You guys from Canada are beating us.....Geeeez ! Look at this...

[Mousefield]

Medic1050, "There are only two fighter bases. Valcartier, QC. and Cold Lake, AB. At each end of the country, but that is all we need as we only have about 30 or so F-18s until we replace them with 20 or so F-35s in the next ten years"

There is an air force base on Vancouver Island called CFB Comox, it is about a 50 minute drive north of us. I do believe they have fighters there.
Victoria, the capital of BC, has a large naval base called CFB Esquimalt, it's about a 2 hours drive south of us.

As far as our health care system it is getting worse. The population of Canada is getting older and so the system is getting more patients and of course over the years we have many more procedures that modern medicine/science had advanced, such as heart, lung, kidney transplants, hip and knees replacement and many other that the medical service didn't do 20-30 years ago. Of course the biggest misconceptions is that it's free, wonder why I and my wife pay $116 per month to BC medical plus lots of taxes. Any time I have traveled outside of Canada I have always paid for extra medical coverage, hate to think of going to a US hospital and paying $50. for an aspirin.

As far as the original posters "Canadians are worth more" it's all relative. Guess that's why all levels of government, local, provincial and federal are taxing us to death. :2cents: :2cents:

 

[Pixguy]

Setting aside, for the moment, any discussion of "quality of care" or "access to care" there are any number of studies that show US per capita expenditures on healthcare to be the highest in the world. The ongoing myth in the US that the "FREE" CDN system is grossly over priced is just that - a myth. Whether the system is paid through direct taxes, government insurance, private insurance, employer paid benefit, there is no free lunch - someone is paying the bill. The other supposition that privatization of healthcare somehow leads to lower costs is another highly debatable item. Privatization may well lead to quicker access, but at what cost.

For Canadians who moan and groan about the proportion of their taxes going towards Gov healthcare - have they ever asked about or become aware of the monthly premiums paid by US individuals not covered by a corporate plan? Canadians who complain they have no choice and they would be better off in a world where privatization of healthcare is allowed, have those choices available now. Pack your bags and go to Buffalo for that MRI with no wait time, go to the Mayo Clinic. Be prepared to pay for the privilege, just as it would cost more if privatization were allowed in Canada.

1. United States

Total expenditure on health per capita: $7,960
Expenditure as percent of GDP: 17.4 percent (the most)
Annual growth of total health expenditure: +2.2 percent (14th least)
Life expectancy: 78.2 years (27th highest)


The U.S. has, by far, the highest total expenditure on health care per capita. America spends approximately $2,600 more per person annually than Norway, the second-highest spender. Only 47.7 percent of this amount is public expenditure -- the third-smallest percentage among developed countries. However, the actual amount of public spending, $3,795, is among the highest. The U.S. also spends the largest amount on pharmaceuticals and other medical nondurables. The country has fairly low rates of doctors and hospital beds relative to its population. It also has the eighth-lowest life expectancy, at 78.2 years.

6. Canada
> Total expenditure on health per capita: $4,478
> Expenditure as % of GDP: 11.3% (7th most)
> Annual growth of total health expenditure: +7.4% (7th most)
> Life expectancy: 80.7 years (tied for 12th highest)

Canada—´ health care system costs $4,500 per person each year, the sixth-most among the 34 OECD countries. Between 2008 and 2009, costs increased 7.4%, the seventh-most among developed nations. One of the biggest expenses for the country are hospital stays. The average length of an acute care hospital visit is 7.7 days. Drugs are extremely expensive in the country. Each year, costs of pharmaceuticals come to $743 per person, the second most in the developed world.

Very informative, Thanks for posting. :thumbsup:

 

[studor]

Aww -- there you go confusing the issue with facts CinderShnauser -- nice post--

 

[chkntrktr]

They also have a national health care system, a high percentage of union jobs, and they don't have a Mitt problem!!

Mitt problem? Did the election happen while I was sleeping?

 

[300UGUY]

Aww -- there you go confusing the issue with facts CinderShnauser -- nice post--

I hate when that happens!!!!

 

[300UGUY]

Mitt problem? Did the election happen while I was sleeping?

I shouldn't have put the Mitt thing in there, it was in response to a Obama hater.

 

[chkntrktr]

I shouldn't have put the Mitt thing in there, it was in response to a Obama hater.

That's OK. Who knows, a year from now it could be true.

 

[rsewill]

Aww -- there you go confusing the issue with facts CinderShnauser -- nice post--

Not to worry, facts don't mean a thing to the baggers.

 

[EE_Bota]

Setting aside, for the moment, any discussion of "quality of care" or "access to care" there are any number of studies that show US per capita expenditures on healthcare to be the highest in the world. The ongoing myth in the US that the "FREE" CDN system is grossly over priced is just that - a myth. Whether the system is paid through direct taxes, government insurance, private insurance, employer paid benefit, there is no free lunch - someone is paying the bill. The other supposition that privatization of healthcare somehow leads to lower costs is another highly debatable item. Privatization may well lead to quicker access, but at what cost.

For Canadians who moan and groan about the proportion of their taxes going towards Gov healthcare - have they ever asked about or become aware of the monthly premiums paid by US individuals not covered by a corporate plan? Canadians who complain they have no choice and they would be better off in a world where privatization of healthcare is allowed, have those choices available now. Pack your bags and go to Buffalo for that MRI with no wait time, go to the Mayo Clinic. Be prepared to pay for the privilege, just as it would cost more if privatization were allowed in Canada.

1. United States

Total expenditure on health per capita: $7,960
Expenditure as percent of GDP: 17.4 percent (the most)
Annual growth of total health expenditure: +2.2 percent (14th least)
Life expectancy: 78.2 years (27th highest)


The U.S. has, by far, the highest total expenditure on health care per capita. America spends approximately $2,600 more per person annually than Norway, the second-highest spender. Only 47.7 percent of this amount is public expenditure -- the third-smallest percentage among developed countries. However, the actual amount of public spending, $3,795, is among the highest. The U.S. also spends the largest amount on pharmaceuticals and other medical nondurables. The country has fairly low rates of doctors and hospital beds relative to its population. It also has the eighth-lowest life expectancy, at 78.2 years.

6. Canada
> Total expenditure on health per capita: $4,478
> Expenditure as % of GDP: 11.3% (7th most)
> Annual growth of total health expenditure: +7.4% (7th most)
> Life expectancy: 80.7 years (tied for 12th highest)

Canada龍 health care system costs $4,500 per person each year, the sixth-most among the 34 OECD countries. Between 2008 and 2009, costs increased 7.4%, the seventh-most among developed nations. One of the biggest expenses for the country are hospital stays. The average length of an acute care hospital visit is 7.7 days. Drugs are extremely expensive in the country. Each year, costs of pharmaceuticals come to $743 per person, the second most in the developed world.

It is a good post, but one notable deficiency is putting aside access and quality for a minute but not picking it up before mentioning moaning and groaning.

If a country has a national system, and folks are moaning and groaning about anything, rather than invite them to go out of country, Canada could decide that instead of comparing themselves to other countries as a hallmark of success, success will be found in comparing customer experience with customer expectations. If I thought for a minute a national system in the US would care one fig about what I thought about the system once entrenched, I'd probably dread it less. But once it's here, it's here, and it might as well be Congress or the presidency for all the bickering and politics that will surround the entrenched medical / governmental complex.

 

[Mace Canute]

If there is one thing that seems to be brought up about our Canadian health care system it's long waiting times for medical procedures...but you couldn't prove it by ANY of my experiences. Last major procedure was just over three years ago, symptoms reared their ugly head on May 25 (couldn't pee) so into emergency and they catheterized me. They kept me in until the 27 while they ran tests and found out I had a cancerous kidney. I was admitted into the hospital on June 10th (a Wednesday) to have it removed and I was home again the following Monday. All in all, I think that's pretty good service, eh?

 

[yelbike]

If there is one thing that seems to be brought up about our Canadian health care system it's long waiting times for medical procedures...but you couldn't prove it by ANY of my experiences. Last major procedure was just over three years ago, symptoms reared their ugly head on May 25 (couldn't pee) so into emergency and they catheterized me. They kept me in until the 27 while they ran tests and found out I had a cancerous kidney. I was admitted into the hospital on June 10th (a Wednesday) to have it removed and I was home again the following Monday. All in all, I think that's pretty good service, eh?

That my take on our system. because it covers everyone not everyone is going to be happy. Theirs definitely room for improvement but what large system of any kind is perfect?
Who/what is mitt?
Why do so many people not like Obama? The problem I see is he like the sound of his own voice. At first I thought he was a great public speaker, now I'm mostly annoyed by his voice.
Last question why do so many Americans not want a health care system similar to ours or something in Europe?
My questions are not meant to be antagonizing, but rather spark further discussion on the topic to further my understanding. Sorry in advance if someone get offended.

 

[300UGUY]

If there is one thing that seems to be brought up about our Canadian health care system it's long waiting times for medical procedures...but you couldn't prove it by ANY of my experiences. Last major procedure was just over three years ago, symptoms reared their ugly head on May 25 (couldn't pee) so into emergency and they catheterized me. They kept me in until the 27 while they ran tests and found out I had a cancerous kidney. I was admitted into the hospital on June 10th (a Wednesday) to have it removed and I was home again the following Monday. All in all, I think that's pretty good service, eh?

Much better than my mother in law's double mastectomy 20 years ago. She had to wait nearly a month before she got a charity appointment with a surgeon. Then she could not be admitted to the hospital. My Fil did not have insurance, as he lost his job at age 57. They kept her in the hospital for 23 hours, then she had to leave, and she was wheeled out into the parking lot, along with her IV. Then they waited in the minivan for an hour, and then went back in, for another 23 hours. This went on for 5 days. By the time she got her health back, they were destitute.

Or my younger brother, who's infant son got pneumonia, and spent 3 weeks in a infant care unit. 50K in hospital bills cost him his house. In his case, the company he worked for went out of biz, and his new job's insurance didn't cover him for 30 days. His old company had stopped paying the insurance bills before they went under.

Count me in for a Canadian style health care system.

 

[EE_Bota]

If there is one thing that seems to be brought up about our Canadian health care system it's long waiting times for medical procedures...but you couldn't prove it by ANY of my experiences. Last major procedure was just over three years ago, symptoms reared their ugly head on May 25 (couldn't pee) so into emergency and they catheterized me. They kept me in until the 27 while they ran tests and found out I had a cancerous kidney. I was admitted into the hospital on June 10th (a Wednesday) to have it removed and I was home again the following Monday. All in all, I think that's pretty good service, eh?

It sounds like good service to me, Mace.

 

[EE_Bota]

That my take on our system. because it covers everyone not everyone is going to be happy. Theirs definitely room for improvement but what large system of any kind is perfect?
Who/what is mitt?
Why do so many people not like Obama? The problem I see is he like the sound of his own voice. At first I thought he was a great public speaker, now I'm mostly annoyed by his voice.
Last question why do so many Americans not want a health care system similar to ours or something in Europe?
My questions are not meant to be antagonizing, but rather spark further discussion on the topic to further my understanding. Sorry in advance if someone get offended.

How does one get a system similar to Canada's system, and is that what we have really done? (Rhetorical, unless someone can comment on it effectively.)

If we were getting a system like Canada's, the evaluation process would be pretty easy, all we would have to do is see if the scale change harms the Canadian system, and if so, compensate, and if not, just deploy the Canadian system here.

But your honest question points out my main concern with Canadian opinion of our system and our choices. And Mace's comment puts a fine point on it: I am so glad Mace had a good experience and a good outcome, since he is a real person I know and like, not a system with per capita targets to be met. Hopefully, Mace would not like our system, current or newly socialized if I am sitting here suffering in agony.

But when you guys express your view that a Canadian system is good, you were supporting these changes in our country without (in my view) any concern at all for my kidney, since you didn't seem to have any specific views about the form the system took, or much real care about whether ours system captured anything that is good about your own, or avoided anything you hate about your own.

I guess what I'm saying, you guys may know how to fix a kidney, and fund it, but did you care enough about me to make sure you knew that is what I am getting before you verbally signed off on it? I don't think you did, but my statements are pretty general, and can't be true for all. Also, they sound a bit pathetic, like I need you guys to shepherd in a new system for me...protect me. But I do have in my opinion some right to say these things by virtue of the fact that I am NOT interested in changing Canada's system in any way, or expressing any support for changing it, unless I can make it my full time dedication to understand exactly what I am advocating be done to my real live friends (not system) in Canada.

