Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think it's feasible to have a Canadian model... and on top of that a private service/insurance model (that's illegal in Canada) for those who can afford it.

Best of both worlds .

whembly wrote:

 AustonT wrote:
They ration education in Canada

Okay... that's funny...

Remember folks, we have over 300 million folks here in US of A... how populous is Canada?

Without checking for sure they run about 10% of our population, maybe more but not significantly.

 whembly wrote:
Remember folks, we have over 300 million folks here in US of A... how populous is Canada?

It is harder and more expensive to provide services to a small, disperse population than it is to population that is generally highly clustered so a direct comparison of population and cost is not valid. But even so Canada comes out ahead

Of course. Health is a commodity, the more other people have the less mine is worth. Making other people healthier is basically stealing from me. The government has no right to do that.

 Chongara wrote:
Of course. Health is a commodity, the more other people have the less mine is worth. Making other people healthier is basically stealing from me. The government has no right to do that.

But it is OK for private health insurers to skim some (lots) off the top and provide a worse service for a higher cost to do exactly the same thing?

I've never really understood the point of view you have expressed...

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
Of course. Health is a commodity, the more other people have the less mine is worth. Making other people healthier is basically stealing from me. The government has no right to do that.

But it is OK for private health insurers to skim some (lots) off the top and provide a worse service for a higher cost to do exactly the same thing?

Um... what?

Do you not understand how health insurance work?

Chongara has gotta be trolling. If not, there's a massive disconnect between his and my understanding of the world.

As my statements were questioned about $4 generic prescriptions. This is what Walmart says in their advertisements. It is a loss leader to get you into the store for 30 minutes while you wait for your prescription to be filled. The assumption is that you will shop around and buy other stuff, or at least see things you like for the price, and come back and buy stuff.

There are also a lot of medications with no generic, then you are screwed on price. You contact the manufacturer directly to get the medication either for free or reduced cost. Nearly every pharmacutical company has a program like this.

As for an $80 MRI, that is called shopping around and making places bid against each other for your money. They just started some sort of medical website like priceline.com

http://bidonhealth.com/




Automatically Appended Next Post:
The site appears to only have CA and AZ on it.. It is a new site. Hopefully it will spread.

 whembly wrote:
Do you not understand how health insurance work?

I understand how health insurance works; do you not understand how a national health system works?

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Do you not understand how health insurance work?

I understand how health insurance works; do you not understand how a national health system works?

Okay... and yep .

I figure this is what the future of health care actually looks like. There is at least one entrepranuer looking to start up a convenience store/fast food model of health care clinic for super routine type stuff.

You walk in, the prices for tests are clearly displayed, you say "yea hello, I'd like the #2 combo with a side of prostate exam." You wait 5 minutes, have your tests, wait another 5 minutes, have your results, and you are done.

 Shadowseer_Kim wrote:
I figure this is what the future of health care actually looks like. There is at least one entrepranuer looking to start up a convenience store/fast food model of health care clinic for super routine type stuff.

You walk in, the prices for tests are clearly displayed, you say "yea hello, I'd like the #2 combo with a side of prostate exam." You wait 5 minutes, have your tests, wait another 5 minutes, have your results, and you are done.

That's sorta happening...

Urgent care outfits are popping up all over the place that works sorta like that.

 whembly wrote:
Okay... and yep .

So... what exactly were you trying to say?

A national health service takes a little bit from everyone so that anyone can access the vast majority of treatments and services for free at point of use. A health insurer takes a lot from some people to pay (or partially pay while the "customer" makes up the shortfall) for a very limited range of treatments and services while taking a big chunk of cash to the bank.

People who complain that national health services "pay for others to have treatment!!!!!1111111oneoneonesqrt-1" and yet are quite happy paying through the nose for health insurance which does exactly the same thing (except for a greater cost to the person paying the insurance and getting a worse overall level of service) just don't make sense to me.

PhantomViper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
I just show up and the government pays for everything.

It's fething awesome.

