posted on August 31, 2007 12:13:34 AM new
So one can believe kiara, lol lol , or the canadian health care PROFESSIONALS. But she'll never believe me because I don't live there. ROFLOL
posted on August 31, 2007 12:34:13 AM new
When faced with the FACTS kiara....your statements are no longer valid. At least not to anyone with a couple of brain cells. LOL
One does NOT have to live there nor have personally experienced the system for themself in order to READ what your own politicians and health care providers are saying about the problems with their system.
But it's YOUR game to seek attention with me. Find it elsewhere.
posted on August 31, 2007 12:34:57 AM new
The Fraser Institute is a right-wing think tank. But it does address concerns that hopefully bring about a more balanced system for all.
Lindak, while I realize this is just another opportunity for you to show your hatred of Canada because of your obvious loathing of me and everything I stand for, I could be just as ignorant and google twice as much on the faults of the health system in the US but I won't because I love America despite any of its faults. G'nite!
posted on August 31, 2007 12:45:46 AM new
Yea.....looks like what every American is just waiting to experience: NOT
==========
Great Britain
Great Britain's National Health Service (NHS) was created on July 5, 1948. As with all government programs, bureaucrats underestimated initial cost projections.
First-year operating costs of NHS were 52 million pounds higher than original estimates1 as Britons saturated the so-called free system.
Many decades of shortages, misery and suffering followed until 1989, when some market-based health care competition was reintroduced to the British citizens2.
Unfortunately for those requiring care, a mostly socialist health care system still has problems. The articles and commentaries in this section identify some disasters caused by government intervention in the British health care system.
One in eight patients waiting over a year for treatment, admits minister
- John Carvel, June 8, 2007 [Guardian Unlimited]
Audit Office asked to investigate record £500m NHS underspend
- John Carvel, May 30, 2007 [Guardian Unlimited]
The drugs the NHS won't give you
- May 11, 2007 [Telegraph UK]
UK lagging behind on cancer drug access, study finds
- May 10, 2007 [Guardian Unlimited]
One in six trusts is still putting patients on mixed-sex wards
- Daniel Martin, May 10, 2007 [Daily Mail(UK)]
Specialist stroke care 'lottery'
- May 9, 2007 [BBC News]
Smokers and the obese banned from UK hospitals
- May 2, 2007 [Healthcare News]
Cancer patients told life-prolonging treatment is too expensive for NHS
- Lyndsay Moss, February 13, 2007 [The Scotsman]
UK health service "harms 10 percent of patients"
- Kate Kelland, July 7, 2006 [Reuters]
5,000 elderly 'killed each year' by lack of care beds
- June 26, 2006 [Telegraph UK]
Dental Socialism in Britain
- Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., May 9, 2006 [LewRockwell.com]
Pay for nurses and surgeons doubles NHS overspend
- Beezy Marsh, Patrick Hennessy and Nina Goswami, April 23, 2006 [Telegraph UK]
The money addicts: it's your cash they are gambling with
- Patience Wheatcroft, April 23, 2006 [Telegraph UK]
NHS chiefs get luxury car deals
- Daniel Foggo and Steven Swinford, April 9, 2006 [The Times]
British Healthcare To Be Rationed
- April 7, 2006 [United Press International]
British body rejects EPO drugs for cancer patients
- March 17, 2006 [Reuters]
National Health Service - Grappling with Deficits
- March 9, 2006 [Economist.com]
Hundreds wait to register as another dentist quits the NHS
- Martin Williams, September 23, 2005 [The Herald (Scotland)]
Life-saving cancer drugs 'kept from NHS patients by red tape'
- Sam Lister, September 20, 2005 [The Times]
NHS slides into the red despite record increases in health care spending
- September 20, 2005 [Telegraph UK]
Alzheimer's sufferers hit by further delay in NHS approval for vital drugs
- Michael Day, September 18, 2005 [Telegraph UK]
We all pay a price for our 'free' NHS
- John Smith, August 19, 2005 [The Scotsman]
2,000 British doctors out of work
- August 14, 2005 [The Washington Times]
UK health 'unsustainable'
- August 14, 2005 [Finance24]
