Canadian Health Care

We don't have co-pays.

It isn't *free* b/c we all pay into it. We just don't pay anything at the point of service.

From the above link:

Public health care is governed by the Canada Health Act. It's designed to make sure that all eligible people in the country have reasonable access to insured health services on a prepaid basis, without direct charges at the point of service.

Simply put, if you break your leg chasing the Canadian dream, you have the right to get fixed up without opening your wallet – except to pull out your provincial health insurance card.

The act is also designed to make sure that the delivery of health care is pretty consistent across the country. Ottawa has found that the best way to do that is by attaching conditions to the cash it transfers to the provinces to cover health care.

Among those conditions are that health care must be:

Portable.
Universal.
Accessible.
Free from extra charges (for insured services).
By portable, Ottawa means if you move from one province or territory to another, you won't lose your coverage. This doesn't mean you can go looking for health services in another province or country because the waiting list at home is too long for your liking. It does, however, mean that your out-of-province in-laws will be covered if they suddenly fall sick while on their annual visit.

Under the universality criterion, all insured residents of a province or territory must be entitled to the insured health services provided by the provincial or territorial health care insurance plan. Doesn't matter if you're rich or poor. You can't buy your way to the front of the line.

By accessible, the CHA means "insured persons in a province or territory have reasonable access to insured hospital, medical and surgical-dental services on uniform terms and conditions, unprecluded or unimpeded, either directly or indirectly, by charges [user charges or extra-billing] or other means [e.g., discrimination on the basis of age, health status or financial circumstances]."


-------------

Another tidbit: Through all entities in its public-private system, the U.S. spends more per capita than any other nation in the world, but is the only wealthy industrialized country in the world that lacks some form of universal health care.

One More Interesting Article: U.S. health care lies about Canada

It's my understading that the Canadian system
 

It's my understanding that the system in Canada is based on the US Medicare system. Do you Canadians know if this is true?

Also, when Taiwan and South Korea went shopping around the planet for the best system to replicate in their country guess which system they chose? yep, you go it, the US Medicare system. So sad that other countries can see how great our single payer system is and want to use it as a model for their country, yet we can not simply extend this to all of our citizens.

We are one twisted country.

From what I read, and even on the gov't website, Medicare is actually the unofficial name for our publicly funded universal health care system. It is governed by the Canada Health Care Act..."Framed by the Canada Health Act, the principles governing our health care system are symbols of the underlying Canadian values of equity and solidarity."

Canada's Health Care System (Medicare)

Wiki:
Medicare (French: assurance-maladie) is the unofficial name for Canada's publicly funded universal health insurance system[1]. The formal terminology for the insurance system is provided by the Canada Health Act and the health insurance legislation of the individual provinces and territories.
Under the terms of the Canada Health Act, all "insured persons" (basically, legal residents of Canada, including permanent residents) are entitled to receive "insured services" without copayment. Such services are defined as medically necessary services if provided in hospital, or by 'practitioners' (usually physicians).[2] Approximately 70% of Canadian health expenditures come from public sources, with the rest paid privately (both through private insurance, and through out-of-pocket payments). The extent of public financing varies considerably across services. For example, approximately 99% of physician services, and 90% of hospital care, are paid by publicly funded sources, whereas almost all dental care is paid for privately.[3] Most doctors are self-employed private entities.

-----------

Note: When I wrote no co-payments, I meant we don't pay out of pocket for doctor visits/surgeries. We do pay minimal out of pocket for Prescriptions. (I've never paid more than five dollars for any prescription). Rx, dental, vision is usually covered via employer.

I don't believe it was but they were created within a year of each other so I wouldn't be surprised if there were discussions between the two countries. What I think is important to add to the discussion is that while Canadians pay for health insurance through taxes, as others have stated, and there are limited to no co-pays (there are some prescription co-pays but that's a different from all the doc visits/hospital/etc. and it varies from province to province), because the cost is spread out across the country, the per person cost is lower. It would be impressive if a similar thing could be done here. To be honest, I'd imagine that everyone would be covered and costs on a per capita basis would likely drop.

This link does a nice comparison between the two countries including costs (2006 figures were $1000 difference, with Canada on the cheaper end per person)

No i am not bitter because i do not have healthcare. What i do not like is the way they are going about things. I get tired of hearing our congress saying if you not for this then we are unamerican. I am kinda wondering what you all going to say when they put a heavy tax on us to where we cant afford things. When i was in Scotland do you know how many had cars or lived with there parents and grandparents because they was so heavily tax that they could not afford to live on there own. Let see what the bill is and see how bad they fuck us before i will agree to anything.