Also, I still seem to have freedom.

Hooray for socialized medicine!

That may be true, but you should feel ashamed for yourself for being a self entitled communist hippie!

Also, you can't have as many guns as the Americans, so you clearly don't have freedom.

Actually, we can. we classify all firearms into one of 3 categories, each requiring a license. But we can haz all the guns.

djones520 wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
I just show up and the government pays for everything.

It's fething awesome.

Also, I still seem to have freedom.

Hooray for socialized medicine!

Really? My dad works in Canada, has about a 40% tax rate, comes to around $36,000 a year he pays in taxes. Ends up being roughly $8,000 more a year then what he'd pay back home, and about $3,000 more a year then what he'd pay for insurance for himself (actually, about $7800, since he's retired military). Then on top of that the 12% sales tax he has to pay for anything he purchases, then gas taxes of about $1.30 per gallon... It's not a wonder he's sick and tired of living there. Doesn't even make $100k a year, and ends up bringing home less then half of his pay after taxes.

If "socialized medicine" means I have to pay so much more in taxes for a system that his fiance still wanted private insurance for, then you can keep it.

I'm gonna call shenanigans on the 40% tax rate, because that's not a thing. And our health care coverage doesn't hire armies of lawyers to try and deny you the coverage that you've paid for, like a private insurance company does. Nor does our health care make its decisions based on what the insurance company's accountants feel is best (for the company, not for you). The sales tax varies by province, and oddly enough gas is so expensive because the government stopped regulating its price. A while back the government used to own a company called Petro Canada, which allowed the government to jump into the competitive market and thus effectively regulate the price of gas for consumers. It doesn't do that anymore, and now gas is stupid expensive. I miss the days when it was about $1.40 per gallon. Anyway, it seems like D-USA has ninja'd me to calculating why your dad either needs to fire his accountant or else needs to stop inventing reasons to whine, so I'll leave it at that.

Frazzled wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:

Would there be “death panels?” You betcha. The horror show that is the ACA has them, and Medicare has it now. However, it’s a tradeoff. As technology expands the cost expands as well.

In the sense that you're using the absurd inflammatory troll term "death panels", every private insurance provider has death panels too. Only they deny a lot higher percentage of people care, because they need to save money for profit.

Its not absurd when you're on the bad end of one of these decisions. I know people on Medicare who already are.
I call it what it is, but also said as technology/cost expands these sorts of decisions come into play. They have here, in Canada, and the UK. Its the fundamental law of economics.

If you're going to respond harshly to everyone who wants to discuss it, even those I'm sure you essentially agree with, you should probably step back and not, er respond. You're too ready for a fight.

Canada doesn't deny healthcare to anyone. Ever. Even a 98-year-old meth addict is entitled to a replacement kidney. He might be very, very low on the transplant list, but if that many kidneys are available then he'll get one.

Frazzled wrote:yea but look what happened to your head. You're bald and grey!
(Frazzled likes the Canadian system fyi).

It's silver!

Jihadin wrote:Whats the classroom size? How many students per teacher? USA pop vs Canada pop?

Class size varies by province. In British Columbia the size is currently 30 students to one teacher, I believe. However this is a point of contention at the moment between the provincial government and the BC Teachers Union, and a really complicated issue. And Canada's population is about 36 million, which I believe if roughly 1/10th of the USA. However, our country is much larger and our populations is spread out more, so keep in mind that a small, spread-out population is actually harder and more costly to administrate for than is a larger centralized population.

Look what Canadian healthcare has done to you. Its turned you into a girl!

 whembly wrote:

 AustonT wrote:
They ration education in Canada

Okay... that's funny...

Remember folks, we have over 300 million folks here in US of A... how populous is Canada?

Are you saying that having lower population makes a country's education system better?

Da Boss wrote:
Chongara has gotta be trolling. If not, there's a massive disconnect between his and my understanding of the world.

Chongara is always trolling. But like a good troll, he'll always deny it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Jihadin wrote:Whats the classroom size? How many students per teacher? USA pop vs Canada pop?

