Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Evil Baby · Feb 18, 2004, 08:43 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Colleptic,)
The [color=darkgreen]NDP[/color] are a little more socialistic than the Liberals, which I like, but I do not like any of their leaders, what-so-ever. <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I don't know what part of Canada you are from but if you are from Southern Ontario you might have heard of Peter Kormos. He is an Ontario NDP and has a huge base in the Niagara Centre. Anywho, I'd love for Peter to be party leader. He is labled as "Party Hell-razor" because he is extreamly out spoken and is not shy at all to state his point of view. He makes sure that people know his point of view and where he is on the issure. No treading around the waters.

Evil Baby · Feb 18, 2004, 08:48 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
It is not like Canada had no surplus in the budget to reinvest in the health care system. Cause you know, while the US try to deal with a deficit wich will gain a life of its own soon, we have ZERO deficit .<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Yes but the problem is that we are still $507 billion in the hole. It is true that we are runing surpluses as a country even in a year as bad as last year but Provinces are underfunded and so are cities. One of the ways the Liberals were able to start making a surplus was to download as many of their priorities as possible.

m5lange1 · Feb 18, 2004, 08:50 pm

This is a side question but is it irritating ot hear us from the US refer to ourselves as Americans or things here as American as if we are the only country in America?

Evil Baby · Feb 18, 2004, 08:55 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Colleptic,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Jackney Sneeb
Fixing the health care system? What's wrong with it?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Not enough funding for one. Over payment of doctors, mixed with under-funding and poor distribution of funding have closed smaller hospitals and shortened staff in many provinces. For instance BC doctors are asking for “another” raise of around 50,000 per physician…

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
AnonT
The fact that it's socialized?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
No that is the reason it is one of the best systems on the planet. It has ruff edges that can easily be fixed with the right sanding block.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I will agree that medicare is underfunded. This underfunding creates long waiting lines. I don't have a problem with two tier medical services as long as those people who can afford and choose to go to a private hospital realize that whatever they spend there they will not get back. I love the idea of everybody recieving equal treatment but I think things would run more smoothly if we had some private sector installments, like cat scans, and x-rays and such. So long as the government makes sure these private hospitals can't allow patients to buy things that are in waiting lines. Like livers', kidney, bone-marrow ... That would have to go one big list and you would have to wait your turn. Also I think people need to be charged for stupid things, like going to the emergency room for a bandaid, or when they call 9-11 for no good reason. One lady in Niagara Falls called 9-11 because she swalloed(sp) a fly. She called from Clifton Hill which is insane on Friday nights due to traffic from both the US and Canada and little kids trying to show off their cars. Things like that need to be charged so people take more care with what they call 9-11 for.

Anywho back to your post. As for the doctors being over paid the real issue is that we have to find some way of competing with the US. If doctors in Canada don't feel they are getting paid enough they can easily jump ship to the US where they get paid more and there is a high demand for Canadian doctors.

Evil Baby · Feb 18, 2004, 08:56 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (m5lange1,)
This is a side question but is it irritating ot hear us from the US refer to ourselves as Americans or things here as American as if we are the only country in America?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

It doesn't bother me or anybody else I know. We know when somebody means the USA and somebody means a country in North America. I

Evil Baby · Feb 18, 2004, 09:00 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Jackney Sneeb,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
Common, there is no way we will abbandon socialized health care.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
No one answered when I asked, "Fixing the health care system? What's wrong with it?"

I've asked authoritarians this question several times, and never once got an answer: "If monopolies are bad in things like the steel industry, oil production, and food, why is there a major exception when it comes to something as important as health care?"

Why would it be wrong for one corporation to control an entire industry such as the news media, yet okay for the state to have a monopoly on health services?

--Jackney Sneeb

PS -- try switching the terms "one corporation" and "the state" in the second sentence, and ask yourself if it makes any difference?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

The difference is that the priorities are vey different. A country run monopoly is not run to make money, but to provide a service where as a Company's only goal is to make money.

