Living the good life off of government benefits

[Dragonlady]

Chaoulli v. Quebec
The majority opinion stated: "The evidence in this case shows that delays in the public health care system are widespread, and that, in some serious cases, patients die as a result of waiting lists for public health care". .

Eddie, I've already debunked this case as being relevant to the situation today: it was an Appeal of a 2002 Appeals Court case, which means that the incident which sparked the case had to have taken place around the turn of the century, or before, given how long it takes for the initial case to wend its way through the Courts. The government in power is long since gone as are the waiting lists which gave rise to the case in the first place

Try looking at the data from today's waiting lists:

Wait Times - Ministry Programs - Public Information - MOHLTC

Other than hip and knee replacements, wait times are all within targets.

. Very few Canadians come to the US for health care treatment. This is a myth that the US medical lobby perpetuates.

The nonpartisan Fraser Institute reported that 46,159 Canadians sought
medical treatment outside of Canada in 2011, as wait times increased 104
percent — more than double — compared with statistics from 1993.

The Fraser Institute bills itself as "non-partisan" but, and this is from the Institutes own website:

Who we are | Fraser Institute

Scroll to the bottom of the page.

Support Greater Choice and Personal Responsibility

The Fraser Institute is a registered non-profit organization. We depend entirely on donations from people who understand the importance of impartial research and who support greater choice, less government intervention, and more personal responsibility.

So much for the "non-partisan" and "impartial" Fraser Institute.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Chaoulli v. Quebec
The majority opinion stated: "The evidence in this case shows that delays in the public health care system are widespread, and that, in some serious cases, patients die as a result of waiting lists for public health care". .

Eddie, I've already debunked this case as being relevant to the situation today: it was an Appeal of a 2002 Appeals Court case, which means that the incident which sparked the case had to have taken place around the turn of the century, or before, given how long it takes for the initial case to wend its way through the Courts. The government in power is long since gone as are the waiting lists which gave rise to the case in the first place

Try looking at the data from today's waiting lists:

Wait Times - Ministry Programs - Public Information - MOHLTC

Other than hip and knee replacements, wait times are all within targets.

. Very few Canadians come to the US for health care treatment. This is a myth that the US medical lobby perpetuates.

The nonpartisan Fraser Institute reported that 46,159 Canadians sought
medical treatment outside of Canada in 2011, as wait times increased 104
percent — more than double — compared with statistics from 1993.

The Fraser Institute bills itself as "non-partisan" but, and this is from the Institutes own website:

Who we are | Fraser Institute

Scroll to the bottom of the page.

Support Greater Choice and Personal Responsibility

The Fraser Institute is a registered non-profit organization. We depend entirely on donations from people who understand the importance of impartial research and who support greater choice, less government intervention, and more personal responsibility.

So much for the "non-partisan" and "impartial" Fraser Institute.

The nonpartisan Fraser Institute reported that 46,159 Canadians sought
medical treatment outside of Canada in 2011, as wait times increased 104
percent — more than double — compared with statistics from 1993

Do you disagree with their numbers?? What are real numbers??
With out US capitalism and medical research 100% of Canada would have to come here health care!!

 

[Jarlaxle]

Kinda makes you wonder why so many Canadians come to the US for HC.

Also makes you wonder why there is now private HC available in Canada. If your system is so great then no one should have to go elsewhere for service nor would they want to use a private HC system.

Hell. I've got a friend who came here to get breast cancer treatment. If she'd waited for the Canadian system to get going she'd be dead now.

My aunt, living in Toronto at the time, was told she would have to wait several weeks for a root canal. She went across the border (I recall to Buffalo)...it was done within two days.

 

[Dragonlady]

The nonpartisan Fraser Institute reported that 46,159 Canadians sought
medical treatment outside of Canada in 2011, as wait times increased 104
percent — more than double — compared with statistics from 1993

Do you disagree with their numbers?? What are real numbers??
With out US capitalism and medical research 100% of Canada would have to come here health care!!

Each year, the Fraser Institute’s Waiting Your Turn survey asks physicians across Canada in 12 major medical specialties the question: “Approximately what percentage of your patients received non-emergency medical treatment in the past 12 months outside Canada?” The answers are averaged for each of the specialties studied in Waiting Your Turn for each province, producing a table that reports the average percentage of patients receiving treatment outside Canada (Barua et al., 2011: table 11). In 2011, 1.0% of all patients in Canada were estimated to have received non-emergency medical treatment outside Canada, the same as in 2010.

Combining these percentages with the number of procedures performed in each province and in each medical specialty gives an estimate of the number of Canadians who actually received treatment outside the country. Three data-related issues must be noted. First, the number of procedures performed in Canada is not readily available from the CIHI. Notably, Alberta and Quebec do not provide complete discharge abstract data (DAD) to the CIHI, which is the source for the procedure data used in Waiting Your Turn. The authors of Waiting Your Turn address this concern by making a pro-rated estimate of procedures to fill in for the actual number of procedures in Alberta and Quebec.

The numbers the Fraser came up with have no basis in fact. The survey asks doctors to "estimate", i.e. take a guess, as to what percentage of their patients went to the US for non-emergency treatment because of wait times. They don't even ask doctors to check their records or defend the numbers they're given. Just give us a percentage, and they they trapolated those figures across the country. The percentage that doctors came up with across the board was 1%. The lowest number possible.

The Fraser then admits that they don't even know how many procedures and what kind were performed in Quebec (25% of the population of Canada lives there) or Alberta, so they just made estimates of those numbers too.

All of these figures are MADE UP IN PEOPLE'S HEADS with no requirement that they be verified. So that an institute with an agenda of self-reliance and personal responsibility can tell people that Canadian Health Care doesn't work.

 

[Dragonlady]

But keep posting this out of date useless shit, and I'll keep shooting it down.

 

[depotoo]

But keep posting this out of date useless shit, and I'll keep shooting it down.

this is from Canada's government healthcare site -

In 2009, half of Canadians age 15 and older reported waiting over a month for a specialist
physician visit, with 14% waiting more than three months. While overall reported wait times
have remained relatively stable since 2003, the percentage waiting more than three months
rose from 10% in 2003 to 14% in 2009.10 Despite many reported challenges in access to
care for those in rural and remote areas, one study found that Canadians in rural areas were
70% less likely than urban residents to report their waits to see specialists as unacceptably
long.11 Overall, approximately one-third of Canadians reported unacceptably long waits to see
a specialist.12
14
Chapter 1: Waits for Routine Care
In an international comparison (among 11 countries) of wait times for a specialist appointment,
Canadians again reported the longest waits for a specialist appointment.

Among jurisdictions reporting wait time information (Table 1), waits were generally longer for
MRI scans than for CT scans. In most provinces, the majority of CT scans were done in about
five weeks, compared with nine out of ten MRIs carried out within three to eight months. As
of March 2012, available data indicates that waits for MRIs have shortened in the last three
years, while waits for CT scans have remained stable or decreased for most patients.

Diagnostic ultrasound is another type of diagnostic imaging used for visualizing body
structures, including organs, tendons, muscles and joints. Three provinces publicly report
on wait times for diagnostic ultrasound:
• In Newfoundland and Labrador, wait times varied by hospital and by anatomical location,
with highest waits reported for the pelvis (29 weeks in one hospital).28
• In Nova Scotia hospitals, median wait times for diagnostic ultrasounds range from 2 weeks
to 18 weeks.29
• Manitoba average wait times are 11 weeks but range from 2 to 16 depending on the facility.30

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in Canadian women,17 and mammography can
help detect it at an early stage. Among women age 50 to 69 who were asked whether they
had received a routine mammogram in 2006 or 2007, mammogram participation varied
by province, from 61% in Prince Edward Island to 74% in New Brunswick and Alberta
(information was unavailable for Nunavut).18 The wait time from an abnormal screen to
resolution is measured in most provinces (see Figure 6). For women not requiring a tissue
biopsy, 90% of cases should be resolved within the target time of five weeks.19

no mention on time if biopsy is needed nor for other types of cancer...
https://secure.cihi.ca/estore/productFamily.htm?locale=en&pf=PFC1984&lang=en

 

[JoeB131]

I live in a country with single-payer health insurance and it's so much better for both the doctors and the patients.

well then we should immediately try it in other industries too!! It would be so much better than capitalism for sure!!

See wny we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow!!

The problem with that is when you are talking about health care, the usual laws of capitalism don't apply.

Give you an example. Your own child has a terminal disease. To you, you would do ANYTHING to save that child, and pay any price to do so. So unlike buying a new pair of shoes or a hamburger for lunch, you don't have the choice to shop around or haggle.

of course, in the real world, someone has to say, "enough".

In a "Single Payer" system, the balance is what the system can afford vs. the benefit acheived.