NHS faces rising bill for negligence claims
- Ben Hall, August 8, 2005 [Financial Times]
British boy to go to India for operation
- August 5, 2005 [United Press International]
NHS failed to stop doctor raping scores of women
- Lois Rogers and Jonathon Carr-Brown, July 31, 2005 [The Times]
Top crimewriter funds drugs for cancer victim refused by NHS
- Martyn Halle, July 8, 2005 [Telegraph UK]
Report says NHS is mired in huge debts
- David Simms, June 25, 2005 [ABC Money (UK)]
U.K. set to restrict smoking
- June 21, 2005 [The Associated Press]
NHS ‘fund bias’ against men may cost 2,500 lives a year
- Sarah-Kate Templeton, June 19, 2005 [The Times]
Doubts on funding NHS 'monuments'
- Nicholas Timmins, June 10, 2005 [Financial Times]
17 million reasons why we must improve hospital meals
- June 7, 2005 [Cambridge Evening News]
Figures show more patients waiting for operations
- June 3, 2005 [Guardian UK]
Scarcity of NHS dental treatment is revealed
- Celia Hall, May 19, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]
Why NHS Opposes 'Treatment by Demand' for the Dying
- Stephen Howard and Jan Colley, PA, May 18, 2005 [Scotsman]
800 queue for NHS dentists
- May 5, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]
Hundreds more heroin addicts to be given a fix on the NHS
- Nic Fleming, April 25, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]
British health service facing nurse exodus
- April 25, 2005 [United Press International]
About 400 patients a year in Scotland succumb to MRSA
- April 25, 2005 [Scotsman]
NHS debts soar to over £1bn
- Karyn Miller, April 24, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]
British taxpayers foot $26.5 million bill for abortion tourists
- April 18, 2005 [Catholic World News]
U.K. Liberal Democrats Would Raise Taxes to Pay for Health Care
- Reed Landberg, April 14, 2005 [Bloomberg]
Number of NHS Bureaucrats 'Rising Faster Than Health Staff'
- Joe Churcher, March 22, 2005 [Scotsman]
'£500m hole' in hospital budgets
- Celia Hall, March 21, 2005 [telegraph.co.uk]
1,000 Scots desert NHS every week
- Murdo Macleod, March 5, 2005 [Scotsman]
British NHS facing financial crisis
- March 3, 2005 [Washington Times]
NHS drugs regulator to withdraw approval of Alzheimer's treatment
- Nicholas Timmins, March 2, 2005 [FT.com - Financial Times]
NHS waiting list rises
- February 11, 2005 [Guardian UK]
Tumour patients hit by NHS shortages
- Jo Revill, February 6, 2005 [Guardian UK]
NHS financial crises set to outlast winter
- Mike Waites, February 4, 2005 [Yorkshire Post]
NHS 24 'priority' callers wait four hours for advice
- Caroline Wilson, January 14, 2005 [Evening Times (UK)]
'No strategy' on NHS waiting time
- January 14, 2005 [BBC]
Output figures show NHS decline
- John Carvel, October 19, 2004 [Guardian UK]
Heart patients die on waiting lists
- Peter Sharples, October 18, 2004 [Manchester Online]
£25bn overspend feared for NHS computer network
- Karen Attwood, October 12, 2004 [telegraph.co.uk]
Gaps in care cost £7bn, says charity
- John Carvel, October 4, 2004 [Guardian UK]
NHS excluding poor people, UK
- September 15, 2004 [Medical News Today]
Smokers 'should not get NHS care'
- September 6, 2004 [BBC News]
Waiting list row blights Brighton
- John Carvel, September 4, 2004 [Guardian UK]
Patients are denied the last rites under data protection law
- Elizabeth Day, July 25, 2004 [telegraph.co.uk]
Shortage of dentists to double by 2011
- John Carvel, July 24, 2004 [Guardian UK]
Britain's stiff upper lip gives way to a snarl
- Sarah Lyall, July 18, 2004 [The New York Times]
Hospital Overcrowding A Cause of Superbug Infections
- John von Radowitz, July 1, 2004 [Scotsman.com]
Study finds British hospitals are still austere, cold, smelly and poorly maintained
- May 6, 2004 [News-Medical.net]
Hospital bathrooms and showers: a continuing saga of inadequacy
- Andy Monro, MRCP & Graham P Mulley, DM, FRCP, May 2004 [Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine]
Majority back public smoking ban
- March 24, 2004 [BBC]
Discrimination Rampant In British Health Care
- Peter Moore, November 17, 2003 [365gay.com]
PERIPATETICS—To the Medical Socialists of All Parties
- Sheldon Richman, September 2003 [FEE.org]
Creeping Privatization?
