another canadian speaks out.

nobull

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
402
justin Bieber said on david Letterman....We go to the doctor and we don't need to worry about paying him, but here, your whole life, you're broke because of medical bills. My bodyguard's baby was premature, and now he has to pay for it. In Canada, if you're baby is premature, he stays in the hospital as long as he needs to, and then you go home.

The Huffington Post praised the 16-year-old singer for making "a surprisingly astute observation." Quel surprise.

Now I know Bieber was using the term "evil" in a flippant, tongue-in-cheek manner. However, things aren't quite that simple. There is no free lunch. Now a patient might not directly pay a phyisician at the doctor's office but Canadian doctors are most certainly compensated for their services through the health care plans in the province in which they practice. For instance, a doctor who practices in Bieber's hometown of Stratford, Ontario is compensated by the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) funded by the taxpayers in Ontario and by transfers from the Government of Canada. Of course, not all medical services are covered by OHIP. Thus health care in Canada is rationed.

And I can state unequivocally that the Canadian health care system has its virtues. But I can also unequivocally state the Canadian health care system has its shortcomings. One of the most significant problems are the waiting lists. They are a fact of life whether its in the emergency room, diagnostic procedures or for surgery.

So heaven forbid a premature infant should require paediatric heart surgery. And if that child lived in Stratford, he or she would have to wait 107 days for the procedure to be performed at the Stratford General Hospital. But what if that child can't wait 107 days? If the procedure could be performed in Detroit, Cleveland or Buffalo immediately you can bet that child's parents would move heaven and earth to get their child off Canadian soil. For all the U.S. health care system's faults, under those circumstances, I would hesitate to call it "evil."

But if Mr. Bieber considers the U.S. health care system so evil why doesn't he (or whoever handles his business affairs) provide his employees with health insurance?

just sayin
doug
 
Werbung:
What can we say, he is 16 and we can excuse his ignorance.

Does he really think that Canadians don't have to worry about paying for health care? Technically he said they don't have to worry about paying for it when they see the doctor. But they most certainly do have to worry about paying for it - they pay for it through a tax or a variety of taxes.

The U.S.'s system is the more civilized one since taxation is little more than coercion which can result in the loss of your property or freedom if you don't cooperate - even if you are healthy and don't need a doctor's services.
 
What can we say, he is 16 and we can excuse his ignorance.

Does he really think that Canadians don't have to worry about paying for health care? Technically he said they don't have to worry about paying for it when they see the doctor. But they most certainly do have to worry about paying for it - they pay for it through a tax or a variety of taxes.

The U.S.'s system is the more civilized one since taxation is little more than coercion which can result in the loss of your property or freedom if you don't cooperate - even if you are healthy and don't need a doctor's services.


Well you can excuse him because of his youth, but what excuse can you support for American liberals? Because they believe the same thing.
 
Has Beiber looked at his tax bill? He pays for his care.

Yes and they all get it to...unlike here...
and they pay less per person to cover more?

Total_health_expenditure_per_capita%2C_US_Dollars_PPP.png
 
Yes and they all get it to...unlike here...
and they pay less per person to cover more?

Total_health_expenditure_per_capita%2C_US_Dollars_PPP.png


Why do you suppose that is ? I'll give tyou the pharma dilemma but thats not all of it. They don't go to the doctor because by the time they can get in, they're better. Care is rationed so they can't spend as much whether they need it or not. Diagnosis is still taught and used there, nowhere the same defensive medicine. For starters.
 
Well you can excuse him because of his youth, but what excuse can you support for American liberals? Because they believe the same thing.

Some of them know that none of the arguments hold water but they want the ends regardless. They are the communists or the corporatists or the power hungry...

Some of them have been mislead by those who are manipulating the strings.

Some of them are idealistic (a good thing) and simply want to give good things to people who need it without thinking it through to realize that there can be consequences even with good intentions. Bieber strikes me as this one.
 
Yes and they all get it to...unlike here...
and they pay less per person to cover more?

Total_health_expenditure_per_capita%2C_US_Dollars_PPP.png

That's a nice graph. It shows that we are able to get a whole lot more care than all those other countries.

Almost every disease one could get would be treated with better outcomes in the US and of course better outcomes cost more.

We get treatment for all sorts of "optional" things here too.

We get treatment faster too - and that also costs money. I am willing to pay for that and if someone is not then they should choose a doctor who charges less but makes him wait more.

And we don't have hidden costs that don't show up on the graph. Our doctors include the cost of their medical training in their rates. In France tuition is paid for by government but it is not on that graph.
 
In the former Soviet Union you dont have to worry about paying the doctor. Its part of the U.S.S.R consitution

http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/36cons04.html#chap10

Russia only spends about 7% of its GNP on health care yet it is their largest industry. (think about that) They have more doctors nurses and health care workers on a per capita basis than any other country. Their centralized method of controlling the population leads to significant results in controlling communicable diseases like typhoid.

Still, many hospitals did not have any radiology services, inadequate heating, as recently as 1989 20% of hospitals did not have piped hot water and 3% did not even have piped cold water, lastly sanitation was sorely lacking in 17% of hospitals. 2 in 7 hospitals need to be torn down and rebuilt.

Their health care system is inefficient and inadequate. Despite reforms there is no real competition among providers and many people lack access to basic care.

The success they have had battling communicable diseases is a tribute to what a totalitarian state can accomplish when it can dictate who gets what treatment, when and how.

But, in just about every other measure the Russian system has results that are worse than every other European country.

Their infant mortality and life expectancy are horrible. Alcoholism, smoking, suicide, cardiovascular disease, cancer and other avoidable lifestyle diseases are the leading causes of death for most people. It would not be an exaggeration to say that the Russian people are killing themselves despite a health care system that has the ability to successfully treat illness.

Government systems come with a price. When one lives under an oppressive and corrupt government there is little left to live for - vice and destructive self-indulgent behavior becomes the norm.

This is the expression of the natural conclusion of the nanny state.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top