• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

A Good Example of Why NOT To Go to Universal Healthcare

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Here is one of many reasons why I oppose socialized medicine and universal healthcare coverage:

Canada's Conservatives vow health care guarantee By David Ljunggren
Fri Dec 2, 2:19 PM ET



OTTAWA (Reuters) - The main opposition Conservative Party, regularly accused of planning to scrap Canada's creaking publicly funded health care system, promised on Friday to cut wait times for treatment if elected, but stressed it would not create a parallel private network.

The Conservatives -- bidding to end 12 years of Liberal rule in the January 23 election -- have had great trouble persuading Canadians that they want to improve rather than kill off the national medicare system.

Medicare gives Canadians the right to free medical treatment. Although it swallows close to C$90 billion a year in public funds, waiting times are growing and there are increasingly serious shortages of family doctors and nurses.
Canadians have sought medical treatment in the US on numerous occassions:

Conservative leader Stephen Harper said he would work with the provinces to guarantee that people get care within a reasonable time or be entitled to go outside the province if necessary. Spokeswoman Carolyn Stewart-Olsen said this would even mean treatment in the United States if necessary.
Private medical facilities have already been set up in various provinces. The Liberals have on occasion threatened to cut off funds to the provinces unless the clinics cease operations but Prime Minister Paul Martin refused at a Toronto news conference on Friday to say he would shut them down.

Martin scoffed at Harper and said he could not be trusted.

He said that in the 1950s his father Paul Martin Sr. had brought in the beginnings of the public health system. He himself made wait times a centerpiece of the 2004 election and then arranged for C$41 billion in new funding.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051202/wl_nm/canada_politics_dc
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Where are the proponents of socialized medicine concerning this issue? I am surprised to not here any comments from liberals or any of them to address the problems that socialized medicine brought to Canada that are stated in this article. I am assuming the proponents of socialized medicine are too scared to debate the issue.
 

Comrade Brian

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
0
Location
NE, Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
To put it short, the reason why we should have free medical care is, to put it short, so everyone can have it. Though maybe the quality may not always be as high in private care, we think it is better that everyone has at least medical care, than some getting the best, and others can't get any at all.
 

Cremaster77

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
962
Reaction score
199
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
TimmyBoy said:
Where are the proponents of socialized medicine concerning this issue? I am surprised to not here any comments from liberals or any of them to address the problems that socialized medicine brought to Canada that are stated in this article. I am assuming the proponents of socialized medicine are too scared to debate the issue.
People push for socialized medicine because up to 40 million Americans are uninsured in the richest country in the world. Why is that hard to understand? The wait times for Canadian medicine are incredibly exagerated. Median wait times to see a specialist is 4 weeks and median wait time to see get a diagnostic test is 3 weeks. These are all non-emergent and elective cases. In emergencies, access is immediate. There is no one waiting 3 weeks to get an emergent CT scan.

Since healthcare in Canada is as horrible as you say, how do explain the fact that 88% of Canadians rate their healthcare is good, very good, or excellent? In fact, this percentage is actually higher the the 85% of Americans who rate their healthcare this way?

I think these numbers stand for themselves. But I'll leave you with an anecdote. I work in a hospital. We had an 8-year-old girl come to our department for radiation treatments for a brain tumor that she had. The overall cure rate of this tumor is 70-80%. However, her parents were uninsured, and because of this, we could not treat her. The patient goes away, and never gets the treatment. 6 months later, she comes back, this time with the tumor spread to her spinal cord causing compression. Because this is considered a medical emergency, we treated give her treatments, but once the tumor has spread, it's incurable. The girl will now die even though she had a greater than 70% chance of cure when she first came to us.

That's why we need universal healthcare coverage.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
TimmyBoy said:
Where are the proponents of socialized medicine concerning this issue? I am surprised to not here any comments from liberals or any of them to address the problems that socialized medicine brought to Canada that are stated in this article. I am assuming the proponents of socialized medicine are too scared to debate the issue.
Surely you jest!
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Comrade Brian said:
To put it short, the reason why we should have free medical care is, to put it short, so everyone can have it.
Then let's have free food too.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Universal health care in Canada is a disaster.........I have friends there that can't get and appointment for 6 months and they come to the states for their medical treatment.........
 