I am selfish, I want you to have healthcare!
 

It really gets under my skin when I see people who would rather let other people suffer A LOT than to have themselves suffer a little bit. In my world, all citizens should be required to sacrifice a little bit so that all of us can have basic standards of living, a social safety net. It's called living in a civilized world - caring about complete strangers simply because they share the planet with us.

When I think about it, it is really a selfish reason why I care enough about people I don't even know to sacrifice some of my hard earned money for them. I know that as hard as I work (self employed for over 10 years now), and as healthy as I am (95% veggie, fit as a fiddle) I am not immune to the twists of fate and misfortunes that can befall any of us. I would hope and pray that complete strangers would care about me if I needed them.

Not to mention that my neighbor getting treated for their TB, or SARS, or H1N1 asap is in MY best interest!

If some freeloader takes advantage of that big deal! I would rather 10 freeloaders get something for nothing than to let one honest person suffer needlessly. But, that is just me – even though I do not claim Christianity as my one religion, I do believe that Jesus had it right when he said “Whatsoever you do to the least among you, that you do unto Me.”

While the list of goodies above regarding insurance reform ( I truly don't see this as healthcare reform) is all good.. I see no where limits being placed on insurance companies for what they can charge or how often they can increase. That is one of the greater issues I have with this bill. It is NOT what Mr Obama wanted. It is not what our country needs. It may be a start, but until insurance companies get capped and until pharmecuticals have shorter limits set on the time before drugs can be made generically, then we are still at their mercy. Until malpractice suits stop making decisions for our medical professionals and until more med students become general practioners again instead of cosmetic surgeons ( because that is where the big bucks vs low risk is), we are still at their mercy.

Frankly, this country and the folks running it have forgotten what "mercy" really means.

Keys, I have mercy for those who work but if u are lazy ass then i say take a flying leap. I must not be liberal thank god. Seems congress thinks that money is grown on trees thats why they are spending it as fast as they can make it before you know it gas will be 10 dollars a gallon and milk will be 8. When you are living paycheck to paycheck like I am I have to worry about taking care of me and my own cant worry about taking care of anyone else. If you consider this selfish I am sorry but I was raised to be self reliant not let government take care of me. My question is who going to be paying this back us, our children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren?

What about those that can't work (e.g., many soldiers coming back from various locations are suffering PTSD), cannot find work (many people are more than willing to work but can't even find the simplest of jobs) or have retired from work finally (however, many are going back to work because they can't afford to retire)?



The reality is there will be no one single answer that will address everything nor will it be solved in a year. We cannot end up back in the 1950s where prosperity seemed endless. Society has drastically changed thanks to advertising (increased our consumerism beyond what, IMO, we really need), the internet (communication -- both medium and language -- has changed drastically), cultural advances, etc. I think as long as we don't lose our humanity, things will work out in some manner (we may not know what it is now and it may be vastly different in the future but we should try to avoid losing our hope and optimism in general).

The saddest part to me
 

The saddest part for me is to read on here where another lesbian, another poor person has come to believe that instead of reaching out to help each other we must fight like dogs over the scraps of bone that the fat cats toss us from time to time.

This is exactly how the rich and greedy want us. So desperate that we come to fear that working together, helping each other, yes even sacrificing for another will somehow threaten our very safety, and the little bit of almost nothing that we have to work so hard to get and maintain. Americans attacking other Americans for being "lazy ass." The ole Ronald Reagan Welfare Queen myth alive and well. The other side of that myth is that the rich people among us "earned" all their obscene wealth. (gag)

I was raised to believe that many hands make the load lighter. That I am not an island, that I actually need other people, and that they actually need me. That is called community, society, and working together towards a bigger goal than any one of us could attain on our own it is not a bad thing.

I was raised to believe that the citizens of this country ARE the Government. This great American Experiment of a Government Of the People, For the People, By the People is not some legend. It is alive (though barely breathing thanks to the rich raping and pillaging it for the last 30 years - thanks Reagan and every President since) But we can revive that great American Spirit that founded this country, that ordinary citizens can create a government (many hands working together) that meets the needs of its citizens as outlined in the Preamble.

