I would rather be sick in Canada than the US - in the US,if

[MEXCAN]

Capitalist Imperial !!!Canada is the most livable country in the world.Canada has the world's most successful health care systems.Rich or poor,in Canada,you get treated.If you're unhealthy and have a lower income,the states is not the place to be.

[Disgustipated]

Just to give you an idea of what "healthcare" in the US costs now a days....Because the business my partner and I run is just the two of us, my partner is paying $750 dollars per month for healthcare, and god help him if he ever needs it. I'm lucky that I am on my wifes plan with her employer. If I had to pay as well it would put us out of business.

[MEXCAN]

I have this little card in my wallet,and if i need to go see a doctor,they just swip my card.And voilà.

[timbaly]

Just this summer 2 bus loads of seniors from the New York City metropolitan area took a trip from Stamford, CT
(or it could have been another city, not really sure) to Montreal to get medicines they needed for cheaper prices since they couldn't afford the prices here in the US.

There is a a doctor in Minnesota who is liscensed to practice in Manitoba as well. He writes out perscription medicines for seniors in MN but he travels to Manitoba himself to get the medicines at cheaper prices for his patients.

[MEXCAN]

Two years ago when my sister-in-law gave birth to my niece,she had to get a c-section.Didn't cost her a red cent.I imagine how much that would cost down in the states?

[timbaly]

My family is having a real hard time with health insurance. We make too much money to get it for free but not enough to pay for it. My Grandma had a terrible accident two years ago and now she needs a caregiver 24/7 and she isn't entitled to free medicade because she has a house in her name. To make things worse she was careless with money and told my family she expected to die by now and not have to face the repricutions of being $3000 in credit card debt. The story is actually much more complicated than that but I don't want to get into unessential details.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from MEXCAN on 9:36 pm on Jan. 14, 2003
Capitalist Imperial !!!Canada is the most livable country in the world.Canada has the world's most successful health care systems.Rich or poor,in Canada,you get treated.If you're unhealthy and have a lower income,the states is not the place to be.


Unfortunately, your whole nation has 1 MRI machine.

California has 8 alone.

While access to health care is better in Canada overall, the quality of American medicine is much better than Canada's.

BTW, most people are covered somehow in the US for health care, either through their employer, or the government, and there are free clinics. No one dies in the street for lack of health care as you leftists would like to believe.

Canada would be nothing without the US, bottom line.

(Edited by Capitalist Imperial at 12:01 am on Jan. 15, 2003)

[Disgustipated]

CI...are you kidding me. Lots of homeless die from lack of medical attention every year. Hospitals ship uninsured patients from hospital to hospital in hopes that someone will take them. Very often, these people die in the transit, or get turned out due to lack of insurance.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Disgustipated on 12:22 am on Jan. 15, 2003
CI...are you kidding me. Lots of homeless die from lack of medical attention every year. Hospitals ship uninsured patients from hospital to hospital in hopes that someone will take them. Very often, these people die in the transit, or get turned out due to lack of insurance.

No, no one with life threatening illnesses die being shipped from hospital to hospital.

that would create gross negligence liability, which would be more expensive to a hospital than to just treat the illness

[RedComrade]

CI there are millions in this country who are not covered by health care. Your right if someone is dying we take em in but only after their condition has been allowed to deteriorate to the level were they are going to die anyway. The us is one of the few modern nations that does not have state health care. Wake up and smell the rotting flesh you heartless leich...

[antieverything]

The fact is, healthcare is a crisis here in America...we just don't have long lines in the ER most of the time!

[xe11]

Canada would be nothing without the US, bottom line.


How does that make sence? If America had never been formed, and those colonies hadnt split from britain, there would probably be just 1 country in all of north america...and that one country wouldnt be weak and hurting just because America never existed..it would get all the benefits America got when it was growing.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from xe11 on 6:02 pm on Jan. 15, 2003

Canada would be nothing without the US, bottom line.


How does that make sence? If America had never been formed, and those colonies hadnt split from britain, there would probably be just 1 country in all of north america...and that one country wouldnt be weak and hurting just because America never existed..it would get all the benefits America got when it was growing.

Wrong! If the US had not succeeded, then the North American nation would have been more like a giant canada, just an extention of the UK, with over 50% taxation, no constitution, and limited freedoms, limited economy, as well as being soft on foreign policy and probalbly weak militarily, setting the stage for Soviet invasion and occupation in the 20th century, and the set-up of an evil world-wide communist dictatorial regime!

Luckily, we have the USA!!! Defender of world freedom and economic viability!!!

[xe11]

And you think the people that split off to make America were better people? You dont think that if North America had become a giant Canada it would of eventually become fed up with taxation from Britain, split off and grown into a strong nation?

