Universal Health Care

[Cecilie1200]

Heak=lth care does serve the nation as a whole... would you stop socialized police, fire, schooling, etc?

I suppose you would since that is 'interference', no?


Look how many Canadians want to switch to the US model... or Brits, French...etc

This is like saying that it "benefits the nation" for everyone to eat, and therefore food distribution should be socialized, rather than a private, individual concern.

 

[Andrew2382]

TheStar.com | Canada | More private health care urged

MONTREAL–The architect of Quebec's now-overburdened public health-care system is proposing a strong and controversial remedy that includes further privatization and user fees of up to $100 for people to see their family doctor.

In a 338-page report, former provincial Liberal health minister Claude Castonguay concluded that Quebec can no longer sustain the annual growth in health-care costs. The province currently spends about $24 billion annually on health care, or about 40 per cent of its budget.

"If nothing is done, at one point we will reach a crisis point ... this is why we say it is urgent to act," Castonguay said. "There's no miracle solution, there is no simple solution."

Castonguay told a news conference in Quebec City that his report is consistent with the guiding principles of publicly funded, universal health care.

However, it makes a raft of bold recommendations, including:

A new tax, including a "health-care deductible" based on income and the number of visits made to a doctor's office or hospital in a calendar year. Low-income families and children would be exempt.

Encouraging private-sector involvement in the management of hospitals and medical clinics.

Lifting a ban that prevents doctors from practising both in the public system and privately.

Raising the provincial sales tax by up to one percentage point.

In the report, provocatively titled "Getting Our Money's Worth," the working group headed by Castonguay also recommends an overhaul of the Canada Health Act, which "sooner or later must be adapted to today's realities."

Though Castonguay said his recommendations don't violate the health act, the report says that "the Canada Health Act is inspired by a centralizing vision of federalism that no longer has its place."

Castonguay was hired by the provincial government last year to consider reforms to Quebec's wheezing health system.

The opposition Action démocratique and Parti Québécois were each asked to nominate a co-commissioner and PQ representative Michel Venne penned a dissenting report.

Though Premier Jean Charest didn't offer any immediate reaction, Health Minister Philippe Couillard wasted no time.

Couillard said it would be "absurd to reject the concept" of blending more private services into the medicare system, but quickly added that the province's doctor shortage makes it impractical to lift the ban on "double-dipping" in both the private and public realms.

He was also lukewarm to the idea of allowing for more private insurance than what Quebec is already planning to do as part of pilot projects for joint replacement surgeries launched as a result of a 2006 Supreme Court decision.

If anything, the report could cause political headaches at the federal rather than the provincial level.

The Quebec Liberals won't likely have a hard time adopting many of its recommendations in the minority National Assembly. While the Parti Québécois fiercely opposed the report, the Action démocratique enthusiastically supports everything except raising the provincial sales tax.

But it's an open question as to how Ottawa would react if Quebec decided to begin challenging the Canada Health Act.

LOOKS LIKE CANADA IS DOING GREAT

 

[michiganFats]

Actually, there is quite a bit of government involvement in the production and distribution of food. The government does influence how much of which types of food are produced, and when. They set quality standards. Food is delivered via transportation networks that were built and are maintained almost exclusively with public money. Low income families receive government help purchasing food items that are deemed necessary for a healthy diet. The only thing the government doesn't do is send an agent to your house to go shopping with you(if you are poor).But, give Obama time, after all he only took office this week.

 

[Chris]

TheStar.com | Canada | More private health care urged

MONTREAL–The architect of Quebec's now-overburdened public health-care system is proposing a strong and controversial remedy that includes further privatization and user fees of up to $100 for people to see their family doctor.

In a 338-page report, former provincial Liberal health minister Claude Castonguay concluded that Quebec can no longer sustain the annual growth in health-care costs. The province currently spends about $24 billion annually on health care, or about 40 per cent of its budget.

"If nothing is done, at one point we will reach a crisis point ... this is why we say it is urgent to act," Castonguay said. "There's no miracle solution, there is no simple solution."

Castonguay told a news conference in Quebec City that his report is consistent with the guiding principles of publicly funded, universal health care.

