Blame Canada
- Thread starter peapod
- Start date
Re: RE: Blame Canada
James, several years ago, my late Mother was having some internal problems and went to the Doctor for an exam - turned out she needed a Colosotomy - which was done the next day!
And the problem would BE ? ? ?
Nascar_James said:
James, several years ago, my late Mother was having some internal problems and went to the Doctor for an exam - turned out she needed a Colosotomy - which was done the next day!
And the problem would BE ? ? ?
Re: RE: Blame Canada
Well Ten Packs, it appears wait times keep getting worst. Many folks experience long waits for critical surgeries ...
Eduard Krause, a 71-year-old retired mechanic, had been waiting more than six weeks for heart-bypass surgery. After fasting for 18 hours, he was lying on a gurney, ready to be rolled into the operating room. Now he would have to wait a bit longer: An emergency patient had been rushed into surgery, bumping him from the day's schedule.
In Canada, the long waits stirred a public outcry and a government inquiry when a 63-year-old heart patient at St. Michael's died in 1989 after his surgery had been canceled 11 times. While the inquiry concluded the death wasn't caused by the delays, it highlighted the long waiting lists and called for better management of patients in the line.
Here's the link for the exerpts above ...
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/weekly_2003/canada_vs_us_healthcare.html
Ten Packs said:
Well Ten Packs, it appears wait times keep getting worst. Many folks experience long waits for critical surgeries ...
Eduard Krause, a 71-year-old retired mechanic, had been waiting more than six weeks for heart-bypass surgery. After fasting for 18 hours, he was lying on a gurney, ready to be rolled into the operating room. Now he would have to wait a bit longer: An emergency patient had been rushed into surgery, bumping him from the day's schedule.
In Canada, the long waits stirred a public outcry and a government inquiry when a 63-year-old heart patient at St. Michael's died in 1989 after his surgery had been canceled 11 times. While the inquiry concluded the death wasn't caused by the delays, it highlighted the long waiting lists and called for better management of patients in the line.
Here's the link for the exerpts above ...
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/weekly_2003/canada_vs_us_healthcare.html
You already posted that example, Nascar Nero. You have to use the same ones over and over again because there aren't that many. Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean much when it isn't backed up by statistics anyway.
Re: RE: Blame Canada
http://heart.bmjjournals.com/cgi/co...7e63a3a147cac3de5dcf148f&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
Reverend Blair said:
http://heart.bmjjournals.com/cgi/co...7e63a3a147cac3de5dcf148f&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
So you read the report then?
I read the report. It's duller than hell, but if you drink coffee and smoke cigarettes, you can get through it.
There is no solution to our health care problems that doesn't require money, MMMike. Study after study has shown that the single-payer system we have is cheaper than other systems. It has the efficiency of an economy of scale as well not having to pay for middlemen and an extra layer of paper pushers.
The inefficiencies in the system have to addressed, and the Romanow Report is clear on that. We under-utilise nurses for instance. We don't pay doctors for phone consultations that would use up less time. We let equipment sit idle overnight. We pay virtually no attention to preventative medicine. We don't look at alternative treatments enough. We make things like mid-wives very difficult to use.
Everybody concentrates on the spending recommendations in the report, but nobody offers a truly less expensive alternative.
Reverend Blair said:
The money can come from the private sector. The govenment certainly doesn't have anymore (esp. after the new programs and the NDP budget). While my preference would be a full parallel private system, there still can (and should) be private delivery of services even under your single payer system. As far as poor use of the resources we do have, and inefficient use of equipment - the private sector excels in efficiency. Do you really think a private company would let doctors do what nurses could do? or nurses do what nurses assistants could do? etc.... Do you really think a private company would let a hugely piece of (much needed) equipment sit idle because it can't afford to operate it? NO! This would never happen! These things should be self-evident to anybody with a brain!!! :!:
Look at the American system, which is what we get the second we make health care a commodity, and tell me again how that's going to save me money, MMMike.
