This is for you, CanadianRocks. I'm reposting here because it was off-topic in that other thread, eh?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ankle Biting Canadians
- Thread starter NightTrain
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #2
yeah we will proabbly disagree on alot. Americans need to see other sides.
In regards to immigration. Canada is one of the privilidged countries in the world and we still live by something the US use to hold dear
"give us your huddled masses, your weak and your poor" I forget how it goes.
So why should we have everything and so many have nothing or less then nothing. We try to keep criminals out but almost everyone else should be welcome.
That's why your Socialist health care program has degenerated to the point that any Canadian that has a few extra bucks flies to the USA for medical treatment & operations, eh?
Frankly, the irresponsible way you people let anyone and everyone into your country is going to be the downfall of your economy. Allow me to elaborate.
You have free health care. Your waiting lists are months long to get in to see a doctor. When you do, you're pretty much treated like a piece of meat by the overworked and underpaid physician & staff. Not only do your people overload your system; you have people by the planeload coming there to take advantage of that free ride. So now, you're waiting longer.
Consider this : Who would you want operating on you - a doctor that gets paid the same as any other doctor (whether he's a quack or not), or a doctor that is damn good at what he does & gets paid accordingly?
You've freely admitted that you Canuckers are embracing everyone that wants to come to Canada. Consider the border relations of our two countries. It's about as lax as you'll find anywhere in the world. That was fine up to 2 years ago. Now, we realize that we are at war, and you idiots up there think everything is just fine and dandy with lunatics entering your country.
That's NOT okay, because of the borders between the USA and Canada. They're lax, remember? If we get another terrorist hit, and we find out that YOU knuckleheads let them into your country so they could sneak into ours, the border is going to get shut down.
Know what happens when that happens? Your economy, already on the brink of collapse due to your socialistic ideals, will tank. Free trade will not go across the borders nearly as briskly as it has for decades upon decades. Hurt us? Yeah, maybe a little. Hurt you? Stupendously. But it really doesn't matter. What you fail to realize is that we're going to protect ourselves & our interests, no matter what it takes.
The USA provides for your defense - that means, you've gotten a free ride because we've made it clear to every possibly hostile nation that you are under our protection. You don't have to spend trillions on your military. And trillions on weapons development. Christ, we even provide you with your RADAR coverage! Don't believe me? Check out NORAD under Cheyenne Mountain outside of Colorado Springs. Yep, we'll let Canada know if they almost got attacked and what we did to prevent it. What military you DO have is inadequate at best.
What will happen when you suddenly find yourselves responsible for providing for your own defense?
It ain't cheap. You just may find yourself reviewing your shitty attitude toward a country that has given you a free ride and asked for nothing except for some symbolic help in a time of need. We didn't need your troops, but we did need your support in the UN and in a war that most of you French-Canadian liberal morons STILL don't support - even though once again you'll be reaping the benefits of spilled American blood for free.
Yep. You Candians have proven yourselves to be solid friends. Thanks for being there.
C
canadarocks
Guest
Oh my. Where do iI start? Instead of picking out points where you are wrong I will just say your whole post is moronic.
But I will say a few points anyway.
15% of the USs trade is with Canada. 85% of Canadas is with the US. The US gets 20% of its power supply from Canada. Canada is the USs 4th(i think its 4th) largest suppplyer of oil. The US gets alot of lumber , iron ore and other natural resourses from canada. And you say it would hurt the US a "bit". How about disastor to both economies?
Just read some more of your post. Where do you get this stuff? I can go to a doctor and be in to see him within a few hours, immediately if its an emergency. And the question about who I would rather have operate on me I am not sure. People that make money by the operation would scare me a little.
Our federal government has a surplus. How about yours?
This war in Iraq will not help Canada or any other western country. All it will do is create more people in the world that wants to attack the US and the west.
And I will not thank the US for murdering 15 to 20 thousand people in Iraq.
But I will say a few points anyway.
