“UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems”
145 Replies to “Are Your Health Care Working?”
John: As for infant mortality… you bet your ass it’s connected to how care is delivered. When both our kid’s were born, we had access to an infant hotline. When the kids got sick, doctors MADE HOUSE CALLS. We also had regular visits from public health nurses.
Interesting. I have two beautiful daughters, 13 and 15. We never had to call an infant hotline, we never required a house call from a doctor, and we have never, ever, been visited by a public health nurse for any reason.
Perhaps you could describe in detail your parenting techniques and the conditions in which you raised your children which required the use of all these services.
Kevin,
First of all, go eff yourself Mr. Smuggly McAssdink.
We are a university educated, upper middle class family who received the same treatment given to all new parents in the Lower Mainland of BC. Perhaps the quality of care where you are isn’t as good?
The purpose of these kinds of visits are to identify children at risk, help out new parents, and reduce stress on infants. It’s really quite civilized, and is EXACTLY the sort of care which contributes to lower infant mortality rates, as oppose to the system you advocate, which clearly results in more dead babies.
What’s a few dead babies though when you can save a buck eh?
john – you have to provide evidence for your assertions.
The so-called 40 million who are ‘uninsured’ in the US? This is a false number. Google the number and start to check facts.
About 10 Million are illegals.
And 17 M can afford it but choose not to.
And 25% already qualify for current public health care.
Uninsured already get about 1,500 per person of free health care per year. Remember, no hospital emergency can refuse you.
Oh – and the CBO Analysis says that under Obama’s plan, 36 million would remain uninsured.
Your anecdote about the bum knee and the US throwing you into a wheelchair is your own fictional tale. Don’t try to win an argument with fiction. Use facts.
In Canada, there are many treatments that are not available; the health care system won’t pay for them. These include not merely regular eye exams, eye surgery, but also various drugs and treatments, eg, for cancer. Ever read the book Code Blue? Google it.
My reference to illegal aliens, who are most certainly not immigrants, and their hesitation in using medical services, was to in part, explain the difference in infant mortatlity rates. Your attempt to divert this FACT to an emotional claim that I am ‘bashing immigrants’ is invalid. The FACT remains – the lack of care by illegal aliens (not immigrants) can’t be overlooked.
Your anecdotal references to doctors making house calls is irrelevant. They don’t do that in large cities – or even small ones. It’s up to the doctor and this has zilch to to with him being paid by public or private funds. Same with public health nurses – which also exist in the US. Same with ‘hot lines’.
The fact that you don’t know anyone who has made trips to the US for treatment doesn’t mean that such trips don’t exist. They do – and the FACTS are that many treatments are not available here in Canada. I’m sure you know that. So, people must go to the US for treatment.
Could you explain why you assume that the only means of bettering our health care system is ‘higher taxes’? Other analysts suggest that providing more private care options, which are less expensive than the public care, would be the more productive answer. Do you know why? Because most of the money for our health care goes to the bureaucracy. Not to the doctors, nurses and equipment. Try to check facts, John, instead of just ranting on and insulting us for being ‘tightwads’ and etc.
Would you provide some proof that the ‘corporate method’ of health care is inefficient and more costly? By the way – the public system is also a corporation; it’s just one that is owned by the govt rather than a small set of shareholders.
And that means that the govt corporation sets up a HUGE ratio of middlemen…that enormous bloated bureaucracy..that gobbles up all our tax money..so that we get LESS medical care, RESTRICTED medical care, out-of-date medical equipment, inadequate care. That’s what a public system does…and why it doesn’t work.
Now, do you think you could argue your case without the insults and ad hominem? And with facts?
John – please check things and use facts, not just your opinions.
No John, taxpayers did not fail her. The system and the bureaucrats that run it failed her. They’re the ones that determine the budgets, they’re the ones that set the rules and allocate the resources. Even if there were more funds in the budget, there’s no guarantee that CAT scanner would be available. As tax payers, we have absolutely no control on how our money is used in this system. Your problem shouldn’t be with us.
John your arguments never hold water. Americans that are covered are more than satisfied with access to the best care available anywhere. Also, your 40 million uninsured is a deceiving number which you are well aware of. If we take your number 40 and subtract 15 for illegals, 40 is now 25. Subtract 10 more from the 25 for the young demographic that CHOOSES not to obtain coverage as a cost/benefit analysis. Subtract and additional 5 from the remaining 15 because of the people that CHOOSE not to access available assistance as it is available now.
So, you’ve actually got around 10 million people who CANNOT get care due to pre existing conditions and those that fall between the cracks.
As per usual with you, and others of a like mind, your position is based solely on ideology and politics. Nobody in their right mind would scrap the existing elite system at a cost of trillions to receive less care for the sake of expanding coverage to 1/3 of a percent of the population.
But my problem is with you Kaga, because conservatives like yourself whine and moan and bitch so much, that we don’t spend the money we need to improve our systems.
ET, you my friend are full of grade A prime baloney. 17 million Americans CHOOSE to purchase iPods instead of healthcare? Dude are you one of those Fox News viewers or something? Because that is the kind of retardation spewed by that network.
How the HELL does a family of four earning less than $50k per year afford $12+k per year in health insurance? I’d say that the extreme cost of healthcare has more to do with it than purchasing “bling”.
And as for illegals… those poor bastards work for lousy wages, and help keep the American middle class comfortable. Without their labour, America would be in rough shape. Oddly enough, the corporate class knows this… just not the racists. They deserve access to healthcare.
Now as for cost…
As for being able to go to the emergency ward in the US… that’s when you may already be too far gone. Everyone loves talking about the “death panels” as mentioned by that supreme retard herself, Sarah Palin, but in fact those panels already operate, every time somebody is refused care.
Again… there is no point in arguing with you guys, because you will continue to believe whatever “facts” you can access. You can stare failure right in the face and not recognize it. I honestly believe you could sh!t your pants and somehow manage to convince yourselves that you were sitting in a flower bed.
Whoa wait a second…
ET says there are 10 million illegals, whereas Indiana says there are 15 million.
And then ET says there are 17 million who choose not to have healtcare, and Indi says there are 10 million. What gives? Those numbers are wildly different.
You guys might want to sort that out.
Next thing you guys will be telling me is that all healthcare in the US is delivered by magical creatures, and everybody would be happy if the Democrats just shut up about healthcare.
Up is down. Black is white. War is peace.
The noise machine continues on its noisy way. Somebody should figure out a way to feed it to the crops.
“But my problem is with you Kaga, because conservatives like yourself whine and moan and bitch so much, that we don’t spend the money we need to improve our systems”
Explain to me how we have control over how our money is allocated in the public system. Explain to me how throwing more of our money into the system will keep that CT scanner running 24/7 instead of paying for the thousands of other expenses of the system. Why aren’t you blaming the bureaucrats that allocate and chew up the resources?
How do we have control over our money? Through the parties we elect to govern us, and the bitching we do to our MPs.
“Throwing more money into the system” will allow us to fund more facilities, upgrade our technology, and hire more professionals. That’s sort of self-evident, isn’t it?
Right now we have a fraction of the CAT and MRI scanners currently operating in the US. The reason? Underfunding.
And in the end… underfunding the system costs us more. Looking at my mom’s situation dispassionately, here’s how it could have played out…
Mom has stroke, goes to hospital. They pop her in the CAT scan (which is operating 24/7, serving a huge community of people), determine the type of stroke, give her a pill to thin her blood, and bob’s your uncle. Damage has been minimized.
But nooooooo. There is nobody around to operate the CAT scan, so the stroke destroys her brain, resulting in her needing 24 hour hospital care for 4 months before we finally move her to a full care nursing home for the remaining four years of her life.
How exactly is this saving money or lives?
And I’ve heard 30 million to 100 million for the uninsured number. What’s your point?
