HEALTH CARE - User fees

[Machjo]

Totalitarian systems are not more open to ideas. However, when they decide to adopt an idea, there is no debate, it gets adopted with lightening speed.

And that is always an advantage of a dictatorship, things move much more quickly in a dictatorship than they do in a democracy. China was able to adopt one child policy, no way India could have done that.

Anyway, we are going to a party. Bye.

So the only difference in a totalitarian system is that it's faster in making decisions. The US would take longer to scrap user fees as we'd take longer to introduce them because we're democratic. Whereas a dictatorship can bake both ideas more quickly. As for the one-child policy, it would only be a matter of the majority supporting an idea to make it legal. Just consider the attempted cultural genocide of many First Nations in Canada over decades in our history, supported by a democratic majority. A democracy can be just as savage as a dictatorship can be benign. In the end, it merely depends on the government in power.

 

[L Gilbert]

Totalitarian systems are not more open to ideas. However, when they decide to adopt an idea, there is no debate, it gets adopted with lightening speed.

Like your Hypogrits gun registry? Harpy's Afghanistan gig?

And that is always an advantage of a dictatorship, things move much more quickly in a dictatorship than they do in a democracy. China was able to adopt one child policy, no way India could have done that.

8O Yup.

Anyway, we are going to a party. Bye.

Try not to dull the party too much and remember, if you can't dazzle people because of lack of brilliance, you can always baffle them with BS.

 

[Machjo]

Quite so, and it has serious problems.

And our system, while certainly better than the US' in many respects, is certainly no model for the world either it seems.

Just to ask a question here. Let's say some country in the middle of the Pacific decided to conduct research on various national health care systems, do you honestly think they'd adopt the Canadian system at least without major modifications? My guess is they'd look at other systems instead, and of course would look even less at the US one than ours, but they'd likely still be looking more at the Singaporean or Swedish models in the end. Or if they're really committed, maybe a French-style system (bearing in mind that while it's possibly the best in the world, it's also more expensive too.) But if they're looking for something of quality and efficient but not necessarily the best system, they'd likely be looking at Sweden or Singapore most likely, or some other similar country. But certainly not as public a system as ours.

 

[Machjo]

And Hitler was elected too and very much supported by many at least in the beginning, let's not forget.

 

[L Gilbert]

And our system, while certainly better than the US' in many respects, is certainly no model for the world either it seems.

Just to ask a question here. Let's say some country in the middle of the Pacific decided to conduct research on various national health care systems, do you honestly think they'd adopt the Canadian system at least without major modifications? My guess is they'd look at other systems instead, and of course would look even less at the US one than ours, but they'd likely still be looking more at the Singaporean or Swedish models in the end. Or if they're really committed, maybe a French-style system (bearing in mind that while it's possibly the best in the world, it's also more expensive too.) But if they're looking for something of quality and efficient but not necessarily the best system, they'd likely be looking at Sweden or Singapore most likely, or some other similar country. But certainly not as public a system as ours.

I still like the Swiss system. It's mandatory to be covered, and the gov't pays for what coverage you can't pay for and obviously, the system is affordable for the Swiss. I'm sure we could adapt it or one of the systems you mentioned to fit Canada. As it sits, we are paying more and more and more for bandaiding a system that still has holes and cracks all over it.

 

[Machjo]

Healthcare in Switzerland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That seems like a good system too. It's the first time I come across the Swiss system, so thanks. I'll definitely have to read more into it.

For the other two systems you can read about them here:

Healthcare in Sweden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Healthcare in Singapore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JLM]

"You didn’t state it JLM, I did. And it is a fact it is not hard to find, Google for it."

I just did and what I found blows my mind, sure you wouldn't use these to support anything. You have about 50 within about a 3 year spread. For all intents and purposes they are all tied in a dead heat. When you were yammering about the huge difference between Canada and the U.S. I thought you talking 20 or 30 years. That trivial of a difference could be due to the way the data is collected - anyway it's negligalbe as far as any real comparisons are concerned.

 

[AnnaG]

Healthcare in Switzerland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That seems like a good system too. It's the first time I come across the Swiss system, so thanks. I'll definitely have to read more into it.