15% of the USs trade is with Canada. 85% of Canadas is with the US. The US gets 20% of its power supply from Canada. Canada is the USs 4th(i think its 4th) largest suppplyer of oil. The US gets alot of lumber , iron ore and other natural resourses from canada. And you say it would hurt the US a "bit". How about disastor to both economies?
Just read some more of your post. Where do you get this stuff? I can go to a doctor and be in to see him within a few hours, immediately if its an emergency. And the question about who I would rather have operate on me I am not sure. People that make money by the operation would scare me a little.
Our federal government has a surplus. How about yours?
This war in Iraq will not help Canada or any other western country. All it will do is create more people in the world that wants to attack the US and the west.
And I will not thank the US for murdering 15 to 20 thousand people in Iraq.
V
vyxen
Guest
Excuse me, "NT", but if I wanted to see a doctor I could easily see one in 15 minutes. But you wouldn't know that, seeing as it seems you've bought into insurance company propaganda and you don't even live in this country. But arrogant, right-wing Americans think they know more about living here than Canadians do. So this does not surprise me.
There ARE waiting lists for non-emergency surgeries, but that is to free up resources for those who require emergency surgery, which there is NO waiting list for. Regardless of what your insurance companies may spoon feed you, if someone has a clogged artery and needs surgery immediately, they aren't going to wait and die on some waiting list.
Considering that our health care is so "crummy", isn't it ironic that Canada has a lower infant mortality rate and a higher life expectancy than the US does?
Well, this country must be in the dumps, because we spend more on teachers' salaries than we do on a military machine. Is living in a highly militarized nation where the average citizen cannot afford decent health care something to be proud of?
As for Canada leeching off America's defense system, are you trying to tell us that you defend our country? Especially when you cannot even defend yours against terrorism? The reason why Canada hasn't been attacked, is because there ARE no hostile nations against us. Well, maybe Afghanistan, but that leads back to the U.S.
There ARE waiting lists for non-emergency surgeries, but that is to free up resources for those who require emergency surgery, which there is NO waiting list for. Regardless of what your insurance companies may spoon feed you, if someone has a clogged artery and needs surgery immediately, they aren't going to wait and die on some waiting list.
Considering that our health care is so "crummy", isn't it ironic that Canada has a lower infant mortality rate and a higher life expectancy than the US does?
Well, this country must be in the dumps, because we spend more on teachers' salaries than we do on a military machine. Is living in a highly militarized nation where the average citizen cannot afford decent health care something to be proud of?
As for Canada leeching off America's defense system, are you trying to tell us that you defend our country? Especially when you cannot even defend yours against terrorism? The reason why Canada hasn't been attacked, is because there ARE no hostile nations against us. Well, maybe Afghanistan, but that leads back to the U.S.
Creek
Member
Stop whining!!...Without U.S. protection..you'd have to depend on France..!!
- Thread starter
- #6
Oh, a thousand pardons. You see, since I'm an American, I'm forced to rely on reading articles about the Canadian Health Care System since I really have no desire to move there to check it out first hand.
BTW - Even the poor in America get a free ride with MediCare. We're not completely callous, you know.
Here is just one of many, are you saying this guy is wrong?
Code Blue: Reviving Canada's Health Care System
David Gratzer, MD
(236 pp., $19.95, ECW Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, available only in Canada at http://www.chapters.ca.)
Long the shining beacon for the American Left, the grand example of successful socialism on North American soil, the Canadian health care system is falling apart, or so says David Gratzer in Code Blue: Revising Canada's Health Care System.
Dr. Gratzer is a journalist and recent graduate of the University of Manitoba's medical school. Canada's system, known as "Medicare," is run by provincial governments and paid for by a combination of provincial and national funds. Co-payments are not allowed, nor are people allowed to go outside the system and pay for services directly (unless one leaves the country). The system is plagued, Gratzer writes, by long waiting lists of sick patients, overcrowded hospitals, second-rate equipment, and a stream of doctors, nurses and patients fleeing to the United States. He documents these woes not only with a host of health care horror stories from Canadian newspapers, but with a long list of studies, both official and private.