However, it makes a raft of bold recommendations, including:

A new tax, including a "health-care deductible" based on income and the number of visits made to a doctor's office or hospital in a calendar year. Low-income families and children would be exempt.

Encouraging private-sector involvement in the management of hospitals and medical clinics.

Lifting a ban that prevents doctors from practising both in the public system and privately.

Raising the provincial sales tax by up to one percentage point.

In the report, provocatively titled "Getting Our Money's Worth," the working group headed by Castonguay also recommends an overhaul of the Canada Health Act, which "sooner or later must be adapted to today's realities."

Though Castonguay said his recommendations don't violate the health act, the report says that "the Canada Health Act is inspired by a centralizing vision of federalism that no longer has its place."

Castonguay was hired by the provincial government last year to consider reforms to Quebec's wheezing health system.

The opposition Action démocratique and Parti Québécois were each asked to nominate a co-commissioner and PQ representative Michel Venne penned a dissenting report.

Though Premier Jean Charest didn't offer any immediate reaction, Health Minister Philippe Couillard wasted no time.

Couillard said it would be "absurd to reject the concept" of blending more private services into the medicare system, but quickly added that the province's doctor shortage makes it impractical to lift the ban on "double-dipping" in both the private and public realms.

He was also lukewarm to the idea of allowing for more private insurance than what Quebec is already planning to do as part of pilot projects for joint replacement surgeries launched as a result of a 2006 Supreme Court decision.

If anything, the report could cause political headaches at the federal rather than the provincial level.

The Quebec Liberals won't likely have a hard time adopting many of its recommendations in the minority National Assembly. While the Parti Québécois fiercely opposed the report, the Action démocratique enthusiastically supports everything except raising the provincial sales tax.

But it's an open question as to how Ottawa would react if Quebec decided to begin challenging the Canada Health Act.

LOOKS LIKE CANADA IS DOING GREAT

Actually they are doing great. Their system costs much less than ours per capita, and they cover everyone.

They have problems, and they are addressing them. We have problems, and we aren't addessing them.

 

[Andrew2382]

lol yes they are addressing htem...by having to turn over to more private practices you idiot. They have a population of 30 million and not even close to the illiegal problem we have, and they are having problems adffording it and with time care....we have a population of over 300 million with illegal immigrants all over...but hell it will work for us.

Please go walk into on coming traffic

 

[Cecilie1200]

Actually, there is quite a bit of government involvement in the production and distribution of food. The government does influence how much of which types of food are produced, and when. They set quality standards. Food is delivered via transportation networks that were built and are maintained almost exclusively with public money. Low income families receive government help purchasing food items that are deemed necessary for a healthy diet. The only thing the government doesn't do is send an agent to your house to go shopping with you(if you are poor).But, give Obama time, after all he only took office this week.

"Is" and "should be" ain't the same thing. And while insuring food safety is a legitimate government concern in my book, feeding people isn't.

 

[Chris]

lol yes they are addressing htem...by having to turn over to more private practices you idiot. They have a population of 30 million and not even close to the illiegal problem we have, and they are having problems adffording it and with time care....we have a population of over 300 million with illegal immigrants all over...but hell it will work for us.

Please go walk into on coming traffic

Insulting people on a message board because they disagree with you is kind of pathetic really.

The Canadians allocate less money per capita for healthcare than we do, and they cover everyone. Now they need to kick a little more money into the system in some way. Not too suprising. The single payer system is still cheaper, better, and more fair than our system. That's why every Western democracy in the world uses it except for us.

 

[Andrew2382]

I insult you because I think it would be interesting to see you get hit by a bus and then go to Canada and get treatment.

What are their theories of fixing their system...by allowing more private practice in!

God you are dense

 

[Chris]

I insult you because I think it would be interesting to see you get hit by a bus and then go to Canada and get treatment.

What are their theories of fixing their system...by allowing more private practice in!

God you are dense

Allowing more private practices does not mean that they are abandoning their single payer system. The best system is one where the government acts as the insurance company, and the hospitals and doctor's practices are privately owned.