You don’t get it John. I, and I suspect most others commenting here are not against creative solutions to ensure that everyone is covered. What I would object to were I an American(and do because it’s a possibility I or my family may need to travel south for care) is the bill set forth which does immense damage to the current system. I’m willing to bet the so called “turfers” would welcome some government in the system proportionate to the existing problem for the 40 million people.
BTW John, put that exact question to the voters and see how giddy they are about paying for illegal’s to have access to their care. I’d bet you’d have a hard time calling all of them racists. On second thought, probably not.
First you say:
“Everyone loves talking about the “death panels” as mentioned by that supreme retard herself, Sarah Palin,”
Then you finish with:
“but in fact those panels already operate, every time somebody is refused care.”
It’s obvious you’re the retard here John, acknowledging Sarah Palin is correct and accurate as your argument for why she’s wrong.
I’d say you’re a hypocrite after saying this:
“Same goes for you guys using the word “fag” as oppose to one of my liberal fag friends using it.”
And then saying this:
“by that supreme retard herself, Sarah Palin,”
I’ll take you at your word John, that you are a retard. After all, an enlightened progressive such as your self would never say a hurtful thing like “retard” unless you and your “liberal fag friends” were in fact retards.
john – try to think about facts rather than insulting us. Stop insulting people. Just deal with the issues.
First, the number of illegals is hardly accurate because they don’t want to be ‘outed’. therefore, the estimate varies from 15 to 20 million (Tucson Border Patrol)as of 2004. And almost 6 years later, there are obviously a lot more.
Your ‘either-or’ of purchasing health insurance vs an ipod is, as I’m sure you know, an invalid comparison. The FACT is, that many young people CHOOSE not to purchase health care insurance. Their need of care is limited; and just as many, many people in Canada do with their dental and eye treatments, they pay for these costs directly rather than buy more expensive insurance.
The family of four does not pay 12K for insurance; the cost to the employee is 25% and 75% is paid by the employer. So much for your hatred of corporations, eh?
Please don’t use the fallacious ‘argument’, full of emotion and bereft of facts, about the ‘illegals working for nothing and keeping the American middle class..blah blah’. Kindly note that their minimal wages are THEIRS to keep, because they have NO DEDUCTIONS for taxes – income or otherwise. And yet, their children attend the local schools – untaxed; and they use all the local hospitals which MUST treat them – unpaid.
Oh, and they send BILLIONS (12 billion in one year 2003) back to their families in Mexico. Mexico refuses to provide low income jobs for these unskilled, uneducated workers – and offloads them on to the US, which pays them, educates their children, and provides medical care. Sending this class off to the US to be given work, housing, education and medical care means that in Mexico, the wealthy class is increasing. There are more billionaires in Mexico than in Switzerland. But Mexico won’t build schools and factories for its poor – it ships them off to the US.
Try again, John, and this time, stop with the insults and emotion and stick to FACTS.
No, we don’t have control over our tax dollars. We have representative government and an unelected civil service. The govt makes the decisions on which hospitals to build, etc.
As for your mother, sad as it has been for you, there is no proof that a CAT scan and a pill could have prevented her further strokes and deterioration.
Again, John, please stop with the insults. Stop calling people dirty names, stop insulting people and just deal with the facts and the issues.
Oh – and you haven’t answered my questions.
ET, dude, if I’m insulting, it’s because I’ve been insulted. Go back a few comments and check it out. See the one calling my parenting into question? Or all the times I’ve been called a troll. That’s insulting, and I did not start it in any way. So get that straight.
In fact a CAT scan would have determined that my mother was having a ischemic stroke (a clot), and a clot buster could have been used to reduce damage. This is a fact. Arguing otherwise is like suggesting that direct pressure is unproven when it comes to staunching bleeding.
And where do you get off thinking a family of four only pays 25%? That’s assuming their company offers insurance. And those companies… they’re hurting too.
The US is a complete mess, and it’s mostly due to greed. Many of the social ills of that country could in fact be solved by throwing money at the problem. Improving education, access to health and social services have been proven time and again to mitigate many of the problems facing nations, but whatever you do… don’t look to the facts. Stick to ideology.
Re a comparison of corporate healthcare to government healthcare, go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems_compared
Yup it’s wikipedia, which throws most rightwingers into a fit, BUT… see the little numbers throughout the document. Those are called “citations”. That means they are pointing to peer-reviewed studies. Unlike, oh say, most rightwing blogs, which mostly just point to each other, or some rightwing think tank.
Just wait, what isn’t in the bill is just as frightening as what is in it.
Obeyme supports partial birth abortion and against letting babies who happen to live through an abortion receive medical treatment. I was told by a contract lawyer that the omission of any reference to abortion is very concerning. He said that it can be adopted later without much problem.
Obeyme is not just a liar, but in my opinion is a narcissist. When narcissists get challenged or people do not agree with them, they can become pretty nasty. They live in a fantasy world that they are unable to separate from reality.
Hold on America, we could be in for a pretty rough ride. Let’s hope it lasts ONLY another 40 months.
God Help Us
“Those are called ‘citations'”
Citations of studies funded by liberal interest groups.
Here is an interesting fact that I have NEVER seen a liberal respond to. I will give it a try, you can verify it yourself if you like. How is such innovation funded if you take away all of the profits that greedy health researches all want to make from their discoveries? The following is a direct result of the … shudder …. profit motive.
Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations. The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other developed country. Since the mid- 1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to U.S. residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined. In only five of the past thirty-four years did a scientist living in the United States not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.
Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and care for the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.
“The US is a complete mess”
That’s funny, because the polls in the US show most people happy with their health care and against govt run health care 2 to 1.
Do you know what the basis for Roe vs Wade was? A right to privacy. How is any other medical procedure any of the government’s business if abortion is not? Either roe v wade is wrong, or this bill is unconstitutional.
“That means they are pointing to peer-reviewed studies. Unlike, oh say, most rightwing blogs, which mostly just point to each other, or some rightwing think tank.” – Simple John
Unlike the Wikipedia which links to left wing think tanks, but calls them “citations”.
no, john, you are the one who began the insults, taunting ‘you guys’ as ideologues who advocate ‘paying more for less’. You increased it from there, moving on to personal insults. There’s no need, for example, to call me ‘dude’. or to call Sarah Palin a ‘retard’.
And saying that you were insulted and therefore, you feel you have the ‘right’ to insult back is irrational. Either you believe that a valid argument can be made based only on facts and reasoning..or you feel that you require insults to make your point. Is that how you feel?
The ratio of 75-25 for insurance is taken straight from the National Coalition on Health Care.
Please provide some evidence and analysis that ‘the USA is in a complete mess’ (explain) and that this is ‘mostly due to greed’. These are simply your unsubstantiated opinions.
That’s interesting that your solution is to ‘throw money at the problem’. That has been proven, time and again, to solve nothing. After all, your Wikipedia article has the US spending twice as much per person as in Canada – and yet, you still complain that the US is ‘in a mess’. Does money solve it all? No. That includes in Canada, where our health care costs soar and yet, don’t solve our problems of inadequate services.
No,john, you are the one who is trapped in ideology and refusing to deal with facts. Again, a public health care system IS a corporation. So, your attempt to denigrate a system because and only because you define it as ‘corporate’ is fallacious.
By the way, ‘citations’ doesn’t necessarily refer to ‘peer-reviewed’ articles. And again, please stop insulting everyone.
Yeah, like the Fraser institute, WHO, Congressional Research Services, US Dept of Health, the CATO institute, and the New England Journal if Medicine to name but a few. It’s practically PETA. Did you even read the article? I’m guessing that’s a big NO.