Class size varies by province. In British Columbia the size is currently 30 students to one teacher, I believe. However this is a point of contention at the moment between the provincial government and the BC Teachers Union, and a really complicated issue. And Canada's population is about 36 million, which I believe if roughly 1/10th of the USA. However, our country is much larger and our populations is spread out more, so keep in mind that a small, spread-out population is actually harder and more costly to administrate for than is a larger centralized population.

The same here, about 28-30 kids per class.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 AustonT wrote:
They ration education in Canada

Okay... that's funny...

Remember folks, we have over 300 million folks here in US of A... how populous is Canada?

Are you saying that having lower population makes a country's education system better?

Not necessarily... I need to look at that study as it seems dodgy... I want to look at the raw numbers and methodology used... will take some time to look at it tonight.

 azazel the cat wrote:
Class size varies by province. In British Columbia the size is currently 30 students to one teacher, I believe. However this is a point of contention at the moment between the provincial government and the BC Teachers Union, and a really complicated issue. And Canada's population is about 36 million, which I believe if roughly 1/10th of the USA. However, our country is much larger and our populations is spread out more, so keep in mind that a small, spread-out population is actually harder and more costly to administrate for than is a larger centralized population.

Canada isn't that much larger size wise than the US, and your population is actually not very spread out either.
Our population density is roughly 10x yours and we have 10x the people and are only about 20,000 sq miles (100,000 sq, km) so basically you aren't any more spread out, if anything you may be less given your population density is 9 to our 84. Basically your population is more centralized than ours, which does not invalidate your point it's just food for thought.
Edit:Less obnoxious map

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
Of course. Health is a commodity, the more other people have the less mine is worth. Making other people healthier is basically stealing from me. The government has no right to do that.

But it is OK for private health insurers to skim some (lots) off the top and provide a worse service for a higher cost to do exactly the same thing?

Of course. That's private industry at work - what the Free Market says the people demand. You can't argue with the Free Market, Jesus invented the Free Market! Questioning it is like spitting in the face of our lord & savior, the very man who penned the US Constitution. Maybe you're comfortable doing that over in Europoplous or wherever you're from that's basically France and not the greatest country on earth but not here.

Da Boss wrote:
Chongara has gotta be trolling. If not, there's a massive disconnect between his and my understanding of the world.

Don't worry, Chongora specializes in parody uber right wing posts. He be trollin.

Now if only the NHS had decent doctors and not-gak nurses...

 Shadowseer_Kim wrote:
As my statements were questioned about $4 generic prescriptions. This is what Walmart says in their advertisements.

Looking at the list of Walmart $4 prescription drugs I don't see any actual prescription drugs. I see drugs that are often prescribed, but that can obtained without a prescription.

I mean, they have 100 mg Ibuprophen on there, I take that gak like candy because of muscle issues related to complications with an ACL tear. Granted $4 is a pretty good price for some of the featured items (including 100 mg Ibuprophen, thanks for the heads up), but they're still not drugs that you need an actual prescription in order to obtain.

You need the Ranger Candy....thats 800mg Motrin (same thing)

d-usa, yea no problem. I saw 800mg Ibu on the list as well. They deliver it to your house for free as well in case you can not make it out.

Walgreens has a similar program, I think they advertise $5 for 30 days, and $12 for 90 days.

Now then, Frazzled, I want to meet your primary care physician who charges $10 a visit. If I was in your area, I would want a referral for certain. That's a bargain.

 d-usa wrote:
If I had kids that drive up my premiums I would save even more in Canada, and also keep in mind that the savings don't include all the out of pocket expenses that I don't have to pay in Canada.

There's a lot more to it than regular out-of-pocket expenses as well. For example, if I feel a bit sick, I can just go to the doctor. I don't have to worry about paying for it, or how this will effect my insurance premiums or excess fees. I can catch a lot of ailments a lot more quickly this way, because I don't have to limit my doctors visits to once a year, or just when I really need it. This in turn allows the government to save a lot of money by early detection and treatment of serious illnesses.