In a "Capitalist" system, with an insurance company focused on profitablity making the calls, frankly, your kid is doomed.

Look up "Natalie Sarkisyan" is you need more enlightenment on that subject.

 

[dblack]

The problem with that is when you are talking about health care, the usual laws of capitalism don't apply.

Give you an example. Your own child has a terminal disease. To you, you would do ANYTHING to save that child, and pay any price to do so. So unlike buying a new pair of shoes or a hamburger for lunch, you don't have the choice to shop around or haggle..

That's just not true. A child is, of course, more of a priority than a hamburger for lunch, but there are still viable value choices to be made. And sane people will not choose to bankrupt their entire family's future to save one child.

 

[Dragonlady]

Yes, there are waits. But the suggestion that people are suffering because of wait times is not actually correct.

I have a bone spur on my foot. I've had it since I broke my foot six years ago and done nothing about it, but now if I walk a mile or two, it bothers me. I live downtown and walk everywhere. I plan on making an appointment soon and I expect a wait of a month for an appointment because this isn't a serious problem that needs to be dealt with now. It's something that can wait with no ill effect.

But my friend who failed her heart stress test, had surgery less than a week later. And my friend being treated for leukemia started chemo four days after she first walked into the emergency ward with what she thought was pneumonia.

It's called triage. The sick are seen and treated immediately. The survey asked if anyone had to wait for a specialist's appointment but they didn't enquire as to the urgency of the request. Critically and seriously ill people are seen immediately, someone like me with a bone spur that causes, at worst, mild discomfort, can wait.

 

[JoeB131]

The problem with that is when you are talking about health care, the usual laws of capitalism don't apply.

Give you an example. Your own child has a terminal disease. To you, you would do ANYTHING to save that child, and pay any price to do so. So unlike buying a new pair of shoes or a hamburger for lunch, you don't have the choice to shop around or haggle..

That's just not true. A child is, of course, more of a priority than a hamburger for lunch, but there are still viable value choices to be made. And sane people will not choose to bankrupt their entire family's future to save one child.

Actually, you wouldn't believe the crazy things people will do to save one child.

That's why you need the government and insurance to be the bad guys and say, "Enough".

So now that we've established that, who would you rather have being the arbiter?

A government you elect or an insurance company out to make a profit that your boss picked because it was the cheapest carrier?

 

[dblack]

The problem with that is when you are talking about health care, the usual laws of capitalism don't apply.

Give you an example. Your own child has a terminal disease. To you, you would do ANYTHING to save that child, and pay any price to do so. So unlike buying a new pair of shoes or a hamburger for lunch, you don't have the choice to shop around or haggle..

That's just not true. A child is, of course, more of a priority than a hamburger for lunch, but there are still viable value choices to be made. And sane people will not choose to bankrupt their entire family's future to save one child.

Actually, you wouldn't believe the crazy things people will do to save one child.[

That's why you need the government and insurance to be the bad guys and say, "Enough".

So now that we've established that, who would you rather have being the arbiter?

A government you elect or an insurance company out to make a profit that your boss picked because it was the cheapest carrier?

Neither. The final arbiter should be each of us spending our own money. If we run out of that, we can can ask for the largess of others - but not demand it via coercion.

You haven't established anything other than "we love our children".
Whether it's a child, or a parent, or other family member, we do what we can to take care of family. But the idea that we must submit to either the government or the insurance industry as the 'arbiter' of our lives is a false dilemma.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Neither. The final arbiter should be each of us spending our own money. If we run out of that, we can can ask for the largess of others - but not demand it via coercion.

You haven't established anything other than "we love our children".
Whether it's a child, or a parent, or other family member, we do what we can to take care of family. But the idea that we must submit to either the government or the insurance industry as the 'arbiter' of our lives is a false dilemma.

Not at all.

Most of us would never be able to pay for a really expensive operation with our "own money".

Serious Pediatric Chemotherapy or things like that would cost tens of thousands of dollars, something most working families can't afford.

That's why I find this nonsense about "Socialized Medicine" so fucking laughable. It's all socialized. Most years, you are paying/working more than you take out, except that one year you get sick, and others are covering you.

And I trust the government to run that better than an insurance company.

 

[Misty]

This really pisses me off.

Add it up and this family can get $81,589 in free assistance

Obama phone lady admitted to separating from her husband just to get more cash. So this encourages the break up of the family unit as well as having more kids to get more money.

It's sick.

 

[JoeB131]

This really pisses me off.