Not only does privately provided care cost more in the US, but the publically funded portion of their system costs over twice as much as ours. That's per capita and as a portion of GDP, so saying that the US is larger isn't an argument. Meanwhile, the people who depend on health care provided by the state routinely get substandard care. That's not to mention all of the people who slip through the cracks and have no health care coverage at all.
Not only does privately provided care cost more in the US, but the publically funded portion of their system costs over twice as much as ours. That's per capita and as a portion of GDP, so saying that the US is larger isn't an argument. Meanwhile, the people who depend on health care provided by the state routinely get substandard care. That's not to mention all of the people who slip through the cracks and have no health care coverage at all.
Why not have two seperate systems for Canada? This would please both sides. Have seperate hospitals and clinics for each system.
Those who are in favor of the deadly wait ... er I mean the publically funded health care way can pay their share of taxes and use the public system.
Others who prefer private insurance like Blue Cross can privately pay for health insurance instead of paying taxes for the public health care system. Employers who offer company benefits will most probably also include insurance coverage so many folks will pay very little for private insurance.
Those who are in favor of the deadly wait ... er I mean the publically funded health care way can pay their share of taxes and use the public system.
Others who prefer private insurance like Blue Cross can privately pay for health insurance instead of paying taxes for the public health care system. Employers who offer company benefits will most probably also include insurance coverage so many folks will pay very little for private insurance.
Re: RE: Blame Canada
There is no evidence to support your little theory, Rev. But I see you didn't dispute my other comments above:
So why aren't we implementing the framework for reform now. Why make sick Canadians pay for your resistance to change?
Reverend Blair said:
There is no evidence to support your little theory, Rev. But I see you didn't dispute my other comments above:
So why aren't we implementing the framework for reform now. Why make sick Canadians pay for your resistance to change?
They call that the two-tier system.Nascar_James said:
In that you wind up with two hospitals in a city that has a population of fifty thousand.
One is a private hospital that offers single rooms, state-of-the-art technology, a two-to-one patient-to-nurse ratio, five-foot plasma televison monitors, and lap dances, for a mere $8,500. per day rate. (Plus treatment costs)
The public hospital, in a different part of town, offers a crowded waiting room, with two overworked doctors, an intern who’s only there to skim the smack, three nurses, and a two-ward sixteen-bed-capacity facility, to serve the rest of the city.
You aren't listening, MMMike. You are refusing to see that, for Canada, we can either fix the system we have now or adopt an already-broken system from south of the border.
You aren't thinking either. A parallel system would require that you pay for insurance and for the public system. That's double your costs. More than double because you have just set yourself up to pay for office staff at insurance companies and in private hospitals, as well as for a whole bunch of government employees to make sure that the for-profit system and not-for-profit systems don't overlap. You also have to pay for corporate shareholders, who do nothing to help you, to turn a profit.
That's not smart, and it's not fixing anything. What it is stupidly clinging to a dogmatic belief in spite of the evidence before you.
You aren't thinking either. A parallel system would require that you pay for insurance and for the public system. That's double your costs. More than double because you have just set yourself up to pay for office staff at insurance companies and in private hospitals, as well as for a whole bunch of government employees to make sure that the for-profit system and not-for-profit systems don't overlap. You also have to pay for corporate shareholders, who do nothing to help you, to turn a profit.
That's not smart, and it's not fixing anything. What it is stupidly clinging to a dogmatic belief in spite of the evidence before you.
Re: RE: Blame Canada
You're not listening Rev, you and all the lefties can only see as far as our neighbours to the south. It's not a question of the status quo or US style heath care. There are unlimited variations, and to not seriously look at these shows your dogmatic belief, not mine. Are you being intentially thick?
Reverend Blair said:
You're not listening Rev, you and all the lefties can only see as far as our neighbours to the south. It's not a question of the status quo or US style heath care. There are unlimited variations, and to not seriously look at these shows your dogmatic belief, not mine. Are you being intentially thick?