[antieverything]

Umm...anyway, back to the subject at hand....

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from xe11 on 6:34 pm on Jan. 15, 2003
And you think the people that split off to make America were better people? You dont think that if North America had become a giant Canada it would of eventually become fed up with taxation from Britain, split off and grown into a strong nation?

Well, Canada itself hasn't, why would that change?

[xe11]

Hasnt what?

[Capitalist Imperial]

hasn't become fed up with high taxation!

[antieverything]

Pretty piss poor comparison...Canada's taxes goes toward Canada...just try and ask Canadians if they would be willing to give up universal health-care or better labor laws!

[MEXCAN]

in 1982,Canada got the Constitution Act which gave it full legal independence from Great Britain.

[xe11]

Yeah really...

[Guest]

"It took many decades, but some Canadians are beginning to understand that our health care system is quite ill. Although many federal and provincial politicians speak fondly of the virtues of universal health care, it has become obvious that the responsibilities for high-quality service rest on the shoulders of employers and families.

In 1996, The Fraser Institute estimated that 172,766 Canadians languished on waiting lists for medical and diagnostic procedures. In 1997, that number rose to 187,416. This increase reflects the fact that there was an 8.5 percent increase in Canadians erquiring surgery in this country, and they are waiting 9.7 percent longer to receive treatment even after seeing a specialist.

Fortunately, a handful of groups have been quietly trying to improve the Canadian health care system. Despite their small numbers, the impact these organizations make on enhancing health care choice could be substantial.

One example is Free Trade Medical Network Inc. (FTMN), founded in Toronto by stockbroker Douglas W. Hitchlock in 1996. After witnessing the unfortunate death of his young daughter from a delayed diagnosis, Hitchlock became motivated to make dramatic changes to universal health care.

FTMN operates as an information resource centre from its offices in Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver. The organization offers advice on access to diagnostic procedures for Canadians on seemingly inexorable waiting lists. FTMN has contracts with various US hospitals from Florida to Hawaii, along with ties to numerous diagnostic centres that offer immediate access to MRIs.

In addition, FTMN helps to cut costs for expensive American health care bills, saving Canadian patients up to 42 percent on all necessities, including flights to the US and hotel bills for families. The simple yet reassuring motto of this firm was articulated by Warren Harris, the National Director of Communications and Western Division President: “If we don’t save you money, we don’t make money.”

A second example is MedResource Canada Inc., which was founded in Toronto by Jonathan Shore, a marketing and public relations specialist, in 1994. Shore was motivated to help Canadians who wanted to obtain treatment outside the present health care system. He believes that people “do not necessarily have to be wealthy” to receive quality care and treatment in countries like the US.

MedResource has worked with the Roswell Institute in the US to get immediate MRIs for Canadians, and has helped facilitate some meetings in Ontario with American specialists. Although this group only works out of Metro Toronto at present, Shore hopes to see some expansion in the next six months.

MedResource looks to physicians to be the “gatekeepers” of any possible health care reform. By working with advocacy groups, insurance and claims managers, associations and individuals, this organization hopes to increase consumer choice.

A third example is International Health Link Inc., which was founded in Vancouver by Becky Russell, an occupational therapist, in 1997. Russell felt there was a need to provide “quick and efficient” service to Canadians who require immediate medical treatment. Thus, she began International Health Link, which is operated by health care workers with experience in both Canada and the US.

IHL works as a medical booking agency to help Canadians pursue alternative medical procedures in the US, ranging from orthopaedic and plastic surgery to diagnostic tests. This group primarily works with individuals but hopes to expand their reach in the near future.

IHL also spends a great deal of time “finding the right provider” for individual clients. It rigorously screens American doctors through the proper channels (such as the American Medical Association and the Department of Health and Human Services), provides each client with a list of well-qualified physicians, and helps choose a geographical location for each client. IHL will also help negotiate a lower price for the medical procedure—as much as a 25 percent discount—and will facilitate the entire billing process.

Certainly, FTMN, MedResource, and IHL are following the important principles of increasing freedom of choice and creating alternative solutions to universality. No longer will people have to wait for 6 to 7 months for a diagnostic procedure. Instead, all three organizations are giving people the ability to jump the queue and get an MRI within a couple of days in the US.

Of course, all of these services are more costly than is necessary because they require that patients travel to the US to receive services. A lower-cost solution would be to amend the Canada Health Act to allow expedited purchase of covered services within Canada.

Governments must begin to understand that universal health care has created substantial problems: massive lineups for needy patients, enormous costs for taxpayers with poor service to boot, and a system that limits competition and freedom of choice. The operation of these three organizations exposes many of the weaknesses that universality entails. And that’s an important first step in changing the way in which all Canadians look at health care."