Once again, the WHO ranked Canada 30th and the U.S. 37th among 191 member nations. To be fair, for those who can afford it, the US ranks 1st compared to Canada’s 7th. Still, we live nearly TWO YEARS longer than Americans on average, and fewer of our babies die. Huge, huge difference.
Now… please proceed to call WHO a liberal organization, and point out how Michelle Malkin’s Journal of Medicine is somehow more reliable.
The number 40,000,000 of uninsured Americans keeps getting thrown about as if that were a bad thing. In an ideal world 100% of Americans, Canadians, Europeans would be uninsured. Insurance aka gambling was never intended to be ‘method of payment’.
Insurance for those who choose to buy it is a bet for and against something bad happening to you. I bet $5000.00 that something bad is going to happen to me this year. The insurance company bets $100,000.00 that nothing bad is going to happen to me this year. After winning the bets for 40 years the insurance company has to pay out the $100,000.00 and keeps the other $100,000.00 as profit
“john, you are the one who began the insults, taunting ‘you guys’ as ideologues who advocate ‘paying more for less’.”
It’s insulting to refer to people as “you guys”?! That is some thin skin you’ve got there (now that was an insult, but a very, very minor one. More of a friendly jab.)
Now, if you want to call me immature for rising to insults, fine. BUT I don’t see you going after those who started with the insults. The reason? Why they’re on your side of course. So basically your points are sorta moot.
The US does indeed throw more money at the problem. The reason that it doesn’t work, is because it goes right into the pockets of the healthcare industry, and then into the pockets of the shareholders. Basically the profit model has corrupted a system intended to help people. Nasty business that.
In fact, the problem of healthcare providers over billing States is endemic. Try searching google news for “medical providers over billing states” and see what you get.
As for quoting the NCHC, did you even read what they’ve written? I’m guessing not. Go read this, and tell me there isn’t a massive problem. I’m not sure whether or not you’ll believe the source you’ve quoted though, because it appears to contradict a number of things you’ve said, and supports some of the numbers I’ve provided http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml
Seriously, I’m gonna be up all gawdamn night making up for wasted work time. I got to go. Believe what you want, but reality doesn’t support your position.
Why don’t you list the WHO criteria for that finding John? They are ideological. If you don’t accept their premises, you won’t accept their rankings. I don’t accept their premises because I am not a socialist like you are John.
BTW, The demographics of our two countries are very different.
BTW, In the US, babies that would be given up on in other countries are fought for here by our wasteful system. My daughter was in the pediatric ICU for 4 months before coming home after having her life saved by a brilliant ex Canadian surgeon. At a cost of about half a million dollars, BTW.
The US does indeed throw more money at the problem. The reason that it doesn’t work, is because it goes right into the pockets of the healthcare industry, and then into the pockets of the shareholders. Basically the profit model has corrupted a system intended to help people. – Simple John
The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other developed country.
That crack about not reading the Wikipedia article really hurt, John.
John
So, Canada is 30th. How many of the countries who ranked 1 through 29 have a government monopoly?
Oh, and 30th? Aren’t we a G8 nation? 30th is abstract failure – and it’s the voters like you who demand the status quo while sticking your head up your ass when you point out that the mixed system of Europe (continent, not UK) is far superior to our state socialist monopoly.
Choice matters.
john – you’ll have to provide proof that the US money goes into the pockets of the healthcare industry (and what do you mean by that anyway?) and ‘then into the pockets of the shareholders’. Please provide proof.
Facts can’t be ignored, john, and it’s a fact that the US medical system is more up-to-date in equipment and services than the Canadian. It’s a fact that they are, as pointed out, the primary innovators of medical and drug treatments in the entire world and have been for many years. So, your claim that the health care industry ‘pockets’ the money is out of line with reality.
You also don’t seem to understand, in your leftist hatred of ‘corporations’ that a public health care system is itself, a corporation. And, that most of the money poured into public health care goes to the middlemen, the bureaucrats and not to services or equipment or medical treatment.
As pointed out before, the age difference in longevity are statistically equal. And, as others have pointed out (and as Wikipedia points out) the demographics are entirely different and contribute in great measure to the infant mortality rates.
Again, stop insulting people. And no, you can’t claim that the reason I don’t go after those who insult you is because they are on my side. The fact is, john, I’m only posting to you. Not to them.
The demographics of our countries are about as close as two countries can get, but I don’t blame you for splitting hairs. The evidence is otherwise pretty damning.
And while it’s great that the US will spend small fortunes saving some kids, it’s a crime that they won’t spend a little bit more cash to save babies that might not actually be that sick.
The infant mortality rate can be affected hugely by small changes… Cuba, which has a lower infant mortality rate than the US (CIA World Factbook, lookitup) certainly isn’t performing half million dollar operations.
ET, John,
Yes, higher spending does go to the health care industry. The first thing that happens when the Canadian government gives major increases in health spending is the unions salivate and threaten to strike, the medial supply companies raise their prices and the doctors go on a futile attempt to get their first raise since the 1980’s.
John
I ask again, on WHO’s list of the top 29 countries, how many of them are government monopoly system?
The age differences are statistically equal? Let’s say you have a choice… you can die today, or 1.9 years from now. Which would you prefer? That’s not statistically equal… it’s a big effing difference.
As for gov money going into the pockets of corporations… I don’t know what to say. If you ask this, you have no idea how the American system works. Part of the care is payed for by government to for-profit providers. That’s just how it works.
And as for corporations… you don’t know that I hate them. I don’t. I actually believe in capitalism. Just not rapacious capitalism. There is a difference you know.
Well ET, I have been insulting John, calling him “Simple John”. That is because it is harder to not insult him than to insult him, and frankly, he is not worth the effort.
John,
Infant mortality and longevity has more to do with living conditions and less to do with health care.
The US has nasty inner cities which only Toronto can duplicate and only in a much smaller scale. If you took out all poverty-ridden inner cities from the US and our few equivalents, I bet our longevity would be equal.
We know this in part because it’s the poor, black inner city where you find the worst outcomes yet they are the ones who already get free government health care. It’s the lower middle income people who are left being in the US – not the poor.
In fact, income has a hell of a lot more to correlate it with outcomes than health care. Lifestyle much the rest.
John wants us to agree with his premises. So his arguments should be about those. Instead, he takes his premises as a given, and expects us to accept them, and so accept his argument, because, if you start where he is coming from, only an idiot would not reach his conclusions. That is why he thinks he is winning this argument, and showing us all to be idiots. That is also why arguing with him is a waste of time. He doesn’t even have the self awareness to understand what it is he is not communicating. How can he even understand our objections? Simple answer? He can’t.
John: We are a university educated, upper middle class family
Oh? First of all, go eff yourself Mr. Smuggly McAssdink.
And that’s the best your university educated, upper middle class self can come up with? I’d ask for a refund. who received the same treatment given to all new parents in the Lower Mainland of BC. Perhaps the quality of care where you are isn’t as good?
I don’t know; the difference between Ontario and BC is less than one death per 1,000 births. I don’t consider that significant; perhaps you do. Let’s remember that the Yukon had the lowest infant mortality rate (0) in the country in 2005, but the highest (11) in 2004. A fractionally lower rate in BC for a couple of years could be nothing more than statistical noise. The purpose of these kinds of visits are to identify children at risk, help out new parents, and reduce stress on infants. It’s really quite civilized, and is EXACTLY the sort of care which contributes to lower infant mortality rates, as oppose to the system you advocate, which clearly results in more dead babies. Clearly results in more dead babies? Case not proven (see above). And, of course, since we didn’t get any of these services, and our daughters are both magnificently healthy, one would question whether they were necessary. In fact, one might go a bit farther, and wonder if all the resources poured into these areas might not have taken money away from other important services, like, say, CAT scans, where they might have had more immediate and telling effect.
