This says a lot for the Canadian helth system

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 12:13 PM
  #31  
Tbird69's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Originally Posted by birddog_61
Ya now try it with the population of your neighbor to the south and see what happens with your quality of life.
I think your missing the point. The population of Canada is about 10% of the population of the U.S, yet our quality of life is on par or in some cases better.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 12:20 PM
  #32  
kingfish51's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,550
Likes: 2
From: Mount Airy,MD
Originally Posted by Tbird69
I think your missing the point. The population of Canada is about 10% of the population of the U.S, yet our quality of life is on par or in some cases better.
I do have to say this, what does population have to do with quality of life. Nothing. It has to do with what is available to you in your environment. India and China have populations far greater than any other countries. Would you really want to li8ve there.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 12:21 PM
  #33  
Frank S's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: Blue Ridge Mountains, GA
Originally Posted by SMIGGS
I find it funny that some of you actually think that you have the power to stop Obama from bringing in this healthcare reform. If you don't like it you can do one of two things, move to another country, or be stubborn and never again go to a doctor if you need to.

Me and the other Canuck here are not stating that our healthcare system is superior. Yes, it has flaws, just like any other healthcare system. But you do realize that with our "flawed" heathcare system, our quality of life is par with our neighbor to the south.
Easy, we know he's not God. And it's not "reform", it's a gov't takeover of 1/6 of the economy.

If people like Obama truly cared, he would be pushing for health care for those who can't afford it instead of pushing for nationalization. (Everyone still will not be covered under his plan).
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 12:24 PM
  #34  
birddog_61's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: Graham TX
Originally Posted by Tbird69
I think your missing the point. The population of Canada is about 10% of the population of the U.S, yet our quality of life is on par or in some cases better.
Its a lot easier to provide for 10 people than 100. Its also a lot easier to provide for 10 people when all 10 are putting money into a system to care for all 10 than it is when 10 people are putting in the 80% of the money and then 60 people are putting 20% and all 100 are using it.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 12:24 PM
  #35  
Tumba's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,512
Likes: 1
From: >wwOwww<
Originally Posted by SMIGGS
You tell me.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 12:25 PM
  #36  
offroadn'98's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,551
Likes: 0
From: Tennessee
My dad...He owns a bussiness. For him he already pays a ton of taxes...Business taxes (highest bracket), FIT, property tax, state tax(sales tax)....etc. Say we go to socialized med care. He will then have a health care tax. Let's just say that the care won't be any worse but it also forsure wouldn't be any better. If we are all healthy for a year and don't need to use any medical care then he still has to pay a ton more taxes. He already pays half his wages for cryin out loud! More than most americans pay....And bc we have a big house and my parents drive nice USED cars, he doesn't pay enough!!! And you can say that we are being selfish, but he put in a lot of hard work to get where he is today. Plus, he gave like somewhere between 35k-40k to charity's this year. That isn't selfis imo. 10 years ago we were in teh lowest tax bracket.

The care sucking or atleast not getting any better isn't worth having to pay more money!
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 12:59 PM
  #37  
SMIGGS's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
From: Manitoba, Canada
Originally Posted by birddog_61

Its also a lot easier to provide for 10 people when all 10 are putting money into a system to care for all 10 than it is when 10 people are putting in the 80% of the money and then 60 people are putting 20% and all 100 are using it.
So now you are assuming that the people that make more money a year and are in a higher tax bracket contribute the same % into healthcare than the people who are in a lower tax bracket?
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 01:29 PM
  #38  
Tbird69's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Originally Posted by NCSU_05_FX4
A 10 second search yielded this article (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE58G6W520090917) that says 45,000 Americans die every year due to lack of insurance. That's 0.01475% of our population, that's the equivalent of 5,000 Canadians. Give me proof that shows less than 5,000 people die in Canada due to insurance related issues. I would say that any Canadian who came to the US to receive treatment counts as part of that 5,000. If they hadn't have come to the US to be treated, they may well have died in Canada.

- NCSU
First off, there's no need to get personal.

Second, 45,000 people a year dying because they can't afford insurance to get the care they need is a problem. In developed, rich countries like the U.S. and Canada having access to basic healthcare should be a right not a privilege. People die up here everyday, but it isn't because they couldn't afford the care they needed.

Just because the premier of Newfoundland is going South for his surgery doesn't mean our system sucks. There's no shortage of U.S citizens that leave your country for treatment, whether they're coming here or going elsewhere. When someone leaves Canada people like you point and say it's a sign of just how bad the Canadian system is. There are alot of misconceptions about our healthcare. You and others around here need to educate yourselves before you start pointing your fingers.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 01:37 PM
  #39  
Frank S's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: Blue Ridge Mountains, GA
Originally Posted by Tbird69
First off, there's no need to get personal.

