Myth busting Canadian healthcare

Chris

Gold Member
May 30, 2008
23,154
1,967
205
1. Canada's health care system is "socialized medicine."
False. In socialized medical systems, the doctors work directly for the state. In Canada (and many other countries with universal care), doctors run their own private practices, just like they do in the US. The only difference is that every doctor deals with one insurer, instead of 150. And that insurer is the provincial government, which is accountable to the legislature and the voters if the quality of coverage is allowed to slide.

The proper term for this is "single-payer insurance." In talking to Americans about it, the better phrase is "Medicare for all."

2. Doctors are hurt financially by single-payer health care.
True and False. Doctors in Canada do make less than their US counterparts. But they also have lower overhead, and usually much better working conditions. A few reasons for this:

First, as noted, they don't have to charge higher fees to cover the salary of a full-time staffer to deal with over a hundred different insurers, all of whom are bent on denying care whenever possible. In fact, most Canadian doctors get by quite nicely with just one assistant, who cheerfully handles the phones, mail, scheduling, patient reception, stocking, filing, and billing all by herself in the course of a standard workday.

Second, they don't have to spend several hours every day on the phone cajoling insurance company bean counters into doing the right thing by their patients. My doctor in California worked a 70-hour week: 35 hours seeing patients, and another 35 hours on the phone arguing with insurance companies. My Canadian doctor, on the other hand, works a 35-hour week, period. She files her invoices online, and the vast majority are simply paid -- quietly, quickly, and without hassle. There is no runaround. There are no fights. Appointments aren't interrupted by vexing phone calls. Care is seldom denied (because everybody knows the rules). She gets her checks on time, sees her patients on schedule, takes Thursdays off, and gets home in time for dinner.

One unsurprising side effect of all this is that the doctors I see here are, to a person, more focused, more relaxed, more generous with their time, more up-to-date in their specialties, and overall much less distracted from the real work of doctoring. You don't realize how much stress the American doctor-insurer fights put on the day-to-day quality of care until you see doctors who don't operate under that stress, because they never have to fight those battles at all. Amazingly: they seem to enjoy their jobs.

Third: The average American medical student graduates $140,000 in hock. The average Canadian doctor's debt is roughly half that.

Finally, Canadian doctors pay lower malpractice insurance fees. When paying for health care constitutes a one of a family's major expenses, expectations tend to run very high. A doctor's mistake not only damages the body; it may very well throw a middle-class family permanently into the ranks of the working poor, and render the victim uninsurable for life. With so much at stake, it's no wonder people are quick to rush to court for redress.

Canadians are far less likely to sue in the first place, since they're not having to absorb devastating financial losses in addition to any physical losses when something goes awry. The cost of the damaging treatment will be covered. So will the cost of fixing it. And, no matter what happens, the victim will remain insured for life. When lawsuits do occur, the awards don't have to include coverage for future medical costs, which reduces the insurance company's liability.

3. Wait times in Canada are horrendous.
True and False again -- it depends on which province you live in, and what's wrong with you. Canada's health care system runs on federal guidelines that ensure uniform standards of care, but each territory and province administers its own program. Some provinces don't plan their facilities well enough; in those, you can have waits. Some do better. As a general rule, the farther north you live, the harder it is to get to care, simply because the doctors and hospitals are concentrated in the south. But that's just as true in any rural county in the U.S.

You can hear the bitching about it no matter where you live, though. The percentage of Canadians who'd consider giving up their beloved system consistently languishes in the single digits. A few years ago, a TV show asked Canadians to name the Greatest Canadian in history; and in a broad national consensus, they gave the honor to Tommy Douglas, the Saskatchewan premier who is considered the father of the country's health care system. (And no, it had nothing to do with the fact that he was also Kiefer Sutherland's grandfather.). In spite of that, though, grousing about health care is still unofficially Canada's third national sport after curling and hockey.

Mythbusting Canadian Health Care -- Part I | OurFuture.org
 
So you just believe it to be false but not sure what part I guess.
Nice projection job btw.
they take false positions AKA straw-man arguments and then answer them'

Just as the view from the anti single payer systems does.
One must view both and sort of average them out.

We have so much slanted information and outright lies out there it is difficult to find the truth.
Which I believe is a goal of many.
Makes it easy to just diss real facts as from a left/right wing source and therefore incorrect.
 
So you just believe it to be false but not sure what part I guess.
Nice projection job btw.
they take false positions AKA straw-man arguments and then answer them'

Just as the view from the anti single payer systems does.
One must view both and sort of average them out.

We have so much slanted information and outright lies out there it is difficult to find the truth.
Which I believe is a goal of many.
Makes it easy to just diss real facts as from a left/right wing source and therefore incorrect.
which is why i pointed out the slanted source in my first post ;)
i would not give you a WND or Newsmax page as a source as it would be dismissed as a slanted source
 
Why do you think the rhetoric about the liberal media was ever started? And why do many want to do away with PBS?

It is so that when the "liberal media" does expose some political/govt corruption they can just be dissed as being that damned liberal media.

The liberal media used to serve a purpose as a watchdog on our govt. Now our media is becoming more and more of a tool of our govt.
 
Last edited:
Why do you think the rhetoric about the liberal media was ever started? And why do many want to do away with PBS?

It is so that when the "liberal media" does expose some political/govt corruption they can just be dissed as being that damned liberal media.

The liberal media used to serve a purpose as a watchdog on our govt. Now our media is becoming more and more of a tool of our govt.
who wants to "do away with PBS"?
what i see is a desire to end federal funding of it
and they say they dont get much so whats the problem
 
So Is the OP wrong/incorrect? or just from a liberal source?
i read through some of it, and yes, it is wrong

Funny how you're so sure that "it is wrong" yet you don't even understand how the tax system works in the country you live in, yet somehow you have a strong grasp on how the healthcare system in a foreign country operates. :cool:
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top