[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

He's not a doctor, he's a dentist. After all, that's why he could afford $77,000 surgery - very few Canadians could come up with that kind of money in a such a short time frame.

I feel for the guy, having been told to wait up to five years, but the fact is this wasn't an urgent health issue. Had he been diagnosed with a bad heart, he'd have had surgery right quick.

I have no problem with people having to wait for non-critical surgery if the issue isn't life threatening - and that comes from a guy who watched while his father waited months for both of his hip replacements.

So chronic conditions and conditions that cause inordinate suffering are okay with you so long as they are not 'life threatening'?

That's cold, brother.

bootlegga bootlegga:

In an ideal world, we'd have enough money to give everyone all the urgent and non-urgent surgery they need, but economics and the geographic size and low population of Canada make that next to impossible.

Sorry, but that argument is bogus. The state of Montana, which is pretty sparsely populated, has more CT scan and more MRI machines than your whole country does. They also have more PICU beds than your country does which is why so many pregnant Canadian women end up in Montana.

Besides, if your argument is that Health Canada CAN'T do these things then what's the harm in letting people buy services from companies that CAN?

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Oops, seems the good doctor isn't alone:

You're right - Tea Party hero Sarah Palin used to come to CANADA for health care all the time.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/0 ... 90080.html

In addition, thousands more Americans come to Canada for all sorts of procedures.

Some come for flu shots, others come for gastric bypasses, and yet others simply come because the costs the are cheaper and most of the outcomes are far higher;

http://www.findprivateclinics.ca/resour ... ourism.php

What's more - 60% of Americans are in favour of medical tourism;

$1:

On the whole, Americans tend to prefer close destinations like Canada, Mexico, and Costa Rica (in that order).

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/b ... -them.html

[Wada]

He was still performing. Had it got to the point where he could no longer perform then he may have gotten a pass to the front of the line. We're tough up here and have little patience for those who are'nt. Besides there is no shortage of dentists in Canada they're all in Yarmouth.

[DrCaleb]

Wada Wada:

Besides there is no shortage of dentists in Canada they're all in Yarmouth.

0:

berlusconi-facepalm.jpg [ 108.49 KiB | Viewed 299 times ]

[Wada]

[peck420]

I thought it was funny!

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

He's not a doctor, he's a dentist. After all, that's why he could afford $77,000 surgery - very few Canadians could come up with that kind of money in a such a short time frame.

I feel for the guy, having been told to wait up to five years, but the fact is this wasn't an urgent health issue. Had he been diagnosed with a bad heart, he'd have had surgery right quick.

I have no problem with people having to wait for non-critical surgery if the issue isn't life threatening - and that comes from a guy who watched while his father waited months for both of his hip replacements.

In an ideal world, we'd have enough money to give everyone all the urgent and non-urgent surgery they need, but economics and the geographic size and low population of Canada make that next to impossible.

So chronic conditions and conditions that cause inordinate suffering are okay with you so long as they are not 'life threatening'?

That's cold, brother.

No, that's the facts of life.

In a public system in a low population, low density country like Canada, it's not economically feasible to have doctors on standby for every little ailment in every little town and village across our country.

Even if Canada had a system similar to yours, we still couldn't provide all the same services your system does due to geographic size and low population density.

Frankly though. you're one to talk about being cold. On the last page, you just told everyone here that if you're poor, then you can't afford quality health care and you should just accept it.

$1:

Likewise, you don't get to have a Mercedes when you can't even afford a Kia. And you don't get to have a nice penthouse apartment in Vancouver if you can't afford it. Too bad.

With health care it's just too f*cking bad that some people have less access to care than some others do.

Now that is fucking cold, man!

The key difference between Canadians and Americans is that Canadians support the group over themselves (for the most part), and Americans support themsleves over everyone else (for the most part). That's why Canadians consider health care a basic right and Americans consider it a luxury only for those who can afford it.

Sometimes I wonder if your opinion of the 'wonders' of a private system would change if Lisa's cancer hadn't gone into remission and you had been forced to spend every last dime you had to try and save her, only to either run out of money or lose the battle anyways.