Shortages of skilled workers, low morale, long queues for services, crumbling facilities and corrupt practises. - Roland Watson, August 6, 2001 [LewRockwell.com]
The World's Worst HMO
- Stephen D. Moore, November 24, 1999 [Random Thoughts]
Socialized Medicine in Great Britain: Lessons for the Oregon Health Plan
- Professor John Spiers, March 18, 1999 [Cascade Policy Institute]
The Sickbed Which is Socialized British Medicine
- December 23, 1997 [NCPA]
The British Way of Withholding Care
- Harry Schwarz, March 1989 [FEE.org]
posted on August 31, 2007 01:05:05 AM new
Financial crisis in the UK causes worse patient care, loss of medical personnel, etc. Yea, let's choose that system. lol
posted on August 31, 2007 03:58:57 AM newI know you too well....you'll believe anything anyone says as long as it's not me.
You are correct there especially since most of your so-called FACTS are actually LIES and not true.
Do you REALLY think I give a #*!@? No I don't just like i could care less about what you think of me, but hey look who is so vile and vulgar. At least my post didnt have to be written like this #*!@ "In my experience, those who do not like you fall into two categories: the stupid, and the envious. - John Wilmot, the Second Earl of Rochester
posted on August 31, 2007 06:33:33 AM newIt's ILLEGAL to purchase private insurance
Are you speaking about Canada in this case? If so you would be wrong again Linda.
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled Thursday that the Quebec government cannot prevent people from paying for private insurance for health-care procedures covered under medicare.
In a 4-3 decision, the panel of seven justices said banning private insurance for a list of services ranging from MRI tests to cataract surgery was unconstitutional under the Quebec Charter of Rights, given that the public system has failed to guarantee patients access to those services in a timely way.
"In my experience, those who do not like you fall into two categories: the stupid, and the envious. - John Wilmot, the Second Earl of Rochester
posted on August 31, 2007 06:40:39 AM new
Kiara, thanks for the information regarding the aspects of the Canadian health care system. It appears that if people do not like the insurance provided by the government they are free to purchase their own insurance.
As you know Linda wants to believe that IF the US goes to a national health care system, we MUST COPY an existing system. I guess she does feel the government can create their own system. Linda is acting like we have to copy an existing system.
Furthermore if the US goes to a national system there is nothing preventing Linda from not using it. As an American citizen she would be free to purchase her own health care through a private provider.
"In my experience, those who do not like you fall into two categories: the stupid, and the envious. - John Wilmot, the Second Earl of Rochester
posted on August 31, 2007 08:38:46 AM new
"Are you speaking about Canada in this case? If so you would be wrong again Linda."
No, ld, it is YOU who again shows just how ignorant you really are. You must LOVE embarrassing yourself since you do it all the time by speaking about things you have NO CLUE about.
=======
September 09, 2006
Alberta Patient Stands Up to Government Prohibition of Health Insurance
OTTAWA & EDMONTON: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) responded favourably to the court case launched today by the Canadian Constitutional Foundation, on behalf of Calgary resident Bill Murray, challenging the Alberta law forbidding citizens from purchasing private health insurance.