 

[t_samford]

Allowing more private practices does not mean that they are abandoning their single payer system. The best system is one where the government acts as the insurance company, and the hospitals and doctor's practices are privately owned.

Lets just face it universal healthcare is just one more way of taking the incentive away from todays youth.

 

[Andrew2382]

Allowing more private practices does not mean that they are abandoning their single payer system. The best system is one where the government acts as the insurance company, and the hospitals and doctor's practices are privately owned.

Please tell me how the goverment is going to act as the insurance company for 300 million people in one of the most obese country in the world, which also ecompasses the best but most expensive treatment you can find.

 

[Bern80]

Insulting people on a message board because they disagree with you is kind of pathetic really.

The Canadians allocate less money per capita for healthcare than we do, and they cover everyone. Now they need to kick a little more money into the system in some way. Not too suprising. The single payer system is still cheaper, better, and more fair than our system. That's why every Western democracy in the world uses it except for us.

The concept you have yet to grasp Chris that Canada and other countries that have single payer systems is that cheaper health care does not equal better health care.

I know you lefties like to think you have lots of unique ideas, but really every leftists solution to a problem is one of two things: 1)throw money at it or 2)or let government take care of it.

The vast majority of Americans do have affordable healthcare coverage. Does 14 million uninsured really mean government needs to be the answer to the problem? There can certainly be a government role in the solution perhaps by facilitating conversations between parties in an effort to come up with ways to improve the cost issue related to our system.

As I said before your 'everyone else does it' argument is weak because everyone else is not the U.S. Many of us don't like the idea of government involvement in health care not because we're greedy are like people to suffer but because we believe it will be an inferior system to what we have now. Given OUR governments track record on efficiency and effectiveness of tax payer dollars I think many of our right in being less than enthusiastic about government having much to do with our health

 

[Chris]

Please tell me how the goverment is going to act as the insurance company for 300 million people in one of the most obese country in the world, which also ecompasses the best but most expensive treatment you can find.

We have 150 insurance companies plus the government acting in that capacity. The inefficiency in that system is one of the reasons our healthcare costs almost twice as much per capita as ever other Western democracy.

And don't kid yourself that we don't already have universal healthcare. We do. Just a really, really, bad version of it.

 

[p kirkes]

The population of the USA over 65 is now around 13% and rising.

The costs for assisted living or nursing home is so much that many older folks are electing to spend their later years in other countries.

The cost of assisted living in Mexico is 1/3 that of the US and that's with all the amenities, safe and beautiful facilities deep the heart of Mexico.

A major industry is sprouting up in Mexico to support the influx of Norte Americano's. However, in less than ten years the Mexican government will begin to regulate this new industry so that the cost differential will not be as much.

Then where will I go. I was so hoping for a place in the Sun with pretty senorita's caring for my every need. Since I'm only seventy it will be another decade before I'll need personal care. Drats.

 

[t_samford]

why dont you all just shut the hell up and admit it wont work

 

[oreo]

Healthcare is a responsibility not a right.

Not when we have a system the makes this healthcare unreachable by many Americans who are working more than one job.

Our system sucks. It is the most expensive per person and yet is not anywhere near the top in quality. The lobbyist for the Managed Care companies have been very successful in making folks think that this is socialized medicine and will drive out quality and incentive. Total bullshit.

Medicare and Medicaid have worked. Universal Healthcare would be similar to those programs.

The doctors are not hired by the goverment and they won't go broke.

I worked in the healthcare system for 14 years. It's broken all to shit.

We are all witness to how our government screws up everytime they get into the private sector. Look at Fannie/Freddie & our social security system, (which will be the next one to collapse, surprise/surprise.)

As far as national health care? Yes, I would love to stop paying out that $800.00 per month medical insurance premium for my husband & I. I would love the taxpayers of this country (via the federal government) to flip that tab.

But, I am realistic at the same time. If the government is going to pay $800 per month for my husband & myself--they are going to have to pay for the other 93 million of the rest of us. It's not affordable--that's the problem & that's where we have to attack it at.