Any kind of medical care or diagnostic tests are all covered by your taxes. And everyone has equal access, no matter if you've got a genetic disorder or your illness is the result of a lifestyle choice (smoking or drinking) or you engage in risky behaviour (motorbike riding or contact sports).

I, my wife and daughter all get free vaccinations, the birth of our daughter was attended by two midwives, two doctors (one our personal doctor, one from the hospital) a specialist and an anesthetist, and included 25 hours in the birthing suite and a week long hospital stay (for both my wife AND me) and didn't cost a penny. We had home visits from both the midwives and the maternal and child health nurse, and follow up visits until my daughter is (I think) five years old, all covered by our taxes. Not a single extra dollar paid by us.

 Kaldor wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
If I had kids that drive up my premiums I would save even more in Canada, and also keep in mind that the savings don't include all the out of pocket expenses that I don't have to pay in Canada.

There's a lot more to it than regular out-of-pocket expenses as well. For example, if I feel a bit sick, I can just go to the doctor. I don't have to worry about paying for it, or how this will effect my insurance premiums or excess fees. I can catch a lot of ailments a lot more quickly this way, because I don't have to limit my doctors visits to once a year, or just when I really need it. This in turn allows the government to save a lot of money by early detection and treatment of serious illnesses.

Any kind of medical care or diagnostic tests are all covered by your taxes. And everyone has equal access, no matter if you've got a genetic disorder or your illness is the result of a lifestyle choice (smoking or drinking) or you engage in risky behaviour (motorbike riding or contact sports).

I, my wife and daughter all get free vaccinations, the birth of our daughter was attended by two midwives, two doctors (one our personal doctor, one from the hospital) a specialist and an anesthetist, and included 25 hours in the birthing suite and a week long hospital stay (for both my wife AND me) and didn't cost a penny. We had home visits from both the midwives and the maternal and child health nurse, and follow up visits until my daughter is (I think) five years old, all covered by our taxes. Not a single extra dollar paid by us.

Your system is controlled by monsters! How do you even have room for Freedom in your life when you are being chocked to death by all these medical people always checking up on you

Be really worried when they schedule prostate check every 2 months......

 azazel the cat wrote:
I just show up and the government pays for everything.

It's fething awesome.

Also, I still seem to have freedom.

Hooray for socialized medicine!

My parents are under the belief that America is the only free country in the world.

They pretty much think you guys (Canadians) are being oppressed and hate your health care system. Yet every Canadian I have ever met likes the system. I guess Canadians don't know they hate it.

I'm ok with a government/tax funded health care system, just like I am ok with it when it comes to military, roads, schools, medicare, social security, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AustonT wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:
Class size varies by province. In British Columbia the size is currently 30 students to one teacher, I believe. However this is a point of contention at the moment between the provincial government and the BC Teachers Union, and a really complicated issue. And Canada's population is about 36 million, which I believe if roughly 1/10th of the USA. However, our country is much larger and our populations is spread out more, so keep in mind that a small, spread-out population is actually harder and more costly to administrate for than is a larger centralized population.

Canada isn't that much larger size wise than the US, and your population is actually not very spread out either.

Spoiler:

Our population density is roughly 10x yours and we have 10x the people and are only about 20,000 sq miles (100,000 sq, km) so basically you aren't any more spread out, if anything you may be less given your population density is 9 to our 84. Basically your population is more centralized than ours, which does not invalidate your point it's just food for thought.
Edit:Less obnoxious map

Remember hearing During the 2010 winter Olympics, about 90 percent of All Canadians live about 100 miles from the boarder.

Canada is a huge country. have to wonder why so man Canadians would live so close to the boarder. Obviously they are waiting to invade America, riding on their Moose eating their fancy maple syrup.

Canadian clustering near the border has less to do with us and more to do with the lay of the land. I prefer not to go North of Calgary unless I have to.