And I’m curious – what kind of illness was serious enough to require a doctor’s house call (as opposed to what we did, which was take them the four blocks to our pediatrician), but NOT serious enough to require a trip to the ER (which, if one of them had started gasping for breath, etc. would have been our next stop)?
Not to mention that he has been manipulated by politicians into believing that anybody who disagrees with him is somewhere between and imbecile and a moron.
“In fact, one might go a bit farther, and wonder if all the resources poured into these areas might not have taken money away from other important services, like, say, CAT scans, where they might have had more immediate and telling effect.”
Bingo. I’ve been making the same point how his beef should be with the bureaucrats in charge of allocating the funds rather than the taxpayers. It doesn’t matter how much money you throw at the system, if the funds are continually mismanaged, spent on inefficiencies in the system instead of restructuring, or spent on initiatives of little value, that CAT scanner isn’t running 24/7.
I read somewhere that the employees of the UK’s NHS are the third largest single block of employees in the world, and are quite able to swing elections, and so are impossible to get rid of, or to reform. Not the kind of situation one would knowingly invite.
Are you kidding me? “Smuggly McAssdink” is gold you can take to the bank. Plus it managed to bi-pass the swearing filters.
“I don’t know; the difference between Ontario and BC is less than one death per 1,000 births. I don’t consider that significant; perhaps you do.”
You know who else might find it significant? The parents and family of the dead baby. Not to mention the dead baby itself.
Re the housecall, I forget the details. Suffice to say, we had a very sick, feverish 2 month old on our hands at 2 in the morning, and we called the number on the magnet on the fridge that we were given by the hospital. They said they’d send somebody. Nobody was more suprised than us. Our next option would have been to head on down to the emergency.
Now, are you really arguing whether or not more attentive care increases an infant’s chances for survival?
Taking resources away from public health outreach to fund more services like CAT scans isn’t the answer. Finding more money to pay for them without cutting cash elsewhere is the answer.
As for inefficiency… the Americans have us beat on the administrative bureaucratic front by a wide margin. How much money do you suppose it costs to hire people to question every single request for payment from an insurance company? And let’s not talk about the money spent on marketing for health insurance firms and healthcare providers.
Again… Americans spend up to 17% of their GDP whereas we spend around 10%.
Do you guys deny this? If so, you cannot quote the NCHC again, because they have posted those numbers as well.
As for the WHO’s list of the top 29 countries… I dunno Jason, go look yourself. Lemme know. I’m not arguing how we shape up compared to most other countries… just the US. That’s what the debate is about right now.
Re Is America a Mess? This makes it look like a bloody 3rd World country. They should be ashamed of themselves. Unless of course… maybe all these people shouldn’t have bought the latest iPod instead of purchasing health insurance. http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/2009/remote_medical_multimedia/
John, re. dead babies, read the rest of KevinB’s post @5:34 – or, if that’s too much trouble, just the rest of his paragraph which you partially quote – and then look up “statistical noise”.
Also note that dead babies do not, as far as we know, find anything significant.
john – a statistical equality can refer only to an average calculation not an individual number!
A statistical equality refers to the average of an aggregate. So, of 1,000 people, a statistical equality refers to a number that is plus or minus 3 from the average of 1,000 people. Therefore, in a population of 1,000, whether one dies at 78 or 81, those numbers are statistically equal. That’s because some in that 1,000 might live to 90, and others might live to only 65. We are talking statistics here – not individual cases!
The bureaucracy of an insurance company and the bureaucracy of a public health care system – both are bureaucracies, but the private care has to be competitive while the public system is a monopoly. That’s why our public civil service have wage increases two to three times that of the private sector, why they have benefits and perks unavailable to the private sector – and why so much of our tax dollars go to the bureaucracy rather than to the actual equipment and treatment. And of course, Canada doesn’t do the medical research that the US does..
The fact that Americans spend more than we do – well, as we’ve pointed out endlessly to you, we don’t get the good medical treatment that they do. Or the medical research. So, again, what’s your point?
Your descriptions of corporations, your reference to them as greedy etc, are clear indications of your disdain for them. You cannot then try to divert your disdain by saying it refers only to ‘rapacious capitalism’ ..and what the heck does that mean, anyway. Who would support ‘rapacious capitalism’?
But your posts have been filled with comments like ‘corporate profiteering’ and ‘lines the pockets of middlemen’ etc..Not a word about ‘rapacious capitalism’..just corporations.
big companies has all of them selling drug and has drug stores
now army has sepcial doctors or big companies has doctor
how about bit on doctor from day one like
chicklen from birth day one to day 21 become ready to used them
ob..s
may not good exmaple I said
it is too late I said it already
what I mean
when some one is gifter or some one accpete for medical school or pass ready in university
govement can buy cost that doctor to pay their life money and made them future ” docter – after in”
or big drug company also pay for doctor cost too
becaue being doctor is not cheap
but made doctore is not easy
when those med student like to study and suffer to beocm doctor nobody help them
when they become doctor all peopel experct too much from them
and some specialist must choose saying we need
certian surgeron or specialist doctor
by help of private and public and government
like supply chain
supply doctor or hosptial
\\\\\
we need also so many counsling doctor so many pharmist can be reduce cost of ddoctor by tell us how to buy certain drug without seeing doctor too
Gafftastic!
In one sentence, he condemns his health care plan.
Imagine, he wants to create the Post Office of Health Care!
“The demographics of our countries are about as close as two countries can get…” – John at 4:39 PM
The ratio of Aboriginal Canadians (~3%) to Canadians vs. “Native Americans” (~1.37%) to Americans? The ratio of “Latin Canadians” (-1%) to Canadians vs. Hispanic Americans (~20%) to Americans?
Those demographics are wayyyy not close.
John: if I’m insulting, it’s because I’ve been insulted. Go back a few comments and check it out. See the one calling my parenting into question?
I call shenanigans. I did NOT call your parenting into question; I merely asked you to provide details about your style. You seem to think that all this extra money poured into child health care has a large positive benefit. I suggested that the miniscule difference is just a statistical aberration which you dismissed without a shred of evidence, mathematical or otherwise. However, since your reading comprehension skills (as noted earlier) are questionable, I’m going to guess – and John, it is just a guess – that you’re functionally innumerate as well.
Of course, I could have made the argument that, since Toronto attracts 3 times as many immigrants as Vancouver, and has done for years, we have many more people who don’t know how to use the public health system properly, who aren’t even registered with it, and who probably lack the literacy skills to follow any advice they’re given. Correcting for that figure alone may well show that Ontario actually has lower infant mortality rates than BC, but I’m far too gentle to make any such suggestion.
However, I am going to suggest that you missed your calling. Given your 100% – in your estimation – ex post facto diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis for your mother, I suggest you move to the USA immediately to get involved in the medical business. Not as a physician, mind you, but as a malpractice lawyer. You apparently have all the requisite attributes.
“Perhaps you could describe in detail your parenting techniques and the conditions in which you raised your children which required the use of all these services.”
You don’t see how that’s condescending? Are you serious? Let me break it down for you.
When you ask about the conditions I raise my children in that require these services, it implies that they are growing up in an unhealthy environment. Don’t be thick.
And if that isn’t insulting enough, I’ve been called a “troll”, and “libtard” more times than I can count. Go have a looksee.
Again… you are attempting to split hairs here. Public health and outreach has a great impact on improving the health of citizens.
Go watch the TIME link I posted. Please tell me that those folks are having a good ol time. And again… go have a look at the NCHC page I’ve posted, which you yourself have quoted many times, and tell me there isn’t a crisis in the United States.
Again… we pay substatially less of our GDP than do Americans. Roughly 10% to their 16%. This is a indisputable fact. Now if you don’t think that this accounts for the reason that Americans at the top of the pyramid receive better care, or that if we simply upped what we spend would result in Canadians having shorter wait times… I don’t know what to say.