26 X World Champs

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
TimmyBoy said:
Where are the proponents of socialized medicine concerning this issue? I am surprised to not here any comments from liberals or any of them to address the problems that socialized medicine brought to Canada that are stated in this article. I am assuming the proponents of socialized medicine are too scared to debate the issue.
What revolutionary idea do you have that will provide health care to the 43 million Americans who currently aren't covered? I'm curious to read what your solution is?

Are any of you out there of the opinion that if people can't afford private health care that's too damn bad? I'm not talking about people living below the poverty line, I'm talking about people who live from paycheck to paycheck and are self-supporting but do not have enough to buy health care, what happens to them? If they have diabetes, how do they get their meds, etc.?
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
26 X World Champs said:
What revolutionary idea do you have that will provide health care to the 43 million Americans who currently aren't covered? I'm curious to read what your solution is?

Are any of you out there of the opinion that if people can't afford private health care that's too damn bad? I'm not talking about people living below the poverty line, I'm talking about people who live from paycheck to paycheck and are self-supporting but do not have enough to buy health care, what happens to them? If they have diabetes, how do they get their meds, etc.?
Any which way you look at it, their is no easy solution to the healthcare problem. If you want better quality healthcare, you want new innovative ideas on health issues then you would want for profit, private, control of healthcare. If you want an inefficient system, shortages of doctors and nurses, doctors who are not very good in the operating room, long waiting lists to see the doctor, but everybody is covered, then the socialized medicine is the way to go. But their are serious risks to socialized medicine and hidden costs that are associated with it. Me personally, i feel that socialized medicine has some serious shortcomings and I have deep misgivings about switching to socialized medicine. Doctors need to make money and the cold hard facts are, nothing in this world is free, even under socialized medicine, it is not free. You will need higher taxes to pay for an inefficient system when it comes to socialized medicine. I guarantee you, those taxes will be very high to pay for that system as well and it will still be inefficient.
 
Last edited:

Inuyasha

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
1,510
Reaction score
58
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I cannot comment on the Canadian system because i have never been covered by it, If you haven't tried it you just don't really know. i only have discussed this with one Canadian who works for a multi-national company and if it is not life threating he always returns to Canada for his medical needs.

I have used the health care plan in Spain and it works really well. There are no long waits and they don't spend $90 billion dollars a year on it. It should be mentioned that most of the Spanish people also carry private medical insurance. My daughter pays in one year less than she paid for a month here. The reason, I am told, is that insurance companies in Spain are prohibited from lobbying. The health insurance industry has one of the biggest lobbies in Washington. maybe that should be looked into.

Waiting? My wife had a plan that cost $970 a month. She had to wait two months for an appointment with a specialist. Waiting... the luck of the draw.

In a sense we do have a national health plan. You can always go to the county hospital for emergencies (an emergency is what ever you deem it to be from a traffic accident to an earache.) The county hospital here is the busiest place in the city at night handling an enormous number of wounds caused by violence and many other cases coming from poor areas. The people are charged a minimal sum but more often than not that sum is never paid. Or it is paid by the taxpayer. Only a private hospital can refuse treatment to someone. Then they are often open to lawsuits based on other laws.

PS. My daughter's doctor in Spain drives a Mercedes-Benz and his wife has an Alfa. They also have a house at the beach. Seems like he's making out OK and he puts time in one day a week to work in the natiuonal system- How's that for making bank.
 

