11-06-2005 20:15									#31
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

It is an interesting question, as to whether there is a right to health care in Canada. I don't see it as a right, but as something voluntarily offered and agreed upon by Canada. Making it a right isn't really going to help things.

	11-06-2005 21:24									#32
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Making it a right would prevent politicians from cutting medicare funding. Of course, it is impossible to have no waiting lists, but we should have reasonable limits on the time people have to wait.

Canada is a wealthy country. It can afford to adequate health care a right and what reasons are there not to do so.

	11-06-2005 22:01									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

First of all, is there a right to medical care? Should governments be required to finance medicare in it's current form?

The system is not working right now in Canada, as we see from the waitlists, and making it even more of a sacred cow that cannot be touched or altered is not a solution to the problems.

Even if there is a right to medical care, it is not necessarily true that we must keep medicare the way it is, in fact, it could be contrary to the right to ensure the destruction of medicare in Canada.

Yes, we are a wealthy nation, but health care is by far, the single largest expenditure.

	11-06-2005 22:22									#34
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi First of all, is there a right to medical care?

Apparently, there is in Quebec there.

But what possible reason would Conservative have for objecting to this right.?

If someone is sick then they should be taken care of within, or course, the reasonable limits that we apply to anyone else. That to me is a basic right.

Providing that basic right would not harm anyone.

The Canadian health care system is working, contrary to what you say. It is highly efficient compared to the U.S. system.

	11-06-2005 22:30									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Is our health care more efficient? I don't see such long wait lists for the provision of care in the United States, and we pay more per capita than the US does on health care. The system is not working here in Canada, and something needs to be done to fix the system.

quote: If someone is sick then they should be taken care of within, or course, the reasonable limits that we apply to anyone else. That to me is a basic right. Providing that basic right would not harm anyone.

When St. Leo words the right as 'protection from pain' I see problems.

First of all, pain is a necessary part of life. The only people who feel no pain are dead people, and I don't think the supposed right to health care, should first enshrine a right to die.

Second of all, I see many things getting bundled into the right to health care. The first being reproductive rights, which of course, also means that abortion becomes a right here in Canada.

You are right that such provision of care should do no harm to anyone, but you have far more faith in the innovators than I have.

	11-06-2005 22:35									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Benoit Pelletier said the province would consider using the notwithstanding clause in Quebec's constitution as an alternative to abiding by the court's decision.

Gee, why is it ok for Quebec to use the notwithstanding clause, and not ok for Alberta to do the same? Is the notwithstanding clause, 'distinct society'?

	11-06-2005 22:39									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Do a google search and it shows the Canadian system is superior.

Canadians pay less per capita on health care than the United States.

In 2002, the latest year for which comparable data are available, the United States spent $5,267 on health care for each man, woman and child in the population. Of this, $2,364, or 45 percent, was government spending, mainly on Medicare and Medicaid. Canada spent $2,931 per person, of which $2,048 came from the government.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/041505H.shtml

"In 1999, health administration costs totaled at least $294.3 billion in the United States, or $1,059 per capita, as compared with $307 per capita in Canada. "http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/349/8/768

"Canada spends just 10.2 percent of its gross domestic product on health care services for all its citizens, the United States spends 14.1 percent"
http://worldpolicy.org/globalrights...ada-health.html
That was from 1995.

	11-06-2005 22:40									#38
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Gee, why is it ok for Quebec to use the notwithstanding clause, and not ok for Alberta to do the same? Is the notwithstanding clause, 'distinct society'?

What are you talking about? Alberta has the same right as Quebec to use the notwithstanding clause

	11-06-2005 22:52									#39
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Good point Tingkai.

I was under the mistaken impression that we spend more than the US on health care.

quote: In 2002, the latest year for which comparable data are available, the United States spent $5,267 on health care for each man, woman and child in the population. Of this, $2,364, or 45 percent, was government spending, mainly on Medicare and Medicaid. Canada spent $2,931 per person, of which $2,048 came from the government.

So that's not a whole lot of difference between the spending. We are spending somewhat less per capita than the Americans for much poorer health care. It's not fair to lump private care, when comparing government spending on health care.

	11-06-2005 22:55									#40
	Support Apolyton

quote: What are you talking about? Alberta has the same right as Quebec to use the notwithstanding clause

Not without being blasted by the media for violating the charter of rights and freedoms. I'm surprised there hasn't been a peep about Quebec wanting to use the notwithstanding clause to 'obstruct justice'

	11-06-2005 23:05									#41
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Not without being blasted by the media for violating the charter of rights and freedoms. I'm surprised there hasn't been a peep about Quebec wanting to use the notwithstanding clause to 'obstruct justice'

The media reports. I doubt anyone ever one ever said that Klein's move violated the charter because all provinces have the right to use the notwithstanding clause.

In Alberta's case, the Liberals were up in arms. If nothing is being said about Quebec, it is a) people have not had time to react; or b) the Liberals are sleeping on the job; or c) the Liberals haven't figured out what strategy to take.

Option c is the most likely.

	11-06-2005 23:08									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi So that's not a whole lot of difference between the spending. We are spending somewhat less per capita than the Americans for much poorer health care. It's not fair to lump private care, when comparing government spending on health care.

Of course, it's fair to compare private spending. If you want to know how much a country spends on health care then you have to look at how much it spends, regardless of whether it is private or public.

The Americans spend twice as much per person on health care compared to Canadians. And yet, Americans have a lower life expectancy. That says a lot.

	12-06-2005 01:28									#43
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi So that's not a whole lot of difference between the spending. We are spending somewhat less per capita than the Americans for much poorer health care. It's not fair to lump private care, when comparing government spending on health care.