John,
KevinB did not call you parenting into question. He was simply curious about the environment that your children grew up in. And since you don’t know what to say, why don’t you listen to what everyone else is saying, for a change.
John:
As for infant mortality… you bet your ass it’s connected to how care is delivered. When both our kid’s were born, we had access to an infant hotline. When the kids got sick, doctors MADE HOUSE CALLS. We also had regular visits from public health nurses.
Interesting. I have two beautiful daughters, 13 and 15. We never had to call an infant hotline, we never required a house call from a doctor, and we have never, ever, been visited by a public health nurse for any reason.
Perhaps you could describe in detail your parenting techniques and the conditions in which you raised your children which required the use of all these services.
Kevin,
First of all, go eff yourself Mr. Smuggly McAssdink.
We are a university educated, upper middle class family who received the same treatment given to all new parents in the Lower Mainland of BC. Perhaps the quality of care where you are isn’t as good?
The purpose of these kinds of visits are to identify children at risk, help out new parents, and reduce stress on infants. It’s really quite civilized, and is EXACTLY the sort of care which contributes to lower infant mortality rates, as oppose to the system you advocate, which clearly results in more dead babies.
What’s a few dead babies though when you can save a buck eh?
john – you have to provide evidence for your assertions.
The so-called 40 million who are ‘uninsured’ in the US? This is a false number. Google the number and start to check facts.
About 10 Million are illegals.
And 17 M can afford it but choose not to.
And 25% already qualify for current public health care.
Uninsured already get about 1,500 per person of free health care per year. Remember, no hospital emergency can refuse you.
Oh – and the CBO Analysis says that under Obama’s plan, 36 million would remain uninsured.
Your anecdote about the bum knee and the US throwing you into a wheelchair is your own fictional tale. Don’t try to win an argument with fiction. Use facts.
In Canada, there are many treatments that are not available; the health care system won’t pay for them. These include not merely regular eye exams, eye surgery, but also various drugs and treatments, eg, for cancer. Ever read the book Code Blue? Google it.
My reference to illegal aliens, who are most certainly not immigrants, and their hesitation in using medical services, was to in part, explain the difference in infant mortatlity rates. Your attempt to divert this FACT to an emotional claim that I am ‘bashing immigrants’ is invalid. The FACT remains – the lack of care by illegal aliens (not immigrants) can’t be overlooked.
Your anecdotal references to doctors making house calls is irrelevant. They don’t do that in large cities – or even small ones. It’s up to the doctor and this has zilch to to with him being paid by public or private funds. Same with public health nurses – which also exist in the US. Same with ‘hot lines’.
The fact that you don’t know anyone who has made trips to the US for treatment doesn’t mean that such trips don’t exist. They do – and the FACTS are that many treatments are not available here in Canada. I’m sure you know that. So, people must go to the US for treatment.
Could you explain why you assume that the only means of bettering our health care system is ‘higher taxes’? Other analysts suggest that providing more private care options, which are less expensive than the public care, would be the more productive answer. Do you know why? Because most of the money for our health care goes to the bureaucracy. Not to the doctors, nurses and equipment. Try to check facts, John, instead of just ranting on and insulting us for being ‘tightwads’ and etc.
Would you provide some proof that the ‘corporate method’ of health care is inefficient and more costly? By the way – the public system is also a corporation; it’s just one that is owned by the govt rather than a small set of shareholders.
And that means that the govt corporation sets up a HUGE ratio of middlemen…that enormous bloated bureaucracy..that gobbles up all our tax money..so that we get LESS medical care, RESTRICTED medical care, out-of-date medical equipment, inadequate care. That’s what a public system does…and why it doesn’t work.
Now, do you think you could argue your case without the insults and ad hominem? And with facts?
John – please check things and use facts, not just your opinions.
No John, taxpayers did not fail her. The system and the bureaucrats that run it failed her. They’re the ones that determine the budgets, they’re the ones that set the rules and allocate the resources. Even if there were more funds in the budget, there’s no guarantee that CAT scanner would be available. As tax payers, we have absolutely no control on how our money is used in this system. Your problem shouldn’t be with us.
John your arguments never hold water. Americans that are covered are more than satisfied with access to the best care available anywhere. Also, your 40 million uninsured is a deceiving number which you are well aware of. If we take your number 40 and subtract 15 for illegals, 40 is now 25. Subtract 10 more from the 25 for the young demographic that CHOOSES not to obtain coverage as a cost/benefit analysis. Subtract and additional 5 from the remaining 15 because of the people that CHOOSE not to access available assistance as it is available now.
So, you’ve actually got around 10 million people who CANNOT get care due to pre existing conditions and those that fall between the cracks.
As per usual with you, and others of a like mind, your position is based solely on ideology and politics. Nobody in their right mind would scrap the existing elite system at a cost of trillions to receive less care for the sake of expanding coverage to 1/3 of a percent of the population.
But my problem is with you Kaga, because conservatives like yourself whine and moan and bitch so much, that we don’t spend the money we need to improve our systems.
ET, you my friend are full of grade A prime baloney. 17 million Americans CHOOSE to purchase iPods instead of healthcare? Dude are you one of those Fox News viewers or something? Because that is the kind of retardation spewed by that network.
How the HELL does a family of four earning less than $50k per year afford $12+k per year in health insurance? I’d say that the extreme cost of healthcare has more to do with it than purchasing “bling”.
And as for illegals… those poor bastards work for lousy wages, and help keep the American middle class comfortable. Without their labour, America would be in rough shape. Oddly enough, the corporate class knows this… just not the racists. They deserve access to healthcare.
Now as for cost…
As for being able to go to the emergency ward in the US… that’s when you may already be too far gone. Everyone loves talking about the “death panels” as mentioned by that supreme retard herself, Sarah Palin, but in fact those panels already operate, every time somebody is refused care.
Again… there is no point in arguing with you guys, because you will continue to believe whatever “facts” you can access. You can stare failure right in the face and not recognize it. I honestly believe you could sh!t your pants and somehow manage to convince yourselves that you were sitting in a flower bed.
Whoa wait a second…
ET says there are 10 million illegals, whereas Indiana says there are 15 million.
And then ET says there are 17 million who choose not to have healtcare, and Indi says there are 10 million. What gives? Those numbers are wildly different.
You guys might want to sort that out.
Next thing you guys will be telling me is that all healthcare in the US is delivered by magical creatures, and everybody would be happy if the Democrats just shut up about healthcare.
Up is down. Black is white. War is peace.
The noise machine continues on its noisy way. Somebody should figure out a way to feed it to the crops.
“But my problem is with you Kaga, because conservatives like yourself whine and moan and bitch so much, that we don’t spend the money we need to improve our systems”
Explain to me how we have control over how our money is allocated in the public system. Explain to me how throwing more of our money into the system will keep that CT scanner running 24/7 instead of paying for the thousands of other expenses of the system. Why aren’t you blaming the bureaucrats that allocate and chew up the resources?
How do we have control over our money? Through the parties we elect to govern us, and the bitching we do to our MPs.
“Throwing more money into the system” will allow us to fund more facilities, upgrade our technology, and hire more professionals. That’s sort of self-evident, isn’t it?
Right now we have a fraction of the CAT and MRI scanners currently operating in the US. The reason? Underfunding.
And in the end… underfunding the system costs us more. Looking at my mom’s situation dispassionately, here’s how it could have played out…
Mom has stroke, goes to hospital. They pop her in the CAT scan (which is operating 24/7, serving a huge community of people), determine the type of stroke, give her a pill to thin her blood, and bob’s your uncle. Damage has been minimized.
But nooooooo. There is nobody around to operate the CAT scan, so the stroke destroys her brain, resulting in her needing 24 hour hospital care for 4 months before we finally move her to a full care nursing home for the remaining four years of her life.
How exactly is this saving money or lives?
And I’ve heard 30 million to 100 million for the uninsured number. What’s your point?
You don’t get it John. I, and I suspect most others commenting here are not against creative solutions to ensure that everyone is covered. What I would object to were I an American(and do because it’s a possibility I or my family may need to travel south for care) is the bill set forth which does immense damage to the current system. I’m willing to bet the so called “turfers” would welcome some government in the system proportionate to the existing problem for the 40 million people.
BTW John, put that exact question to the voters and see how giddy they are about paying for illegal’s to have access to their care. I’d bet you’d have a hard time calling all of them racists. On second thought, probably not.
First you say:
“Everyone loves talking about the “death panels” as mentioned by that supreme retard herself, Sarah Palin,”
Then you finish with:
“but in fact those panels already operate, every time somebody is refused care.”
It’s obvious you’re the retard here John, acknowledging Sarah Palin is correct and accurate as your argument for why she’s wrong.
I’d say you’re a hypocrite after saying this:
“Same goes for you guys using the word “fag” as oppose to one of my liberal fag friends using it.”
And then saying this:
“by that supreme retard herself, Sarah Palin,”
I’ll take you at your word John, that you are a retard. After all, an enlightened progressive such as your self would never say a hurtful thing like “retard” unless you and your “liberal fag friends” were in fact retards.
john – try to think about facts rather than insulting us. Stop insulting people. Just deal with the issues.
First, the number of illegals is hardly accurate because they don’t want to be ‘outed’. therefore, the estimate varies from 15 to 20 million (Tucson Border Patrol)as of 2004. And almost 6 years later, there are obviously a lot more.
Your ‘either-or’ of purchasing health insurance vs an ipod is, as I’m sure you know, an invalid comparison. The FACT is, that many young people CHOOSE not to purchase health care insurance. Their need of care is limited; and just as many, many people in Canada do with their dental and eye treatments, they pay for these costs directly rather than buy more expensive insurance.
The family of four does not pay 12K for insurance; the cost to the employee is 25% and 75% is paid by the employer. So much for your hatred of corporations, eh?
Please don’t use the fallacious ‘argument’, full of emotion and bereft of facts, about the ‘illegals working for nothing and keeping the American middle class..blah blah’. Kindly note that their minimal wages are THEIRS to keep, because they have NO DEDUCTIONS for taxes – income or otherwise. And yet, their children attend the local schools – untaxed; and they use all the local hospitals which MUST treat them – unpaid.
Oh, and they send BILLIONS (12 billion in one year 2003) back to their families in Mexico. Mexico refuses to provide low income jobs for these unskilled, uneducated workers – and offloads them on to the US, which pays them, educates their children, and provides medical care. Sending this class off to the US to be given work, housing, education and medical care means that in Mexico, the wealthy class is increasing. There are more billionaires in Mexico than in Switzerland. But Mexico won’t build schools and factories for its poor – it ships them off to the US.
Try again, John, and this time, stop with the insults and emotion and stick to FACTS.
No, we don’t have control over our tax dollars. We have representative government and an unelected civil service. The govt makes the decisions on which hospitals to build, etc.
As for your mother, sad as it has been for you, there is no proof that a CAT scan and a pill could have prevented her further strokes and deterioration.
Again, John, please stop with the insults. Stop calling people dirty names, stop insulting people and just deal with the facts and the issues.
Oh – and you haven’t answered my questions.
ET, dude, if I’m insulting, it’s because I’ve been insulted. Go back a few comments and check it out. See the one calling my parenting into question? Or all the times I’ve been called a troll. That’s insulting, and I did not start it in any way. So get that straight.
In fact a CAT scan would have determined that my mother was having a ischemic stroke (a clot), and a clot buster could have been used to reduce damage. This is a fact. Arguing otherwise is like suggesting that direct pressure is unproven when it comes to staunching bleeding.
And where do you get off thinking a family of four only pays 25%? That’s assuming their company offers insurance. And those companies… they’re hurting too.
The US is a complete mess, and it’s mostly due to greed. Many of the social ills of that country could in fact be solved by throwing money at the problem. Improving education, access to health and social services have been proven time and again to mitigate many of the problems facing nations, but whatever you do… don’t look to the facts. Stick to ideology.
Re a comparison of corporate healthcare to government healthcare, go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems_compared
Yup it’s wikipedia, which throws most rightwingers into a fit, BUT… see the little numbers throughout the document. Those are called “citations”. That means they are pointing to peer-reviewed studies. Unlike, oh say, most rightwing blogs, which mostly just point to each other, or some rightwing think tank.
Just wait, what isn’t in the bill is just as frightening as what is in it.
Obeyme supports partial birth abortion and against letting babies who happen to live through an abortion receive medical treatment. I was told by a contract lawyer that the omission of any reference to abortion is very concerning. He said that it can be adopted later without much problem.
Obeyme is not just a liar, but in my opinion is a narcissist. When narcissists get challenged or people do not agree with them, they can become pretty nasty. They live in a fantasy world that they are unable to separate from reality.
Hold on America, we could be in for a pretty rough ride. Let’s hope it lasts ONLY another 40 months.
God Help Us
“Those are called ‘citations'”
Citations of studies funded by liberal interest groups.
Here is an interesting fact that I have NEVER seen a liberal respond to. I will give it a try, you can verify it yourself if you like. How is such innovation funded if you take away all of the profits that greedy health researches all want to make from their discoveries? The following is a direct result of the … shudder …. profit motive.
“The US is a complete mess”
That’s funny, because the polls in the US show most people happy with their health care and against govt run health care 2 to 1.
Do you know what the basis for Roe vs Wade was? A right to privacy. How is any other medical procedure any of the government’s business if abortion is not? Either roe v wade is wrong, or this bill is unconstitutional.
“That means they are pointing to peer-reviewed studies. Unlike, oh say, most rightwing blogs, which mostly just point to each other, or some rightwing think tank.” – Simple John
Unlike the Wikipedia which links to left wing think tanks, but calls them “citations”.
no, john, you are the one who began the insults, taunting ‘you guys’ as ideologues who advocate ‘paying more for less’. You increased it from there, moving on to personal insults. There’s no need, for example, to call me ‘dude’. or to call Sarah Palin a ‘retard’.
And saying that you were insulted and therefore, you feel you have the ‘right’ to insult back is irrational. Either you believe that a valid argument can be made based only on facts and reasoning..or you feel that you require insults to make your point. Is that how you feel?
The ratio of 75-25 for insurance is taken straight from the National Coalition on Health Care.
Please provide some evidence and analysis that ‘the USA is in a complete mess’ (explain) and that this is ‘mostly due to greed’. These are simply your unsubstantiated opinions.
That’s interesting that your solution is to ‘throw money at the problem’. That has been proven, time and again, to solve nothing. After all, your Wikipedia article has the US spending twice as much per person as in Canada – and yet, you still complain that the US is ‘in a mess’. Does money solve it all? No. That includes in Canada, where our health care costs soar and yet, don’t solve our problems of inadequate services.
No,john, you are the one who is trapped in ideology and refusing to deal with facts. Again, a public health care system IS a corporation. So, your attempt to denigrate a system because and only because you define it as ‘corporate’ is fallacious.
By the way, ‘citations’ doesn’t necessarily refer to ‘peer-reviewed’ articles. And again, please stop insulting everyone.
Yeah, like the Fraser institute, WHO, Congressional Research Services, US Dept of Health, the CATO institute, and the New England Journal if Medicine to name but a few. It’s practically PETA. Did you even read the article? I’m guessing that’s a big NO.