1)Form a more perfect Union (Federal Standards while respecting states rights)

2) Establish Justice (write and enforce these standards, and have an equal and fair justice system)

3) Ensure domestic tranquility (no prejudice, no hate, minority rights not trampled by majority)

4) Provide for the Common Defense (this is the only one the cons want you know about)

5) Promote the General Welfare (yes, gov. supporting ways to have basic needs met - education, food, shelter, and health care)

6)Ensure the blessings of Liberty (when basic needs are met people are free to experiment, to grow, to innovate, to be entrepreneurial)

Roosevelt said it best when he said. We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

Dear Key, what saddens me is that some other person is judging me on my opinion, someone who does not even know who I am. I have opened my home to those who need help no matter who or what they are. I am done discussing this matter. I am tired of people thinking I am uneducated, selfish, or stupid because I have a different opinion.

Actually, she was judged. I don't blame her for wanting to step away from the conversation. Her first judgement was that she was racist. She apologized and it wasn't enough.

I have had this conversation on this site before and will not subject my home to it again. Be clear. Not coming to defend anyone. Just noting that yes, she was judged. Please go back and read it all from the beginning.

Sometimes a healthy distance gives us all a better perspective. I try not to judge folks who have a different experience in life than I have had. I try not to judge folks who say things with words that don't sit well with me. I try. Sometimes I fail to make my point clearly or concisely without ruffling feathers. I guess if I put myself out there, then I am due my own lil ass whooping.

If someone tries and feels they have failed and says they need to step aside, that should be honored and enough. Just my opinion.

I saw it as her giving reason for removing herself. Her right to do so. I see a lot of shit as high school angst and it saddens me.

Whew... not to beat a dead horse, as it is no longer about her but about our responses to her action. I think you really want to beat up on her because she didn't agree with you. Sorry. I like your additions to most threads and all, but I gotta part ways on this one man. A woman stands up for what she truly feels is right and gets bashed for it. Some do it with an educational purpose. Some do it just to be right.
Our purpose here is to grow. By here, I mean on this lil planet.. not website. How are we supposed to do that when folks just immediately bash us back into the ground? It happened to her. It has happened to others.

I just erased an entire two paragraphs outlining exactly what my "gut reaction" to this healthcare law really is. I know it would make me no friends. Here is how I will pretty it up. It is crap. It is not what should have been done and now will only delay what needs to be done in its undoing. Period. I can't afford insurance. I have chronic illness. I will be asked to pay a penalty AND pay my medical bills out of pocket. I have to now pay attorney fees to find ways to protect my home. I think it was an act of cowardice and a disservice to the American people. Meanwhile, every year that this is allowed to stand, my penalties will increase just as the Romney care in Mass has done.

Would have been better off without it. That is the statement from a poor person who can't afford it. It will do me no favors.

in my defense
 

"I must not be liberal thank god. "

That is a quote from the person who left because she felt like she was being judged. That was posted long before I posted my rant about wishing she cared enough to work together politically to change our f-ed up system (not just health care, the entire predator capitalist system we operate under).

The other thing I could not stand reading from her over and over was how lazy she thought other people (I guess people in need specifically) were. F that! Most poor people have to work twice as hard to get half as much in this country. And if anyone should know that she should!

Anyway. I agree with you Jess that this "reform" is f-ed up, but after not having health insurance for the 10 years that I have been self employed, I don't care, I want to see a doctor without fear of going bankrupt due to what they may find.

Jess, there are hardship waivers in this law, have you looked through it? Are you sure that your only option is to take the fine and pay out of pocket? If you feel comfortable PMing me (or posting here) with details of your situation I could comb through this bill and try and answer your specific questions.

Have you done the subsidy calculator already?

To those who are what they are . Hope u all well. But I still believe what i believe. We will see taxes raised and I will be waiting for the day to say I told you so.

[QUOTE=Corkey;93041]Oh good grief. Does this mean you actually read the law? Or is it a thumb your nose at everyone who disagrees with you? All we ask is that you read it, digest what it means, even to you.

Here I'll even do your leg work for you.
Here it is :http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc...ter_HR3590.pdf[/QU

At this time I would not care what the bill said. To me they can take the bill and shove it up where the sun dont shine. I really dont fucking care. Sorry to those who know me for using the foul language.

[quote=casey35;93053]
Done trying to reason with a rock.

[quote=Corkey;93055]That fine but I did not have a disagreement with u. Most of mine was to Key. I read yours and understood them.

[quote=casey35;93057]But did you read the law????? Do you understand it????? Look I'm willing to debate here, but I'd like to be on an even keel. I can't debate opinion, I can only debate facts. If you haven't read the law you have not the facts to debate with. Make since?