[Guest]

U.S. and Canada---yes; Mexico---Nah!!! I just love these people that claim how "proud" they are to be "Mexicans"---just as long as they live in the U.S. or Canada and not in Mexico.
A Mexican once told me: "My country (Mexico) is like a beautiful golden cage where the birds inside are worthless".

[antieverything]

So...it isn't ok to be proud of your heritage if you come from a poor country?

[Fires of History]

CI,

You really don't have a clue do you? Nothing you said about Canada is factual. Especially about taxation. I pay only slightly higher taxes than I did in the US, and I actually see that money used for something other than shiny new bombs. 50%? LOL! Are you just a reservoir of hearsay or what?

Guest,

Where did you get that article? Hmm? There are a lot of people that are bending facts because of their desire for a two-tier healthcare system, and the article's slant in that direction is much too obvious.

And why do we not have privatized healthcare in Canada yet? Because most Canadians can see it for the lie it is- 'patient-centered' really means wallet-centered. And Canadians aren't going to let that happen, sorry. No matter what the stockbrokers want.

Mexcan,

I've been through the American system and now the Canadian system. I prefer the Canadian. There's no difference in quality that I can tell. In fact, because it is universal health care, I feel more cared for. Instead of asking me for my insurance card to see if I qualify for certain things, it's never a question that I'm going to get what I need. And the same with EVERYONE else, not just the luckily insured. What a fucked-up country eh?

[antieverything]

And it isn't as if crises don't happen in the for-profit system. In fact, all too often the government is forced to step in.

Now that we are all posting articles, here's a good one that dispels several myths surrounding universal healthcare including that it is less efficient and more expensive.
[hr]February 17, 2000

When mainstream media report on widespread dissatisfaction with the HMO-driven U.S. health-care system, reporters seldom mention proposals for fundamental health reform; debate is usually limited to modest, incremental plans, like the "patients' bill of rights."

But as Canada has struggled this year with a funding shortage for its much-admired public health system, ABC News and the New York Times have pounced on the story as an opportunity to declare the failure of that country's system of universal healthcare.

On February 3, ABC aired a report by correspondent Deborah Amos in Toronto, depicting a country "struggling with universal healthcare." Most of Amos' report was taken up by grim descriptions of crowded hospitals: "The emergency rooms in Toronto hospitals are so clogged this winter, patients wait hours for critical treatment," Amos reported. "They sleep on stretchers in drafty hallways. And wait days for a hospital bed."

Introducing Amos' report, anchor Peter Jennings made it clear that the problems described in the segment were meant to be viewed as the pitfalls of universal health insurance: "For many years, politicians, the press, and the medical community have looked to Canada for the pros and cons of universal health care. There are pros and cons…And [in Canada] it's a very serious situation."

But Amos' attempt to explain why Canada's health service has suffered in recent years did not even make a pretense of journalistic balance. She reported that while health authorities blame shortages on this year's flu epidemic, "many Canadians believe it is the healthcare system itself that is truly sick":

The problem goes back a decade to when the Canadian government, in the middle of a recession, recognized that universal care was inefficient and expensive. So Canada closed hospital wards, eliminated 11,000 hospital beds, reduced nursing staffs, cut the number of places in state medical schools.
Not only does Amos' diagnosis blatantly take sides in an obviously controversial debate, but it contradicts a large body of evidence about the Canadian health system. The notion that universal health care is "expensive" in Canada is hard to reconcile with the fact that per capita health spending in the U.S. is more than twice as high: $4,000 last year, compared with $1,800 in Canada.

And while Amos calls Canada's system "inefficient," administrative costs in the U.S. system are far higher, due to a sprawling private-sector bureaucracy: A landmark 1991 New England Journal of Medicine study found that 24 percent of U.S. health spending went to administration, compared with 11 percent in Canada.

In fact, as Amos herself seems to recognize, the immediate causes of Canada's current health-care delivery problems are the austerity measures implemented by a series of recent budget-cutting governments. While real per capita health spending in the U.S. has risen by 27 percent since 1990, in Canada it has risen by only 7 percent--leading to predictable shortfalls in services, given the healthcare industry's higher rate of inflation.

Likewise, a January 16 New York Times article, headlined "Full Hospitals Make Canadians Wait and Look South," also made dubious claims about Canada's health program. Illustrated with a photograph of an overcrowded Montreal hospital, reporter James Brooke's article depicted a country rejecting its model of universal care in favor of more American-style solutions:

When Canada's state-run health system was in its first bloom, in the 1970s, Americans regularly trooped up here on inspection tours, attracted by Canada's promise of universal 'free' health care. Today, however, few Canadians would recommend their model for export.
Yet the closest evidence Brooke could find to support this thesis was a January poll by the Pollara firm that found 74 percent of Canadians "supported the idea of user fees," which have been outlawed in Canada since 1984. But Pollara surveys have also found that Canadians would only be willing to support very small fees, averaging about $18 per health visit--a sum that is unlikely to add more than 1 percent to the annual health budget (Montreal Gazette, 1/13/00).

