I saw the video attached to the title above and thought I'd post it here. It is a semi-humorous look at the Canadian system (I say "semi-humorous" because it's really not funny at all) and says pretty much what has been said before about the gov't run system there.
What scares me the most is knowing what a bunch of buffoons the president and his majority lapdogs are (if they are the lapdogs---it could be that Barry's their lapdog). After having taken part in the destruction of the economy ("inherited" my ass), they now think they're capable of fixing it, and it seems obvious that they're only making it worse. Now, they want to push a system of health care that hasn't provided the medical utopia they promised it would be elsewhere. This of course doesn't even address the whole "how d'ya pay for it?" aspect of whole deal.
So watch and see how it works up north. The video kinda just stops at the end, but by then you should have gotten the point. As I've said, others have made the same complaints about Canada, most notably, Mark Steyn, and this vid just re-iterates the warning. Heed it. Call your reps and scream at them to block any such legislation that brings us anything similar. They just aren't smart enough to do it better than Canada and we will all suffer as a result.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
10 comments:
Your First Amendment right to free speech is a privilege and comes with a measure of responsibility. You have the right to exercise that responsibility here but we reserve the right to inform you when you've used that right irresponsibly.
We are benevolent dictators in this regard. Enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Who cares about Canada?
ReplyDeleteNONE NONE NONE of the reforms being debated in the House and Senate are remotely like the system in Canada.
Get a brain, then get a clue.
Don't be a sheep!
This health bill is shaping-up to be exactly like a loading chute at a slaughterhouse and BenT calls us "sheep".
ReplyDeleteLiving up to his username, fer sure!
Ben,
ReplyDeleteAs Al suggests, I think it is YOU who compares more favorably to sheep.
More important that what is written down in the proposals is what the consequences of those proposals are likely to be. The CBO already predicts 1.5 trillion dollars over the next ten for this proposal alone, on top of the spending already taking place. What will that mean to our economy, an economy even the fools running the country insist is teetering on the brink?
That NONE NONE NONE of the reforms currently resemble Canada's system, will they be able to maintain that difference in practice once the real impact of the legislation is felt? At some point the reality will clash with the fantasy of the admin's expectations. We're seeing that in other areas (may God get us to the mid-terms without too much damage).
I don't trust that these bozos can accomplish what they think they can. When they start from a bad premise, how can it get better without trashing the whole idea and starting over? Obama's trying to ram this down our throats with the same speed as he's trying to do everything else. There's no way ANY of this crap needs to be put in place so quickly and without serious debate and discussion.
America doesn't need this. America needs something much smarter, like a populace willing to act like adults and take care of themselves. That alone will reduce costs as fewer demands are placed on the system. But no. We have to be forced to provide for everyone whether they choose to live responsibly or not.
We already have accessible health care. The question is who should pay for it when it is accessed. I believe it is the one who does the "accessing". Grow up. Take care of yourself. Save for the possibility of the unknown. Sacrifice as needed to provide yourself whatever insurance will help defray your own costs. That's what each of us is supposed to be doing if we want to consider ourselves mature adults. It's what liberty demands from each of us.
Universal health care is for suckers who are too stupid to see that they are giving away a piece of their own liberty to an ungrateful Dem party. UHC is for sheep.
Here are the facts.
ReplyDelete1. America spends twice as much as any other industrialized nation on healthcare.
2. America has a higher rate of infant mortality than any other industrialized nation.
3. America has a higher incidence of obesity than any other industrialized nation.
4. America has a lower life expectancy than other first world nations.
5. America has a higher incidence of complications from lack of preventative healthcare.
6. America has more citizens without health care (47-million) than any other industrialized nation.
These fact are what drive this desire for healthcare reform. You can talk about personal responsibility all you want but health care costs for the last decade have risen more than twice as fast as inflation. And the underlying market forces of profitability have encouraged insurance companies to both deny coverage and raise premiums. So unless you're very well off healthcare coverage and costs have become more an more an untenable expense.
What if the recent swine flu was just a bit more virulent and a bit more deadly? Imagine trying to cope with that when a significant portion of the populace can't afford a basic office visit. healthcare reform is a national security issue as much as an economic issue.
You bemoan the cost, but most American companies budget 10-15% of income for healthcare benefits. And then they have to hire personnel to manage healthcare plans.
Here's another fact to weigh. So far the Iraq (not Afghanistan) War has cost the United States $2.75-trillion. Compare that against even the highest total of $1.5-trillion for 10 years of healthcare for all Americans.
ReplyDeleteSeems like a deal to me.
Ben,
ReplyDeleteIt wouldn't be a deal even if Iraq never happened. Let's look at your facts:
1) Why? Many say that this is largely due to gov't regs and intervention that has already taken place. No spending should take place before a review of these regs and laws is done and ejecting those that have resulted in nothing but costs, but no real benefits. Free up the free market that has been choked and costs will fall.
Lawsuits are another problem. Doctors run tests in an overkill mode in order to protect themselves from not being perfect. Insurance against malpractice suits are not only expensive, which makes sense considering the size of awards, but drive doctors out of states to those with more reasonable laws, as well as out of the business altogether.
