Canadians starting to demand the privatized USA Health Care system.......

[Logical]

No they are not actually. They love their system. They don't want ours. Actually, Canadians are very happy with their Health Care. See below.

This is what I tell all my right wing friends, so should you......If the USA system is so much better then why does Canada not demand Aetna and Blue Cross come to Canada and implement the USA plan! I have not heard Canadians march in the streets and say "We demand the USA private insurance plan!!!"

Lets face it, the GOP knows Britain and Canada do not think the USA has better health care. But since that means "The USA is not perfect" then it means Canada and Britain are wrong. And we cannot ever question "American Perfection"!

An international survey reveals that Canadians, compared to residents of other countries, are generally happy with our health care system.

The Deloitte survey, conducted in April and May of this year, queried 15,735 health care consumers in Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Mexico, Portugal, Switzerland, the UK, and the U.S. with regards to their attitudes about their health-care systems.

When asked to grade the overall performance of their medical system, most Canadians, 50 per cent, gave a score of "A" (excellent) or "B" very good.

Systems in Luxembourg (69 per cent), Belgium (57 per cent), Switzerland (52 per cent), France (51 per cent), also earned an "A" or "B" score.

Conversely, 57 per cent of consumers in Brazil, 44 per cent in Mexico, 37 per cent in the U.S. and 33 per cent of consumers in Portugal give their health care system's performance a failing grade.

The study also charted the health care expenditures, as a percentage of GDP, of each of the 12 countries researched. Canadians, the report notes, spends 10.4 per cent of their GDP on health care compared to China at 4.7 per cent and the United States at 17.6 per cent.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/canadians-generally-happy-healthcare-system-195734829.html

[ProSense]

1. Good information, and

note Switzerland has compulsory insurance.

Healthcare in Switzerland is universal[1] and is regulated by the Federal Health Insurance Act of 1994 (Krankenversicherungsgesetz - KVG). Health insurance is compulsory for all persons residing in Switzerland (within three months of taking up residence or being born in the country). International civil servants, members of permanent missions and their family members are exempted from compulsory health insurance. They can, however, apply to join the Swiss health insurance system, within six months of taking up residence in the country.

Health insurance covers the costs of medical treatment and hospitalisation of the insured. However, the insured person pays part of the cost of treatment. This is done (a) by means of an annual excess (or deductible, called the franchise), which ranges from CHF 300 to a maximum of CHF 2,500 as chosen by the insured person (premiums are adjusted accordingly) and (b) by a charge of 10% of the costs over and above the excess up to a stop-loss amount of CHF 700.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland

Krugman:

<...>

Finally, the third route to universal coverage relies on private insurance companies, using a combination of regulation and subsidies to ensure that everyone is covered. Switzerland offers the clearest example: everyone is required to buy insurance, insurers can’t discriminate based on medical history or pre-existing conditions, and lower-income citizens get government help in paying for their policies.

In this country, the Massachusetts health reform more or less follows the Swiss model; costs are running higher than expected, but the reform has greatly reduced the number of uninsured. And the most common form of health insurance in America, employment-based coverage, actually has some “Swiss” aspects: to avoid making benefits taxable, employers have to follow rules that effectively rule out discrimination based on medical history and subsidize care for lower-wage workers.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/opinion/17krugman.html

[sabrina 1]

2. They have not yet been inundated with right wing propaganda telling them

that 'socialism' = 'communism'. Plus they've experienced the difference in a system that puts people over profits. The US has no clue how they are being exploited, we've never experienced a HC system that puts people first.

We do have our 'socialist' programs, Medicare eg. But the ignorami who receive their education from Faux and the rest of the Right Wing Noise machine, while happily enjoying the benefits of this 'socialist' program, have no clue that they are in fact endorsing what they claim to oppose:



The stupidity is beyond belief and makes you wonder is it even possible to reverse with facts?

[whatchamacallit]

3. Yep. +1 nt

[Scootaloo]

84. This is why we can't have nice things

[riverbendviewgal]

4. Today my doctor and his friends did joke about America's health care

I saw my optometrist today at the Biker event up here in Northern Ontario. I was walking by and he said hi and asked how I was doing. He saw me for a detached retina last fall. I knew something was wrong back then when half my left eye was losing vision and I could see partially out of it. It was slowly going bad and after a week I called his office who told me to come in immediately He was waiting for me and examined me right away and within 5 minutes I was on my way for the eye surgeon to operate on me. My boyfriend drove me as it is a two hour drive one way. I got the operation that afternoon and was home at night. The cost was nothing, no doctor or hospital costs. My gas was paid for by the provincial health care system. I saw him in December after the surgeon saw me twice for check ups. My eyesight is better than ever.

He and his wife and friends and my boyfriend spoke happily that we are Canadians with our health care system and we don't have the American system. My optometrist is doing pretty well financially too. He and his wife have high end motorcycles.

I do not know any Canadians who would want the American health care system..

[Politicalboi]

6. But,

We're the BEST! USA! USA! USA!

My Repuke brother tells me what Fox tells him, that Canadians are coming here for health care. So see, he saw it on TV. All we have with you is your real life experience with it.

[riverbendviewgal]

7. yes I have friends in the USA and they say the same thing.

I laugh...