Mr. Murray was not only denied the opportunity to receive a Birmingham hip replacement, Alberta law denies all Albertans the right to purchase private health insurance that would have helped cover the cost of his surgery.
“We applaud Mr. Murray for standing up against this injustice rather than simply going quietly into the night. Denying an individual medical treatment while also making it illegal to purchase health insurance is unconscionable and completely unacceptable in a free and democratic society,” said CTF federal director John Williamson.
===================
Jan. 15,2007
Chaoulli copycat cases crop up
across country
Using Quebec's landmark Supreme Court decision as a precedent, more Canadians challenge single-payer system
By Sam Solomon
Since the Supreme Court of Canada handed down its decision in favour of Jacques Chaoulli in June 2005, the implications of the case have been as far-reaching and transformative as the aftershocks of an earthquake.
Now, a massive wave of legal challenges is set to come crashing down across Canada, in the form of at least two new lawsuits — one in Alberta and one in Ontario — that seek to apply the Chaoulli v Québec precedent.
As it becomes increasingly apparent that Chaoulli will play a major role in several upcoming suits — the case has already been cited in 31 decisions in the intervening year and a half, in almost every province — the decision's nuances are now beginning to come into renewed focus. But big changes aren't a given. There is reason to doubt that Chaoulli v Québec can be applied to the rest of Canada. [b]While the Supreme Court did find the healthcare system violated the Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms[b] they didn't find a breach of the Canadian Charter — the justices were split three-three over this prickly issue.
PLAYING POLITICS
Dr Marie-Claude Prémont, associate dean of McGill University's Law faculty, says the Supreme Court's decision has been perverted in the name of political gain. "The political interpretation of the Chaoulli decision fits the agenda of the Charest and Harper governments," she says, referring to Bill 33, passed in Quebec's National Assembly on December 13. Bill 33 overturns the province's ban on private medical insurance in certain cases. "Bill 33 opened the door to a system being set up, a system which will lead to further growth of the private, for-profit sector," says Dr Prémont. "There was no reason for that based on the Chaoulli decision. Politicians have been abusing what the Supreme Court has been saying," she says. "We're supposed to live in a democracy."
But the people have already spoken, says lawyer John Carpay, who is providing financial backing for a similar lawsuit in Alberta. "The majority of Canadians support the right of individuals to spend their own after-tax dollars to preserve and protect their own health," he says. "The politicians are lagging by sticking with an inefficient and ineffective government monopoly over healthcare."
posted on August 31, 2007 11:56:52 AM newYou must LOVE embarrassing yourself since you do it all the time by speaking about things you have NO CLUE about.
And what is your excuse Linda. You have been wrong on alot of things when you have claimed to be such an expert on them. You said you knew a lot of about HIV but you were VERY VERY VERY WRONG ON THE STATEMENTS YOU MADE YESTERDAY. You cliam you know alot about Canada but you still claim they speak CANADIAN when it is not even a langauge. I suppose you like having egg all over your face.
"In my experience, those who do not like you fall into two categories: the stupid, and the envious. - John Wilmot, the Second Earl of Rochester
posted on August 31, 2007 12:16:14 PM new
Furthermore Linda the United States does not even have a national health care system and is not even close to having one. You are acting like the United States will be starting one next month and we will be adopting a model that is exists already and following it to a "T".
You are the ignorant one that keeps presenting these doomsday scenarios for everything.
Even if the United States does go to a national health care system how do you know individuals here will not be able to have a private health care if they do not like the ones provided by the government. The answer is you don't know. Just like most subjects, you present scenarios that are not based on anything but you act like it will happen for sure. Do you like running around like chicken little screaming about all these doomsday/end of the world events when the chances of them happening are slim to none. Why don't you worry about what is actually taking place NOW instead of worrying about legislation that may never come to be.
