Why would any AMERICAN who understands the FAILURE of SOCIALISM be for HC reform?

[Anonymous]

So you are clearly against The Second Amendment, anything else you feel needs updating? Perhaps you are also against free-speech.... I mean this Constituton thing is old, it has no relevance in today's society. Really, only the greatest political philosophers of all-time wrote it... what they hell do they know compared to the great minds of today like Michael Moore and Al Gore. So now that we have rid ourselves of The Constitution, now what? Where do you suggest that we draw the line.... Maybe there is no line, lets just throw-out over 200 years of logic and reason for the whims of today's society. Lets just make up shit as we go along.... Wow, this is fun.... I have become a blissfully stupid liberal without a care in the world. Big government will take care of my every need now without any restraints..... THIS IS SO GREAT!!! Now do you understand WHAT A BIG MORON YOU ARE??? Probably NOT because you're a MORON.

After reading your several lame, unsupportable arguments, yeah, I would like to see your free speech curtailed. Go educate yourself before making one more response.

 

[Anonymous]

Here we go again..... some Moron acts like we are in favor of eliminating ALL Government. The role of government is determined, in no uncertain terms, by The Constitution. So while I am ALL-FOR paying for LEGITIMATE FUNCTIONS of Government, I whole-heartedly OPPOSE government that steps OUTSIDE of its bounds. CLEARLY Healthcare Reform and the individual mandate is an ILLEGITIMATE use of government.
Nothing is MORE INEFFICIENT than government.... profit-motive is what keeps business EFFICIENT. During this economic down-turn, businesses have either become more lean and efficient or have gone out of business. Government on the other hand GROWS and becomes even MORE INEFFICIENT. Government grows independent of the economy. It has no motive to become efficient. Government should follow the lead of the private market and become lean and efficient. Government has created a $15 trillion debt and it can't find a single program to cut or reduce...... PATHETIC.

News flash. You got it wrong and this is exactly why HC reform would work. Government is not in the business of making a profit. Got it?

 

[Anonymous]

News flash. You got it wrong and this is exactly why HC reform would work. Government is not in the business of making a profit. Got it?

Government is not in the business of being efficient either. No where in The Constitution is government supposed to be involved with healthcare. If you claim that government has no profit-motive, I wonder what it is exactly that you think motivates government? I can't wait for this answer.

 

[Anonymous]

After reading your several lame, unsupportable arguments, yeah, I would like to see your free speech curtailed. Go educate yourself before making one more response.

be more specific my liberal drone.... what is not supportable?

 

[Anonymous]

This is an easy one. Healthcare. Every single other industrialized country has some form of government run universal healthcare system, and every single other industrialized country has better outcomes than the US and does it much more cheaply - often at half the cost. I think that is the very definition of efficient.

And before you spout the standard line about how horrible the health care is in x country, note that in EVERY SINGLE INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY there is no interest in the population to revert to a US style system. No interest at all. If you talk to people who are from Europe, or Canada that now live in the US, they universally will tell you that the US system sucks compared to where they are from.

Yeah.... those countries are so efficient, they are BROKE. Name a couuntry with government-run healthcare and I will name a country with the biggest debt in the world.... how's that for efficiency?

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah.... those countries are so efficient, they are BROKE. Name a couuntry with government-run healthcare and I will name a country with the biggest debt in the world.... how's that for efficiency?

Well, Canada's federal debt to Gdp ratio is 33%, the lowest in G8. It was one of the last countries to enter the recession, and one of the first to exit it. Its unemployment is also now down to 7.2%. Of course, their system isn't gov't run, but the insurance is gov't financed. Australia also has a very good fiscal policy.

To blame healthcare spending on 'some' countries debt is factually wrong and foolish.

 

[Anonymous]

Well, Canada's federal debt to Gdp ratio is 33%, the lowest in G8. It was one of the last countries to enter the recession, and one of the first to exit it. Its unemployment is also now down to 7.2%. Of course, their system isn't gov't run, but the insurance is gov't financed. Australia also has a very good fiscal policy.

To blame healthcare spending on 'some' countries debt is factually wrong and foolish.