Add it up and this family can get $81,589 in free assistance

Obama phone lady admitted to separating from her husband just to get more cash. So this encourages the break up of the family unit as well as having more kids to get more money.

It's sick.

No, what's sick is that her husband can't get a good paying job anymore.

What's sick is that the big banks got BILLIONS in bailouts after wrecking the economy and you are complaining about this woman's free phone.

 

[Dragonlady]

This really pisses me off.

Add it up and this family can get $81,589 in free assistance

Obama phone lady admitted to separating from her husband just to get more cash. So this encourages the break up of the family unit as well as having more kids to get more money.

It's sick.

Well no, it's not all available to her and she has to work hard to keep those Pell Grants but yes, there is assistance available to those who (a) have the skills and resources to find it; (b) qualify for it; (c) can wend their way through the red tape to get it; (d) have the abillity and work ethic to maintain the grades; and a whole lot of other if's ands buts.

When she finishes school, gets and job and starts paying taxes and contributing to the economy, her overall contribution stands to be far more than she was "given". Many wealthy people have gone through periods in their lives when they needed a helping hand.

There are lots of policies which encourages poor families to break up. Some people put their kids into foster care because they can't afford to feed them. Husband leave their families all of the time because they can't support them and they know the family can get welfare and government assistance if they go.

What saddens me in reading this is the selfish, greed attitude of people like you. You are more concerned about all of the so-called free stuff this woman can get. Try living on social assistance level income for a while. I know people who have tried it. They restrict their spending on everything to the exact amount they would receive and no one said they could do it without giving up good nutrition, leisure activities and social activities. Every decision is fraught with stress, and these were people who could easily go back to their regular lives.

Americans used to have big hearts and a generosity of spirit which was unmatched. Now, because of Republican class war, you all hate the poor as parasites and takers while the real parasites - the corporations, Wall Street, and the wealthy rob you blind.

Walmart cost every American household over $2500 in entitlement payments for their employees, and you're worried that this woman could get $81,000 in benefits. Why that's drop in the bucket to what GE, Big Oil, Walmart, Monsanto, and all of the other big corporations are getting.

Open your eyes woman. It's not the welfare for people like this woman that is the reason you're being bled white - it's the big time "takers" like Walmart, Monsanto, General Electric. Those are the people you should really be PISSED AT.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

it's the big time "takers" like Walmart, Those are the people you should really be PISSED AT.

please say exactly why so we can all have a good laugh! Walmart saved the American people about $600 billion in lower prices over the last 10 years!! That are saintly!!

 

[ArmyCowboy]

it's the big time "takers" like Walmart, Those are the people you should really be PISSED AT.

please say exactly why so we can all have a good laugh! Walmart saved the American people about $600 billion in lower prices over the last 10 years!! That are saintly!!

That are not saintly when compared to all the businesses Wal-Mart has bankrupted and people they have put out of work in order to save you money on all that cheap Chinese junk.

 

[JoeB131]

it's the big time "takers" like Walmart, Those are the people you should really be PISSED AT.

please say exactly why so we can all have a good laugh! Walmart saved the American people about $600 billion in lower prices over the last 10 years!! That are saintly!!

They are also responsible for a huge transfer of wealth from the US to China in trade deficits...

Which is a lot worse.

 

[Dragonlady]

They're not saintly when Walmart employees, the majority of whom fall into the 47% of Americans who pay no income tax, received over a billion $$$ in food stamps and Medicaid while Walmart carefully monitors their income to ensure that they don't earn enough to lose those entitlements. How is this not reprehensible, when Walmart is posting their highest profits in history? How is this less disgusting than couples divorcing so the wife can qualify for welfare?

Republicans make a big hairy deal about investors getting a good return. Hell, these people are leeches!!! They're making money off every tax payer in America and they're not working for this money. Their employees are paid so little that they can't feed their families and that is just wrong on every level, and you're whining about the pittance that the US pays out to social welfare, while admiring companies like Walmart who are bleeding you from both sides.

Talk about picking up the peanuts while being trampled by the elephants.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

it's the big time "takers" like Walmart, Those are the people you should really be PISSED AT.

please say exactly why so we can all have a good laugh! Walmart saved the American people about $600 billion in lower prices over the last 10 years!! That are saintly!!

They are also responsible for a huge transfer of wealth from the US to China in trade deficits...

Which is a lot worse.

too stupid of course!! Ever dollar they get through Walmart or other companies must be spent in America. What did you think they did with all those dollars, burn them???