That's not a shot or shouldn't be taken as an attack, but an honest to goodness question.

I'm betting if you bankrupted yourself trying to save her - or even worse, had your Mercedes medical insurer turn her down for treatment simply because it would cost them too much - I bet your opinion would be the exact opposite of what it is currently.

That is unless you are a heartless SOB.

[DrCaleb]

peck420 peck420:

I thought it was funny!

Very. But still a 'groaner'.

[peck420]

Back on topic, I wonder how much Canada wide wait times could be reduced if everybody, that pays for private care, put that money into the public system?

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Tea Party hero Sarah Palin used to come to CANADA for health care all the time.

$1:

Up to the age of six, Palin lived in a remote town near the closest Canadian city, Whitehorse.

That had more to do with proximity than anything else.

bootlegga bootlegga:

In addition, thousands more Americans come to Canada for all sorts of procedures.

Some come for flu shots, others come for gastric bypasses, and yet others simply come because the costs the are cheaper and most of the outcomes are far higher;

Thank you for paying for them.

bootlegga bootlegga:

What's more - 60% of Americans are in favour of medical tourism;

And for some odd reason you seem compelled to want to force your fellow Canadians to have to leave their country for treatment, too. I'm at a loss as to why you'd criticize the USA on this point when this is exactly the point we're talking about in Canada.

[peck420]

He was forced?

I could understand 'forced' if he had a terminal condition that needed attention now, but that wasn't really the case.

The only thing that forced this dentist south was his own ego.

[Bodah]

If anyone needs an MRI done quick, go to Gatineau, Quebec. There's already a clinic set-up. Cash only. Blood work extra.






Ahh shit... looks like the two-tier system is already here.

[Brenda]

Again, it is pretty common in (at least Western) Europe to go abroad. Germans come to The Netherlands, Dutchies go to Belgium, Belgians go to Germany (and all other ways of versa) and insurance pays. I don't see why I couldn't go to Spokane or Vancouverites to Seattle if the wait time is shorter there. Especially if it turns out to be cheaper too, all costs considered.
My neighbour had to go to Kelowna for radiation therapy for breast cancer for 5 weeks. Just because the hospital here does not offer that. It's a 3 hour drive one way. Spokane is just as far away, so if the hospital here wouldn't offer a (non-life threatening) surgery, or wait times would be ridiculously long, why not go cross border?

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Sometimes I wonder if your opinion of the 'wonders' of a private system would change if Lisa's cancer hadn't gone into remission and you had been forced to spend every last dime you had to try and save her, only to either run out of money or lose the battle anyways.

That's the thing. I have peers who opt for cheaper health care so they can afford bigger houses, newer cars, and more frequent vacations than we have. They've got the latest cell phones and they've got the latest big screen TV and they've got swimming pools and jet skis and etc. I choose to skip all of that crap so I can save money and the one thing I don't cut corners on is health care. We've had this same level of care since we got married in 1987.

And it paid off.

Sorry if I sound cold but I have no sympathies for people who piss away their money on crap and then they DEMAND that someone else has to pay for their health care, their retirement, their food, their housing, and etc.

You wonder why I'm so hard on losers who can't make good choices in life?

Maybe it's because I'm the only person in my immediate family who's never filed bankruptcy. I'm the only person in the family to OWN a home. My brother and sister used to think that Lisa and I were poor because we didn't spend money like they did. Then when each of them got a divorce and they went broke the two liberal Democrats turned to the 'mean old Republican' expecting me to bail them out. Nope.

My mother was a bubble headed liberal who called everyone 'stupid' if she didn't agree with them. She couldn't ever manage to come up with a single reason why they were stupid, but they were if they didn't see things her way.

She called me stupid and called Lisa "That Lisa" pretty much non-stop from 1987 until 1999. What changed in 1999? She lost her home to foreclosure, filed bankruptcy for the second time, and expected to move in with Lisa and I. Which did not happen. I did help her get into a senior housing center and I bought groceries for her pretty regularly and she was over for dinner quite a bit before she died. Both my brother and sister had nothing to do with her.