Most sources place Canada's debt much higher than 30%. Government-run healthcare can account for much of a country's debt, that is unless that country decides to actually pay for it with tax money. Canada apparently does a better job of paying for government programs than does the U.S., they also do a good job of raising taxes.... that is taking money from one group of people and giving it to another. As a result, if you look at Canada prices or the general cost of living across almost any consumer index, it costs more to live in Canada. So one way or another, you will pay for your healthcare. There are no Free-Rides my liberal friend.

And as far as unemployment..... you're right again, Canada has begun to embrace more economic freedom, much the way the U.S. used to do. They have lower corporate tax rates and as a result, job growth has followed. I guess that's what conservative leadership will get you. God bless ya Stephen Joseph Harper.... maybe you can teach Barry a thing or two.

 

[Anonymous]

Most sources place Canada's debt much higher than 30%. Government-run healthcare can account for much of a country's debt, that is unless that country decides to actually pay for it with tax money. Canada apparently does a better job of paying for government programs than does the U.S., they also do a good job of raising taxes.... that is taking money from one group of people and giving it to another. As a result, if you look at Canada prices or the general cost of living across almost any consumer index, it costs more to live in Canada. So one way or another, you will pay for your healthcare. There are no Free-Rides my liberal friend.

And as far as unemployment..... you're right again, Canada has begun to embrace more economic freedom, much the way the U.S. used to do. They have lower corporate tax rates and as a result, job growth has followed. I guess that's what conservative leadership will get you. God bless ya Stephen Joseph Harper.... maybe you can teach Barry a thing or two.

If you are looking at the total debt including the provinces, then yes, it is higher. When measured by Federal debt, its 33%. And no, much of the countries debt is NOT from healthcare. Up until 2008, Canada was running nearly a decade of budget surpluses, while paying down its debt. Even after increased spending, and going back into deficit the last 3 years, it is still only a 33% federally. With the deficit being eliminated by 2015/16. And who said it was free? Us Canadians know we pay through out taxes. And we also know we will never be denied treatment due to cost, we will never lose our coverage for life, and ever have to worry about going into personal debt just because we became ill. We pay more for goods because the corporations get away with charging more to us Canadians. It has nothing to do with our healthcare. It a free market for goods here, and they are charging more here.

Btw, I voted for Harper!

 

[Anonymous]

If you are looking at the total debt including the provinces, then yes, it is higher. When measured by Federal debt, its 33%. And no, much of the countries debt is NOT from healthcare. Up until 2008, Canada was running nearly a decade of budget surpluses, while paying down its debt. Even after increased spending, and going back into deficit the last 3 years, it is still only a 33% federally. With the deficit being eliminated by 2015/16. And who said it was free? Us Canadians know we pay through out taxes. And we also know we will never be denied treatment due to cost, we will never lose our coverage for life, and ever have to worry about going into personal debt just because we became ill. We pay more for goods because the corporations get away with charging more to us Canadians. It has nothing to do with our healthcare. It a free market for goods here, and they are charging more here.

Btw, I voted for Harper!

While I agree with much that you have said, I don't believe it is completely honest to say that you will never be denied medical treatment in Canada. There are plenty of stories about Canadians coming to America to get medical treatment because while 100% of you canucks have coverage, less than 100% get treatment. Canadians obviously value the myth of medical coverage more than they value the principles of individual rights and personal freedom. BTW, according to the IMF, in 2010, Canada was at 77% debt-to-GDP.

 

[Anonymous]

While I agree with much that you have said, I don't believe it is completely honest to say that you will never be denied medical treatment in Canada. There are plenty of stories about Canadians coming to America to get medical treatment because while 100% of you canucks have coverage, less than 100% get treatment. Canadians obviously value the myth of medical coverage more than they value the principles of individual rights and personal freedom. BTW, according to the IMF, in 2010, Canada was at 77% debt-to-GDP.

Its a myth that many Canadians go south for care. Read the study Phantoms in the Snow, which concludes that Canadians going south for care is like a tip with no iceberg. And its not that for the few that do go south are denied care here, its more they don't want to wait a few months for that knee operation, and have the means to pay for it to get it a little faster. But make no mistake, we will ALL get that operation, regardless of ability to pay. 99.8% of us, get our care here. In addtion, it was estimated that 1.2 Million Americans went abroad for care they couldn't afford at home in 2010.