2) Why? Because of a lack of health care accessability or a lack of common sense of the parents? People have babies when they can't afford them because they won't control their urges. Some kill the kids and some have them without making the necessary sacrifices to care for them properly. Some kill them AFTER having them. To say this stat is the result soley of our health care system is not honest.
3) These are the very people for whom society should NOT spend their tax money. People are NOT obese because of our health care system. Great health information is widely available and free. No need to tax the hell out of us for the purpose of trying to reduce obesity.
4) If true, why? Is it only our health care system that is responsible for this. Is the health care system play a part at all? This is debatable.
5) See point 3. There is a wealth of information that can help everyone live healthier lives. It's free and easy to access.
6) This is untrue on two scores. Anyone can access medical attention. What you're talking about is insurance, and some of that number simply don't want it or don't want to pay for it. I've heard one source say the true number of those who want it but can't get it is less than half that number.
Obama wants the gov't to insure everyone. There are stories now about the trouble with Massachussetts' problems with their state plan. Indian reservations have trouble getting quality care under their federal gov't plan. No thanks, Ben. I'll get my own insurance. I'm unemployed right now and found a plan that works for us for only slightly more than what I had while working, with only slightly less coverage. If you saw the difference, you'd wonder why anyone bothers with Cobra after a job loss. Since the coverage IS a bit less, I'm more careful with my health. What a concept! An individual taking care of his own business. Just what the founders envisioned!
If the truly poor and needy concern you so much, do what I do. Be charitable and donate.
So the American healthcare system, whose purpose is to combat these problems, like obesity, infant mortality, and life expectancy, aren't actually responsible for the state of these national stats.
ReplyDeleteThat's like saying the SEC and the FED have no responsibility in the recent economic crisis. The people charged with protecting the country from these problems aren't actually responsible when they fail.
"Oh yeah. The problem with all these planes falling out the sky isn't with the manufacturers or the FAA, or the air traffic controllers. No. The real cause is that the pilots and passengers aren't trying hard enough!"
medical malpractice lawsuits:
ReplyDelete1. the numbers off MML's hasn't risen over the last 10 years. It hasn't and if you insist I can link to a chart showing such.
2. The average jury award for MML's also hasn't risen since the late 90's.
Conservative ideologues have talked up MML's like they were some wave poised to sweep doctors away, but that is because one of the richest group of Dem campaign donors is ... trial lawyers.
Insurance companies used the conservative talk as excuses to raise rates on doctors and increase their own profitability.
Ordinary doctors and well-meaning conservatives have been scammed, by the party leaders and greedy insurance corporations.
Here is another tidbit about the cost of this new program.
ReplyDeleteThe Medicare Part D coverage that Pres. Bush signed in his first term contained no cost abatement measures at all. No new taxes. No rules or policies to negotiate savings with drug suppliers. No budget trimmings elsewhere. And the price tag for that expansion for just medicare recipients ended up being $600-million over 10 years.
Half of the projected cost for Pres. Obama's health care plan for just about the same number of people.
And you know Dem's and Pres. Obama have sworn this new plan will be revenue neutral. Any new expenditures will be offset by either new revenue or cutbacks elsewhere.
"So the American healthcare system, whose purpose is to combat these problems, like obesity, infant mortality, and life expectancy, aren't actually responsible for the state of these national stats."
ReplyDeleteNot soley and I suspect less than you'd have us believe. I also dispute what you think the purpose of the system is. Rather than combat those ailments, it is to treat those who are failing to combat them themselves.
People don't generally just "get sick". Illness is generally the result of poor nutrition and lifestyle choices. One doesn't need a gov't run system to learn how to live better and healthier, one only needs the resolve to take responsibility for their own situation.
As far as injury, many cases can be avoided or lessened by the same perspective. Even if you get blind-sided, your body's ability to absorb or withstand punishment can be enhanced or reduced by how one lives and eats.
In addition, how many accidents are the result of simple carelessness? I'm supposed to pay emergency room costs because some idiot wasn't paying attention?
I'd rather just deal with my own doctor on terms the two of us set and then negotiate personally with insurance companies to get the best coverage at the lowest cost, if I feel it necessary.
As to lawsuits, who are you to decide how much of an award, or how many of them, is tolerable for any given doctor? Who are you to determine how many of these an insurance company can bear?
I think people have lost sight of what insurance is supposed to be. It is a way of protecting one's self from catastrophic illness or injury (or damage for other types). It is the catastrophic kind that costs the big bucks that can bankrupt people. The idea is that one never needs it, but buys it "just in case". From the other side, the idea is to sell it, but never pay a premium if possible. That's how they make their money, by offering to pay costs "IF" the unthinkable happens. Would you offer to pay off someone's bypass operation if they only paid you ten dollars per month? You'd probably want much more, and more still if they weren't healthy to begin with. Multiply that by just a dozen or so with high blood pressure and it adds up fast.
Gov't regs and interferences have driven up the costs of those medical procedures and equipment and the paper work alone is staggering in both labor and cost. There's years of schooling and internships, research and testing. Where do people get off thinking they are entitled to this stuff for free, or worse, at the cost of their fellow citizens? The gall is incredible!