MrLocke Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Hey Folks! I'm a fourth year philosophy student doing my thesis on whether countries ought to have a Canadian style health care system or not. I am by no means touting our system as better than yours and in fact I am a hard core libertarian. In any even the best arguments for universal health care seem to be efficiency and that if some suffers a serious illness medical illness it should not ruin them financially. In any event Canada spends about the same percentage of their GDP on healthcare as the U.S. does. I have heard the American system reffered to as "publically funded, but privately run". Canada covers all of its citizens with this expendiure, whereas the United States only covers about 30% IIRC. I have heard that insurance schemes tend to be economically ineficient. The other argument is that prior to universal healthcare being brought about in Canada people were financially ruined if they suffered severe medical illness. The point being you pay the same amount of tax regardless of what your illness is. The weak point, as I see it in Canada is that even if one endorses universal healthcare private clinics would be to everyone's advantage. This is because the public healthcare system would have to compete and this would give consumers choice. I just want to know what people think and am not claiming one system as better than the other. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Hey Folks! I'm a fourth year philosophy student doing my thesis on whether countries ought to have a Canadian style health care system or not. I am by no means touting our system as better than yours and in fact I am a hard core libertarian. In any even the best arguments for universal health care seem to be efficiency and that if some suffers a serious illness medical illness it should not ruin them financially. In any event Canada spends about the same percentage of their GDP on healthcare as the U.S. does. I have heard the American system reffered to as "publically funded, but privately run". Canada covers all of its citizens with this expendiure, whereas the United States only covers about 30% IIRC. I have heard that insurance schemes tend to be economically ineficient. The other argument is that prior to universal healthcare being brought about in Canada people were financially ruined if they suffered severe medical illness. The point being you pay the same amount of tax regardless of what your illness is. The weak point, as I see it in Canada is that even if one endorses universal healthcare private clinics would be to everyone's advantage. This is because the public healthcare system would have to compete and this would give consumers choice. I just want to know what people think and am not claiming one system as better than the other. Thoughts? 820279[/snapback] I took a class on health care last year. US spends more than Canada as a percentage of GDP in health care. I live in Canada, and at the moment, if I get an illness, the waiting periods are huge. I can't compare with the US since I've never been to a hospital/clinic there. From what I saw they were both inefficient but Canada's was inefficient because of mismanagement and US was inefficient because of dishonest HMO's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 The weak point, as I see it in Canada is that even if one endorses universal healthcare private clinics would be to everyone's advantage. This is because the public healthcare system would have to compete and this would give consumers choice. 820279[/snapback] The argument against private clinics in Alberta is that there will be a two-tier system and the citizens who can afford it will be able to attain better service with shorter wait times than those who use the public system. In addition, some Canadians believe that the private sector would be far less efficient that public sector in delivery healthcare. I'm not sure why we (Canadians) are uncomfortable with providing a bare minimum to all citizens and allowing people with more money or better insurance to pay for better health care. In reality, Canadians have always had two-tier health care. Wealthy Canadians get treated in the US or Europe rather than put up with extended wait times at home. Personally, I have 3 young boys and we have lots of experience with the health care system in Alberta and I don't have any complaints with wait times or service although I have read horror stories in the papers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 The argument against private clinics in Alberta is that there will be a two-tier system and the citizens who can afford it will be able to attain better service with shorter wait times than those who use the public system. In addition, some Canadians believe that the private sector would be far less efficient that public sector in delivery healthcare. I'm not sure why we (Canadians) are uncomfortable with providing a bare minimum to all citizens and allowing people with more money or better insurance to pay for better health care. In reality, Canadians have always had two-tier health care. Wealthy Canadians get treated in the US or Europe rather than put up with extended wait times at home. Personally, I have 3 young boys and we have lots of experience with the health care system in Alberta and I don't have any complaints with wait times or service although I have read horror stories in the papers. 