Gratzer says, "Waiting lists are the biggest concern that Canadians have with their health care system. The lists are not a medical but an economic problem. Because patients have no incentive to think twice about using health care services, policy makers are forced to find ways to ration health care."
Gratzer agrees that the Canadian system is less costly than the American one, but says the difference is overstated in a number of ways. Total American spending is inflated, and Canadian spending lowered, by the Canadians who cross the border to receive services in the States. He also points out that raw comparisons don't account for differences in spending on research, or differences in demographics or accounting procedures. He notes that, "Canada's entire research budget is smaller than the R&D budget of the University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center."
Even after adjusting for these differences, Canadian medicine may still be cheaper, but you fail to get what you fail to pay for --- in this case, modern equipment, adequate facilities, and motivated physicians.
Gratzer's most withering analysis is aimed at Canada's "gutless" political establishment that relies on bromides and clichés in place of serious efforts to address the problems in Canadian medicine: "The badly needed national debate isn't taking place. There is only the sound of silence as partisans of every political stripe advocate the intellectually vacant position of maintaining the status quo in an ideal system that doesn't really exist."
He maintains that the early success of medicare --- back when the population was young and costs were low --- became hard-wired in the Canadian psyche as a source of national pride. Now that the system is failing, no political leader wants to be the first to tell the truth. As with "The Emperor's New Clothes," denial reigns supreme.
Gratzer doesn't stop at documenting the problems in Canadian medicine, nor at laying the responsibility at a political class that prefers to look the other way. He also examines possible solutions and their consequences, including simply spending more money, applying user fees, or creating a parallel privatized system to supplement the public program. Any of these reforms would be an improvement, he says, but "the most important step toward renewing health care in [Canada] is to accept that medicare is fundamentally flawed." He notes that medicare currently "consumes 21 cents of every dollar earned by working Canadians," and the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Services projects a tax rate of 94.5 percent will be needed to support the program in 2040 without fundamental reform.
Instead, Dr. Gratzer would like to see patients making their own decisions about how to best spend their health care resources, whether those resources come through the government, from employers, or directly out-of-pocket. And the best way to do this, he proposes, is through a national system of medical savings accounts (MSAs), combined with high-deductible indemnity insurance plans. He examines several alternative MSA designs, including the possibility of government-provided high deductible insurance and taxpayer funded "allowances" for MSA deposits. He prefers self-funded MSAs using tax-free deposits. He argues that the poor and persons with "special needs" could be granted extra assistance.
He concludes that "medical savings accounts aren't a miracle solution. But an MSA system has the potential to address many of the problems with the present health care system in Canada." They could fix the problems of waiting lists, second-rate equipment and fleeing physicians, while maintaining accessibility and timeliness of care.
Greg Scandlen
Frederick, MD
Mr. Scandlen is a senior fellow in health policy at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas, Texas. His e-mail is [email protected].
Originally published in the Medical Sentinel 2001;6(1):35. Copyright © 2001 Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS).
BTW - Even the poor in America get a free ride with MediCare. We're not completely callous, you know.
Here is just one of many, are you saying this guy is wrong?
Code Blue: Reviving Canada's Health Care System
David Gratzer, MD
(236 pp., $19.95, ECW Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, available only in Canada at http://www.chapters.ca.)
Long the shining beacon for the American Left, the grand example of successful socialism on North American soil, the Canadian health care system is falling apart, or so says David Gratzer in Code Blue: Revising Canada's Health Care System.
Dr. Gratzer is a journalist and recent graduate of the University of Manitoba's medical school. Canada's system, known as "Medicare," is run by provincial governments and paid for by a combination of provincial and national funds. Co-payments are not allowed, nor are people allowed to go outside the system and pay for services directly (unless one leaves the country). The system is plagued, Gratzer writes, by long waiting lists of sick patients, overcrowded hospitals, second-rate equipment, and a stream of doctors, nurses and patients fleeing to the United States. He documents these woes not only with a host of health care horror stories from Canadian newspapers, but with a long list of studies, both official and private.
Gratzer says, "Waiting lists are the biggest concern that Canadians have with their health care system. The lists are not a medical but an economic problem. Because patients have no incentive to think twice about using health care services, policy makers are forced to find ways to ration health care."
Gratzer agrees that the Canadian system is less costly than the American one, but says the difference is overstated in a number of ways. Total American spending is inflated, and Canadian spending lowered, by the Canadians who cross the border to receive services in the States. He also points out that raw comparisons don't account for differences in spending on research, or differences in demographics or accounting procedures. He notes that, "Canada's entire research budget is smaller than the R&D budget of the University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center."
Even after adjusting for these differences, Canadian medicine may still be cheaper, but you fail to get what you fail to pay for --- in this case, modern equipment, adequate facilities, and motivated physicians.
Gratzer's most withering analysis is aimed at Canada's "gutless" political establishment that relies on bromides and clichés in place of serious efforts to address the problems in Canadian medicine: "The badly needed national debate isn't taking place. There is only the sound of silence as partisans of every political stripe advocate the intellectually vacant position of maintaining the status quo in an ideal system that doesn't really exist."
He maintains that the early success of medicare --- back when the population was young and costs were low --- became hard-wired in the Canadian psyche as a source of national pride. Now that the system is failing, no political leader wants to be the first to tell the truth. As with "The Emperor's New Clothes," denial reigns supreme.
Gratzer doesn't stop at documenting the problems in Canadian medicine, nor at laying the responsibility at a political class that prefers to look the other way. He also examines possible solutions and their consequences, including simply spending more money, applying user fees, or creating a parallel privatized system to supplement the public program. Any of these reforms would be an improvement, he says, but "the most important step toward renewing health care in [Canada] is to accept that medicare is fundamentally flawed." He notes that medicare currently "consumes 21 cents of every dollar earned by working Canadians," and the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Services projects a tax rate of 94.5 percent will be needed to support the program in 2040 without fundamental reform.
Instead, Dr. Gratzer would like to see patients making their own decisions about how to best spend their health care resources, whether those resources come through the government, from employers, or directly out-of-pocket. And the best way to do this, he proposes, is through a national system of medical savings accounts (MSAs), combined with high-deductible indemnity insurance plans. He examines several alternative MSA designs, including the possibility of government-provided high deductible insurance and taxpayer funded "allowances" for MSA deposits. He prefers self-funded MSAs using tax-free deposits. He argues that the poor and persons with "special needs" could be granted extra assistance.
He concludes that "medical savings accounts aren't a miracle solution. But an MSA system has the potential to address many of the problems with the present health care system in Canada." They could fix the problems of waiting lists, second-rate equipment and fleeing physicians, while maintaining accessibility and timeliness of care.
Greg Scandlen
Frederick, MD
Mr. Scandlen is a senior fellow in health policy at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas, Texas. His e-mail is [email protected].
Originally published in the Medical Sentinel 2001;6(1):35. Copyright © 2001 Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS).
V
vyxen
Guest
Originally posted by NightTrain
Oh, a thousand pardons. You see, since I'm an American, I'm forced to rely on reading articles about the Canadian Health Care System since I really have no desire to move there to check it out first hand.
BTW - Even the poor in America get a free ride with MediCare. We're not completely callous, you know.
Here is just one of many, are you saying this guy is wrong?
Maybe the original article would be nice instead of some guy in Texas merely reiterating what MIGHT be on that article? That's the only way I can judge if the original author is right or wrong.
- Thread starter
- #8
I guess I would rush out and buy the book then. It was a book review.
Nevertheless, do you dispute what he outlined?
Nevertheless, do you dispute what he outlined?
C
canadarocks
Guest
Yeah he is full of sht. He sounds like he is texan. Every system is always in need of improvement. To say that 21c out of every dollar earned goes to the government for medical coverage is an outright lie. I have no time for liars.
- Thread starter
- #10
How very curious.
I think you'd best look at who the author is. He looks like a pretty solid Canadian to me.
The review was written by a Texan, that much is clear. However, that still doesn't change what was written by a Canadian Doctor practicing in Canada, does it?
I think you'd best look at who the author is. He looks like a pretty solid Canadian to me.
The review was written by a Texan, that much is clear. However, that still doesn't change what was written by a Canadian Doctor practicing in Canada, does it?
How very curious.
I think you'd best look at who the author is. He looks like a pretty solid Canadian to me.
The review was written by a Texan, that much is clear. However, that still doesn't change what was written by a Canadian Doctor practicing in Canada, does it?
There are always malcontents in every system. That doesn't make him correct or even close to it.
It is a total myth that Canadians in large numbers go to the US for treatment. In 68 years I've personally known one person who went to Boston for an experimental lung cancer treatment, and he is quite wealthy.
If you're not rich, you're staying g home since you would have to pay for American Health care at highly inflated rates with no insurance. Few can afford it.
How very curious.
I think you'd best look at who the author is. He looks like a pretty solid Canadian to me.
The review was written by a Texan, that much is clear. However, that still doesn't change what was written by a Canadian Doctor practicing in Canada, does it?
There are always malcontents in every system. That doesn't make him correct or even close to it.
It is a total myth that Canadians in large numbers go to the US for treatment. In 68 years I've personally known one person who went to Boston for an experimental lung cancer treatment, and he is quite wealthy.
If you're not rich, you're staying g home since you would have to pay for American Health care at highly inflated rates with no insurance. Few can afford it.
Wow. You know soooo many people. Not.
Canadian Politician Comes to U.S. for Heart Surgery
The top politician in Canada's easternmost province has set off fireworks by deciding to go to the U.S. for heart surgery.Canadian Politician Comes to U.S. for Heart Surgery
Crossing the Border for Care
Frustrated by long waits, some Canadians are heading to the U.S. for medical treatment.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care
Stronach travels to U.S. for cancer treatment
Belinda Stronach went to California for some of her breast cancer treatment earlier this year.
Stronach travels to U.S. for cancer treatment | Toronto Star
More than 52,000 Canadians travelled abroad for health care last year, study finds
In 2014, 52,513 Canadians travelled beyond our borders to seek medical treatment, compared with 41,838 in 2013
More than 52,000 Canadians travelled abroad for health care last year, study finds
So far you've named two politicians who went to the US for treatment and cited a study from the Fraser Institute as reported in the National Post. Big whoop!
Let's start with the Fraser Institute - an extreme right wing think tank with a stated goal of eliminating the Canada Health Act and public education in Canada. Their methods are specious and their numbers grossly exaggerated.
The so-called Fraser Institute study involved sending out surveys to Canadian doctors only 1% of whom responded. The multiple choice question asked was "What percentage of your patients sought treatment in the USA?". There was no "zero percent" option, only "less than 2%", so from the 1% of Canadian physicians who responded "less than 2%", the Fraser extrapolated that 52,000 Canadians sought treatment in the US. Hardly accurate but when the goal is to make Canadian health care look bad, the Fraser is up for the task.
I've seen numbers from hospitals in the US which suggest that the number is fewer than 2000 per year and that most of those 2000 people were in the US on business or vacation when they took ill. I have another friend who suffered a heart attack while in the US and sought treatment but asked that he be stabilized so he could return home and be treated in Toronto.
Let's start with the Fraser Institute - an extreme right wing think tank with a stated goal of eliminating the Canada Health Act and public education in Canada. Their methods are specious and their numbers grossly exaggerated.
The so-called Fraser Institute study involved sending out surveys to Canadian doctors only 1% of whom responded. The multiple choice question asked was "What percentage of your patients sought treatment in the USA?". There was no "zero percent" option, only "less than 2%", so from the 1% of Canadian physicians who responded "less than 2%", the Fraser extrapolated that 52,000 Canadians sought treatment in the US. Hardly accurate but when the goal is to make Canadian health care look bad, the Fraser is up for the task.
I've seen numbers from hospitals in the US which suggest that the number is fewer than 2000 per year and that most of those 2000 people were in the US on business or vacation when they took ill. I have another friend who suffered a heart attack while in the US and sought treatment but asked that he be stabilized so he could return home and be treated in Toronto.
So far you've named two politicians who went to the US for treatment and cited a study from the Fraser Institute as reported in the National Post. Big whoop!
Let's start with the Fraser Institute - an extreme right wing think tank with a stated goal of eliminating the Canada Health Act and public education in Canada. Their methods are specious and their numbers grossly exaggerated.
The so-called Fraser Institute study involved sending out surveys to Canadian doctors only 1% of whom responded. The multiple choice question asked was "What percentage of your patients sought treatment in the USA?". There was no "zero percent" option, only "less than 2%", so from the 1% of Canadian physicians who responded "less than 2%", the Fraser extrapolated that 52,000 Canadians sought treatment in the US. Hardly accurate but when the goal is to make Canadian health care look bad, the Fraser is up for the task.
I've seen numbers from hospitals in the US which suggest that the number is fewer than 2000 per year and that most of those 2000 people were in the US on business or vacation when they took ill. I have another friend who suffered a heart attack while in the US and sought treatment but asked that he be stabilized so he could return home and be treated in Toronto.
And 52,000 one year, 41,000 another year, and the numbers are INCREASING. So far all you've presented is "I heard". Here in Reno we have one wing of Renown Hospital that is referred to as "the Canadian wing" due to the number of Canadians coming here for care. You are wrong, and seemingly proudly so.
Bruce_T_Laney
Platinum Member
- Banned
- #16
So far you've named two politicians who went to the US for treatment and cited a study from the Fraser Institute as reported in the National Post. Big whoop!
Let's start with the Fraser Institute - an extreme right wing think tank with a stated goal of eliminating the Canada Health Act and public education in Canada. Their methods are specious and their numbers grossly exaggerated.
The so-called Fraser Institute study involved sending out surveys to Canadian doctors only 1% of whom responded. The multiple choice question asked was "What percentage of your patients sought treatment in the USA?". There was no "zero percent" option, only "less than 2%", so from the 1% of Canadian physicians who responded "less than 2%", the Fraser extrapolated that 52,000 Canadians sought treatment in the US. Hardly accurate but when the goal is to make Canadian health care look bad, the Fraser is up for the task.
I've seen numbers from hospitals in the US which suggest that the number is fewer than 2000 per year and that most of those 2000 people were in the US on business or vacation when they took ill. I have another friend who suffered a heart attack while in the US and sought treatment but asked that he be stabilized so he could return home and be treated in Toronto.
Just through the clinic I am with they have brought in Canadian-Filipinos, so I damn well know Canadians come here.
You can pretend it is not true. You can deny it until you are blue in the face, but reality is Canadians come here for medical treatment.
Socialize Medicine will not work for a nation the Size of America with the political format it has.
So let cut the nonsense or don't and deny three times for your thirty pieces of silver...
So far you've named two politicians who went to the US for treatment and cited a study from the Fraser Institute as reported in the National Post. Big whoop!
Let's start with the Fraser Institute - an extreme right wing think tank with a stated goal of eliminating the Canada Health Act and public education in Canada. Their methods are specious and their numbers grossly exaggerated.
The so-called Fraser Institute study involved sending out surveys to Canadian doctors only 1% of whom responded. The multiple choice question asked was "What percentage of your patients sought treatment in the USA?". There was no "zero percent" option, only "less than 2%", so from the 1% of Canadian physicians who responded "less than 2%", the Fraser extrapolated that 52,000 Canadians sought treatment in the US. Hardly accurate but when the goal is to make Canadian health care look bad, the Fraser is up for the task.