Cremaster77

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
962
Reaction score
199
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
TimmyBoy said:
Any which way you look at it, their is no easy solution to the healthcare problem. If you want better quality healthcare, you want new innovative ideas on health issues then you would want for profit, private, control of healthcare. If you want an inefficient system, shortages of doctors and nurses, doctors who are not very good in the operating room, long waiting lists to see the doctor, but everybody is covered, then the socialized medicine is the way to go. But their are serious risks to socialized medicine and hidden costs that are associated with it. Me personally, i feel that socialized medicine has some serious shortcomings and I have deep misgivings about switching to socialized medicine. Doctors need to make money and the cold hard facts are, nothing in this world is free, even under socialized medicine, it is not free. You will need higher taxes to pay for an inefficient system when it comes to socialized medicine. I guarantee you, those taxes will be very high to pay for that system as well and it will still be inefficient.
I post studies with links that show that Canadians have a wait time of a few weeks, not 6 months like some people here blindly state. I post data with links that show that Candians are MORE satisfied with their healthcare than Americans. You make ridiculous statements about how socialized medicine results in inferior medical care citing "doctors who are not very good in the operating room", yet in countries with socialized medicine average life expectancy is higher, and infant mortality and maternal mortality are lower than in the US. This includes most European countries, some Asian countries, and Canada.

You make a blanket statement to start the thread about how noone wants to debate these issues. I post DATA showing how your statements and completely false, and you ignore them, instead choosing to make unsubstantiated claims as to the inferiority of healthcare under socialized systems. You serve as a prime example why healthcare in this country is declining and will continue to do so. Congratulations.
 
H

hipsterdufus

TimmyBoy said:
Where are the proponents of socialized medicine concerning this issue? I am surprised to not here any comments from liberals or any of them to address the problems that socialized medicine brought to Canada that are stated in this article. I am assuming the proponents of socialized medicine are too scared to debate the issue.
Canadians have already voted to keep their current system of healthcare. It's certainly not perfect, but it's so much better than ours. We are leaving more and more people uninsured and without healthcare every day.

I think that's one of the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives. The conservative argument is "so what - it's every man for himself". The liberal argument is that "every American deserves health care".
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
think that's one of the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives. The conservative argument is "so what - it's every man for himself". The liberal argument is that "every American deserves health care".
_
Thats kinda inaccurate. I've read some stuff by libertarians and its not like they're saying '**** em.' I think its just a question of different philiosopies. Some will say like conservatives or whatever that if you help yourself the system will take care of everything while liberals think differently. Its just a difference of philosopies.
 
H

hipsterdufus

Cremaster77 said:
I post studies with links that show that Canadians have a wait time of a few weeks, not 6 months like some people here blindly state. I post data with links that show that Candians are MORE satisfied with their healthcare than Americans. You make ridiculous statements about how socialized medicine results in inferior medical care citing "doctors who are not very good in the operating room", yet in countries with socialized medicine average life expectancy is higher, and infant mortality and maternal mortality are lower than in the US. This includes most European countries, some Asian countries, and Canada.

You make a blanket statement to start the thread about how noone wants to debate these issues. I post DATA showing how your statements and completely false, and you ignore them, instead choosing to make unsubstantiated claims as to the inferiority of healthcare under socialized systems. You serve as a prime example why healthcare in this country is declining and will continue to do so. Congratulations.
You here this crap about how bad it is in Canada on Fox all the time.

Remember - the big losers in National Health Insurance are the pharmaceutical companies, HMOs and private insurance companies. They are all very powerful lobbyists.

A new study by "Public Citizen" showed that national health insurance could save at least $286 billion annually on paperwork, enough to cover all of the uninsured and to provide full prescription drug coverage for everyone in the United States.

http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1623
 

Inuyasha

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
1,510
Reaction score
58
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
hipsterdufus said:
You here this crap about how bad it is in Canada on Fox all the time.

Remember - the big losers in National Health Insurance are the pharmaceutical companies, HMOs and private insurance companies. They are all very powerful lobbyists.

A new study by "Public Citizen" showed that national health insurance could save at least $286 billion annually on paperwork, enough to cover all of the uninsured and to provide full prescription drug coverage for everyone in the United States.

http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1623
Bingo and yessiree Bob you have hit the nail on the head. See my post above.
 

mesue

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I have waited as long as 3 months to see a specialist and that is with two types of insurance here in the US. All this talk about long waits and not being able to see your doctor is from ads made by the insurance companies and shown on tv whenever anyone mentions national healthcare,who think their cash cow will be gone if we go to a national healthcare program.