That's some of the most rediculous logic I've ever seen. You want to claim that the US has better health care based on their total spend, but don't want to acknowledge the massive private portion of the spending. If you wanted to be fair and honest, imagine the US health care system with the same level of government spending, but strip away all private spending. Then see how the two systems would compare.

	12-06-2005 02:10									#44
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki Are all arrests in the US based on the police kicking down someone's door?

Only if they're Canadians.

	12-06-2005 04:08									#45
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi So that's not a whole lot of difference between the spending. We are spending somewhat less per capita than the Americans for much poorer health care. It's not fair to lump private care, when comparing government spending on health care.

That’s not true. The American system is much better… if you happen to be fortunate enough to be rich. Many Americans receive very poor services due to their socio-economic status. The Canadian system has its problems, but I hardly see how moving toward an American style system is the solution. Those on the right keep spouting how the system is broken and needs to be fixed, except in their minds ‘fixing’ the system means dismantling it. I do not think that there is anyone in Canada who would deny that the system needs improvement, but I hardly see change in the direction of private healthcare as the best means to go about achieving the ends Canadians want to see.

	12-06-2005 05:17									#46
	Increase the size of your Attachments

This ruling will not bring "American style" health care to Canada, not by a longshot.

It simply lifts a ban on private systems operating parallel to the public one or, in other words, a two-tier system. In fact, most developed countries in the world have two tier systems, Canada is unique in not having one. And in most countries (like in the EU) health services are still free...

I don't see the problem. Seems more like a blow to the national image than anything else.

	12-06-2005 11:35									#47
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

This is an excellent example of exactly what is wrong with Canadian healthcare. The Yanks get brought up as a boogyman. Thou shalt not have any private healthcare.

OK. It's back to the Cuban model for us.

	12-06-2005 11:38									#48
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Where have I suggested that the system ought to be dismantled? I think that there are things that ought to be done to the system to improve it and fix the problems that do not involve dismantling.

Secondly, it isn't fair to compare private and public spending with public spending. What would Canadians spend on health care were they given the option to spend money as they see fit?

	12-06-2005 11:57									#49
	Inflate your Upload Space

Health should not be for sale. I find giving a person more of a right to good medical attention just because that person has lots of money dispicable. Healthcare is not a consumer good to be baought and sold, it is a vital public service.

	12-06-2005 12:03									#50
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Health is always for sale, just look at how much the drug companies profit. If you believe health should not be for sale, than that ought to shut down every single company that develops drugs, since that is what they are selling, health.

I agree that there should be some health care available to everyone, but also, that if people want extraordinary care, that they should be able to pay to obtain the service.

	12-06-2005 12:41									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

The point I was trying to make was not that a two-tier system is in it of itself a bad thing, but that no one looks at any other possible ways of solving the problems. Two-tire healthcare is not the only solution, in fact I don’t see it as a solution at all; it doesn’t attempt to solve the problems of the public system, but rather merely is a means of remedying them, it’s not a cure, but rather a treatment. What we should be doing is looking at ways to fix the public system we already have in place and reform it.

	12-06-2005 13:29									#52
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Odin Health should not be for sale. I find giving a person more of a right to good medical attention just because that person has lots of money dispicable. Healthcare is not a consumer good to be baought and sold, it is a vital public service.

Then you would not want to live in that running capitalist, pig-dog state known as Sweden.

	12-06-2005 13:31									#53
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Voltaire The point I was trying to make was not that a two-tier system is in it of itself a bad thing, but that no one looks at any other possible ways of solving the problems. Two-tire healthcare is not the only solution, in fact I don’t see it as a solution at all; it doesn’t attempt to solve the problems of the public system, but rather merely is a means of remedying them, it’s not a cure, but rather a treatment. What we should be doing is looking at ways to fix the public system we already have in place and reform it.

Except, only North Korea and Cuba try to do everything through the state. Not even the Yanks are so stupid to do it all one way.

We're in good company with our North Korean and Cuban cousins.

	12-06-2005 13:42									#54
	Put an end to popups!

Great Britain, France, Germany, Norway, Switzerland, The Netherlands, and on, and on...

All these countries have a blended system where the public system guarantees care for everyone and a private system is there to take pressure off the public.

Do the rich get better care? No doubt. Incidently, how many PMs in recent years have gone for private treatment of themsleves or their families?

	12-06-2005 13:44									#55
	Increase Your PM Length

Does anyone have a link to an article on Hargrove going to the front of the line for a recent medical issue?

	12-06-2005 14:05									#56
	Got spare money?

In Canada, if you have pull you go to the front of the line. If you have money you go to the States.

Oh sorry, you thought millionaires with cancer stay here for treatment?

Could I sell you a slightly used bridge?

	12-06-2005 14:53									#57
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

The problem with the two-tier system is that it creates administrative inefficiencies that lead to higher costs. Besides, if the rich have their own private system, they'll pressure government to cut funding to the public system.

Conservative ideologues get blinded by their desire to have a free market in everything. The goal should not be a free market. The goal is to provide the best health care possible within reasonable limits.

	12-06-2005 15:08									#58
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Yes, the free market, dog eat dog economy that Sweden is should be a warning to us all.

	12-06-2005 15:15									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

It seems most people have a two tier system. A public system which gives everyone basic coverage then a second for profit system where people with money can pay extra to get more. It fills a demand and improves the system as a whole by lowering wait times and improving patient to staff ratios.

	12-06-2005 15:47									#60
	Got spare money?

Well, I suppose everyone already has a two-tiered system. If you want an operation done quickly, just go to Thailand.