Moreover, the poll presented user fees as the only alternative to higher taxes or less spending on other government programs. (Respondents rejected both higher taxes and lower social spending, but 64 percent favored cutting military spending to pay for health.)

Yet Canada has a large and growing federal budget surplus that can be used to dramatically increase healthcare spending--an option endorsed by the leaders of Canada's 13 provinces and territories at their February 3 meeting, but not given as an option in the poll (Montreal Gazette, 1/13/00; Globe and Mail, 2/3/00).

The last time the Gallup polling firm asked Canadians whether they preferred the American health-care system, in 1993, only 2 percent said they did; 96 percent prefered their own system (UPI, 9/13/93). By contrast, a 1998 survey by Zogby, a polling firm that often conduct surveys for Republicans, found that 51 percent of Americans would favor a "government-run health care plan that covers everyone in the same way, like the system used in Canada. It would be paid for through taxes and cover all necessary medical costs." Despite the abundance of negative buzzwords ("government-run," "covers everyone in the same way," "taxes"), only 38 percent were opposed.
[hr]
Like I said before, there is a crisis in America...here are some facts about New Mexico's health crisis.

Fully half of low to moderate income working New Mexicans have NO health insurance.

25% of all New Mexicans have no health insurance (14% Nationally)

We have the highest percent of children without insurance in the country (24%). This is at a time when Governor Johnson just tried to cut 200 Million dollars from Medicaid.

4/5ths of uninsured New Mexicans work for a living.

There are long wait times for appointments to see your doctor.

Some medications not covered by your particular formulary.

Mental health services are rarely adequately covered in any insurance policy.

Substance abuse rehabilitation services are not a reality for most people with or without insurance.

Insurance premiums are increasing 10-50% every year.

NM workers pay one of the highest percents of their premiums (30%) in the country (national average 17%).

Necessary medications are priced out of reach. Much of this cost is from the enormous TV advertising budgets of pharmaceutical companies.

For-Profit 'buyouts' of previously not for profit hospitals are bound to drive up costs and squeeze out higher payments from poor New Mexicans.

More people will lose their choice of doctor and hospital as they are shunted into an already overcrowded public hospital, UNMH.

Our ER's are constantly on "divert," meaning that there are no beds for ambulances to bring patients to so they must keep driving down the road.

Wait times in the ER are anywhere from 4-12 hours to be seen and up to 30 hours or longer to be moved to a hospital bed.

Our hospitals are also on "divert" meaning that we routinely send patients by ambulance or air transport to hospitals in other states.

There is a nursing shortage in New Mexico.

There is a physician shortage in New Mexico.

Rural areas are hit much harder with these shortages.

Interestingly, the World Health Organization came to the same conclusions in 2000 and ranked the entire United States healthcare system 37th in the world. That's just below Costa Rica and just above Cuba.

Now for the Good News

Healthcare for ALL is AFFORDABLE

We are already paying for a Universal Healthcare System, we just don't get it. Check out these two facts:

Nationally, 60% of the money spent on health care comes from our taxes. (more than 70% in NM)

We pay twice as much per person for health care than any other industrialized country. Yet they all provide healthcare for everyone in their country.
Where is all that money going?

Healthcare for All COSTS LESS than 'MANAGED' CARE

The Lewin Group is a conservative multi-national healthcare marketing firm that does Analytical Reports on healthcare systems projected costs. They have done five reports so far in the United States which have all showed a cost savings for a 'single payer' type system over managed care.

We Know WHO Opposes

Insurance companies are making a killing. Enough said.

Pharmaceutical companies have higher profits in a fragmented health care system. They make most of their money worldwide on the US Healthcare market and are the most profitable industry around.

Some Physician groups like the American Medical Association continue to oppose real health care reform.
These groups can afford to make large campaign contributions and pay alot of money for lobbyists and television ads to keep their interests protected.

It is interesting to note that more and more physicians are begining to support universal healthcare as the prevalence of HMO's begins to cut into their profits.




(Edited by antieverything at 10:21 pm on Jan. 20, 2003)

[Fires of History]

Good one.

And somebody should ask any of the More Than 41 Million Americans Without Health Insurance (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/insu-o17.shtml) about the 'quality' of American care.

[antieverything]

That would be almost 1 in every 6 Americans.

[Fjoodor]

I'll rather be sick in Sweden...
there the health care is for free!!

[antieverything]

...*blink blink*