But I did tell one friend who said he buys online from Canada pharmaceutical website his wife's prescriptions. This urked me because my government negotiates with the pharmas to keep our prescription drugs prices down. I consider him a cockroach and he still hates Obama care What a nitwit.

[Politicalboi]

9. LOL!

They of course never see themselves as cockroaches. Only the illegal brown people can be those.
USA! USA! USA!

[MADem]

37. No one minds Canadians coming to USA for hip replacements.

Why begrudge? As the world gets smaller, medical tourism becomes more common. http://www.mtqua.org/2011/09/22/peace-of-mind-medical-tourism/

[laundry_queen]

44. Lots of times

Canadians go to the US because it's closer. My grandparents lived 5 min from the border and the closest Canadian hospital was an hour away, while the American one was less than 10 min away. So they went to the American one for emergencies, totally paid for by their provincial health care plan (I won't get into how the American system almost killed my grandfather and the Canadian system saved him after my grandmother transferred him to the Canadian hospital....) I'm not really getting what's wrong with that kind of cross border stuff. The only other people I've heard of going to the US were those who needed very specialized treatment for things they can't get in Canada simply because of our population size limitations. I mean, common sense dictates that there is more likely to be a specialist who treats a particular rare disorder in a country of 300 million vs 30 million. 'Course, we all know common sense ain't common amongst a certain subset of the population (*cough* republicans *cough*).

[MADem]

86. Canadians, Americans, and those of other nationalities all engage in medical tourism.

Brazil is into it in a big way for cosmetic surgery; India is into it for all sorts of stuff, from joint replacement to heart procedures.

What I am saying is there isn't a thing wrong with cross-border stuff. Even CANADA is starting to look for medical tourism revenue, which has potential to provide a substantial cash influx to nations that do it well (see: http://www.findprivateclinics.ca/resources/general/medical-tourism.php ) -- you can't blame any of these countries for trying to swipe customers from USA and elsewhere!

The more medical care available, the better. The more competition, the more motivated providers will be to maximize efficiencies and make the damn care affordable and reasonable in-country.

USA has taken on the VERY wealthy medical tourists down the years, the money-is-no-object crowd, but other countries have been getting into the act and appealing to "average people" for some time already:

Factors that have led to the increasing popularity of medical travel include the high cost of health care, long wait times for certain procedures, the ease and affordability of international travel, and improvements in both technology and standards of care in many countries.[7] The avoidance of waiting times is the leading factor for medical tourism from the UK, whereas in the US, the main reason is cheaper prices abroad. In 2009, there were 60,000 patients going for treatment abroad in the UK[8].

Many surgery procedures performed in medical tourism destinations cost a fraction of the price they do in the First World. For example a liver transplant that cost $300,000 USD in America cost about $91,000 USD in Taiwan.[9] A large draw to medical travel is convenience and speed. Countries that operate public health-care systems are often so taxed that it can take considerable time to get non-urgent medical care. Using Canada as an example, an estimated 782,936 Canadians spent time on medical waiting lists in 2005, waiting an average of 9.4 weeks.[10] Canada has set waiting-time benchmarks, e. g. 26 weeks for a hip replacement and 16 weeks for cataract surgery, for non-urgent medical procedures.[11]

Medical tourists come from a variety of locations including Europe, the Middle East, Japan, the United States, and Canada. Factors that drive demand for medical services abroad in First World countries include: large populations, comparatively high wealth, the high expense of health care or lack of health care options locally, and increasingly high expectations of their populations with respect to health care.

In First World countries like the United States medical tourism has large growth prospects and potentially destabilizing implications. A forecast by Deloitte Consulting published in August 2008 projected that medical tourism originating in the US could jump by a factor of ten over the next decade. An estimated 750,000 Americans went abroad for health care in 2007, and the report estimated that a million and a half would seek health care outside the US in 2008. The growth in medical tourism has the potential to cost US health care providers billions of dollars in lost revenue.[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism

Competition drives markets and creates incentives for providers to lower their prices. I do think that more people having access to health care in USA is a good thing, because it will force these institutions that are care providers to work harder at providing quality care at a fair price.

[Logical]

19. Thanks for this!! I would move to Canada if I was younger. Being 50 hurts my chances.

[Enrique]

5. Israelis have no interest in our system either

watch a Tea Party lady call this Israeli (a conservative, by the way) "Hitler" for talking about how he likes his country's health system.

Ah, the Summer of '09

&feature=relmfu

[Politicalboi]

8. Wow!

My Repuke brother sounds just like that crazy lady. I told him, better to pay for it for 18 years through welfare? Or blame the mother because she couldn't get health care for the kid when it's sick. Or arrest the mother for abuse to the child that she never wanted.

[Ruby the Liberal]

26. OMG!?!?

A woman in an IDF t-shirt is yelling Heil Hitler at an Israeli and then defending US Healthcare because she paid $15,000 for a dogbite?

I am going to have to start buying irony meters by the case just to get through to November.

[JohnnyRingo]

10. Our system of health care has been available to Canadians all along

When a right wing friend would email some Limbaugh talking point about how upset the Canadians are with "socialized medicine", I would just send them the link to Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Canada and asked why they don't just use our system if they're so unhappy:

http://www.bluecross.ca/

Conservatives make the incredible leap to assume private health care must be illegal in Canada, when the fact is no one there sees a need to pay for it. It only survives to cater to those leaving the country for a while, and as an incentive to lure top level executives.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

11. I've only read one thing about Canadian healthcare that I wouldn't like

And I don't know if it's nationwide, or by province, but the part about not being permitted to purchase private insurance for anything that is covered by the national system. While I'm a fan of single payer, I wouldn't want that provision here.

No one should be exempt from paying the taxes for single payer, but if someone want to pay extra for private insurance and opt out of the single payer system at the consumer end, I think they should be able to.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. That's the British system

You can either go to the National Health Service or buy private insurance to see a doctor in private practice. But it's more complicated than that--you can ask the folks in the UK Forum.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

36. It's in Canada as well

Canadians can purchase supplemental private coverage for services that are not covered by the public plan, but cannot purchase private insurance for basic services.

(Emphasis mine)

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2009/08/11/170904/npr-report-canada/

[laundry_queen]

69. LMFAO

That NPR report references an ad put out about a Canadian woman with a 'tumor' that had to get 'life saving' treatment in the US because Canada wanted her to wait 6 months or she might have DIED. LOL, that one has been debunked here at DU only like a kazillion times. What a crock of an NPR report. That woman had a brain cyst, which many doctors, Canadian or American, don't operate on right away because it's not fatal. I actually have a friend dealing with the same thing right now. They are taking a 'wait and see' approach because they don't want to dive right in with major brain surgery and the cyst may not actually grow (it hasnt' in a year). Jesus, NPR did not report the facts. They actually let that ad 'stand' on its own merit in the report. Again, total BS.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

72. Of course that woman's story was debunked

That has nothing to do with what I posted, since you've said elsewhere in the thread that this is correct, i.e., insurance can't be purchased for basic services.

Do you have a point related to what I posted, i.e., was it incorrect?

[laundry_queen]

79. Not really.

Just wanted to point out even pro-Canadian health care articles are full of misinformation.

[MADem]

40. Private care is common in UK, too. The rich like it.

Some have supplemental insurance, others are just so stinking rich they write a check.

The thing is, though, everyone and anyone who is a UK citizen gets access to medical care, even if it's not the private doctor, the private room, the fancy hospital, etc.

[TrogL]

12. Don't scare me like that

[Logical]

20. :-)

[laundry_queen]

45. LOL

I was waiting for a link to a Fox news article that linked a study that actually said the opposite, LMBO.

[beac]

13. K&R and

Happy Canada ('s Health Care System Kicks the Crap Out of Ours) Day!

[Logical]

21. +1000

[Scuba]

14. Complete list of countries that overturned their national health plan after passing one...

Complete list of countries that overturned their national health plan after passing one:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[Logical]

22. LOL, you scared me for a second there!

[Jamaal510]

15. The RW talking point I hear on Yahoo Answers is that more Canadiens

come to the U.S. to use our health care, and that people have to wait in longer lines for single-payer.

[Honeycombe8]

17. I think that is a fact of single payer systems...you have to wait longer, both in line & for

and for certain procedures.

You can Google that and see that that is an issue with single payer.

Those are not life and death procedures, of course. But if you need knee surgery, you may have to wait many months or a year, is what I've read. Of course, in teh U.S., you don't have to wait at all if you have ins. coverage. BUT there are many who cannot get the operation at all (if they don't qualify for Medicaid and don't have ins. coverage and can't afford to pay out of pocket: the working poor).

There are also fewer physicians under single payer, to treat more patients. Because the drs. get paid less, there are fewer drs.

All systems have problems. The crux of the matter is, which problem is the worst and the one to be avoided?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

32. If you have good insurance or are rich, you can jump the line in the U.S.

But for a lot of people here, the wait lasts until they qualify for Medicare.

I think what the righties hate about single payer is that rich people have to wait just as long as poor people, and righties deep down believe that the rich are an especially wonderful breed of human beings who deserve special treatment.

[Ikonoklast]

35. Bullshit you don't have to wait for a knee replacement if you have insurance in this country.

Six months wait for my uncle, and he has excellent insurance.

He can barely walk with a cane, it's not like his knee isn't shot, either.


Right-wing talking points, you haz them.

[Honeycombe8]

47. No need to be ugly. I was speaking from experience and reading on the subject. There are stats.

There was apparently something unique in your uncle's situation. One incident does not make a statistic.

Maybe his ins. wasn't as good as you think. Maybe he lives in a rural area where there is a dearth of care providers. Could be anything.

The real deal is: If you have insurance (and barring any issues with finding a care provider in the area, and your area has a normal number of hospitals, out patient surgery centers, etc.), you will NOT have to wait for a knee procedure.

I won't alert on you, even though your post warrants it. I suspect you just need anger management and a little kindness, to learn to be kind yourself.

[Ikonoklast]

62. Stop posting deliberately misleading information.

Take your platitudes and put them to good use elswhere, I ain't buyin' what you are selling here.

My uncle has health coverage as a retired school superintendant under PERS in the state of Ohio, which is an excellent plan.

He also lives within 50 miles of the University Hospital, which is one of the premier orthopaedic hospitals on the Planet Earth. I have had work done there, as have both of my sons.

I had to wait six weeks for a minor procedure.

My uncle has to wait.

My sons didn't as both were emergency situations.

[Honeycombe8]

49. Stat: Avg wait time in U.S. for Ortho. Surgeon appt is 17 days.

In a 2009 survey of physician appointment wait times in the United States, the average wait time for an appointment with an orthopaedic surgeon in country as a whole was 17 days.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_health_care_systems_in_Canada_and_the_United_States#Wait_times

The wait time can vary, though, depending on your location.

[Ikonoklast]

57. That's to see an orthopaedic for an office visit or consultation.

NOT FOR THE SURGERY.

Jesus H. Christ, two completely different things.

You posted that the wait time for surgery was almost nil.

What you posted:

Those are not life and death procedures, of course. But if you need knee surgery, you may have to wait many months or a year, is what I've read. Of course, in teh U.S., you don't have to wait at all if you have ins. coverage. BUT there are many who cannot get the operation at all (if they don't qualify for Medicaid and don't have ins. coverage and can't afford to pay out of pocket: the working poor).

Average wait time according to your link is 17 days in the U.S., JUST TO SEE THE SURGEON.

Surgery will be scheduled whenefer they can get to you, and it might take one hell of a long time if there are others ahead of you in more serious condition.

[Honeycombe8]

58. Chill. What I didn't post was the comparison to Canada: Canada's avg wait time was 45 days for

that appt.

That's the point.

If a wait time is a certain length of time here for a non-life threatening condition, you can multiply that times 4 for Canada.

Give it up. You've lost. You don't have any facts, except what your uncle complained about one day.

[Ikonoklast]

67. Wow.

You posted misinformation as fact, got called on it, and now are changing the discussion.

You made no point other than you are being disingenuous.

[Historic NY]

73. Just a point most ortho's and other surgeons are in private practice....

you work on their schedule, except for an emergency life threatening situation. The secret to speeding up is to have a written referral for your own Dr.

[riverbendviewgal]

39. waits are prioritized

My son had the first seizures he ever had, with no warnings of ill health. he was 2 weeks short of his 25th birthday. The same day he was given a CT scan and ambulanced to the University Hospital in Toronto, operated 3 days later by the head neurosurgeon.. Unfortunately he was diagnosed with GlioBlastma Multiforme (same brain tumour as Ted Kennedy), given a 5 percent chance to live past two years. He had 2 more surgeries, chemo, radiation, intensive care for almost 3 weeks after the 3rd surgery and palliative care for 5 days, in hospital. The cost....nothing...We did have to pay for parking. He lived for 18 months after the diagnosis.


Two months after my son was diagnosed, his Dad was diagnosed by our GP after my husband found a lump near his belly button, after an ultrasound he was scheduled for an operation 6 weeks after the lump was discovered. He had surgery, radiation, chemo, his stem cells harvested for the month long in hospital chemo and then his stem cells put back in. Unfortunately he died 18 months after our son died, after spending 3 months in hospital in the palliative care ward.

The whole family got psychotherapy sessions together as a family and separate, including my son's fiancee and his brother.
No costs, just parking fees for the hospital. Oh, and my son had blood transfusions as well as his dad. All lab tests were covered too. And the government gave us $2300 toward the funeral expenses for each of them.

As for me, beside my most recent ailment, detached retina, see above post, I have back problems that physiotherapy was required. I could get privately and jump the line with extra insurance or wait. I opted to wait. I ended up only waiting 2 months.

I do have private health insurance to cover glasses/contacs, hearing aid - my insurance pays 300 bucks, the government pays 500...dental, prescription, massage, semi private room.. etc. My annual fee is about $1650, which I deduct from my income tax. I have a limit of $1000 dental, $750 prescription, $200 glasses. I go over than I claim on my income tax. When I turn 65 my private insurance will be lowered about $200 annual due to the provincial health care will cover all my prescriptions. I just pay the first $100.. I pay 20 percent of my prescriptions and dental until I reach my limit.

We Canadians never have to worry about losing our basic health care if we lose jobs.

[Honeycombe8]

50. Sounds great. Wish we had that. nt

[SouthernLiberal]

42. I've never had knee surgery

But I do have Rheumatoid Arthritis (not creaky joints... a serious auto-immune disease that can be crippling and even fatal if not treated) and 'really good' insurance. It took me two years to see a specialist, and then another year or more to find a specialist who would actually believe my test results and start treating me. If my case of RA had been more aggressive than it has been, I could have been crippled for life in that amount of time.

So maybe elective surgeries get treated faster here (perhaps because surgeons make a LOT of money), but that doesn't mean that there aren't insured people who are waiting for care that is life and death.

Because I did have to wait so long to get properly treated for a disease that is as serious as RA does not leave me at all sympathetic to the 'we don't have to wait like those Canadians do' argument. Of course, with this disease, if I did not have insurance through my employer, I could not have gotten treatment at all. I sure could not afford all the medication I have to take for it, either.

[Honeycombe8]

53. By contrast, I was examined & tested for RA. I got in immediately.

I had been diagnosed with arthritis, so even tho I didn't have RA symptoms, they wanted to make sure, since the dr I went to initially wasn't a specialist in that.

The RA dr specialized in that (rheumatologist or something). I made an appt & got in really quickly (next week? I don't recall). Got a thorough exam and blood test, and told to take naproxin for regular arthritis. Results mailed to me (I just had regular middle aged arthritis, no RA).