So what 'individual rights and personal freedoms' don't we have in our system? The freedom to pay through our ass to get care? The freedom of not being able to afford care?

And the IMF Includes provincial debt. Federally, we are $582 Billion in debt, with a total Federal GDP of $1.76 Trillion. That is 33% of Federal Debt to GDP ratio. The U.S. has about the same in Federal debt as it does in total GDP output dollars. Not including State debt.

 

[Anonymous]

Its a myth that many Canadians go south for care. Read the study Phantoms in the Snow, which concludes that Canadians going south for care is like a tip with no iceberg. And its not that for the few that do go south are denied care here, its more they don't want to wait a few months for that knee operation, and have the means to pay for it to get it a little faster. But make no mistake, we will ALL get that operation, regardless of ability to pay. 99.8% of us, get our care here. In addtion, it was estimated that 1.2 Million Americans went abroad for care they couldn't afford at home in 2010.

So what 'individual rights and personal freedoms' don't we have in our system? The freedom to pay through our ass to get care? The freedom of not being able to afford care?

And the IMF Includes provincial debt. Federally, we are $582 Billion in debt, with a total Federal GDP of $1.76 Trillion. That is 33% of Federal Debt to GDP ratio. The U.S. has about the same in Federal debt as it does in total GDP output dollars. Not including State debt.

First, allow me to point-out the shortcomings of this study to which the authors freely admit… “This study might have underestimated the number of Canadians seeking care in the United States, for several possible reasons.”
Second, they also openly admit to the inferior nature of health care available in Canada… “there are still the highly visible examples of Canadian provincial governments contracting with U.S. providers for specific services that are unavailable or in short supply in Canada.”
Lastly, they make a convincing case to increase the amount of contracting with the U.S. to supplement their inferior system… “As long as Canadian capacity remains tight for selected medical technologies while at the same time the United States continues to generate excess capacity, cross-border contracting appears to be a perfectly sensible approach to dealing with patient queues. It also offers a way of delaying capital investments in response to shifts in patterns of clinical practice until these have had time to establish themselves. As a purely economically motivated “make or buy” decision, it might even make sense to enter into long-term contracts for the purchase of services in the United States.”

Utilizing only your source of information, it is obvious that your argument is not as clear-cut as you might want people to believe. Clearly, Canada has many shortcomings within its mythical healthcare utopia it has created. If you want further proof, I am sure that I can find many other sources that will further dispel your delusions.

BTW…. I love RUSH.

 

[Anonymous]

First, allow me to point-out the shortcomings of this study to which the authors freely admit… “This study might have underestimated the number of Canadians seeking care in the United States, for several possible reasons.”
Second, they also openly admit to the inferior nature of health care available in Canada… “there are still the highly visible examples of Canadian provincial governments contracting with U.S. providers for specific services that are unavailable or in short supply in Canada.”
Lastly, they make a convincing case to increase the amount of contracting with the U.S. to supplement their inferior system… “As long as Canadian capacity remains tight for selected medical technologies while at the same time the United States continues to generate excess capacity, cross-border contracting appears to be a perfectly sensible approach to dealing with patient queues. It also offers a way of delaying capital investments in response to shifts in patterns of clinical practice until these have had time to establish themselves. As a purely economically motivated “make or buy” decision, it might even make sense to enter into long-term contracts for the purchase of services in the United States.”

Utilizing only your source of information, it is obvious that your argument is not as clear-cut as you might want people to believe. Clearly, Canada has many shortcomings within its mythical healthcare utopia it has created. If you want further proof, I am sure that I can find many other sources that will further dispel your delusions.

BTW…. I love RUSH.