Key -

Thank you for your offer. I have read the bill and know not only what it won't entail for Jess, but also the fallout to both mine and my special needs son's current coverage. Part of my job is benefits administration and I also can forecast the impact it will have on the coverage we currently offer to our employees.

Just a few thoughts off the top of my head...

Yes, its grand that pre-exists will be no longer. What it doesn't do is cap the premium for those with pre-exists. Unfortunately, I believe that most currently uninsured folks will have higher premiums b/c of this "oversight" in the bill. That will only burden the subsidy/funding issue further.

The tax on the "cadillac plans" - I see this as being handed down to employers in rate hikes - I currently offer three different coverages to our employees - all three would fall into this category. Do you think that BCBS is gonna just absorb the cost?? Hell no. We will see it in rate increases, but they will be much more than the 12-15% per year increases we have seen over the last 4 years and it will effectively force the small business who has employed folks for over 57 years to drop health coverage.

That the federal government would oversee any new plans?? Oh hell no - if Medicare is a shining example of oversight, I'll pass, thanks. Don't even get me started on the Part D debacle and how most of the legislators supporting it went on to be bankrolled by the pharmaceutical companies.

I watched as the state of TN took Medicaid dollars and pooled them into several managed care programs. Anyone caring to take a look at that successful model, feel free to google "TennCare." It was a fiasco that left many covered individuals without medical care because the administration of the plans was so fucked up, providers stopped accepting patients if they were TNCare recipients.

Do I think we need a single payer system? Yes. Do I think that people such as my beloved Jess need to battle chronic, debilitating illness without consistent, proper, adequate medical care? No. Do I think that ANYONE should have to choose between healthcare and food? No. Do I want my government, who has a glorious way of fucking up the simplest of things, involved in the insurance coverage that my son depends on? No. I want a solution - a workable solution. Not a Band-Aid on a gushing artery.

I think this was another "throwing a bone" so that it looked good for midterm elections. I think it was a piss poor effort and would have rather our elected officials really grown a set of balls and went for the tougher fight of Single Payer. It really would have been worth it and not felt like we were sold out or that they settled yet once again.

If it weren't for the Party Of No, aka the Senate Republicans, filibustering virtually everything that has come through the Senate (they really have, go check for yourself) and refusing to sign on to absolutely anything the Obama supports, even if those same Republicans have written or sponsored the same language/ideas/concepts in the past, then we'd have real health reform. Instead, we have a few dozen people who are so hell bent on the black man in the white house failing that they will screw over this entire country and not give a rats ass.

Their latest slimy decision, buy the way, was to filibuster debate of Wall Street Reform in the Senate. They didn't filibuster a bill, they said we won't even allow this to be discussed on the floor of the Senate, in front of the American People. I officially have nothing nice to say to and/or about any Republican. The Senate Republicans are the scum of the earth, and anyone who supports them is swimming in the same scum.

I'm over it.

Amen and amen to all of that
 

But to be fair most Democrats are just as slimey as the Republicans. But to be fair, at this point the only decent handful of politicians in Washington right now are in the Democratic Party (and the Independent, Democratic/Socialist Bernie Sanders).

And I agree, anyone supporting any Republican at this time in our nations history is, in my opinion, a traitor to this country and should be treated accordingly. They are dragging us back to pre-revolution days. I honestly think that is what they mean when they say they want to "take our country back". Back to when women and blacks and any other minority were simply rich white men's property.

How these rich white men are (still) convincing poor people to fight for their rights to own them is baffling, just baffling to me. But then again when the only news and information available to these poor communities is Fox "News" and Rush Limbaugh....well, it does begin to make sense. Keep the poor people afraid of the other poor people so they never band together. It has worked for generation after generation.

in response
 

So, what this means it does not change what you have now - insurance co's being able to raise rates as much as they want. They were trying to raise rates 20-30-40% as this bill was being debated. But the change is that they can't drop you, like they had been doing.

So, if the co does drop it's plans, they better give that benefit money directly to the employee so they can shop for their own coverage. This may be helpful to getting us on the path to single payer. HC should not (in my opinion) be employer based. Hopefully you work at a union shop so the union can fight to make sure this happens (benefit $ goes directly to employees).

You know what the second most satisfied group of healthcare recipients are in the US? Recipients of Medicare. Know what the first is? Recipients of the VA. (Our Socialist Medicine). Know what the least satisfied is? Private Insurance.

Part D is what you get when Republicans are in charge. They care nothing, not one iota about human people, only corporate "persons". Period.

More Republicans in charge I imagine. Just a guess.