Followup was scheduled for 1 month for checkup.

In general, wait times in the US are less than with single payer, is what I've read. But there are locations in the U.S. where you'll be above average in wait time, for various reasons, and less than the average wait, time.

It took me quite a few phone calls to find a dr near my place of work and who could see me quickly and who would accept my insurance, but I found one. And there was only one.

So when you're talking specialists, your area may have a shortage of a certain kind of specialist, or something like that.

One of my neighbors has RA. He has no problems seeing his dr. quickly & getting the latest treatments, etc.

Anecdotes don't really make for sound statistics. Think about all the cars that are statistically shown to be unreliable over time, and yet, there is ALWAYS someone who will swear that he had one of those & it was the most reliable car he ever owned! He had it for 10 years and never had to do even one repair!

[Logical]

23. I would take the wait for free and universal healthcare.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

27. First off, it's not free

It's paid through taxation, which is fine, but it's definitely not free.

Second, I would prefer to have the option of purchasing insurance so that I didn't have to wait a year for a knee or hip replacement. Not saying that I shouldn't still pay the tax to support single payer, but the option for insurance should remain, IMO.

[Logical]

28. Well, I will choose universal health care with a wait vs. the stupid USA method. And I have great...

insurance now through a great employer.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

29. I'm all for universal single payer

But I believe that people should be able to opt out of utilizing the service and pay for their own insurance if they choose to.

The premise is no different than paying for private school - my kids went to Catholic school, but I still gladly paid my property taxes, even though I didn't utilize the schools. It was an advantage to the school system that our kids attended private school - they got the funding, but didn't have to provide the service. And I'm more than fine with that.

I just want the same option should we ever go to single payer, and in some parts of Canada, that isn't allowed.

[Doctor_J]

33. you have two lies in your post

you can purchase private insurance, and there is no year-long wait for knee and hip replacements. Take your bullshit back to freeperville.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

38. What is it with some at DU that they assume that anyone they don't agree with is a freeper?

Canadians can purchase supplemental private coverage for services that are not covered by the public plan, but cannot purchase private insurance for basic services.

Emphasis mine.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2009/08/11/170904/npr-report-canada/

Since 2005, wait times have been reduced by:
191 days (61%) for cataract surgery
156 days (44%) for hip replacement
212 days (48%) for knee replacement
17 days (21%) for cancer surgery
27 days (48%) for angiography
11 days (39%) for angioplasty
4 days (8%) for bypass surgery

http://news.ontario.ca/mohltc/en/2012/03/ontario-wait-times-leader.html

If 156 days is a 44% reduction for hip replacement, that means in 2005 it was 355 days, and is now 199 days (roughly 6.6 months)

If 212 days is a 48% reduction for knee replacement, that means in 2005 it was 442 days, and is now 230 days (roughly 7.6 months)

No, not a year, but then again this is an average for one province.

It is not a perfect system, but it has its merits. For people like my 55-year-old Aunt Betty, who has been waiting for 14 months for knee-replacement surgery due to a long history of arthritis, it is the superior system. Her $35,000-plus surgery is finally scheduled for next month. She has been in pain, and her quality of life has been compromised. However, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. Aunt Betty — who lives on a fixed income and could never afford private health insurance, much less the cost of the surgery and requisite follow-up care — will soon sport a new, high-tech knee. Waiting 14 months for the procedure is easy when the alternative is living in pain for the rest of your life.

http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_12523427

A really good op-ed debunking myths about Canadian healthcare. Long waits for elective surgery is not one of the myths he debunked.

[laundry_queen]

48. Can I just say re: wait times

it's near impossible to have a 'national average' for those things. They vary WIDELY from region to region and province to province. I don't know anyone who has waiting half that long for some of those surgeries. Large cities tend to have longer wait times (sheer numbers) and also really remote areas have long wait times (lots of travelling, booking with specialists when they happen to come to town, etc). For instance - my mom needed a CT scan (well, not really, but 'in case' because she had been having more headaches than normal, but nothing emergent or serious). She was told it would be 6 weeks. Her doctor phoned around and found for an extra 15 minute drive my mom could get in THAT WEEK.

Another instance of miscommunication that may be part of the reason for the stories people in the US hear - my ex-FIL needed a knee replacement. For years he'd been to a specific doctor who kept telling him he was too young to get a knee replacement. When he started going to a new doctor, who immediately realized ex-FIL needed new knees asap, it took him 2 weeks to get his new (1st) knee and when he was recovered he got his second (3 months after the 1st). My ex-MIL has told people "Oh, it took him YEARS to get his knees!" implying he had been on the wait list for that long. Um, no, LOL, it was his stupid doctor who just refused to put him on the wait list - once he was on he got right in!

And I think your little 'thing' about not being able to purchase private insurance is weird - why would you even want to here? I pay no premiums, have no co-pay and no deductible and I get right in to the doctor or hospital whenever I want or need to. What would private insurance offer on top of that (for a cool few hundred a month)? And the main reason I was taught in school was to prevent any kind of 2 tier system developing.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

52. Yes, I understand that a national average is difficult due to the setup of the system

That's why I just used the once province in the example. And these weren't anectdotal numbers, they were the actual numbers. This wasn't someone saying "I waited years", these were stats compiled by the province.