For the other two systems you can read about them here:

Healthcare in Sweden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Healthcare in Singapore - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've mentioned it before, Machjo. You thought it was interesting then, too. lol

 

[Machjo]

I've mentioned it before, Machjo. You thought it was interesting then, too. lol

I can't remember, but thanks for reminding me. But the Swiss idea of simply offering national health care that all must pay into is not a bad idea definitely worth considering.

 

[ironsides]

Really? I suggest you put your house in order first, before you try to help others with advice. According to CNN, there will be a shortage of 40,000 to 100,000 Family Physicians in USA in the next few years.

Your 70% figure is to high. Here is a definition of what Bankruptcy actually means in the U.S..

“Bankrupt” is not synonymous with “broke.” “Bankrupt” means filing a petition in a federal court asking for protection from creditors via the bankruptcy laws. A single petition may cover an individual or married couple. The instant a debtor files for bankruptcy, the court assumes legal control of the debtor’s assets and halts all collection efforts.

Shortly after the filing, a court-appointed trustee convenes a meeting to inventory the debtor’s assets and debts and to determine which assets are exempt from seizure. States may regulate these exemptions, which often include work tools, clothes, and some equity in a home.

About 70 percent of all consumer debtors file under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code; most others file under Chapter 13. In Chapter 7 the trustee liquidates all nonexempt assets—although 96 percent of debtors have so little unencumbered property that there is nothing left to liquidate. At the conclusion of the bankruptcy, the debtor is freed from many debts. In Chapter 13 the debtor proposes a repayment plan, which extends for up to five years. Chapter 13 debtors may retain their property so long as they stay current with their repayments.

Under both chapters, taxes, student loans, alimony, and child support remain payable in full, and debtors must make payments on all secured loans (such as home mortgages and car loans) or forfeit the collateral."

As for a shortage of doctors and Nurses, it is not because they get low pay or cannot find jobs, you can blame the AMA as well as your CMA for that. Universities are only to willing to increase student medical enrollment. You have to get out more, the real world is not in books or tabloids. I am not saying that to be mean.

 

[AnnaG]

Quite so, and it has serious problems.

All because of user fees? C'mon.:roll:

 

[AnnaG]

Totalitarian systems are not more open to ideas. However, when they decide to adopt an idea, there is no debate, it gets adopted with lightening speed.

And that is always an advantage of a dictatorship, things move much more quickly in a dictatorship than they do in a democracy. China was able to adopt one child policy, no way India could have done that.

So democracies have too much bureaucracy. I definitely agree.

Anyway, we are going to a party. Bye.

Sounds like a fun party.:-|

 

[JLM]

"User fees however, are nonsense.". IN YOUR HUMBLE OPINION.

 

[AnnaG]

Who are you talking to, JLM?

 

[JLM]

Who are you talking to, JLM?

I think he's a friend of yours......................:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:- thought you could tell by the words in the quotations. He has another mannerism................"Quite so".........you've had all the hints you're getting....................:lol:

 

[JLM]

Ironsides- I've found out lately that "bankruptcy" is not as serious as I first thought- I know a guy who looked into it and found he couldn't afford it. Said something about having to pay a couple of thousand bucks..........................Makes a lot of sense eh?

 

[Chev]

Bar Sinister "User fees were tried in Alberta..."
Can you give us an idea of how long ago that was?

 

[JLM]

Perhaps. But taken overall, it is a huge disadvantage. If user fees keep 100 patients with sniffles away form doctor's office, but leads to one or two more cancer cases, the health care system is hugely worse off than if there had not been any user fee.

In spite of all the bluster and bravado, nobody has been able to come up with even a single good argument in favor of user fees here (except merely to state that they are for it).

And if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle. User pay is quite a common and acceptable practice. Would you rather have the service paid for by those who don't use it? I think that people who eat properly, exercise property have good genes and a good health record shouldn't be paying more than a token amount until such time as they are making regular use of the service.

 

[ironsides]

Ironsides- I've found out lately that "bankruptcy" is not as serious as I first thought- I know a guy who looked into it and found he couldn't afford it. Said something about having to pay a couple of thousand bucks..........................Makes a lot of sense eh?

No, it is not, it gives the individual a chance to get their life back together. The biggest problem a individual may have is buying more stuff on credit for awhile. Definatly not the end of the world.

 

[ironsides]

All because of user fees? C'mon.:roll:

The only reason given so far for user fees is that the doctor may have to collect and record them.