With all due respect, you just went off about how Government can't do it right? Who do want administering this single payer system? A private company? That answers to ....it's shareholders...not the people using it's service? Give me the Government (who I can fire at 2 year intervals if need be) running this system any day over a private company only out to make a profit, answerable only to the bottom line. That is how we got in this mess to begin with Healthcare (actually it's denial) for profit.


Again, you want a CEO making 7 million a year deciding your and your son's health care "coverage" People who rail against the government running things, I ask. So we should privatize everything? Is there nothing so precious to you that you want to have control (through the political process) over who gets to "control" it? You want everything to be about the bottom line and making sure someone makes a buck off it? Like corporations have not f-ed the country up (can we say a housing bubble that nearly destroyed this country? how about a military contractor that lost 9 billion dollars in cash and electrocuted our troops in the shower? how about giving away American's well paying jobs to communists so that their shareholders could make more money, geesh I could go on and on about predatory capitalism, talk about a gushing artery)

Whew! Enough.



Again, the contradiction. You hate the Government running things, but you want single payer. I don't get it. Please explain.

Key -

Thank you for your response. It was late when I responded and I am certain that I was not as clear as I could have been. My apologies. I see your responses and questions very valid and I will be back later to try and clarify.

C

Yeah, Rachel Maddow's whole show last night was done using the Republican image with the "just say no" thing written over it. Yes, the Republicans have attempted to stop everything being addressed by democrats ( along with a handful of dem's who have proven where they stand which is alongside the republicans).

here's the way I see it laid out now... We KNOW who is going to vote how on whatever issue comes down the pike, and like the healthcare law, there were enough votes to pass it. So why bother watering shit down anymore. You know you have enough votes, just do it, yes you can..yes you should...

I no longer have any faith in either of the primary parties and will seek independents who have a proven track record in their voting history to spend my vote on.

My reponses are in blue
 

I'm at your side. I can get ticked at some of the Dems and Obama, too (he is too moderate), but, the GOP of today has lost any semblance of a soul or conscience. Mostly a bunch of privileged white men that just can't take having an African American president above them.

I am wondering if the GOP is going to shoot itself in the foot with the latest antics concerning Wall Street Reform. Perhaps they might want to pull back on their cockiness about the mid-term election outcomes. Any immigration legislative proposals might also bring a very big onslaught of organized Democratic support among Latinos also with the AZ actions.

I don't always fall in with far-left or progressive ideology on everything, but, I am disgusted with the Republicans (and Blue Dog Dems), their wing-nut Teabag auxiliary and brainless cheerleader, Sister Sarah. Glenn Beck is nothing more than a propagator of domestic terrorism and even more vile and mentally disturbed than Limbaugh.

Health Care reform even in the form it ended up (far too moderate), will indeed make a big difference to me as it kicks in over the next few years. hell, if the only thing that was included was the pre-existing condition clauses, I would benefit even though I pay for my insurance myself in CA!

The corporate house of health care still needs to be hit, and hit hard by a single payer system! This is not a done deal and as all of the reform measures take place, people will see this, especially small business.

I'm curious can you explain what the difference between these are:

Scenario 1: There's a program that people can buy into. This pools the risk. Those who are healthy are, essentially, paying for those who are less healthy. By the time that you, yourself, become less healthy there are other people who have flowed into the system to pay for those who are less healthy which now includes you.

Scenario 2: There's program everyone contributes to. The population that is more healthy pays more into the system then they use in services. The population that is less healthy gets more in services then they are *currently* paying in.

Now, have I described an insurance policy, Medicare or single-payer national healthcare?

The thing is, that description could more or less apply to *any* of them!

So my question is this:

Why is it that if in one scenario, a large, corporation is making profits beyond the dreams of avarice it is a Good Thing (r) and the way the world should work but if in another scenario it is the government that is paying the health care providers that is 'tax payers paying for other's health care'. Both are pools of risk, the two seem pretty much the same as far as I can tell. The *difference* is this: Aetna has one goal and that is to make a profit. If, in the course of doing so, someone happens to get needed medical attention no one at Aetna will shed a tear. But if there is SOME way to deny your claim, they will.

Now, as far as paying for others. In my department, there are a bunch of middle-aged folks, with middle-aged people's problems, and a number of twenty-somethings. The fact of the matter is, the twenty-somethings are *paying* for us middle-aged people. The kids, as we call them, hardly use their healthcare at all while us old farts use it rather often. Should the kids be able to pull out of the insurance because it'll be a decade before they start using the health insurance in a manner closer to what us older folks do?