Lastly you continue to present the American health care system as a "perfect example" but it is far from it. There are millions that do not have health care and there are many examples of US citizens going overseas and to CANADA for operations because they are cost prohibitive or unavailable in this country. Funny you never talk about these problems that actually are occurring in this country when you continue to bash the Canadian and European health care systems. This is just another example of your hypocrisy.
"In my experience, those who do not like you fall into two categories: the stupid, and the envious. - John Wilmot, the Second Earl of Rochester
posted on August 31, 2007 12:50:56 PM newIt's ILLEGAL to purchase private insurance
You better get your facts straight Linda. Yet again your claims are only partially correct.
The illegality of private health care in Canada
Colleen M. Flood, Tom Archibald
Abstract
WE ADDRESSED THE QUESTION OF WHETHER PRIVATE HEALTH CARE IS ILLEGAL in Canada by surveying the health insurance legislation of all 10 provinces. Our survey revealed multiple layers of regulation that seem to have as their primary objective preventingthe public sector from subsidizing the private sector, as opposed to rendering privately funded practice illegal. Private insurance for medically necessary hospital and physician services is illegal in only 6 of the 10 provinces. Nonetheless, a significant private sector has not developed in any of the 4 provinces that do permit private insurance coverage. The absence of a significant private sector is probably best explained by the prohibitions on the subsidy of private practice by public plans, measures that prevent physicians from topping up their public sector incomes with private fees.
--------------------------------------------
The final aspect of public health insurance that we reviewed was limitations on the availability of private insurance to cover the kinds of services covered by provincial insurance plans. Prohibition of private insurance for hospital and physician services that are covered by a public plan (but for which there may be long waits or concerns about quality) dampens the demand for opted-out physicians and physicians who extra-bill by limiting patients’ ability to finance those services. If neither public nor private insurance covers services provided by opted-out physicians and those who extra-bill, the market for those physicians’ services is restricted to patients who can afford to pay out of pocket.
Six of the 10 provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Prince Edward Island and Quebec) prohibit contracts of private insurance to cover the kinds of services that are publicly funded. 54–59 All of the provinces that prohibit private insurance do so by prohibiting any person from entering into a contract that covers publicly insured health services. Four of these provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Prince Edward Island) also explicitly void any part of an insurance contract that covers the kinds of services covered by the public plan.
In the 4 provinces that permit private insurance (New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan),patients of opted-out or extra-billing physicians can substitute private for public coverage. However, in Nova Scotia opted-out physicians are limited to billing privately only as much as the public plan allows. Thus, only New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Saskatchewan allow private insurance to cover all or part of the costs of optedout physicians’ services. Thus, in 3 of the 10 Canadian provinces, the availability of private insurance creates greater economic opportunities for physicians to practise outside the public plan and charge whatever fees they wish.
"In my experience, those who do not like you fall into two categories: the stupid, and the envious. - John Wilmot, the Second Earl of Rochester
posted on September 1, 2007 07:13:50 PM new
linduh, why do you insist that the U.S. can't do anything right?
No faith in your own country? How un-American!
IF government doesn't function properly...why hasn't 6 years of god bushit fixed the problems ??????
LOLOLOL!!!!
I KNEW , linduh, you wouldn't have an answer for THAT !
Thank you for admitting that bushit's administration is a failure !
Uh-oh, Canada
By Bill Steigerwald
Saturday, September 1, 2007
If Canada's national health-care system is so dang wonderful, why are so many Canadians coming to America to pay for their own medical care?
Why is the hip replacement center of Canada in Ohio -- at the Cleveland Clinic, where 10 percent of its international patients are Canadians?
Why is the Brain and Spine Clinic in Buffalo serving about 10 border-crossing Canadians a week?
Why did a Calgary woman recently have to drive several hundred miles to Great Falls, Mont., to give birth to her quadruplets?
It's simple. As the market-oriented Fraser Institute in Vancouver, B.C., can tell you, Canada's vaunted "free" government health-care system cannot or deliberately will not provide its 33 million citizens with the nonemergency health care they want and need when they need or want it.
