Private vs Universal Health Care

Apr 13, 2007 14:12

While this is technically an American commentary, I think it's interesting because of the implications on the universal/private/mixed debate in Canada.

What Jacques Chirac could teach us about health care
by Jonathan Cohn


PS - You'll need to register for free at The New Republic.

health care

Leave a comment

velvetpage April 13 2007, 22:28:36 UTC
That's a good article, and it gets to the heart of the matter. Americans routinely spend a thousand dollars a month or more on basic health coverage, and still end up with huge bills if they happen to come down with something serious. I don't pay that much in taxes, and my taxes gets a lot more than just health care.

Reply

uncut_diamond April 13 2007, 23:05:05 UTC
Shhhh. That sort of factoid doesn't register with the Yankees. Their logic is "crappy service expensive, better service must be super expensive." The idea that they might be loaded with inefficiencies doesn't register.

Reply

velvetpage April 13 2007, 23:08:20 UTC
Or at least, it doesn't register with those who have enough money to fund political campaigns.

Reply

uncut_diamond April 13 2007, 23:10:06 UTC
your point is valid and accepted!

Reply

velvetpage April 13 2007, 23:20:13 UTC
I have a friend whose son has something rare (but not fatal - he'll probably outgrow it, but in the meantime it's unpleasant.) She was describing how her son's doctor first called this specialist about one possibility, and got him seen within the week. Then, that having been ruled out, the doc called another specialist and got him seen within another week, and so on, and so forth. She said she couldn't imagine waiting months for one specialist appointment ( ... )

Reply

uncut_diamond April 13 2007, 23:21:28 UTC
Also, you really can't convince people that you, the specialist in your field, know more then they do. :(

Reply

velvetpage April 13 2007, 23:24:51 UTC
There is that. I get that all the time as a teacher.

Reply

uncut_diamond April 13 2007, 23:25:54 UTC
Me too, as a lawyer.

Reply

allhatnocattle April 14 2007, 16:47:34 UTC
True that, but incomplete. My mom had a two year wait for hip replacement in Ontario and got in early... only 21months instead of 24. But damage incurred during the wait period required a knee and 2nd hip replacement. Said to be another 18month wait, turned out to be only 9months ( ... )

Reply

ringzero April 16 2007, 13:44:48 UTC
The moral of your story is a one week wait is comparable to a three month wait, because in the latter case your aunt was originally told it would take a year?

Reply

velvetpage April 16 2007, 20:20:52 UTC
Actually, in the long run, the kid's treatment took nearly six months, in two-week or so increments. It was just set up differently.

Reply

primad April 14 2007, 02:41:28 UTC
No, no it does! They just don't want the sheeple to find out about it!

You don't know how many times my MiL goes on and on about the state of Canadian healthcare that's nearly Republican talking points verbatum.

(aside: Tommy Thompson, the former HHS who's running for president has been hitting this hard and heavy while he sucks up to people who weep big salty tears for his glory days as Governor in Wisconsin)

Then I have to remind her that I actually used the system when I lived in Saskatchewan and Ontario...and that she's been fed a line of shit woefully misinformed. *g*

Reply


Leave a comment

Up