been a party to it and know how it's done. There are just as many kids smoking outside our local school as there were 6 years ago, even more in my estimation.

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Ever tried to work when you're sick or worn out from working?

Ummm, yeah, it's no picnic, but the alternative is not getting paid. But what's your point?

 

[petros]

Did that make you a burden or drop your "class"?

I never knew we had a caste system in Canada. Go figure!

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Did that make you a burden or drop your "class"?

I never knew we had a caste system in Canada. Go figure!

Alright, maybe I'm a bit thick, but I don't get what your trying to say. When I said those with the least ability to pay are the ones who use the system the most just go into a walk in clinic, or if you are in the medical profession or know someone who is all you need to do is ask. This has nothing to do with booking off sick. This has to do with those using the system daily to get meds they don't need for illnesses they don't have. If you live in Saskatchewan, you don't have to look far, Alberta isn't much different. Walk in clinics in Nova Scotia are far and few between so it isn't as obvious.

 

[Tonington]

And where does it stop? Social engineering has no end.

You use the word like it is inherently a bad thing, perhaps it is, but that argument needs to be made. Social engineering allows me to go to university. Prohibition of murder is social engineering. Society as you grew up in, and as I know it today owe to social engineering.

Unless you're an anarchist or a nihilist, I would think most people see value in law and order. Most people see value in promoting health, and at the same time cutting costs to present and future tax payers.

 

[Tonington]

That is if you believe statistics. There is no way to accurately tell if that is, in fact, correct. Statistics are gathered to either show a need for action, or to show that corrective action has had its effect, and they are biased, I've been a party to it and know how it's done. There are just as many kids smoking outside our local school as there were 6 years ago, even more in my estimation.

You haven't estimated anything. You've stated an opinion. The trends are the same in other provinces as well. If you understand statistics, you don't "believe" the results. You simply say the methodology used to generate those statistics is either valid, or not.

In any event, I'm skeptical until proven otherwise that you do indeed know how it's done.

 

[petros]

This has to do with those using the system daily to get meds they don't need for illnesses they don't have..

How do you get meds daily for something you don't have? Have you ever tried to get something you don't need? Do you think Drs don't know a junkie when they see one? To get an Rx for narcotics you need to see a specialist. If it takes six months to see one how does one do this daily?