Courtesy of the institute, here are some unflattering facts about Canada's sickly system:
Number of Canadians on waiting lists for referrals to specialists or for medical services -- 875,000.
Average wait from time of referral to treatment by a specialist -- 17.8 weeks. Shortest waiting time -- oncology, 4.9 weeks. Longest waiting times -- orthopedic surgery, 40.3 weeks. Average wait to get an MRI -- 10.3 weeks nationally but 28 weeks in Newfoundland.
Average wait time for a surgery considered "elective," like a hip replacement -- four or more months.
Hello, Cleveland.
The Canadian system is horribly short on consumer choice and competition. But it isn't all bad -- if you don't mind waiting to access it. As health policy analyst Nadeem Esmail of the Fraser Institute said last week, it does "a decent job of saving your life but treats you terribly in the process."
Esmail says no one knows exactly how many Canadians go to the United States each year for medical care. His best estimate for 2006 -- a conservative one -- is 39,282. Whatever the actual number is, however, it is growing.
Clinics in Detroit and Buffalo market speedy MRIs, CTs or ultrasounds to Canadians which, by law, cannot be purchased privately in some provinces, including Ontario.
Ontario residents have three options: wait months for their free public MRI, travel to a province like Quebec where it is legal to buy one privately or travel to the U.S.
It's no wonder private medical and surgical brokers like Timely Medical Alternatives of Vancouver have sprung into existence. Rick Baker said his three-year-old company refers about 100 Canadians a month to U.S. clinics and hospitals for such things as MRIs and knee replacements.
Timely Medical's services came in handy for Lindsay McCreith, a retired auto body shop owner who was told in 2006 he probably had a brain tumor. He needed an MRI fast. But the wait time for a "free" public one was 4 1/2 months and it was illegal to purchase a private MRI in Ontario.
McCreith contacted Timely Medical, which got him an MRI the next day in Buffalo that showed he had a Titleist-sized tumor. Four and half weeks later, McCreith had received the brain surgery that could have taken eight months to happen in Canada -- if he had still been alive. It cost him $28,000 -- for which Canada's government won't reimburse him.
Stories like McCreith's -- and the downsides of Canadian and American health care -- will be exposed Sept. 14 by ABC's John Stossel in his "20/20" special, tentatively titled "Sick in America." Rick Baker hopes Hillary Clinton and her friends will be watching.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bill Steigerwald, born and raised in Pittsburgh, is a former L.A. Times copy editor and free-lancer who also worked as a docudrama researcher for CBS-TV in Hollywood before becoming an associate editor and columnist for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.
posted on September 1, 2007 10:33:53 PM new
linduh, why do you insist that the U.S. can't do anything right?
No faith in your own country? How un-American!
IF government doesn't function properly...why hasn't 6 years of god bushit fixed the problems ??????
LOLOLOL!!!!
I KNEW , linduh, you wouldn't have an answer for THAT !
Thank you for admitting that bushit's administration is a failure !
posted on September 1, 2007 10:39:33 PM new HillaryCare on the Horizon
By Robert Bluey
Sunday, September 2, 2007
Topping the Democrats’ to-do list when they return to Washington this week is reauthorization of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). The House and Senate passed two different versions of the bill before August recess and now must reconcile the legislation before the program expires at month’s end.
Although the Senate bill passed in August with a veto-proof majority on a 68-31 vote, Democrats won’t be able to push their new bill through the House as easily. Just five House Republicans sided with liberals when the bill came to a vote last month, giving President Bush the backup he needs for a likely veto.
Why the veto threat? Congressional liberals have cleverly packaged a massive expansion of government-provided health care as a simple extension of a popular program for poor kids. In reality, the new SCHIP is no longer about helping only low-income children. It also wants to cover middle-class kids, even though most of them already have private insurance. In fact, the House-passed SCHIP bill incorporates some of the same language used by then-First Lady Hillary Clinton during her 1993 pursuit of socialized medicine..