In short, I grew up with liberals and their entitlement mindset and I'm fairly intolerant of them anymore. I chose to work hard and I chose to sacrifice by skipping the new cars and etc. and instead saving for the future and buying decent health care that I didn't have to worry about when I needed it. That attitude paid off when Lisa needed it. It also paid off when my premium health care chose to fix my knee (which they didn't have to) when the sh*t job the VA did had me partially disabled.

Government health care left me with a disability that I would still have were it not for my private health care.

It's ironic that the same government that would've left me disabled is supposed to be trustworthy enough not to do it again. Sorry, I just don't believe that.

So the question of what would've happened to Lisa and I has already been answered.

As for other people, they make their choices in life and the ones who choose to fritter away their lives are not at all a concern to me.

It's like the fable of the Grasshopper and the Ant.

$1:

In a field one summer's day a grasshopper was hopping about, chirping and singing to its heart's content. A group of ants walked by, grunting as they struggled to carry plump kernels of corn.

"Where are you going with those heavy things?" asked the grasshopper.

Without stopping, the first ant replied, "To our ant hill. This is the third kernel I've delivered today."

"Why not come and sing with me," teased the grasshopper, "instead of working so hard?"

"We are helping to store food for the winter," said the ant, "and think you should do the same."

"Winter is far away and it is a glorious day to play," sang the grasshopper.

But the ants went on their way and continued their hard work.

The weather soon turned cold. All the food lying in the field was covered with a thick white blanket of snow that even the grasshopper could not dig through. Soon the grasshopper found itself dying of hunger.

He staggered to the ants' hill and saw them handing out corn from the stores they had collected in the summer. He begged them for something to eat.

"What!" cried the ants in surprise, "haven't you stored anything away for the winter? What in the world were you doing all last summer?"

"I didn't have time to store any food," complained the grasshopper; "I was so busy playing music that before I knew it the summer was gone."

The ants shook their heads in disgust, turned their backs on the grasshopper and went on with their work.

Now don't get me wrong, I have sympathy for those who simply fall on hard times despite their best efforts and I've often donated money to helping such people.

But for the ones who don't apply themselves and then spout off about using government as a means to steal money from those who earned it I really don't give a damn if they live or die anymore. To me they are not even as good as pigeons who at least leave their nest every day to go find a meal. These jokers just want everything handed to them and they have nothing but hatred for anyone who works hard, saves, and gets ahead.

In the matter of Obamacare I oppose it because it is just another scheme where layabouts are taking my money.

The Congressional Budget Office, which is strictly non-partisan, released some charming facts this past week.

49% of Americans receive some sort of support from the government and they pay no taxes.

Another 2% pay no taxes but do not take any assistance.

Just shy of 49% of Americans pay taxes with 20% of Americans shouldering over 78% of the total tax burden.

And now we're going to ask the 49% of Americans to cough up another $2 trillion per year by 2020 to pay for the health care of the other 51%...in addition to what they pay for.

It is just another scheme to transfer wealth from those who earned it to those who didn't.

Sorry for the tl;dr but this galls me.

And now you have a better picture as to why.

[Caelon]

Bodah Bodah:

Ahh shit... looks like the two-tier system is already here.

Canada has had a two tier health system for a long time. If you are injured on the job WCB pays for the care and you jump the que. Knee surgery is within 10 days. If you are a MP you bypass the public system. If you are a member of the military you bypass the public system. It is not a new concept.

OTOH if our public system is so bad compared to the US private system why do Canadians live longer on average than Americans and according to various reports are in better health than Americans?

The arguement for allowing a wider based private health insurance/care system is that for those willing to pay the extra they can receive faster care. Once they are off the waiting list then the remainder will be cared for that much sooner. Sort of a win win scenario.

The public system needs to be mandatory as far as funding through taxation or through health care premiums (another form of tax). If you wish you could purchase private care in addition to your share of the public system. No loss of revenue to the public system and potentially less total cost. A side benefit could see the private system selling services to the public system. If the cost was competitive then it could multiply the number of MRI's or even surgeries completed and again help shorten the waiting list.

I do not see it as bad. As others have pointed out other countries have moved away from a total public system without showing a negative impact on health care.