Once again, the WHO ranked Canada 30th and the U.S. 37th among 191 member nations. To be fair, for those who can afford it, the US ranks 1st compared to Canada’s 7th. Still, we live nearly TWO YEARS longer than Americans on average, and fewer of our babies die. Huge, huge difference.
Now… please proceed to call WHO a liberal organization, and point out how Michelle Malkin’s Journal of Medicine is somehow more reliable.
The number 40,000,000 of uninsured Americans keeps getting thrown about as if that were a bad thing. In an ideal world 100% of Americans, Canadians, Europeans would be uninsured. Insurance aka gambling was never intended to be ‘method of payment’.
Insurance for those who choose to buy it is a bet for and against something bad happening to you. I bet $5000.00 that something bad is going to happen to me this year. The insurance company bets $100,000.00 that nothing bad is going to happen to me this year. After winning the bets for 40 years the insurance company has to pay out the $100,000.00 and keeps the other $100,000.00 as profit
“john, you are the one who began the insults, taunting ‘you guys’ as ideologues who advocate ‘paying more for less’.”
It’s insulting to refer to people as “you guys”?! That is some thin skin you’ve got there (now that was an insult, but a very, very minor one. More of a friendly jab.)
Now, if you want to call me immature for rising to insults, fine. BUT I don’t see you going after those who started with the insults. The reason? Why they’re on your side of course. So basically your points are sorta moot.
The US does indeed throw more money at the problem. The reason that it doesn’t work, is because it goes right into the pockets of the healthcare industry, and then into the pockets of the shareholders. Basically the profit model has corrupted a system intended to help people. Nasty business that.
In fact, the problem of healthcare providers over billing States is endemic. Try searching google news for “medical providers over billing states” and see what you get.
As for quoting the NCHC, did you even read what they’ve written? I’m guessing not. Go read this, and tell me there isn’t a massive problem. I’m not sure whether or not you’ll believe the source you’ve quoted though, because it appears to contradict a number of things you’ve said, and supports some of the numbers I’ve provided
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml
Seriously, I’m gonna be up all gawdamn night making up for wasted work time. I got to go. Believe what you want, but reality doesn’t support your position.
Why don’t you list the WHO criteria for that finding John? They are ideological. If you don’t accept their premises, you won’t accept their rankings. I don’t accept their premises because I am not a socialist like you are John.
BTW, The demographics of our two countries are very different.
BTW, In the US, babies that would be given up on in other countries are fought for here by our wasteful system. My daughter was in the pediatric ICU for 4 months before coming home after having her life saved by a brilliant ex Canadian surgeon. At a cost of about half a million dollars, BTW.
That crack about not reading the Wikipedia article really hurt, John.
John
So, Canada is 30th. How many of the countries who ranked 1 through 29 have a government monopoly?
Oh, and 30th? Aren’t we a G8 nation? 30th is abstract failure – and it’s the voters like you who demand the status quo while sticking your head up your ass when you point out that the mixed system of Europe (continent, not UK) is far superior to our state socialist monopoly.
Choice matters.
john – you’ll have to provide proof that the US money goes into the pockets of the healthcare industry (and what do you mean by that anyway?) and ‘then into the pockets of the shareholders’. Please provide proof.
Facts can’t be ignored, john, and it’s a fact that the US medical system is more up-to-date in equipment and services than the Canadian. It’s a fact that they are, as pointed out, the primary innovators of medical and drug treatments in the entire world and have been for many years. So, your claim that the health care industry ‘pockets’ the money is out of line with reality.
You also don’t seem to understand, in your leftist hatred of ‘corporations’ that a public health care system is itself, a corporation. And, that most of the money poured into public health care goes to the middlemen, the bureaucrats and not to services or equipment or medical treatment.
As pointed out before, the age difference in longevity are statistically equal. And, as others have pointed out (and as Wikipedia points out) the demographics are entirely different and contribute in great measure to the infant mortality rates.
Again, stop insulting people. And no, you can’t claim that the reason I don’t go after those who insult you is because they are on my side. The fact is, john, I’m only posting to you. Not to them.
The demographics of our countries are about as close as two countries can get, but I don’t blame you for splitting hairs. The evidence is otherwise pretty damning.
And while it’s great that the US will spend small fortunes saving some kids, it’s a crime that they won’t spend a little bit more cash to save babies that might not actually be that sick.
The infant mortality rate can be affected hugely by small changes… Cuba, which has a lower infant mortality rate than the US (CIA World Factbook, lookitup) certainly isn’t performing half million dollar operations.
ET, John,
Yes, higher spending does go to the health care industry. The first thing that happens when the Canadian government gives major increases in health spending is the unions salivate and threaten to strike, the medial supply companies raise their prices and the doctors go on a futile attempt to get their first raise since the 1980’s.
John
I ask again, on WHO’s list of the top 29 countries, how many of them are government monopoly system?
The age differences are statistically equal? Let’s say you have a choice… you can die today, or 1.9 years from now. Which would you prefer? That’s not statistically equal… it’s a big effing difference.
As for gov money going into the pockets of corporations… I don’t know what to say. If you ask this, you have no idea how the American system works. Part of the care is payed for by government to for-profit providers. That’s just how it works.
And as for corporations… you don’t know that I hate them. I don’t. I actually believe in capitalism. Just not rapacious capitalism. There is a difference you know.
Well ET, I have been insulting John, calling him “Simple John”. That is because it is harder to not insult him than to insult him, and frankly, he is not worth the effort.
John,
Infant mortality and longevity has more to do with living conditions and less to do with health care.
The US has nasty inner cities which only Toronto can duplicate and only in a much smaller scale. If you took out all poverty-ridden inner cities from the US and our few equivalents, I bet our longevity would be equal.
We know this in part because it’s the poor, black inner city where you find the worst outcomes yet they are the ones who already get free government health care. It’s the lower middle income people who are left being in the US – not the poor.
In fact, income has a hell of a lot more to correlate it with outcomes than health care. Lifestyle much the rest.
John wants us to agree with his premises. So his arguments should be about those. Instead, he takes his premises as a given, and expects us to accept them, and so accept his argument, because, if you start where he is coming from, only an idiot would not reach his conclusions. That is why he thinks he is winning this argument, and showing us all to be idiots. That is also why arguing with him is a waste of time. He doesn’t even have the self awareness to understand what it is he is not communicating. How can he even understand our objections? Simple answer? He can’t.
John:
We are a university educated, upper middle class family
Oh?
First of all, go eff yourself Mr. Smuggly McAssdink.
And that’s the best your university educated, upper middle class self can come up with? I’d ask for a refund.
who received the same treatment given to all new parents in the Lower Mainland of BC. Perhaps the quality of care where you are isn’t as good?
I don’t know; the difference between Ontario and BC is less than one death per 1,000 births. I don’t consider that significant; perhaps you do. Let’s remember that the Yukon had the lowest infant mortality rate (0) in the country in 2005, but the highest (11) in 2004. A fractionally lower rate in BC for a couple of years could be nothing more than statistical noise.
The purpose of these kinds of visits are to identify children at risk, help out new parents, and reduce stress on infants. It’s really quite civilized, and is EXACTLY the sort of care which contributes to lower infant mortality rates, as oppose to the system you advocate, which clearly results in more dead babies.
Clearly results in more dead babies? Case not proven (see above). And, of course, since we didn’t get any of these services, and our daughters are both magnificently healthy, one would question whether they were necessary. In fact, one might go a bit farther, and wonder if all the resources poured into these areas might not have taken money away from other important services, like, say, CAT scans, where they might have had more immediate and telling effect.
And I’m curious – what kind of illness was serious enough to require a doctor’s house call (as opposed to what we did, which was take them the four blocks to our pediatrician), but NOT serious enough to require a trip to the ER (which, if one of them had started gasping for breath, etc. would have been our next stop)?