The question is whether conservatives can do anything to stop SCHIP’s expansion. With the program expiring on Sept. 30, Democrats are under the gun to get something done. That means they just might be in the mood to compromise to avoid a veto -- and the label of a do-nothing Congress.
Conservatives have spent the past month gearing up for the SCHIP fight, calling it a new-look HillaryCare. They have plenty of data to show the dangerous fiscal consequences of heading down this path, such as the reliance on tobacco taxes to pay for SCHIP’s expansion. The House bill raises cigarette taxes by 45 cents, and the Senate bill increases them by 61 cents. Tax hikes of that magnitude would be disastrous for state finances. And in addition, millions of Americans would have to start smoking to pay for this new entitlement.
Just as troublesome is the move by liberals to strip out language in the bill to eliminate the so-called Medicare trigger. That language was part of the controversial Medicare prescription drug bill that narrowly passed in 2003. Fiscal conservatives insisted the language be included in that bill to force the president and Congress to address Medicare’s unfunded obligation. However, in a move that would allow Congress to ignore the $32 trillion unfunded obligation of Medicare, liberals inserted a provision in the SCHIP bill to eliminate the trigger. The non-partisan Concord Coalition called the move a terrible mistake.
Given Medicare’s growing burden on our economy, it’s no coincidence that the trigger was “sprung” in April when the Medicare trustees issued their annual report. But will Congress do anything about it? Under the current law, they cannot simply turn a blind eye toward Medicare’s rapidly increasing costs. But if liberals get their way with the SCHIP bill, it would allow them to do just that.
What’s worse is that while Congress removes the trigger -- the only entitlement spending warning in law -- liberals are trying to create one more entitlement by modifying the original nature of SCHIP (particularly in the House version of the bill).
Conservatives can’t let this happen. The SCHIP bill that will ultimately be sent to the president’s desk must be fiscally responsible, focusing only on low-income children so it won’t bust state budgets.
Conservatives should also strike back at the left’s attempt to steer America in the direction of socialized medicine. A rational alternative would be to explore ways to make private coverage more affordable.
This debate illustrates the left’s mentality toward health care and federal spending -- reckless and short-sighted. It also pinpoints exactly where liberals are trying to take America. Heading down that road would be disastrous.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert B. Bluey is director of the Center for Media & Public Policy at The Heritage Foundation
posted on September 1, 2007 10:45:38 PM new
linduh, why do you insist that the U.S. can't do anything right?
No faith in your own country? How un-American!
IF government doesn't function properly...why hasn't 6 years of god bushit fixed the problems ??????
LOLOLOL!!!!
I KNEW , linduh, you wouldn't have an answer for THAT !
Thank you for admitting that bushit's administration is a failure !
posted on September 1, 2007 11:42:59 PM new
Thanks for the info, Logansdad. It's difficult to keep up with all the changes across Canada, as each province manages its own health care. And with all the changing governments, federal and provincial, it's a wonder the system operates as well as it does.
Lindak's c & p is a biased report from a fellow who writes for World Nut Daily and he's probably as ignorant as she is about Canada. We've noticed that some of the media tend to spin the same rhetoric nonstop whenever comparisons are made and most don't have a clue about the differences between the two countries, never realizing that Canada is the 2nd largest country in the world in land mass with only about 32 million people spread out across it. With each province having different problems, a cross-country blanket comparison doesn't make much sense to me.
Here are the B.C. Provincial median waiting lists as of a couple of months ago. More than half the surgeries are done immediately. Our local media highlights serious problems from individuals on a regular basis on the evening news so it puts pressure on both governments to keep trying to improve care for all. Many communities are quite remote so some have more problems than others.
posted on September 2, 2007 05:45:12 AM new
Let's see. Would one find propoganda issued by the GOVERNMENT more value than that of the actual canadian citizens who are FORCED to use their system? LOL LOL
I'll believe the people, NOT the gov.
Here, from kiara's OWN link is site that posts weekly updates about the concerns canadians themselves have about their health care system.