And whether you consciously acknowledge it or not when you support not having a national healthcare program you are supporting over 40 some million people not having health care, and stats prove that as a result many of these people will die. So what you are supporting is letting poor people die. Bottom line thats it, if they don't have access to medical care because their poor and they have an illness that can kill without medical care they will die, and you support that when you support NOT having a national healthcare program.

Many of you assume none of these over 40 million people work and they are lazy and you are tired of supportng them anyway. Well the truth is many of them are the working poor, people who are out of work and looking for work, people who are working, who toil long hard hours for little money (minimum wage or a few cents above it) and no benefits and pay taxes just like you do, In with these over 40 million peoiple who don't have insurance are the ones who have lost their jobs for any number of reasons, looking for work, and then also the ones who have found employment and are waiting for the waiting period for insurance to kick in, most of the time here in my area you work for three months before you can get insurance.

I'm all for a National Healthcare Program, my brother died as a result of not having found employment (economy is bad lots of folks out of work) to provide himself with health insurance, he finally found a job but and had gotten called to work but by that time he was to sick to go. The local hospital only ran the necessary tests after his medicaid kicked in that they filed for him. He died one week later. The doctors said if they had gotten it early on there was a high cure rate for this type of cancer.

You can die in America as a result of not having insurance which basically means that hospitals will see you but they will not run expensive tests or give expenisve treatment without your having insurance to pay for it. And for all you people here screaming you don't support a national healthcare program, life turns on a dime, you could lose your job tomorrow and your insurance and then you will be in with this group. Lets hope you or your children don't get sick and need healthcare and access to expensive test or treatment. If and when this happens just remember this is what you have supported.
 
Last edited:

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
mesue said:
I have waited as long as 3 months to see a specialist and that is with two types of insurance here in the US. All this talk about long waits and not being able to see your doctor is from ads made by the insurance companies and shown on tv whenever anyone mentions national healthcare,who think their cash cow will be gone if we go to a national healthcare program.

And whether you consciously acknowledge it or not when you support not having a national healthcare program you are supporting over 40 some million people not having health care, and stats prove that as a result many of these people will die. So what you are supporting is letting poor people die. Bottom line thats it, if they don't have access to medical care because their poor and they have an illness that can kill without medical care they will die, and you support that when you support NOT having a national healthcare program.

Many of you assume none of these over 40 million people work and they are lazy and you are tired of supportng them anyway. Well the truth is many of them are the working poor, people who are out of work and looking for work, people who are working, who toil long hard hours for little money (minimum wage or a few cents above it) and no benefits and pay taxes just like you do, In with these over 40 million peoiple who don't have insurance are the ones who have lost their jobs for any number of reasons, looking for work, and then also the ones who have found employment and are waiting for the waiting period for insurance to kick in, most of the time here in my area you work for three months before you can get insurance.

I'm all for a National Healthcare Program, my brother died as a result of not having found employment (economy is bad lots of folks out of work) to provide himself with health insurance, he finally found a job but and had gotten called to work but by that time he was to sick to go. The local hospital only ran the necessary tests after his medicaid kicked in that they filed for him. He died one week later. The doctors said if they had gotten it early on there was a high cure rate for this type of cancer.

You can die in America as a result of not having insurance which basically means that hospitals will see you but they will not run expensive tests or give expenisve treatment without your having insurance to pay for it. And for all you people here screaming you don't support a national healthcare program, life turns on a dime, you could lose your job tomorrow and your insurance and then you will be in with this group. Lets hope you or your children don't get sick and need healthcare and access to expensive test or treatment. If and when this happens just remember this is what you have supported.
I am certainly sorry to hear about your brother. Our system is not perfect either. You are right, American capitalism can be brutal. However, I have been to former communist countries and saw how socialism just destroyed their economies and brought about poverty and left their people poor. Honestly, speaking, no system is perfect. I will, however, have to respectfully disagree with you. I think that universal health care coverage is the easy way out to the problem and issue of healthcare. Universal healthcare will create a new set of problems and circumstances from doctor and nurse shortages to inefficiencies in surgery and medical care and access to that medical care. Their are people who lived in nations who regret going to universal healthcare. As George Orwell said, life is sufferring. Socialism is not the solution to dealing with poverty and the healthcare problem. I personally think that lawsuits have been a big problem towards contributing to the high cost of healthcare here in the US and it makes getting insurance more difficult for Americans.
 