Yes, for the very very rare case of it being 'unavailable' there are cases that are 1 in 2 million, so due to our population, we just don't have the expertise in it. SO, in these EXTREMELY rare cases we will them to some physician who specializes in these cases in the States. Of course, all travel expenses and care for the patient would be covered by the provincial system. How many U.S> insurance companies do this? We also get cases of border cities, as said in the report, that will take advantage of under used facilities in the States and contract with them instead of sending of them to the next major city that could be 4 hours away. Let's see, a 10 tunnel or bridge ride for a very rare case, or send them 4 hours up the highway?? Again, all covered. Since this study, many of those 'short comings' have been addressed and out of province payouts to U.S. institutions are at an all time low and again make up a very small blip compared to all the healthcare done within our country. But again, I find this just a tad bit hypocritical since countless Americans leave your country to go abroad to other countries, including Canada, for less expensive care they can't afford at home.

I simply pointed out that your claim of many Canadians going south for care is a myth that, unfortunately, many Americans still believe.

I also find it comical that you want to quell my delusions of our system, when I call on hospitals throughout the country and know what our healthcare system offers. Did I say it was utopia? No, but even with its small short comings, Canadians are clear that we'd take it hands down over your system.

 

[Anonymous]

Yes, for the very very rare case of it being 'unavailable' there are cases that are 1 in 2 million, so due to our population, we just don't have the expertise in it. SO, in these EXTREMELY rare cases we will them to some physician who specializes in these cases in the States. Of course, all travel expenses and care for the patient would be covered by the provincial system. How many U.S> insurance companies do this? We also get cases of border cities, as said in the report, that will take advantage of under used facilities in the States and contract with them instead of sending of them to the next major city that could be 4 hours away. Let's see, a 10 tunnel or bridge ride for a very rare case, or send them 4 hours up the highway?? Again, all covered. Since this study, many of those 'short comings' have been addressed and out of province payouts to U.S. institutions are at an all time low and again make up a very small blip compared to all the healthcare done within our country. But again, I find this just a tad bit hypocritical since countless Americans leave your country to go abroad to other countries, including Canada, for less expensive care they can't afford at home.

I simply pointed out that your claim of many Canadians going south for care is a myth that, unfortunately, many Americans still believe.

I also find it comical that you want to quell my delusions of our system, when I call on hospitals throughout the country and know what our healthcare system offers. Did I say it was utopia? No, but even with its small short comings, Canadians are clear that we'd take it hands down over your system.

Perhaps you should become familiar with The Fraser Institute and their assessment of Canadian Health Care. You may prefer your health care system, but clearly it could not exist without the U.S. being your neighbor to the South. According to the article, your health care system is so financially unsustainable it might not continue to exist as it does today anyway even with our help. Let’s face it, Canada couldn’t exist on any level as it does now without the U.S. We pretty much enable all your funny little activities up there. So you can keep your health care and just say Thank You….. and to that I say You’re Welcome.

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/news/display.aspx?id=16488

 

[Anonymous]

Perhaps you should become familiar with The Fraser Institute and their assessment of Canadian Health Care. You may prefer your health care system, but clearly it could not exist without the U.S. being your neighbor to the South. According to the article, your health care system is so financially unsustainable it might not continue to exist as it does today anyway even with our help. Let’s face it, Canada couldn’t exist on any level as it does now without the U.S. We pretty much enable all your funny little activities up there. So you can keep your health care and just say Thank You….. and to that I say You’re Welcome.

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/news/display.aspx?id=16488

The Fraser Institute?? Really? Not surprised you'd try to quote them. Saying they are biased would be an understatement. They are a right wing think tank who is VERY in favour of for profit insurance coming into Canada. Quoting them is like quoting Philip Morris that smoking is perfectly safe. Try again.

For the rest of your bullshit about Canada not existing without the States? Spare me.

I like you guys, I really do. I fucking hate your egotistical ignorance.
Thanks for coming out though.
Hope you don't lose your job and your health insurance with it.

 

[Anonymous]

The Fraser Institute?? Really? Not surprised you'd try to quote them. Saying they are biased would be an understatement. They are a right wing think tank who is VERY in favour of for profit insurance coming into Canada. Quoting them is like quoting Philip Morris that smoking is perfectly safe. Try again.

For the rest of your bullshit about Canada not existing without the States? Spare me.