It matters to me that I was opposed to much of it, and in my view justly, but many from Canada worked against me and others. I hope at least some of you who did that know better than me. No! I hope ALL OF YOU who supported the change knew better than me. If you were way off base, many real people here will suffer much real pain and possibly death too due to at least in some small part to your efforts.

And one more thing...this is not nearly as mysterious now as it was during the initial debate, though much of it is still to be back-filled by bureaucratic rule making. Giving what I have said above, about real people, and real pain, should a Canadian comment any further at all in generalities given the law actually exists and is on the books, and passed by the Supreme Court? I think not, since that is just taking a liberty you should not have taken to begin with if you cared about real people instead of systems. You should NOW be able to game the outcomes of our law as effectively as we can (not very) and you should find things that are good, and things that are lousy. You should also be able sooner than later to borrow the good things from our system and add them to your own. Question: how may of you Canadians had a light go on over your head "Let's copy that from the US!!!!" I'm betting NONE of you. Yet, many of you are still quite sure that the changes that have been enacted are best for at least someone's real kidney.

 

[EE_Bota]

Count me in for a Canadian style health care system.

Where can such a system be found with any certainty other than Canada?

Effective advocates of this passed and upheld law should site specifically how the law addresses the issues from the past about which they are complaining (if they bring these up in support of the change.)

Detractors will have the task of siting the new problems that start happening that are the result of the law. These should and could rightly be countered in part or whole by new advantages properly noted and attributed to the law.

But continuing along like nothing has changed when in fact this law IS the law of the land, that simply makes no sense to me.

Did you find basis in the law that the house would be saved? Are you absolutely sure that in the future that the house and the child will not both be lost? Apparently the care was adequate to at least save the child, regardless of whether folks believe that a house is an asset, and whether a person actually HAS to lose a house due to medical.

It would also be helpful if you told the person's exact financial position in the house for the benefit of us who believe that all our financial resources can be brought to bear in a life threatening situation. I believe you are telling the truth as you know it, but each time you have told this story, I have become more and more resistant to it due to the lack of financial details.

Mace's story was for a person, not people in aggregate, and he gave details. You are trying to use a person minus details, and propel the person as an example of the aggregate. When we talk about individuals, and use them as examples for change, I want to know most everything about them, and I can get pretty judgmental too. Frequently, we want to use individual point in time examples of people, and ignore all the lousy decisions and missteps they make in their lives. It is a violation of freedom to force some to indemnify others from their avoidable mistakes (and probably the unavoidable ones too, but it is not as clear,) and failure is as important an outcome as success to the cause of freedom among men.

 

[studor]

success will be found in comparing customer experience with customer expectations

My expectation is to get whatever it is fixed right away as though it never happened and that none of the problem is ever caused by me or my genetics and that it should not cost anything -- -- I don't think any system in the world meets those expectations but does not stop me moaning about one that does not
I don't know too many customer experiences in many industries that qualify by meeting customer expectations (although I will admit to having expectations that are lower than the belly of a snake about many types of organizations)

 

[tcartwri]

One thing is a certainty, and that is if they were to deploy a system like ours they would have to completely overhaul their tax system as well. As I understand it, something like 40% of Americans pay no federal income tax... Where as we have a base tax amount that you cannot avoid.

 

[Loren49]

Looks like Canadiens making under $11000 pay no federal income tax.
Income taxes in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Loren

 

[EE_Bota]

One thing is a certainty, and that is if they were to deploy a system like ours they would have to completely overhaul their tax system as well. As I understand it, something like 40% of Americans pay no federal income tax... Where as we have a base tax amount that you cannot avoid.

The tax system is so perverse here, it would be difficult to know if the medical issue is not instead a tax system issue to begin with. How some decide that medical is what needs overhauling rather than the tax system is an interesting question in my view.

Edit: I have three long posts in a thread about a "done deal" but the thread is not specifically about that deal.
If I can keep on track, I'd rather discuss things going well for Canada. I love Canada, and I like to compete with them too. Although I respect them too much to ever consider throwing a competition, the times Canada beats us, I am really not able to be sad about that, since the spirit of competition and cooperation and the respect and admiration all act to salve the wound.