Also if the consumer does not agree with the "owner" they can just vote that political party out next election but if the consumer does not agree with an company owned monopoly thier only choice is to boycott that item, and how would one go about boycotting medicare?

Mathieu · Feb 18, 2004, 09:45 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
It is not like Canada had no surplus in the budget to reinvest in the health care system. Cause you know, while the US try to deal with a deficit wich will gain a life of its own soon, we have ZERO deficit .<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Yes but the problem is that we are still $507 billion in the hole. It is true that we are runing surpluses as a country even in a year as bad as last year but Provinces are underfunded and so are cities. One of the ways the Liberals were able to start making a surplus was to download as many of their priorities as possible.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Well if you want to add state's debt and deficit in the balance... I think we still do very well.

Evil Baby · Feb 18, 2004, 10:16 pm

I'm not saying the States are doing better then us. hahaha. Their projected deficet this year is lareger then Canada's entire debt, I'm just saying although we are runing a surplus unlike the US we can't afford to run in the red ink. The US has billions in the world market and that is why they are allowed to run such a huge debt. Whereas Canada was in the gutter early 1990's. So bad that we were getting notices from the World Bank. Were were in hot waters and unless we did somethign drastic no country would invest in Canada. Thankfully we have turned that around but we still can't run into the red ink like we used to and we must find a way to pay this debt down.

FreedomFirst · Feb 18, 2004, 10:31 pm

I'm not sure who the Libertarian is, but I'd vote for him. If there's no libertarian running, I'd probably move to the United States.

Jackney Sneeb · Feb 18, 2004, 10:48 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Jackney Sneeb,)

No one answered when I asked, "Fixing the health care system? What's wrong with it?"

I've asked authoritarians this question several times, and never once got an answer: "If monopolies are bad in things like the steel industry, oil production, and food, why is there a major exception when it comes to something as important as health care?"

Why would it be wrong for one corporation to control an entire industry such as the news media, yet okay for the state to have a monopoly on health services?

--Jackney Sneeb

PS -- try switching the terms "one corporation" and "the state" in the second sentence, and ask yourself if it makes any difference?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
The difference is that the priorities are vey different. A country run monopoly is not run to make money . . .<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
The state running a monopoly gets its money how? By taxing you. What would be the difference between what you have now and a corporate monopoly that taxed you to fund your health care?

Also, you don't think people work for the state to make money? I see no difference between a monopoly run by the state and one run by a company other than the state can rob you to make up for the losses owing to the bad service it provides. What other company can take your wages from you whether you use its service or not?

Why is a state monopoly good, in your view, for things like health care, yet bad for oil production, food service, and the news media for example?
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,)
but to provide a service where as a Company's only goal is to make money.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
What companies provide people nothing and still make money?
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,)
Also if the consumer does not agree with the "owner" they can just vote that political party out next election but if the consumer does not agree with an company owned monopoly thier only choice is to boycott that item, and how would one go about boycotting medicare?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
"The consumer" cannot vote anyone out. Your one vote changes nothing. If the majority votes to kick your ass, your ass will be kicked. (Ain't democracy wonderful?) I don't live in a country that forces a monopoly on me for things as important as health care (yet). I already have a choice.

--Jackney Sneeb

Evil Baby · Feb 18, 2004, 10:54 pm

and one consumer can't boycott a company out of existance. Once consumer can't even start a protest. Obviously it takes more then one person, but if a company or Country is only pissing off one person they they are doing a pretty damn good job.

Jackney Sneeb · Feb 18, 2004, 11:10 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,)
and one consumer can't boycott a company out of existance. Once consumer can't even start a protest. Obviously it takes more then one person, but if a company or Country is only pissing off one person they they are doing a pretty damn good job.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
One consumer can spend his money elsewhere. Can one voter boycott the state out of existence? Can he refuse to pay for service he doesn't use, want, or need?