Not to mention that he has been manipulated by politicians into believing that anybody who disagrees with him is somewhere between and imbecile and a moron.
“In fact, one might go a bit farther, and wonder if all the resources poured into these areas might not have taken money away from other important services, like, say, CAT scans, where they might have had more immediate and telling effect.”
Bingo. I’ve been making the same point how his beef should be with the bureaucrats in charge of allocating the funds rather than the taxpayers. It doesn’t matter how much money you throw at the system, if the funds are continually mismanaged, spent on inefficiencies in the system instead of restructuring, or spent on initiatives of little value, that CAT scanner isn’t running 24/7.
I read somewhere that the employees of the UK’s NHS are the third largest single block of employees in the world, and are quite able to swing elections, and so are impossible to get rid of, or to reform. Not the kind of situation one would knowingly invite.
Are you kidding me? “Smuggly McAssdink” is gold you can take to the bank. Plus it managed to bi-pass the swearing filters.
“I don’t know; the difference between Ontario and BC is less than one death per 1,000 births. I don’t consider that significant; perhaps you do.”
You know who else might find it significant? The parents and family of the dead baby. Not to mention the dead baby itself.
Re the housecall, I forget the details. Suffice to say, we had a very sick, feverish 2 month old on our hands at 2 in the morning, and we called the number on the magnet on the fridge that we were given by the hospital. They said they’d send somebody. Nobody was more suprised than us. Our next option would have been to head on down to the emergency.
Now, are you really arguing whether or not more attentive care increases an infant’s chances for survival?
Taking resources away from public health outreach to fund more services like CAT scans isn’t the answer. Finding more money to pay for them without cutting cash elsewhere is the answer.
As for inefficiency… the Americans have us beat on the administrative bureaucratic front by a wide margin. How much money do you suppose it costs to hire people to question every single request for payment from an insurance company? And let’s not talk about the money spent on marketing for health insurance firms and healthcare providers.
Again… Americans spend up to 17% of their GDP whereas we spend around 10%.
Do you guys deny this? If so, you cannot quote the NCHC again, because they have posted those numbers as well.
As for the WHO’s list of the top 29 countries… I dunno Jason, go look yourself. Lemme know. I’m not arguing how we shape up compared to most other countries… just the US. That’s what the debate is about right now.
Re Is America a Mess? This makes it look like a bloody 3rd World country. They should be ashamed of themselves. Unless of course… maybe all these people shouldn’t have bought the latest iPod instead of purchasing health insurance.
http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/2009/remote_medical_multimedia/
John, re. dead babies, read the rest of KevinB’s post @5:34 – or, if that’s too much trouble, just the rest of his paragraph which you partially quote – and then look up “statistical noise”.
Also note that dead babies do not, as far as we know, find anything significant.
john – a statistical equality can refer only to an average calculation not an individual number!
A statistical equality refers to the average of an aggregate. So, of 1,000 people, a statistical equality refers to a number that is plus or minus 3 from the average of 1,000 people. Therefore, in a population of 1,000, whether one dies at 78 or 81, those numbers are statistically equal. That’s because some in that 1,000 might live to 90, and others might live to only 65. We are talking statistics here – not individual cases!
The bureaucracy of an insurance company and the bureaucracy of a public health care system – both are bureaucracies, but the private care has to be competitive while the public system is a monopoly. That’s why our public civil service have wage increases two to three times that of the private sector, why they have benefits and perks unavailable to the private sector – and why so much of our tax dollars go to the bureaucracy rather than to the actual equipment and treatment. And of course, Canada doesn’t do the medical research that the US does..
The fact that Americans spend more than we do – well, as we’ve pointed out endlessly to you, we don’t get the good medical treatment that they do. Or the medical research. So, again, what’s your point?
Your descriptions of corporations, your reference to them as greedy etc, are clear indications of your disdain for them. You cannot then try to divert your disdain by saying it refers only to ‘rapacious capitalism’ ..and what the heck does that mean, anyway. Who would support ‘rapacious capitalism’?
But your posts have been filled with comments like ‘corporate profiteering’ and ‘lines the pockets of middlemen’ etc..Not a word about ‘rapacious capitalism’..just corporations.
big companies has all of them selling drug and has drug stores
now army has sepcial doctors or big companies has doctor
how about bit on doctor from day one like
chicklen from birth day one to day 21 become ready to used them
ob..s
may not good exmaple I said
it is too late I said it already
what I mean
when some one is gifter or some one accpete for medical school or pass ready in university
govement can buy cost that doctor to pay their life money and made them future ” docter – after in”
or big drug company also pay for doctor cost too
becaue being doctor is not cheap
but made doctore is not easy
when those med student like to study and suffer to beocm doctor nobody help them
when they become doctor all peopel experct too much from them
and some specialist must choose saying we need
certian surgeron or specialist doctor
by help of private and public and government
like supply chain
supply doctor or hosptial
\\\\\
we need also so many counsling doctor so many pharmist can be reduce cost of ddoctor by tell us how to buy certain drug without seeing doctor too
Gafftastic!
In one sentence, he condemns his health care plan.
Imagine, he wants to create the Post Office of Health Care!
“The demographics of our countries are about as close as two countries can get…” – John at 4:39 PM
The ratio of Aboriginal Canadians (~3%) to Canadians vs. “Native Americans” (~1.37%) to Americans? The ratio of “Latin Canadians” (-1%) to Canadians vs. Hispanic Americans (~20%) to Americans?
Those demographics are wayyyy not close.
John:
if I’m insulting, it’s because I’ve been insulted. Go back a few comments and check it out. See the one calling my parenting into question?
I call shenanigans. I did NOT call your parenting into question; I merely asked you to provide details about your style. You seem to think that all this extra money poured into child health care has a large positive benefit. I suggested that the miniscule difference is just a statistical aberration which you dismissed without a shred of evidence, mathematical or otherwise. However, since your reading comprehension skills (as noted earlier) are questionable, I’m going to guess – and John, it is just a guess – that you’re functionally innumerate as well.
Of course, I could have made the argument that, since Toronto attracts 3 times as many immigrants as Vancouver, and has done for years, we have many more people who don’t know how to use the public health system properly, who aren’t even registered with it, and who probably lack the literacy skills to follow any advice they’re given. Correcting for that figure alone may well show that Ontario actually has lower infant mortality rates than BC, but I’m far too gentle to make any such suggestion.
However, I am going to suggest that you missed your calling. Given your 100% – in your estimation – ex post facto diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis for your mother, I suggest you move to the USA immediately to get involved in the medical business. Not as a physician, mind you, but as a malpractice lawyer. You apparently have all the requisite attributes.
“Perhaps you could describe in detail your parenting techniques and the conditions in which you raised your children which required the use of all these services.”
You don’t see how that’s condescending? Are you serious? Let me break it down for you.
When you ask about the conditions I raise my children in that require these services, it implies that they are growing up in an unhealthy environment. Don’t be thick.
And if that isn’t insulting enough, I’ve been called a “troll”, and “libtard” more times than I can count. Go have a looksee.
Again… you are attempting to split hairs here. Public health and outreach has a great impact on improving the health of citizens.
Go watch the TIME link I posted. Please tell me that those folks are having a good ol time. And again… go have a look at the NCHC page I’ve posted, which you yourself have quoted many times, and tell me there isn’t a crisis in the United States.
Again… we pay substatially less of our GDP than do Americans. Roughly 10% to their 16%. This is a indisputable fact. Now if you don’t think that this accounts for the reason that Americans at the top of the pyramid receive better care, or that if we simply upped what we spend would result in Canadians having shorter wait times… I don’t know what to say.
John,
KevinB did not call you parenting into question. He was simply curious about the environment that your children grew up in. And since you don’t know what to say, why don’t you listen to what everyone else is saying, for a change.