I like you guys, I really do. I fucking hate your egotistical ignorance.
Thanks for coming out though.
Hope you don't lose your job and your health insurance with it.

Oh my poor little, jealous, irrelevant Canadian friend. Don’t be so sore…. We Americans love you too. I mean think about it, would we Americans completely subsidize your country’s entire security if we didn’t? But I do digress…. Anyway, back to the point, why must you resort to typical liberal tactics? Such as, when you can’t debate the facts as presented by The Fraser Institute, you attack the legitimacy of the institute itself. The Fraser Institute is a Canadian think tank. Its stated mission is "to measure, study, and communicate the impact of competitive markets and government intervention on the welfare of individuals.” That hardly seems anything like your analogy about Phillip Morris and smoking safety. Seriously, I could have easily used the same tactics when analyzing your referenced study, but why? For all I know, “Phantoms in the Snow” could have been funded by the biggest liberal drones ever, but who cares…. They disproved the legitimacy of their own study throughout the study. I thought you were better than that…. Debate facts or shutup, because what you are doing now is embarrassing.

 

[Anonymous]

Oh my poor little, jealous, irrelevant Canadian friend. Don’t be so sore…. We Americans love you too. I mean think about it, would we Americans completely subsidize your country’s entire security if we didn’t? But I do digress…. Anyway, back to the point, why must you resort to typical liberal tactics? Such as, when you can’t debate the facts as presented by The Fraser Institute, you attack the legitimacy of the institute itself. The Fraser Institute is a Canadian think tank. Its stated mission is "to measure, study, and communicate the impact of competitive markets and government intervention on the welfare of individuals.” That hardly seems anything like your analogy about Phillip Morris and smoking safety. Seriously, I could have easily used the same tactics when analyzing your referenced study, but why? For all I know, “Phantoms in the Snow” could have been funded by the biggest liberal drones ever, but who cares…. They disproved the legitimacy of their own study throughout the study. I thought you were better than that…. Debate facts or shutup, because what you are doing now is embarrassing.

Tell me my friend, name me one time you have ever come to our defense. You subsidize nothing regarding us. But thanks for more of your typical ignorance.

And I can easily debate the 'facts' with Fraser when I can link more than one counter report showing that our sytem is MORE than sustainable. Not to mention our spending on healthcare, although somewhat higher, as remained pretty stable for the past 20 years.
And I love how you give your 'opinion' that they 'disproved the legitimacy'. What a crock. Thanks for the laugh on that one.

Debate facts? What facts? That we live longer, have better access to healthcare for all, never pay a copay, never pay a deductible, never have to worry about be dropped by our insurance carrier and never go bankrupt due to a hospital bill. Those facts? Or the fact that our system costs us about 11% of our GDP and covers EVERYONE, and yours 17% and doesn't it? Those facts?

And I always love it when yahoos like you also provide the 'liberal tactic' talking point when all you have is biased bullshit info from a biased right wing think tank. Good for you. Again, I vote conservative. Why? Because as a fiscal conservative, I want a system that costs less, but serves everyone, while at the same time providing the same health outcomes. That's our system, NOT yours.

So do yourself a favour, look in the mirror on your own system that NO COUNTRY wants to copy, and spare me your hypocritical ignorance.

Speaking of shutting up. You've just been silenced.

 

[Anonymous]

Tell me my friend, name me one time you have ever come to our defense. You subsidize nothing regarding us. But thanks for more of your typical ignorance.

And I can easily debate the 'facts' with Fraser when I can link more than one counter report showing that our sytem is MORE than sustainable. Not to mention our spending on healthcare, although somewhat higher, as remained pretty stable for the past 20 years.
And I love how you give your 'opinion' that they 'disproved the legitimacy'. What a crock. Thanks for the laugh on that one.

Debate facts? What facts? That we live longer, have better access to healthcare for all, never pay a copay, never pay a deductible, never have to worry about be dropped by our insurance carrier and never go bankrupt due to a hospital bill. Those facts? Or the fact that our system costs us about 11% of our GDP and covers EVERYONE, and yours 17% and doesn't it? Those facts?