Which of the following demands that you fork over a chunk of your wages whether you want its product/service or not:

__a) the state

__b) a company

When you refuse to do business with a company, you retain the benefit of keeping your money. When you are dissatisfied with the crap the (state) monopoly offers you, do you keep your money? No. I prefer the system that depends on satisfying my needs or it doesn't get paid. That puts the power in my hands, not politicians'.

--Jackney Sneeb

AnonT · Feb 19, 2004, 12:18 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,)
I will agree that medicare is underfunded. This underfunding creates long waiting lines.... Also I think people need to be charged for stupid things, like going to the emergency room for a bandaid, or when they call 9-11 for no good reason. One lady in Niagara Falls called 9-11 because she swalloed(sp) a fly. She called from Clifton Hill which is insane on Friday nights due to traffic from both the US and Canada and little kids trying to show off their cars. Things like that need to be charged so people take more care with what they call 9-11 for. <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

This is exactly the problem with socialized health care. Everything is free, so people use the service whether they need it or not. In the US, when someone has a cold, they spend a couple bucks on some soup and a bottle of NyQuil. In Canada, they head to the hospital. In the US, we get over our colds within a few days, because we spend a little money taking care of it ourselves. In Canada, the person heading to the hospital has to wait in line behind the people who got minor cuts and bruises, the other people with very minor, not life threatening illnesses, the person who called an ambulance when she swallowed a fly, etc., and all that time sitting in that cold waiting room just makes them even sicker. Two days later, when they finally get to see the doctor, the guy from the US is already much better and getting on with his life.

And a week later when they each break their arm, the American gets a cast put on that day. The Canadian spends a couple days waiting in line between the people who got minor cuts and bruises, the people who went to see the doctor when they got a minor cold.... Sure, the American pays for any services he uses, and the Canadian doesn't pay based on his services. But that just ends up rewarding the people who go to the hospital in Canada for minor things. They get free treatment for whatever they want, while slowing things down for the people who are kind enough to shorten the lines by staying home when their injury or illness is minor and only go to the doctor when they have a major injury or illness. Socialized healthcare just encourages people to leech off of each other; after all, if you're forced to pay for it whether you use it or not, you might as well use it.

So, like I said, the problem with Canadian healthcare is that it's socialized.

Mathieu · Feb 19, 2004, 01:09 am

You must not know the canadian system " Well I can't talk for the "canadian" system, but in Quebec we have 3 major level regarding treatment of the patient. First a network of private clinics with familly doctors and specialist, then the CLSC who are like an urgency for the non-urgent and the more or less urgent case . You can go ther for various care from the service of a psychologist to the service of radiology. Then there is the urgency for the more serious case where the admission is based on the gravity of the cases. They have the power to redirect to different clinics the case they judge are not enough serious for their service. You have also transition hospital with no urgency who takes care of long term patient, psychiatry , specialized tratment etc... That reduce a lot the problem you talk about, and make the system more efficient. An it is based on a principle of equity for all,wich you don't seem to have as a value. That may not be understandable for you to see people who cares for something else than their own person?

AnonT · Feb 19, 2004, 02:49 am

I do care about others.... having a hospital system that is efficient and well run helps far more people than a system that's "equal for all" but that gives worse care or where people have to wait long periods of time for their health care.

Jackney Sneeb · Feb 19, 2004, 02:52 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
An it is based on a principle of equity for all,wich you don't seem to have as a value.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
No, it serves as an excuse for mass theft, which I don't think is valuable.

--Jackney Sneeb

Mathieu · Feb 19, 2004, 08:25 am

As far as I know, We spent less per capita on healthcare than US citizen ... So who is doing a mass theft?

Mathieu · Feb 19, 2004, 08:27 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (AnonT,)
I do care about others.... having a hospital system that is efficient and well run helps far more people than a system that's "equal for all" but that gives worse care or where people have to wait long periods of time for their health care.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Bullshit, we take care of our people and we take care of every one here. There no more waiting list there is in a lot of place in US.

Bayou · Feb 19, 2004, 09:06 am

Well jackney sneeb, fu(k off unless your canadian- if you are swallow that load of c0me that you are gonna need to run your business with.
There was reason we didnt join the other 13 colonies, we want our own ideas represented in a government.
People are free to leave anytime if they dont like the concept of universal healthcare.
I dont care if their is some private health care systems in place but GOVERNMENT money should not be going to these institutions LIKE THEY ARE NOW, because that is exactly what creates 2-tiered healthcare.

Anyhow the Liberals need to be taken out of power, but with the current system of government funding for political parties breakdown- your best bet is to vote what you beleive in, as that will help fund that party even more in the next election- power voting will also be an economic boost as well now, so you will be economically supporting something that doesnt represent your beleifs if you power vote.
The NDP are the best representatives of the left right now, so if your attached to the Trudeau liberal style of government or Trotskiast communist, this is the party for you.

On canadian party leaders, I dont physically agree with the looks of any of the leaders we have (not sure of the conservatives, though stronach is nicer to look at then the average politician).
When it comes to voice I LOATHE Paul Martin when he is talking like a politician.......but when he is talking one to one on non political subjects his voice becomes soothing and has a calming effect.
Wuld I like him as a teacher: yes.
DO I think he is a good politician which would be a good leader of our country: no.
Jack Layton on the other hand I like his voice when he is talking politics, I think he would make a decent priminister - though not my ideal for sure.
But when it comes to political ideas and philosophy, the NDP beats everything right of it hands down:
50% target of all candidates are going to be female.

Serious dedication to environmental issues and investment in environemtal technologies.

Retract government money going to private healthcare businesses.

Bring government investment in healthcare back up to 35% with the aim of 50%(pre cut level) if fiscally possible; current level of support from the liberal government :15%

Bring back spending in CBC to 1 billion mark or more, again depending
on fiscal flexibility.

Continue to pay off the federal debt.

A most neccessary one: eliminate the senate and bring in proportional represantation for the house of commons.

Bring back 1% of budget funding of low income housing

Test all cattle being exported for BSE

And of course how they are going to fund these ideas, roll back tax cuts to corporations that were implemented during the dot.com boom days,

on top of special tax on banks and their profit margins, I think it weighs in at leaving them 10% profit (considering the combined profits of canadian banks was in the realm of 30 Billion dollars or more, thats a big chunk of change to help fund these ideas).

Eliminate corporate welfare in the system.

The total amount of money canada pays on healthcare is 9% of its GDP to support EVERYONE, unlike the sates who pay 14% of their GDP and 60 million people do NOT get coverage- that is a big disparity.
well I know personally that their is at least to levels of healthcare here in alberta, we have the medicentrel for petty injuries and normal hospital waiting areas for more serious injures.

Jackney Sneeb · Feb 19, 2004, 11:09 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
As far as I know, We spent less per capita on healthcare than US citizen ...<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Why is spending less money on health care good, while spending less money on education is bad?
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,)
So who is doing a mass theft?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
The state.

--Jackney Sneeb

View Poll Results: how would you vote in the next Canadian Fed Election?
Liberal	4	18.18%
Conservative	4	18.18%
NDP	6	27.27%
Bloq	0	0%
Green	3	13.64%
other	5	22.73%
Voters: 22. You may not vote

Feb 18, 2004, 08:43 pm	#21 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Colleptic,) The [color=darkgreen]NDP[/color] are a little more socialistic* than the Liberals, which I like, but I do not like any of their leaders, what-so-ever.* <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I don't know what part of Canada you are from but if you are from Southern Ontario you might have heard of Peter Kormos. He is an Ontario NDP and has a huge base in the Niagara Centre. Anywho, I'd love for Peter to be party leader. He is labled as "Party Hell-razor" because he is extreamly out spoken and is not shy at all to state his point of view. He makes sure that people know his point of view and where he is on the issure. No treading around the waters.

Feb 18, 2004, 08:48 pm	#22 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) It is not like Canada had no surplus in the budget to reinvest in the health care system. Cause you know, while the US try to deal with a deficit wich will gain a life of its own soon, we have ZERO deficit .<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Yes but the problem is that we are still $507 billion in the hole. It is true that we are runing surpluses as a country even in a year as bad as last year but Provinces are underfunded and so are cities. One of the ways the Liberals were able to start making a surplus was to download as many of their priorities as possible.

Feb 18, 2004, 08:50 pm	#23 (permalink) (top)
m5lange1 Igneous Magma Posts: 667	This is a side question but is it irritating ot hear us from the US refer to ourselves as Americans or things here as American as if we are the only country in America? Protester against the culture war!!!!

Feb 18, 2004, 08:55 pm	#24 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Colleptic,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by Jackney Sneeb Fixing the health care system? What's wrong with it?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Not enough funding for one. Over payment of doctors, mixed with under-funding and poor distribution of funding have closed smaller hospitals and shortened staff in many provinces. For instance BC doctors are asking for “another” raise of around 50,000 per physician… </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by AnonT The fact that it's socialized?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No that is the reason it is one of the best systems on the planet. It has ruff edges that can easily be fixed with the right sanding block.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I will agree that medicare is underfunded. This underfunding creates long waiting lines. I don't have a problem with two tier medical services as long as those people who can afford and choose to go to a private hospital realize that whatever they spend there they will not get back. I love the idea of everybody recieving equal treatment but I think things would run more smoothly if we had some private sector installments, like cat scans, and x-rays and such. So long as the government makes sure these private hospitals can't allow patients to buy things that are in waiting lines. Like livers', kidney, bone-marrow ... That would have to go one big list and you would have to wait your turn. Also I think people need to be charged for stupid things, like going to the emergency room for a bandaid, or when they call 9-11 for no good reason. One lady in Niagara Falls called 9-11 because she swalloed(sp) a fly. She called from Clifton Hill which is insane on Friday nights due to traffic from both the US and Canada and little kids trying to show off their cars. Things like that need to be charged so people take more care with what they call 9-11 for. Anywho back to your post. As for the doctors being over paid the real issue is that we have to find some way of competing with the US. If doctors in Canada don't feel they are getting paid enough they can easily jump ship to the US where they get paid more and there is a high demand for Canadian doctors.

Feb 18, 2004, 08:56 pm	#25 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (m5lange1,) This is a side question but is it irritating ot hear us from the US refer to ourselves as Americans or things here as American as if we are the only country in America?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> It doesn't bother me or anybody else I know. We know when somebody means the USA and somebody means a country in North America. I

Feb 18, 2004, 09:00 pm	#26 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Jackney Sneeb,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) Common, there is no way we will abbandon socialized health care.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No one answered when I asked, "Fixing the health care system? What's wrong with it?" I've asked authoritarians this question several times, and never once got an answer: "If monopolies are bad in things like the steel industry, oil production, and food, why is there a major exception when it comes to something as important as health care?" Why would it be wrong for one corporation to control an entire industry such as the news media, yet okay for the state to have a monopoly on health services? --Jackney Sneeb PS -- try switching the terms "one corporation" and "the state" in the second sentence, and ask yourself if it makes any difference?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> The difference is that the priorities are vey different. A country run monopoly is not run to make money, but to provide a service where as a Company's only goal is to make money. Also if the consumer does not agree with the "owner" they can just vote that political party out next election but if the consumer does not agree with an company owned monopoly thier only choice is to boycott that item, and how would one go about boycotting medicare?

Feb 18, 2004, 09:45 pm	#27 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) It is not like Canada had no surplus in the budget to reinvest in the health care system. Cause you know, while the US try to deal with a deficit wich will gain a life of its own soon, we have ZERO deficit .<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Yes but the problem is that we are still $507 billion in the hole. It is true that we are runing surpluses as a country even in a year as bad as last year but Provinces are underfunded and so are cities. One of the ways the Liberals were able to start making a surplus was to download as many of their priorities as possible.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Well if you want to add state's debt and deficit in the balance... I think we still do very well.

Feb 18, 2004, 10:16 pm	#28 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	I'm not saying the States are doing better then us. hahaha. Their projected deficet this year is lareger then Canada's entire debt, I'm just saying although we are runing a surplus unlike the US we can't afford to run in the red ink. The US has billions in the world market and that is why they are allowed to run such a huge debt. Whereas Canada was in the gutter early 1990's. So bad that we were getting notices from the World Bank. Were were in hot waters and unless we did somethign drastic no country would invest in Canada. Thankfully we have turned that around but we still can't run into the red ink like we used to and we must find a way to pay this debt down.

Feb 18, 2004, 10:31 pm	#29 (permalink) (top)
FreedomFirst Molten Ash Posts: 67	I'm not sure who the Libertarian is, but I'd vote for him. If there's no libertarian running, I'd probably move to the United States. "You have to question when a person says, 'I have a great idea, let's make everyone __________.' If it's such a great idea, why do you have to make people do it?" www.freestateproject.org

Feb 18, 2004, 10:48 pm	#30 (permalink) (top)
Jackney Sneeb Igneous Magma Posts: 240	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Jackney Sneeb,) No one answered when I asked, "Fixing the health care system? What's wrong with it?" I've asked authoritarians this question several times, and never once got an answer: "If monopolies are bad in things like the steel industry, oil production, and food, why is there a major exception when it comes to something as important as health care?" Why would it be wrong for one corporation to control an entire industry such as the news media, yet okay for the state to have a monopoly on health services? --Jackney Sneeb PS -- try switching the terms "one corporation" and "the state" in the second sentence, and ask yourself if it makes any difference?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> The difference is that the priorities are vey different. A country run monopoly is not run to make money . . .<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> The state running a monopoly gets its money how? By taxing you. What would be the difference between what you have now and a corporate monopoly that taxed you to fund your health care? Also, you don't think people work for the state to make money? I see no difference between a monopoly run by the state and one run by a company other than the state can rob you to make up for the losses owing to the bad service it provides. What other company can take your wages from you whether you use its service or not? Why is a state monopoly good, in your view, for things like health care, yet bad for oil production, food service, and the news media for example? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,) but to provide a service where as a Company's only goal is to make money.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> What companies provide people nothing and still make money? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,) Also if the consumer does not agree with the "owner" they can just vote that political party out next election but if the consumer does not agree with an company owned monopoly thier only choice is to boycott that item, and how would one go about boycotting medicare?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> "The consumer" cannot vote anyone out. Your one vote changes nothing. If the majority votes to kick your ass, your ass will be kicked. (Ain't democracy wonderful?) I don't live in a country that forces a monopoly on me for things as important as health care (yet). I already have a choice. --Jackney Sneeb

Feb 18, 2004, 10:54 pm	#31 (permalink) (top)
Evil Baby Igneous Magma Posts: 313	and one consumer can't boycott a company out of existance. Once consumer can't even start a protest. Obviously it takes more then one person, but if a company or Country is only pissing off one person they they are doing a pretty damn good job.

Feb 18, 2004, 11:10 pm	#32 (permalink) (top)
Jackney Sneeb Igneous Magma Posts: 240	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,) and one consumer can't boycott a company out of existance. Once consumer can't even start a protest. Obviously it takes more then one person, but if a company or Country is only pissing off one person they they are doing a pretty damn good job.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> One consumer can spend his money elsewhere. Can one voter boycott the state out of existence? Can he refuse to pay for service he doesn't use, want, or need? Which of the following demands that you fork over a chunk of your wages whether you want its product/service or not: __a) the state __b) a company When you refuse to do business with a company, you retain the benefit of keeping your money. When you are dissatisfied with the crap the (state) monopoly offers you, do you keep your money? No. I prefer the system that depends on satisfying my needs or it doesn't get paid. That puts the power in my hands, not politicians'. --Jackney Sneeb

Feb 19, 2004, 12:18 am	#33 (permalink) (top)
AnonT Molten Ash Location: Middle of nowhere, Nebraska Posts: 130	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Evil Baby,) I will agree that medicare is underfunded. This underfunding creates long waiting lines.... Also I think people need to be charged for stupid things, like going to the emergency room for a bandaid, or when they call 9-11 for no good reason. One lady in Niagara Falls called 9-11 because she swalloed(sp) a fly. She called from Clifton Hill which is insane on Friday nights due to traffic from both the US and Canada and little kids trying to show off their cars. Things like that need to be charged so people take more care with what they call 9-11 for. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> This is exactly the problem with socialized health care. Everything is free, so people use the service whether they need it or not. In the US, when someone has a cold, they spend a couple bucks on some soup and a bottle of NyQuil. In Canada, they head to the hospital. In the US, we get over our colds within a few days, because we spend a little money taking care of it ourselves. In Canada, the person heading to the hospital has to wait in line behind the people who got minor cuts and bruises, the other people with very minor, not life threatening illnesses, the person who called an ambulance when she swallowed a fly, etc., and all that time sitting in that cold waiting room just makes them even sicker. Two days later, when they finally get to see the doctor, the guy from the US is already much better and getting on with his life. And a week later when they each break their arm, the American gets a cast put on that day. The Canadian spends a couple days waiting in line between the people who got minor cuts and bruises, the people who went to see the doctor when they got a minor cold.... Sure, the American pays for any services he uses, and the Canadian doesn't pay based on his services. But that just ends up rewarding the people who go to the hospital in Canada for minor things. They get free treatment for whatever they want, while slowing things down for the people who are kind enough to shorten the lines by staying home when their injury or illness is minor and only go to the doctor when they have a major injury or illness. Socialized healthcare just encourages people to leech off of each other; after all, if you're forced to pay for it whether you use it or not, you might as well use it. So, like I said, the problem with Canadian healthcare is that it's socialized.

Feb 19, 2004, 01:09 am	#34 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	You must not know the canadian system " Well I can't talk for the "canadian" system, but in Quebec we have 3 major level regarding treatment of the patient. First a network of private clinics with familly doctors and specialist, then the CLSC who are like an urgency for the non-urgent and the more or less urgent case . You can go ther for various care from the service of a psychologist to the service of radiology. Then there is the urgency for the more serious case where the admission is based on the gravity of the cases. They have the power to redirect to different clinics the case they judge are not enough serious for their service. You have also transition hospital with no urgency who takes care of long term patient, psychiatry , specialized tratment etc... That reduce a lot the problem you talk about, and make the system more efficient. An it is based on a principle of equity for all,wich you don't seem to have as a value. That may not be understandable for you to see people who cares for something else than their own person?

Feb 19, 2004, 02:49 am	#35 (permalink) (top)
AnonT Molten Ash Location: Middle of nowhere, Nebraska Posts: 130	I do care about others.... having a hospital system that is efficient and well run helps far more people than a system that's "equal for all" but that gives worse care or where people have to wait long periods of time for their health care.

Feb 19, 2004, 02:52 am	#36 (permalink) (top)
Jackney Sneeb Igneous Magma Posts: 240	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) An it is based on a principle of equity for all,wich you don't seem to have as a value.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No, it serves as an excuse for mass theft, which I don't think is valuable. --Jackney Sneeb

Feb 19, 2004, 08:25 am	#37 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	As far as I know, We spent less per capita on healthcare than US citizen ... So who is doing a mass theft?