I've seen numbers from hospitals in the US which suggest that the number is fewer than 2000 per year and that most of those 2000 people were in the US on business or vacation when they took ill. I have another friend who suffered a heart attack while in the US and sought treatment but asked that he be stabilized so he could return home and be treated in Toronto.
Just through the clinic I am with they have brought in Canadian-Filipinos, so I damn well know Canadians come here.
You can pretend it is not true. You can deny it until you are blue in the face, but reality is Canadians come here for medical treatment.
Socialize Medicine will not work for a nation the Size of America with the political format it has.
So let cut the nonsense or don't and deny three times for your thirty pieces of silver...
You know nothing of the kind. You believe what the lies big pharmacy and big Medicine tell you. Phillipino-Canadians generally work as nannies for low wages. Tell me how or why they're paying US prices for medical care which cost nothing out of their pockets at home.
Every American who posts quotes the Fraser Institute Report and yet Canadians know how inaccurate their guesses are. They do a handful of questionnaires and then make guesses on the basis of the responses received.
Why would I go to the United States and pay $40,000 for a knee replacement which costs me nothing here? The answer is, I wouldn't, and I couldn't afford to even if I wanted to, which I don't.
Canadians have a longer life expectancy than the US, and a better quality of life BECAUSE of our health care system. We have lower infant mortality rates, and 100% of our citizens are covered.
The US could do something similar but greed and this ridiculous idea that some undeserving soul might get something they didn't earn added to an abundance of greed, prevents it.
There are countries with larger populations that not only have single payer, their health care system is better than the US system. Your system is bankrupting your country while big insurance skims 20% off the top.
Prior to the ACA, 45,000 Americans died every year from lack of medical insurance.
So far you've named two politicians who went to the US for treatment and cited a study from the Fraser Institute as reported in the National Post. Big whoop!
Let's start with the Fraser Institute - an extreme right wing think tank with a stated goal of eliminating the Canada Health Act and public education in Canada. Their methods are specious and their numbers grossly exaggerated.
The so-called Fraser Institute study involved sending out surveys to Canadian doctors only 1% of whom responded. The multiple choice question asked was "What percentage of your patients sought treatment in the USA?". There was no "zero percent" option, only "less than 2%", so from the 1% of Canadian physicians who responded "less than 2%", the Fraser extrapolated that 52,000 Canadians sought treatment in the US. Hardly accurate but when the goal is to make Canadian health care look bad, the Fraser is up for the task.
I've seen numbers from hospitals in the US which suggest that the number is fewer than 2000 per year and that most of those 2000 people were in the US on business or vacation when they took ill. I have another friend who suffered a heart attack while in the US and sought treatment but asked that he be stabilized so he could return home and be treated in Toronto.
And 52,000 one year, 41,000 another year, and the numbers are INCREASING. So far all you've presented is "I heard". Here in Reno we have one wing of Renown Hospital that is referred to as "the Canadian wing" due to the number of Canadians coming here for care. You are wrong, and seemingly proudly so.
No, I'm not wrong:
Fact-Checking Trump: Are Canadians Swarming the Border to Get Better Healthcare?
The report I linked to, says about 15,000 patients seek treatment outside of Canada, and not necessarily the US. It also says that 750,000 Americans seek medical treatment abroad. That's 5 times the number of Canadians.
The report I linked to, says about 15,000 patients seek treatment outside of Canada, and not necessarily the US. It also says that 750,000 Americans seek medical treatment abroad. That's 5 times the number of Canadians.
Try comparing populations silly girl. And a lot of those seeking treatment elsewhere are for sex reassignment. Not exactly a life or death operation in the overall scheme of things. Your precious linked study is from 2002! How about you come up with something a little more current mmmmkay....
Similar threads
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 127
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 117
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 245
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 1K
- Views
- 14K
- Replies
- 173
- Views
- 849
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8037
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 468
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-