820468[/snapback] Alberta is a better province than Quebec. Better managed, and I believe the doctors are compensated better than in most other provinces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Alberta is a better province than Quebec. Better managed, and I believe the doctors are compensated better than in most other provinces. 820479[/snapback] The benefits of 35+ consecutive years of Conservative governments and an endless supply of oil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 The benefits of 35+ consecutive years of Conservative governments and an endless supply of oil 820482[/snapback] I don't like the conservatives. Was never a big fan of Mulroney. To be honest, Liberals are the main reason why Italian immigrants were able to do so well here in Quebec. Not going to turn my back on them now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 The argument against private clinics in Alberta is that there will be a two-tier system and the citizens who can afford it will be able to attain better service with shorter wait times than those who use the public system. In addition, some Canadians believe that the private sector would be far less efficient that public sector in delivery healthcare. I see no problem with a two-tiered system. You are providing a baseline coverage for everyone and offering a higher level for those willing to pay for it. The market tends to force companies into efficient practices over time. Plus, it would reduce wait times overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 I see no problem with a two-tiered system. You are providing a baseline coverage for everyone and offering a higher level for those willing to pay for it. The market tends to force companies into efficient practices over time. Plus, it would reduce wait times overall. 820496[/snapback] But the wealthier would get the better practitioners since the private clinics would offer better wages. Whether it is more efficient, I think it is but it defeats the whole purpose of the health care system in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 I don't like the conservatives. Was never a big fan of Mulroney. To be honest, Liberals are the main reason why Italian immigrants were able to do so well here in Quebec. Not going to turn my back on them now 820484[/snapback] Never one to try and change someone's politics, especially someone living in Quebec In Alberta, we would say immigrants are able to be successful because the government gets out of the way - no provincial debt, no provincial sales tax, lowest corporate and personal taxes in the country and an economy that is "energizing" all of Canada. Out here, we view the liberals as the Eastern Canada party that consistently tries to steal our wealth and redistribute it to their voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 But the wealthier would get the better practitioners since the private clinics would offer better wages. Whether it is more efficient, I think it is but it defeats the whole purpose of the health care system in Canada. 820506[/snapback] Depends on what you think the purpose of our health care system is. Does every Canadian deserve to see the best doctors and best care available? Does everyone deserve the best teachers, best vehicles, best houses, best jobs, etc.? I am willing to pay enough taxes that every Canadian's basic health care is taken care of. That does not mean everyone has the option for a new titanium hip replacement - but should that prevent me from getting one if I want to pay for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Depends on what you think the purpose of our health care system is. Does every Canadian deserve to see the best doctors and best care available? Does everyone deserve the best teachers, best vehicles, best houses, best jobs, etc.? I am willing to pay enough taxes that every Canadian's basic health care is taken care of. That does not mean everyone has the option for a new titanium hip replacement - but should that prevent me from getting one if I want to pay for it? 820517[/snapback] Well like I said, it is very debatable. Personally, I do wish that everyone have access to basic medical services and good schools. Pretty much the building blocks of every society. It is unrealistic though. The problem with Quebec is the whole language/sovereignty debate. It has literally killed any prosperity this province had. That, and the fact that the immigrants control more of this province than the actual french speaking people that do live here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Hey Folks! I'm a fourth year philosophy student doing my thesis on whether countries ought to have a Canadian style health care system or not. I am by no means touting our system as better than yours and in fact I am a hard core libertarian. In any even the best arguments for universal health care seem to be efficiency and that if some suffers a serious illness medical illness it should not ruin them financially. In any event Canada spends about the same percentage of their GDP on healthcare as the U.S. does. I have heard the American system reffered to as "publically funded, but privately run". Canada covers all of its citizens with this expendiure, whereas the United States only covers about 30% IIRC. I have heard that insurance schemes tend to be economically ineficient. The other argument is that prior to universal healthcare being brought about in Canada people were financially ruined if they suffered severe medical illness. The point being you pay the same amount of tax regardless of what your illness is. The weak point, as I see it in Canada is that even if one endorses universal healthcare private clinics would be to everyone's advantage. This is because the public healthcare system would have to compete and this would give consumers choice. I just want to know what people think and am not claiming one system as better than the other. Thoughts? 