Second, 45,000 people a year dying because they can't afford insurance to get the care they need is a problem. In developed, rich countries like the U.S. and Canada having access to basic healthcare should be a right not a privilege. People die up here everyday, but it isn't because they couldn't afford the care they needed.

Just because the premier of Newfoundland is going South for his surgery doesn't mean our system sucks. There's no shortage of U.S citizens that leave your country for treatment, whether they're coming here or going elsewhere. When someone leaves Canada people like you point and say it's a sign of just how bad the Canadian system is. There are alot of misconceptions about our healthcare. You and others around here need to educate yourselves before you start pointing your fingers.
Approximately 200,000 people die in the U.S. every year via malpractice. This number will be even higher under socialized medicine.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 01:45 PM
  #40  
Tbird69's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Originally Posted by Frank S
Approximately 200,000 people die in the U.S. every year via malpractice. This number will be even higher under socialized medicine.
At least those people could afford a doctor, I believe it's far worse when somebody dies because they couldn't.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 01:46 PM
  #41  
offroadn'98's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,551
Likes: 0
From: Tennessee
Yeah and obviously it's everyone else's job to pay for it! I know it sounds harsh, but forcing ppl in and individualist culture like the US to pay for everyone else's healthcare isn't right and people are not going to be happy about it! Nobody in their right mind leaves america to go to canada for healthcare! Many of canada's doctor's come over here. Their is more incentive to succed when you have the possibility to make more money. That's just the way is, ppl want the biggest reward for their work.
That's why their is Canadian doctor's that come over here and very few American docs that go over their.

This is putting aside the fact that the US can't afford it? By the time i get out of college and get a job i'll be paying 90% of my wages on taxes. It's ridiculous, if everyone wanted it like libs say, then it would already be passed.
NO...teh ppl who want it are the lazy, less ambitious members of our society. Also, I woudl go as far to say that the majority of those 45,000 deaths are the illegals that flood our borders in search of a better life!(HELLO, Illegals don't come here bc it's horrible like libs make it out to be)
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 01:49 PM
  #42  
Frank S's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: Blue Ridge Mountains, GA
Originally Posted by Tbird69
At least those people could afford a doctor, I believe it's far worse when somebody dies because they couldn't.
Are you serious? Nowhere in that statistic does it mention whether they could afford a Dr. or not. You still get treated at a hospital here in the states whether you have insurance or not. You are not kicked out the door.

Besides, how is it better for you to have seen a Dr. if you die from malpractice?
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 01:51 PM
  #43  
birddog_61's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: Graham TX
Originally Posted by SMIGGS
So now you are assuming that the people that make more money a year and are in a higher tax bracket contribute the same % into healthcare than the people who are in a lower tax bracket?
Nope what I am saying is that under this new plan the people in the higher tax brackets will be paying for people that pay no taxes at all. That is stupid, if you contribute nothing you should get nothing. If everyone contributes the same % of their income then you might actually have something in healthcare for everyone.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 01:55 PM
  #44  
offroadn'98's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,551
Likes: 0
From: Tennessee
Originally Posted by Tbird69
At least those people could afford a doctor, I believe it's far worse when somebody dies because they couldn't.
That's a real intelligent statement! That's like saying i'd rather pay to get killed then not pay to get killed!

That's what medicaid is for anyway.(cause majority are illegals) Why doesn't the government just help that small percentage of ppl that are that bad off and they care so much for them.
That would be way better than overhauling a system that 90% of americans are happy with!
It's not about caring for ppl that libs want thisl, it's about power/greed. You notice they always call us conservatives way more greedy, but when you look at amounts given to charities, the conservatives always have given some. Many times libs haven't given any charity or anything. IT'S EASIER FOR THEM TO GIVE AWAY MINE AND YOUR MONEYS!! They're not looking out for my best interest. This isn't gov's role!
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2010 | 01:55 PM
  #45  
kingfish51's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,550
Likes: 2
From: Mount Airy,MD
I would be very surprised if those numbers are even realistic as they use an estimate of how much more at risk people without insurance are, not actual numbers. A good bit of the cost of medicine is due to those not having insurance being treated by hospitals for free when they can not afford. When there are stories of hospitals turning away patients because they can't pay, how bad does that look, and how badly are they ostracized. It is bad publicity to turn away those without insurance. Also many of those without insurance is by choice, not need.

PS, it is also federal law that they must be treated.

http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-e...hout-insurance
 

Last edited by kingfish51; Feb 3, 2010 at 02:01 PM.
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:04 AM.