Inuyasha

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
1,510
Reaction score
58
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
You'll get no argument from me on those who abuse the system like those ridiculous multi-million dollar law-suits and the lawyers who promote that. That surely makes the price of medical care skyrocket. That along with the lobbyists who line their pockets at the expense of sick people.

I never saw, in the three communist nations, i went to a good example of medical care that i for sure, But national health plans do not indicate socialism after all Franco had health care in the most anti socialistic nation in the western world.

We need something and there is more than one way to skin a cat but as long as big money controls the medical profession you will be unlikely to find anyone interested in the 40 or 45% of Americans who do not have health care. Again I'd like to know how many folks don't have "adequate" health care. That can be a danger almost as fatal as having "no" health care.
 

debate_junkie

Worst Nightmare
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
19
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
My family went nearly 8 years without insurance coverage? Were we too lazy to work? No, however working for places that did not offer it, or the prices were so outrageous it wasn't affordable. Privately, to get healthcare coverage not with an employer can cost as much as 500 per month for a family of 4.

While it is always best to better one's self, isn't it possible that we could offer a safety net? I mean really, is someone going to quit their job to maintain health insurance? Hell no, but if that is ONE less stress off the mind of the parent(s) providing for children, doesn't it make sense? I think so.

Also, eliminating the lobby in Washington, on any level, has to be done. I said this on another thread... with the current cast of characters disguised as Representatives and Senators, which of them is willing to get rid of their cash cows? Not one, that I'm aware of.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
When the media tells us that 40 million Americans do not have health insurance, I immediately want to know what percentage of them CAN afford it, but won't buy it because they would rather have a few more toys, luxuries, videos, beer, wine, cigarettes, etc. in their house.
I know a lot of people who fit that description. Their toys are more important to them than the health of their children.
 

Inuyasha

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
1,510
Reaction score
58
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
UtahBill said:
When the media tells us that 40 million Americans do not have health insurance, I immediately want to know what percentage of them CAN afford it, but won't buy it because they would rather have a few more toys, luxuries, videos, beer, wine, cigarettes, etc. in their house.
I know a lot of people who fit that description. Their toys are more important to them than the health of their children.

I am sure there are people like that especially since we live in a society where opulent wealth is often thrown in the faces of the less fortunate.

Also not mentioned are the millions who are on welfare but DO have access to adequate health care. For all our compaining and criticism of socialism we have the biggest and most expensive welfare system in the world. Hidden socialism? You bet.

The media gives us the figure of 40 million because that's the figure put out by the insurance companies and the AMA. I would venture to guess that the actual number is even higher.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Then let's have free food too.



Comrade Brian said:
How strange, I am for that too. Want a moneyless society.
Great and how about free cars and houses too?
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
UtahBill said:
When the media tells us that 40 million Americans do not have health insurance, I immediately want to know what percentage of them CAN afford it, but won't buy it because they would rather have a few more toys, luxuries, videos, beer, wine, cigarettes, etc. in their house.
I know a lot of people who fit that description. Their toys are more important to them than the health of their children.
I certainly did not have comprehensive care when I was in my early twentys. I had major medical with a high deduction but I didn't pay for comprehensive.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Inuyasha said:
The media gives us the figure of 40 million because that's the figure put out by the insurance companies and the AMA. I would venture to guess that the actual number is even higher.
That reported number came from the census bureau if I remember correctly, the number included self-employed, jobs without health benefits, and unemployed, but it was mostly skewed to favor the argument for U.H.C. The fact is that some of the self employed did not fit the uninsured category, and likewise some of the non benefits employees had their own individual policies, 40 million was an inflated figure.
 
Top Bottom