Read it....you'll see on the whole they don't AGREE with kiara's take on how things actually are. ROFLOL Nope....kiara sure doesn't speak for the concerns of the majority of canadian's, even those in BC. lol
========
Canadians speak out about their own medical system:
posted on September 2, 2007 06:10:57 AM new
linduh, why do you insist that the U.S. can't do anything right?
No faith in your own country? How un-American!
IF government doesn't function properly...why hasn't 6 years of god bushit fixed the problems ??????
LOLOLOL!!!!
I KNEW , linduh, you wouldn't have an answer for THAT !
Thank you for admitting that bushit's administration is a failure !
posted on September 2, 2007 07:16:12 AM new
"I'll believe the people, NOT the gov."
That's a first. The Canadian government puts out propaganda and we should believe the people not the government. Why is that not also true in the U.S.?
posted on September 2, 2007 07:42:01 AM newRead it....you'll see on the whole they don't AGREE with kiara's take on how things actually are. ROFLOL Nope....kiara sure doesn't speak for the concerns of the majority of canadian's, even those in BC. lol
Lindak, I have admitted that there are problems across Canada each time we've had this discussion and I've explained the reasons. Are you now saying that the actual reports don't agree with me about the problems and that I am the only one that recognizes that they exist?
Here, from kiara's OWN link is site that posts weekly updates about the concerns canadians themselves have about their health care system.
Your comprehension and assumptions don't seem to have much clarity at all because of course my links do address the concerns, that's why I posted them, you dummy.
Any surgery with an advance hospital booking is wait-listed, even if the surgery occurs within a day of the booking.
FYI, there are groups in many communities that work constantly to bring concerns to the media - many that participate are retired and devote much of their time to these causes, trying to improve the system for everyone and those of us who work and don't always have time to attend the meetings are grateful for what they achieve.
They also do endless fund raising for hospital equipment and form support groups for those who are experiencing problems. On top of that they devote more time to the conditions in care homes to make sure that loved ones are well taken care of and also visit with those who have no relatives or uncaring relatives, bringing them flowers and gifts too.
I feel fortunate to live where there are so many who look out for all and they don't always get the recognition they deserve.
posted on September 2, 2007 08:04:41 AM new
"""coach81938
posted on September 2, 2007 07:16:12 AM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I'll believe the people, NOT the gov."
That's a first. The Canadian government puts out propaganda and we should believe the people not the government. Why is that not also true in the U.S.? """"
BOOM! ZING!!!!!!
Ha! You will never get an answer from linduh on THAT !
Just like I can't seem to get an answer. ....once again proving that if linduh can't google it or chant it, she can't think or reason out an answer
posted on September 2, 2007 08:20:15 AM new
Coach and Mingo, as long as Lindak worships Bush, there can be no wrong. She has been assimilated and her mind is blocked to all reality. If she's this whacked living in her dream, can you imagine the damage if she had to deal with the true state of affairs?
posted on September 2, 2007 12:15:14 PM new
ROFLOL
Here are the liberals who watched how our gov. handled Katrina....screamed bloody murder about how those in charge handled it - who are STILL whining two years later ..... and just SO willing to have that same gov. be in charge of their medical care/medical decisions. tsk tsk tsk
So typically liberal.
Being in PAIN for months or years, suffering in pain because your needed surgery is considered 'elective' by politicians, having 'elite' citizens get treatment before the average person does, DYING because they don't have enough diagnostic equipment, doctors or techs to use them....is NOT my idea of good health care. Nor is it to millions of canadians.
And THAT is why they're pushing the issue to ALLOW private insurance in canada now, so those who CAN'T receive timely care CAN buy it for themselves. Being told by a gov. that can't provided care for you that you also can't purchase your own care....is nothing short ludicrous. And to intentionally CHOOSE that poor socialist system....is nothing short of insanity.
But that's progressive liberals for you....anything that they believe will give them another FREE RIDE.
I never would expect SOME here to 'get that'. They can't.