Feb 19, 2004, 08:27 am	#38 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (AnonT,) I do care about others.... having a hospital system that is efficient and well run helps far more people than a system that's "equal for all" but that gives worse care or where people have to wait long periods of time for their health care.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Bullshit, we take care of our people and we take care of every one here. There no more waiting list there is in a lot of place in US.

Feb 19, 2004, 09:06 am	#39 (permalink) (top)
Bayou Igneous Magma Location: Calgary Alberta Canada Posts: 154	Well jackney sneeb, fu(k off unless your canadian- if you are swallow that load of c0me that you are gonna need to run your business with. There was reason we didnt join the other 13 colonies, we want our own ideas represented in a government. People are free to leave anytime if they dont like the concept of universal healthcare. I dont care if their is some private health care systems in place but GOVERNMENT money should not be going to these institutions LIKE THEY ARE NOW, because that is exactly what creates 2-tiered healthcare. Anyhow the Liberals need to be taken out of power, but with the current system of government funding for political parties breakdown- your best bet is to vote what you beleive in, as that will help fund that party even more in the next election- power voting will also be an economic boost as well now, so you will be economically supporting something that doesnt represent your beleifs if you power vote. The NDP are the best representatives of the left right now, so if your attached to the Trudeau liberal style of government or Trotskiast communist, this is the party for you. On canadian party leaders, I dont physically agree with the looks of any of the leaders we have (not sure of the conservatives, though stronach is nicer to look at then the average politician). When it comes to voice I LOATHE Paul Martin when he is talking like a politician.......but when he is talking one to one on non political subjects his voice becomes soothing and has a calming effect. Wuld I like him as a teacher: yes. DO I think he is a good politician which would be a good leader of our country: no. Jack Layton on the other hand I like his voice when he is talking politics, I think he would make a decent priminister - though not my ideal for sure. But when it comes to political ideas and philosophy, the NDP beats everything right of it hands down: 50% target of all candidates are going to be female. Serious dedication to environmental issues and investment in environemtal technologies. Retract government money going to private healthcare businesses. Bring government investment in healthcare back up to 35% with the aim of 50%(pre cut level) if fiscally possible; current level of support from the liberal government :15% Bring back spending in CBC to 1 billion mark or more, again depending on fiscal flexibility. Continue to pay off the federal debt. A most neccessary one: eliminate the senate and bring in proportional represantation for the house of commons. Bring back 1% of budget funding of low income housing Test all cattle being exported for BSE And of course how they are going to fund these ideas, roll back tax cuts to corporations that were implemented during the dot.com boom days, on top of special tax on banks and their profit margins, I think it weighs in at leaving them 10% profit (considering the combined profits of canadian banks was in the realm of 30 Billion dollars or more, thats a big chunk of change to help fund these ideas). Eliminate corporate welfare in the system. The total amount of money canada pays on healthcare is 9% of its GDP to support EVERYONE, unlike the sates who pay 14% of their GDP and 60 million people do NOT get coverage- that is a big disparity. well I know personally that their is at least to levels of healthcare here in alberta, we have the medicentrel for petty injuries and normal hospital waiting areas for more serious injures. <span style='font-size:16pt;line-height:100%'><span style='font-family:Impact'><span style='color:green'>Vote NDP "The independence of art for the revolution. "The revolution for the complete liberation of art!"</span></span></span>

Feb 19, 2004, 11:09 am	#40 (permalink) (top)
Jackney Sneeb Igneous Magma Posts: 240	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) As far as I know, We spent less per capita on healthcare than US citizen ...<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Why is spending less money on health care good, while spending less money on education is bad? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Mathieu,) So who is doing a mass theft?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> The state. --Jackney Sneeb