As for why I might want separate insurance even though it would cost more? For the same reason I pay for a more expensive fee for service plan instead of a much cheaper HMO...when I need medical care, I don't want to have to wait a long time for it. And if I can afford to do it, why should anyone else care, so long as I continue to pay my share of the single payer load? It's a benefit to the other members of the single payer pool to have people paying for, but not utlizing, the system.

[laundry_queen]

63. ugh, I KNOW it wasn't anecdotal!

I was trying to explain WHY Americans hear these false stories from their friends and relatives who happen to 'know' some fake Canadian horror story. I didn't mean to link it with the study at all - I'm well aware those are ACTUAL times.

As for your 2-tier dream, it doesn't work that way. If that's what you want I suggest you stay in the US. In Canada, most of us don't believe in people who can pay should have the privilege of jumping the line. Most of us also don't believe that it makes the government system better. It's like the whole private/charter school argument in my opinion - what ends up happening is those who have the means and are privileged end up becoming more so while those who aren't able, suffer. So, yeah, I would 'care'. You are no more important than the next person in line. My advice to rich Canadians dreaming of a 2-tier queue jumping system would be to concentrate your money and efforts on improving the system as a whole, instead of focusing on yourself. YMMV.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

65. No worries about me moving to Canada

Too cold and I like being able to get my non-critical medical care when I need it, not 4 or 5 months later.

[laundry_queen]

66. Holy freeper talking point batman

what crap. Have you even used our services? If not, I suggest you stop commenting on them. It's obvious you know nothing.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

68. No, I haven't used your services

I'm just going by the statistics provided by the province. Are they incorrect?

I am curious about something though...if you don't mind the wait times, then why would you care if someone waited a shorter period of time than you did? If you have to wait two months for a procedure, and you're fine with that wait time, then why would you resent someone that only waited two weeks?

When I'm happy with what I have, I don't begrudge someone that has something better.

[laundry_queen]

71. They are old.

The government has since put in a lot of money into reducing wait times. And it's just one province and only a few choice procedures. Cherry picked info.

Plus, most people get put on the list when they don't 'need' it. IE my dad wasn't even on anti-inflammatories or pain killers when he got on the list for his hip. Got his new hip a month or so later. So it's not like we have all these people who are in wheelchairs and walkers popping painkillers waiting 6 months for knee or hip replacements.

Why would I resent it? Because, if you are using your money to jump the line, to set up a 2-tier system and to fancy yourself as superior, then it bothers me. It's arrogant. Canadians aren't much for arrogant people. You aren't any more important that anyone else. When it comes to health care, I DO begrudge people who step on others to serve themselves first, and that's exactly what queue jumping is.

[polly7]

75. +1001! nt.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

76. Old? They're from March 22, 2012

http://news.ontario.ca/mohltc/en/2012/03/ontario-wait-times-leader.html

If someone were stepping on others to get to the head of the line, I would agree with you 100%. But if someone is paying separately and isn't even in the single payer line, I don't see how they're stepping on someone else. In fact, they're getting out of the way and making the line shorter for the people that are utilizing the single payer plan.

[laundry_queen]

81. That's a BS talking point

are are NOT just 'getting out of the way'. You are CREATING a duplicate system which siphons off resources (doctors, nurses etc) from the public system and creates hardship for the public system.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

83. So say you - I disagree

And where is that world famous Canadian calm I always hear about? You certainly aren't displaying any of it tonight...

You love your system - good on you. Without an option to buy insurance, I wouldn't like it.

[laundry_queen]

87. You obviously don't know any Canadians

We're polite, yes. But calm, hell no. Been to a hockey game? I think it's the Brits that are known for calmness.

Yes we love our system (and would likely fight a war with who(M?)ever tried to take it away - it's not just our health system, it is part of our identity - go look up 'The Greatest Canadian'). You wouldn't like it since it doesn't favour people with money. Good, enjoy your system. I guess I can mark you down as anti-single payer here on DU.

[MADem]

89. They're getting very picky about immigration--if you're not rich, they don't want you.

When they were underpopulated they were less fussy, but now, you'd better have a needed skill (and that's a needed skill that will benefit Canada, that Canada is in need of; not just a jazzy specialty) or a half million dollars and a business plan to start your own business/franchise and hire locals. Then you can get in even if you are older.

And if you're a criminal? And by "criminal" I mean too many speeding or parking tickets or a youthful bust for a bit o' pot? Fuggedaboudit!

Like I said, they're getting picky!

[polly7]

74. +1000 nt.

[Honeycombe8]

55. They don't get the wait stats from patients. It's reported by care provider admins...

is what I read. Presumably they refer to their records, but I'm not sure about that.

Yes, there can be, and often is, a median or an average to everything. Absolutely everything. Implicit in an average, of course, is that is a calculation of a wide range of totals. Obviously, a median is a halfway mark. Half of the wait times would be above that wait time, and half would be below.

Statistics is a pretty exact science. It IS a science, and medians and averages can be calculated on almost anything.

Canadians and Englanders can buy private health insurance. Maybe it's rich people who don't want to be treated like the ordinary riff raff? Or rich people who want to be assured of less wait times? Another poster in this chain from Canada buys private insurance for vision and other things, and it'll pay for things the nat'l health doesn't pay for, she said.

[laundry_queen]

59. I know that.

I was referring to the 'stories' here people were talking about - how they all have friends who have some random 'Canadian friend' who waited forever for some surgery or another.

I realize the whole thing was a study based on actual wait times.

I also think that Americans don't realize the vastness of Canada, nor the challenges to the medical delivery system because of that vastness. It's why reports of wait times have to be taken with a grain of salt. Circumstances can be vastly different across the provinces because of concentration of populations.

Canadians of course can buy private insurance - but it won't cover the things that the provincial health plan covers, just the additions (as you said, dental, vision, drugs). The other poster was arguing he'd want to dump the government plan and have the option to buy the private plan for basic services. That doesn't happen, and I was told the reason for that is to avoid a 2-tier system where the people with private insurance (and presumably money) have their own insurance and hospitals (and highest paid doctors) and the 'riff-raff' get the public system. This way, with no option for private insurance for stuff that's already covered, everyone is treated equally according to their condition and not their pocketbook. As you said, that is probably why that poster disagrees with not having the option - he's hoping for preferrential treatment.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

61. Yes, I think that I should be able to buy insurance

so that I don't have to wait 6 or 7 months for a joint replacement. And why should anyone else care, so long as I'm paying taxes for the single payer system? They get my money (which I would be happy to pay) and I'm not taking up any treatment resources. If the majority of people are utilizing single payer, it isn't going to hurt the system for a subset to opt out of utilizing while continuing to pay.

Again, it's just like putting kids in private school - it's an advantage for the public system, because the parents pay the taxes into the system, but don't take anything out.

[laundry_queen]

64. LOL funny you brought up the private/public school argument

Private schools are to the detriment of public schools, FWIW.

I stand by my argument - a 2-tier system does not bring the public system up, it drags it down. I hope you are not a Canadian because even most of the rich Canadians understand this, that everyone should be equals when it comes to health care. And I doubt, by the sounds of it, you are sick of the 1%, you sound too much LIKE one.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

70. Nope, not a Canadian

And definitely not one of the 1%...I just don't see where it is detrimental to the single payer system to have people that pay into it but don't use it. Same with public schools - putting our daughters in Catholic schools was a money maker for the local public school system because they didn't have to expend resources on them, and those resources were spread among other students that were/are in public school.

[laundry_queen]

78. You don't see it because you don't want to

or you haven't been taught to look for it, not sure which.

Here's the thing, when some rich famous dude sticks his kid in a private school, you think he gives a shit about the local public school? Nope (well, most don't).

Now stick that rich famous dude's kid into the local public school and suddenly he's in there like a dirty shirt trying to improve things for everyone (and that IS what usually happens). What private vs public does is create a 2-tier system where those who are well off and educated are able to afford better educations for their children, who are then able to become well off due to their superior education. The kids who are at public school, and who are now in a classes of kids with no college educated parents among them, aren't going to have the quality of schooling or the same opportunities as all the kids at the private schools (with their educated, involved parents). Remember the days where there were kids in your class whose parent did something special for a living? Imagine all the parents in your class work for min wage or are unemployed. It creates an atmosphere of despair.

And when you send your kid to private schoo, you think that money the school system isn't spending on your child is now put to good use? LOL! So naive. It's now being cut due to drops in enrollment, and the kids left behind suffer, and suffer greatly as their schools enter the decline spiral where those better off will always try to pull their kids out to a better school, and those left behind will always face a decline in funding. And it's not just funding. The parents who are well off and have more time and are more educated also tend to volunteer more than those parents who are working 3 min wage jobs and sleep 3 hours a night. Without the well off parents in schools and volunteering, the teachers back at the public school, now with less community resources, are struggling to do more work with less people.

It's a death spiral, these 2-tier systems. I refuse to have my country create one system for the rich and one for the poor when it comes to health and education - 2 of the biggest investments a country can make in their population.

[polly7]

80. Exactly

And, I find it reassuring that the same top physicians and surgeons take care of the least among right alongside the wealthiest. I know many physicians ...... not one that I've talked about this with wants anything resembling a 2-tier system. They know how fast our whole system could descend into one huge mess.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

82. I can tell you why we put our kids in private school

Because they were zoned for one of the worst public schools in Washington DC, and no amount of work that my then-wife and I would have done could have made a damned bit of difference. We're both products of public schools, I'm a huge supporter of public schools, but there was no way I was going to sacrifice my daughters' educations to that, period. By the time we moved to a good district, both kids had been in the school for 6 years, and we weren't about to pull them out and away from all of their friends. It was a huge sacrifice financially, but one that I would do again in a heartbeat, given the same circumstances.

And I can't speak to how education funding works in Canada, but in Fairfax county Virginia, property taxes go to the schools, whether you have kids there or not. The public schools lost out on the federal per pupil spending, but they didn't lose a dime in county funding, and in fact received state sales tax fundiing for my kids even though they weren't in public schools. I'm fine with that, in fact glad for that. But the fact is, Fairfax County was better off with my kids not being in school, because the per pupil spending is much greater than any loss of federal funding.

As I said in another post to you, I would agree with you 100% on the single payer/insurance issue if it were a matter of insured people jumping to the head of the line. But if there is a separate line, then that doesn't happen, and in fact, the single payer users move up faster because there are fewer people in the line.

As you said, YMMV.

[laundry_queen]

85. And I disagree with your basic premise.

That your dropping out of the system doesn't affect/benefits those left behind. You, by not putting your daughter in the 'worst' public school, are essentially telling me that the kids who don't have a choice but to go to those schools aren't as important as your child, that their parents must not care about their kids as much as you care about your child and that your child deserves a better education than THOSE children. It's a mindset, and you can justify it all you want about how you weren't going to sacrifice YOUR child's education. What about those children that are still there, in those schools that are in the 'death spiral'? Even the actions of *1* person matters. By opting out, you contribute to the problem. You say nothing you would have done would have made a damned bit of difference. I suppose not if that's how you view things. You got yours, I suppose. Too bad for those kids in that 'worst' school, who don't matter.

It's PARTICIPATION that makes the difference in public schools. If all that's left in those schools are kids with no resources, soon you end up with schools with no resources.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

93. Lots of mind reading (and bad mind reading to boot) in your response

My daughters deserved a better education than they would have received in that school, and as their father, my first responsibility was and is to them. Where you would get the idea that I'm assuming the parents that didn't have a choice don't care about their children is anyone's guess, as I would never presume such a thing.

Even with high levels of parental involvement, schools don't change overnight. Consigning my children to an inferior education so that improvments might be seen by the time they left the school when I had the option to ensure that they received a good education would have been an abrogation of my responsibility to them.

So I guess you have no problem with me keeping them in private school when we're in a good school district, but if we're in a bad school district, we should be forced to attend public schools?

Do you believe that private schools should be banned? Or that students zoned for bad schools should have to attend, even if there are other options?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

60. In some provinces, patients cannot buy insurance for anything covered under single payer n/t

[polly7]

77. Private insurance is purchased to supplement the provincial plan insurance,

ie. for private rooms, vision, dental, ambulance etc. that may not be covered. It doesn't get you to the front of any list as far as wait times go.

[Doctor_J]

94. when you show up during election season and spout hate radio lies,

expect to be called a freeper.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

95. What did I lie about?

I have citations to prove both of the things that you claim I lied about.

[Honeycombe8]

34. I think you CAN still buy private ins. in both Canada and England. But...

after paying the taxes for the universal system, not sure how many can afford teh private insurance. And since there wouldn't be as many people buying the insurance to spread teh risk, I'd guess that it's pretty expensive. That's just a guess, though.

So, as usual, if you are wealthy, you don't have to wait in line for health care anywhere, it seems. And that's fine. As long as those who don't have money can still get health care.

[riverbendviewgal]

41. My federal and provincial taxes combined in 2011 were 25 percent

and grossed over 40k.

see link 39 on my private insurance to cover other than basic....just over $1650...I am a widow so it is just for me.

I give my Canadian health system an A

[Honeycombe8]

56. Wow, that's great. Thx. Yes, I saw your other post. nt

[ThoughtCriminal]

88. The main reason Canadians come to the U.S.

Weather.

Those that can afford to, head south for the winter. If they get sick, they probably get treatment while here rather than going back to the Great White North. I see plenty of people from Canada visiting Arizona in January, and they are not here for medical care or assault weapons.

On the other hand I have known a few people here who went to Mexico for medical treatment they can't afford in the U.S.

[MADem]

90. Brazil is the place to go--it's summer in winter down there and they

do a lot of medical and dental tourism. They are famous for plastic surgery but they do other stuff as well: http://medicaltourism.com/en/destination/brazil.html

A lot of people go to Mexico for this-n-that, too; dentists just over the border are becoming very popular.

[Zalatix]

96. Medical tourism - the big secret America's health care industry doesn't want to talk about...

[Honeycombe8]

16. So 50% of Canadians grade their ins. A or B, while over 60% of Americans grade theirs A or B?

Is that what that article is saying? that surprises me.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

18. It doesn't surprise me

Of all the people I know that have insurance, they're all happy with their level of care, although they're unhappy with the premium increases.

[Agony]

24. No, not what it sez... 22% of Americans give a grade of A or B

How satisfied are you with the performance of your country’s health care system? US - 16% Satisfied 28% Dissatisfied Canada - 32% and 10%

[Logical]

25. Where do you see that?? From the study link....

Less than a quarter (22%) of U.S. consumers, 18% of Portuguese,
15% of Mexican, and 8% of Brazilian consumers grade
their country’s health care systems as “A” or ”B.”

http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/US_CHS_2011ConsumerSurveyGlobal_062111.pdf

[and-justice-for-all]

30. I was gonna say that the headline does not match the content of the post...

who in their right mind would want a fucked up HCS like ours.

[littlewolf]

43. there certainly is alot

of good information here ... thank you everyone ...

[Fumesucker]

46. We have one right here on DU..

I'm surprised he hasn't shown up on this thread yet.

[Autumn]

51. Well, our Sid seems to like it.

But I would bet the farm he wouldn't trade his for ours.

[Romulox]

54. Canadians wouldn't accept mandatory for-profit insurance from their hard Right. Fact. nt

[Gregorian]

91. Well, you've got to pay for the biggest military in the world somehow.

I'm not saying they're doing on the backs of sick people.

[Zalatix]

92. DAMMIT!!! You almost stopped my heart with that title.