It's completely understandable why 1/2 of this nation is not covered. Group medical insurance rates in my State--are actually 40% higher than single payer rates. Henceforth, small business cannot afford to cover employees.

So a solution:

1. Put nurse practitioners in every single Walgreens, Walmart or any other places where there is a pharmacy. People with common cold & flu symptons go there for treatment, versus filling our hospital emergency rooms (at an exhorbatant cost) that they normally will not pay anyway--causing the cost of medical premiums of the insured to sky-rocket.

2. Force people to have medical insurance, like we're forced to pay for automobile liability insurance: I was struck by the state of Mass. whose govenor (Mitt Romney) discovered that over 60% of the uninsured in his state made over $75,000 per year. They just chose not to cover themselves. They found that when they forced them to pay for it, medical insurance rates to all came down to affordable. (The dirt poor where still eligible for medicade.)

There are really better solutions out there, than trusting our very inept & reckless government to run another program into the ground--then coming back to us for another bail-out.

 

[Chris]

Healthcare is a responsibility not a right.

Not when we have a system the makes this healthcare unreachable by many Americans who are working more than one job.

Our system sucks. It is the most expensive per person and yet is not anywhere near the top in quality. The lobbyist for the Managed Care companies have been very successful in making folks think that this is socialized medicine and will drive out quality and incentive. Total bullshit.

Medicare and Medicaid have worked. Universal Healthcare would be similar to those programs.

The doctors are not hired by the goverment and they won't go broke.

I worked in the healthcare system for 14 years. It's broken all to shit.

We are all witness to how our government screws up everytime they get into the private sector. Look at Fannie/Freddie & our social security system, (which will be the next one to collapse, surprise/surprise.)

As far as national health care? Yes, I would love to stop paying out that $800.00 per month medical insurance premium for my husband & I. I would love the taxpayers of this country (via the federal government) to flip that tab.

But, I am realistic at the same time. If the government is going to pay $800 per month for my husband & myself--they are going to have to pay for the other 93 million of the rest of us. It's not affordable--that's the problem & that's where we have to attack it at.

It's completely understandable why 1/2 of this nation is not covered. Group medical insurance rates in my State--are actually 40% higher than single payer rates. Henceforth, small business cannot afford to cover employees.

So a solution:

1. Put nurse practitioners in every single Walgreens, Walmart or any other places where there is a pharmacy. People with common cold & flu symptons go there for treatment, versus filling our hospital emergency rooms (at an exhorbatant cost) that they normally will not pay anyway--causing the cost of medical premiums of the insured to sky-rocket.

2. Force people to have medical insurance, like we're forced to pay for automobile liability insurance: I was struck by the state of Mass. whose govenor (Mitt Romney) discovered that over 60% of the uninsured in his state made over $75,000 per year. They just chose not to cover themselves. They found that when they forced them to pay for it, medical insurance rates to all came down to affordable. (The dirt poor where still eligible for medicade.)

There are really better solutions out there, than trusting our very inept & reckless government to run another program into the ground--then coming back to us for another bail-out.

Socialist!

 

[jodylee]

Not when we have a system the makes this healthcare unreachable by many Americans who are working more than one job.

Our system sucks. It is the most expensive per person and yet is not anywhere near the top in quality. The lobbyist for the Managed Care companies have been very successful in making folks think that this is socialized medicine and will drive out quality and incentive. Total bullshit.

Medicare and Medicaid have worked. Universal Healthcare would be similar to those programs.

The doctors are not hired by the goverment and they won't go broke.

I worked in the healthcare system for 14 years. It's broken all to shit.

We are all witness to how our government screws up everytime they get into the private sector. Look at Fannie/Freddie & our social security system, (which will be the next one to collapse, surprise/surprise.)

As far as national health care? Yes, I would love to stop paying out that $800.00 per month medical insurance premium for my husband & I. I would love the taxpayers of this country (via the federal government) to flip that tab.

But, I am realistic at the same time. If the government is going to pay $800 per month for my husband & myself--they are going to have to pay for the other 93 million of the rest of us. It's not affordable--that's the problem & that's where we have to attack it at.

It's completely understandable why 1/2 of this nation is not covered. Group medical insurance rates in my State--are actually 40% higher than single payer rates. Henceforth, small business cannot afford to cover employees.

So a solution:

1. Put nurse practitioners in every single Walgreens, Walmart or any other places where there is a pharmacy. People with common cold & flu symptons go there for treatment, versus filling our hospital emergency rooms (at an exhorbatant cost) that they normally will not pay anyway--causing the cost of medical premiums of the insured to sky-rocket.

2. Force people to have medical insurance, like we're forced to pay for automobile liability insurance: I was struck by the state of Mass. whose govenor (Mitt Romney) discovered that over 60% of the uninsured in his state made over $75,000 per year. They just chose not to cover themselves. They found that when they forced them to pay for it, medical insurance rates to all came down to affordable. (The dirt poor where still eligible for medicade.)

There are really better solutions out there, than trusting our very inept & reckless government to run another program into the ground--then coming back to us for another bail-out.

Socialist!

you can keep on thinking the rest of the world is mad for having free health care, it dosn't bother me cause I get free heath care and I have no worries.
I suppose you think like this bacause:
1. your government is in the pockets of the heath insurance lobbyists.
2.The media is in the pockets of the politicians and corporations.
2. you the people, are in the pockets of the media.

and you've been told that to nationalise heath care is socialisum, well what about other funamental services, the police, shall we privatise that, no! oh your all socialist then.
the fire service, no! socialist
government its self, no! SOCIALIST.
Do yourselves a favour and demand free health care. you buch of spaz mongs.

 

[cunclusion]

Truth is this you can either find a way to get everyone insured or we just keep going down this spiral or increasing cost. Some people cannot afford basic care much less the more expensive. Now its easy for people who have the money to pay for good health insurance saying their is no need for universal health insurance but they need to find a area in between. The costs keep going up because people cant pay back so the hospital has to take the loss. So to cover some of the lose they raise costs just a spriral that keeps going up.

 

[Chris]

We are all witness to how our government screws up everytime they get into the private sector. Look at Fannie/Freddie & our social security system, (which will be the next one to collapse, surprise/surprise.)

As far as national health care? Yes, I would love to stop paying out that $800.00 per month medical insurance premium for my husband & I. I would love the taxpayers of this country (via the federal government) to flip that tab.

But, I am realistic at the same time. If the government is going to pay $800 per month for my husband & myself--they are going to have to pay for the other 93 million of the rest of us. It's not affordable--that's the problem & that's where we have to attack it at.

It's completely understandable why 1/2 of this nation is not covered. Group medical insurance rates in my State--are actually 40% higher than single payer rates. Henceforth, small business cannot afford to cover employees.

So a solution:

1. Put nurse practitioners in every single Walgreens, Walmart or any other places where there is a pharmacy. People with common cold & flu symptons go there for treatment, versus filling our hospital emergency rooms (at an exhorbatant cost) that they normally will not pay anyway--causing the cost of medical premiums of the insured to sky-rocket.

2. Force people to have medical insurance, like we're forced to pay for automobile liability insurance: I was struck by the state of Mass. whose govenor (Mitt Romney) discovered that over 60% of the uninsured in his state made over $75,000 per year. They just chose not to cover themselves. They found that when they forced them to pay for it, medical insurance rates to all came down to affordable. (The dirt poor where still eligible for medicade.)

There are really better solutions out there, than trusting our very inept & reckless government to run another program into the ground--then coming back to us for another bail-out.

Socialist!

you can keep on thinking the rest of the world is mad for having free health care, it dosn't bother me cause I get free heath care and I have no worries.
I suppose you think like this bacause:
1. your government is in the pockets of the heath insurance lobbyists.
2.The media is in the pockets of the politicians and corporations.
2. you the people, are in the pockets of the media.

and you've been told that to nationalise heath care is socialisum, well what about other funamental services, the police, shall we privatise that, no! oh your all socialist then.
the fire service, no! socialist
government its self, no! SOCIALIST.
Do yourselves a favour and demand free health care. you buch of spaz mongs.

Jodylee, my post was a joke, not serious.