And I always love it when yahoos like you also provide the 'liberal tactic' talking point when all you have is biased bullshit info from a biased right wing think tank. Good for you. Again, I vote conservative. Why? Because as a fiscal conservative, I want a system that costs less, but serves everyone, while at the same time providing the same health outcomes. That's our system, NOT yours.

So do yourself a favour, look in the mirror on your own system that NO COUNTRY wants to copy, and spare me your hypocritical ignorance.

Speaking of shutting up. You've just been silenced.

Look man, I am sorry this has come down to a U.S. versus Canada discussion, but here we are. Personally, I think Canada has a lot of positive things it contributes to the world, but be realistic, Canada can not compare to the U.S. in anyway… unless of course you’re counting hockey.

In terms of the U.S. subsidizing Canada’s security…. Of course we have never come to your defense, we have never had to. It is a true testament of our military power and the security that it provides. Look at it this way… in terms of security, Canada is like a little kid, who nobody messes with, because he has a big brother who can kick any kid’s ass on the block.

If you have sources to refute the Fraser Institute, by all means, share them. It’s nice that you talk about them, but it is quite different to actually put them on display for all to see.

And I am sorry that your study undermines itself, but it does. It openly admits to “underestimating” the amount of people who come to the U.S. from Canada for medical purposes.

As far as debating facts regarding healthcare…. it is acknowledged by most experts that life-expectancy is a poor method for measuring the quality of a healthcare system. But since you mentioned it, Canada has an 80 year life expectancy and the U.S. is at 78. And how exactly do you have better access to healthcare? Everyone in the U.S. - including those illegally in the U.S. -- is guaranteed access to basic health care. Under a 1968 federal law, all patients seeking care in hospital emergency rooms must be given a minimum level of treatment, regardless of their ability to pay or health insurance status. The law applies to all hospitals that participate in Medicare -- which most do - and requires the hospitals to provide initial patient screening, life-saving and "stabilizing" emergency care and transfers to advanced trauma centers, if needed. Those services must be provided without asking about the patient's ability to pay. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that over the course of every year millions of Americans lose their health insurance, but only temporarily. Most people become uninsured because they lose or leave their jobs and regain insurance coverage when they return to work. In 2007, the Census Bureau reported that 253.4 million people -- about 85 percent of the total population -- did have health insurance.

Lastly, you’re right….. few governments around the world want to copy the U.S. system. Most countries are not interested in personal freedom and individual liberty for its people. They would prefer to control people. It is the history of government throughout the world to oppress its people and deprive them of their God-Given Unalienable Rights. So you either, believe in and embrace freedom and free-market principles, or you don’t. It is America’s continued belief in freedom that has created the idea of American Exceptionalism. It is why we continue to be the lone SuperPower of the world. It is why we have an immigration problem… everyone wants to come here. It is why I would never trade our way of life for anything.

So keep your socialized medicine and I will keep my freedom…. Thank you.

 

[Anonymous]

Giving up already?? I guess you must be one of those French-Canadians.

 

[Anonymous]

Government is not in the business of being efficient either. No where in The Constitution is government supposed to be involved with healthcare. If you claim that government has no profit-motive, I wonder what it is exactly that you think motivates government? I can't wait for this answer.

The reason why Healthcare was not mentioned in the Constitution is because back in the late 1700's there was NO Healthcare, to speak of. People died around age 50 of infections because there were no antibiotics or they died of stroke because there were no blood pressure medications. So your argument about the Constitution is not valid when it comes to healthcare.

People who needed it sent word to the Dr. via Horse and Rider, and the Dr. got money or perhaps a few chickens for his services. His bag carried very little.

 

[Anonymous]

The reason why Healthcare was not mentioned in the Constitution is because back in the late 1700's there was NO Healthcare, to speak of. People died around age 50 of infections because there were no antibiotics or they died of stroke because there were no blood pressure medications. So your argument about the Constitution is not valid when it comes to healthcare.

People who needed it sent word to the Dr. via Horse and Rider, and the Dr. got money or perhaps a few chickens for his services. His bag carried very little.

Ok.... then how about you liberal drones trying to ammend the Constitution to include healthcare?