820279[/snapback] Hijack: Whatcha gonna do with the philosophy degree? The American system is well-maligned but it's the result of capitalism. On the plus side, better companies offer better benefits to get better employees--my company offers one of the best plans in the US (Blue Cross's Personal Choice). From an economic perspective, offering a family health benefit from a top notch provider attracts the best people at all levels: from professionals to clerks, we attract a lot of candidates and get the best. (For a family of 5, the personal choice benefit is worth about $15,000/year.) In the laissez faire capitalist system, this sounds pretty good. Of course, this does little for the people who don't qualify for jobs in my firm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Well like I said, it is very debatable. Personally, I do wish that everyone have access to basic medical services and good schools. Pretty much the building blocks of every society. It is unrealistic though. The problem with Quebec is the whole language/sovereignty debate. It has literally killed any prosperity this province had. That, and the fact that the immigrants control more of this province than the actual french speaking people that do live here. 820521[/snapback] I completely agree with you. You sound too reasonable to be living in La Belle Province, why don't you move west Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 I completely agree with you. You sound too reasonable to be living in La Belle Province, why don't you move west 820529[/snapback] I like La Belle Province . My cousin who works for CAE travels all around Canada and the US. He told me from his experiences that Calgary/Edmonton are a nice place to live but nothing beats Montreal. I have family here, and if I ever do decide to leave, it's to go to Rome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 but nothing beats Montreal. 820530[/snapback] That is if you like ice storms, power failures, minor earthquakes, union strikes and people worried about the size of the English letters on your signs I love Montreal - I was born in NDG and grew up on the West Island in Beaconsfield and Pointe Claire. I always tell the francophobes here in Alberta that it's only the Quebec politicians that suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 That is if you like ice storms, power failures, minor earthquakes, union strikes and people worried about the size of the English letters on your signs I love Montreal - I was born in NDG and grew up on the West Island in Beaconsfield and Pointe Claire. I always tell the francophobes here in Alberta that it's only the Quebec politicians that suck. 820532[/snapback] I work in Westmount. The company I work for owns a bunch of the real estate in the Westmount/downtown area. To be honest though, I do sympathize with some of the Partie Quebecois grumblings with the Federal government, but I think that it's a lost cause and that their own bitching will cause more problems than it will solve. Earthquakes?? There was only one ice storm and my house didn't even lose cable let alone power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Canada gets cheaper drugs (which is why people smuggle them across the border) US has better specialists (which is why people from countries with socialized medicine come here for treatment) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 30, 2006 Share Posted October 30, 2006 Canada gets cheaper drugs (which is why people smuggle them across the border)US has better specialists (which is why people from countries with socialized medicine come here for treatment) 820576[/snapback] Because the specialists are paid more. That is the problem with socialized medicine. Doctors make nearly 3 times the income they would make in Canada, what incentive do they have to stay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 But the wealthier would get the better practitioners since the private clinics would offer better wages. Whether it is more efficient, I think it is but it defeats the whole purpose of the health care system in Canada. 820506[/snapback] Would the bad outweigh the good though? If there are problems such as inefficiency with the Canadian system, private clinics could (and potentially would) help alleviate some of that. Just because there are two-tiers doesn't necessarily mean the lower one would be bad, it just means that it would be "not as good" (education is the analogy I'm thinking of here) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 Would the bad outweigh the good though? If there are problems such as inefficiency with the Canadian system, private clinics could (and potentially would) help alleviate some of that. Just because there are two-tiers doesn't necessarily mean the lower one would be bad, it just means that it would be "not as good" (education is the analogy I'm thinking of here) 820621[/snapback] True. I took a class on the economics of health care last year and this was pretty much what was discussed through the course. Comparing the Canadian and American system and how it could be improved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts