http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=68&ncid=68&e=1&u=/nyt/20031202/ts_nyt/canadasviewonsocialissuesisopeningriftswiththeus

As an American who has spent lots of time in both countries, I think the NYT article has it right. Sadly, because, in my view, the Canadians have it right on social issues and the Americans have it wrong.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, she said, an old roommate told her that "the U.S. deserved 9/11 because we're bullies."

nobody, NOBODY deserved that

Recently, while musing about his retirement plans, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said he might just kick back and smoke some pot. "I will have my money for my fine and a joint in the other hand," he said with a smile.

The city opened a publicly financed and supervised injection site for heroin users in September. The federal government, meanwhile, is preparing to start an experimental heroin distribution program for addicts in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver in 2004.

i had no idea Canada had such lenient laws on drugs...they're almost asking you to do drugs...i doubt laws like that would ever pass in the US...i mean, there's no way i'd want my tax money paying for other people's addictions

i had no idea Canada had such lenient laws on drugs...they're almost asking you to do drugs...i doubt laws like that would ever pass in the US...i mean, there's no way i'd want my tax money paying for other people's addictions


Your tax dollars are probably going towards a lot larger of a sum to fight the war on drugs than it would be to aim to control drug use. Especially considering how heavily the government could, say, tax a pack of joints if they decided to legalize marijuana. Age old debate that will never end though, so...


the Canadians have it right on social issues and the Americans have it wrong.


Right and wrong can be tricky concerns with me even on simple things, and with these social issues, there's gazillions of variables and information that can be analyzed such that it would be hard for anyone to determine right and wrong. Just different ways suited for different folk.

Originally posted by blizz81
Your tax dollars are probably going towards a lot larger of a sum to fight the war on drugs than it would be to aim to control drug use. Especially considering how heavily the government could, say, tax a pack of joints if they decided to legalize marijuana. Age old debate that will never end though, so...

that's very true as well...i've always been an advocate of the legalization of marijuana even though i no longer smoke it...i feel that there are many benefits to legalizing it such as taxation of joints/packs of joints and lesser crime due to easier access to the drug

my point, however, is not to encourage drug use by paying for other people to use it...what would stop the heroin addicts, then, from quitting if they know they can simply go to a clinic and get administered free dosages?

i would gladly take my tax money going to clinics, rehabilitation, counselling, and drugs that help get over the addiction, but not the addiction itself

Originally posted by BRx8
...i've always been an advocate of the legalization of marijuana even though i no longer smoke it...

That explains a lot!:p

I think that article is much ado about (aboot) nothing. Americans and Canadians (English speaking especially) are more similar than 49 state Americans and Louisiana.

Then again, so what! Why does America and Canada have to be clones? A little difference makes things interesting.

You know, now that I think about it I bet a joint Canadian and American plebiscite on the reuinion of Louisiana and Quebec would easily be accepted.

Well, I think most Canadians see Canadian culture as fundamentally different from American culture in many ways.

Speaking in generalities, American values are more individualistic. To take only two examples: Something like 40% of American are without medical insurance of any kind: the uninsured are left to go it alone in America. College tuition is extraordinarily expensive in the U.S., even at state schools: many can't afford to go and federal grant programs are being reduced even further.

Canadians, on the other hand, have a much higher level of tolerance and concern for other people. Canadians are (rightly) proud of their medical insurance program which provides a medical safety net for ALL Canadians. Tuition at Canadian universities is much cheaper than at their American counterparts so that a higher percentage of qualified students can afford university education. And I haven't even mentioned their very different attitudes toward international relations and respect for other countries, international treaties, and the United Nations.

Originally posted by babylou
That explains a lot!:p

now, now, play nice...leave the hate in the other thread ;)

verdict:

canada sucks

To take only two examples: Something like 40% of American are without medical insurance of any kind: the uninsured are left to go it alone in America.

Health care isn't free, nor is it guaranteed by the government. The US has roughly 290 million people - significantly more than Canada. If you want free health care, be prepared for the monumental taxes it'll cost you considering not everyone earns the same amount (or pays the same percentage in taxes) yet everyone will universally receive the same level of care.

College tuition is extraordinarily expensive in the U.S., even at state schools: many can't afford to go and federal grant programs are being reduced even further.

Everyone CAN afford to go to a university if they CHOOSE to. Federal grants are just that - grants, as in free money you never have to pay back. Not everyone qualifies for a grant due to income restrictions; however, the fact remains that federally backed student loans are readily available. Accept it as fact that not everyone will be able to attend private universities like Cornell, or Stanford or Wellesley. There's no such thing as a free lunch. Even running a state university costs a state money, and the better state schools have professors with serious pedigrees. I can guarantee you they aren't going to work for pennies out of the goodness of their heart. Those professors worked themselves to death to get those credentials, and they're fully justified in the salaries they get. If you want to get your degree, be prepared to work if need be. For a four year degree, I got about $300 (I think) in federal grant money. The rest was student loan money every term combined with my GI Bill for military service. Trust me - the military isn't for everyone (nor do we want everyone); but in exchange for 5 years of enlisted time, it was a benefit I EARNED. It wasn't "given" to me. In the meantime I'll still be paying student loans off for many years to come, but I also have a significantly better financial status than I did before I got my degree. You have to work if you want it - period.

And I haven't even mentioned their very different attitudes toward international relations and respect for other countries, international treaties, and the United Nations.

That's because the US is the single largest contributor of foreign aid in the world. While we do contribute this in an effort to help better our neighbors, we're not going to stand by and let people poke us in the eye with a sharp stick. Because our economy is the size it is (and it's not a brag - I'm simply stating fact), nations around the world expect us to intervene either on their behalf or at the very least in our own self-interests. Considering what we contribute, it's absurd to think we won't look out for ourselves at times. It's the equivalent of having the majority share of stock in a corporation yet being told what to do by the one guy in his underwear who just bought a single share of stock over the internet on his Ameritrade account. Yes, we do have an obligation to treat other countries with respect; but ultimately our government will be judged by its own citizens by whether or not we looked out for our own people before we sold the farm to help the rest of the world.

An interesting post, S3/P3/E2, one that exemplifies just what I was saying: the individualistic orientation of many Americans.

Canadians are (rightly) proud of their medical insurance program which provides a medical safety net for ALL Canadians. Are you sure about that? http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0828/p01s04-wogi.html

Listen, you get what you pay for. Fact is Canada's service when it comes to healthcare is brutal. They don't have enough doctor's and the technology they have is pitiful. Healthcase in the US has increased due to technological advances, economic growth, increasing annual salaries yada yada yada. More people die in a univeral access program (like Canada's), while waiting for a transplant and treatment, then in the US's program. That is a fact you can't deny.

Tuition at Canadian universities is much cheaper than at their American counterparts so that a higher percentage of qualified students can afford university education. Again, you get what you pay for. Hmmm, Ivy League or....Canadian League? I choose Ivy league. The education you receive in the US is the best the world has to offer. Again, that cannot be denied, even with your Canadian bias.

Like S3 said, everyone CAN afford college. While it won't be free, ANYONE can get a college loan. Borrow money to get through school and pay it off slowly when you get out with an American education.

And I haven't even mentioned their very different attitudes toward international relations What international relations does Canada hold besides for sucking on Lady America's box?

...respect for other countries What countries does America not have respect for (besides for countries that either: supoort/sponsor terror or communist nations)? You can't name one.

international treaties, and the United Nations. OK now you are talking out of line. The US formed the UN and the US is the leader in prodiving treaties for causes. The US pays for 65% of the UN revenue of the ENTIRE WORLD! No other country pays more than 9%. What a joke!

People have a natural tendency to hate the best. The rest of the world are jealous of what America has, that is why some countries tend to bash America (France, Germany). Oh I forgot, we should take foreign policy lessons from France and Germany. HA.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
What countries does America not have respect for (besides for countries that either: supoort/sponsor terror or communist nations)? You can't name one.

Well, if we were to judge by your response, then obviously the US does not have respect for Canada. Don't worry, though - most Canadians don't judge a country by the rantings of it's more fanatical citizens! :p

Regards,
Gordon

That's good then.

Just so we're clear, this wasn't an attempt to flame anyone for their views on the subject(s). Personally, I'm here to read about cars. :) I did, however, want to comment from what I feel to be an average American's point of view. Yeah, I tend to run on the conservative side of the street; but I do try to remain objective in order to gain from the other person's point of view as well (unless they're just being silly about the whole thing in which case nothing I say will matter anyway). Truth be told, I probably wouldn't like the States if everyone felt the way I do about most subjects considering the prisons would likely be equipped w/ electric bleachers instead of electric chairs, criminal penalties would be tougher, etc. We really do need people from both sides of the political aisle to keep things in perspective. In this case, the other side of the aisle just happens to be from the 13 future states, I mean provinces and territories to the north. :D

(Oh relax guys - I was only kidding about the "future states" thing.) :)







Maybe.

S3/P3/E2 : I'm impressed you know how many provinces and territories we have up here, most Americans probably don't know or care.


Originally posted by Goldenhue22
Listen, you get what you pay for. Fact is Canada's service when it comes to healthcare is brutal. They don't have enough doctor's and the technology they have is pitiful. Healthcase in the US has increased due to technological advances, economic growth, increasing annual salaries yada yada yada. More people die in a univeral access program (like Canada's), while waiting for a transplant and treatment, then in the US's program. That is a fact you can't deny.

I'll deny it, you're saying more people die when they have to wait a bit longer for treatment in our system than in a system where they're denied treatment altogether??? Huh?

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
Again, you get what you pay for. Hmmm, Ivy League or....Canadian League? I choose Ivy league. The education you receive in the US is the best the world has to offer. Again, that cannot be denied, even with your Canadian bias.

I'll deny this one too, that's a pretty bold statement to make. I'm not saying the US doesn't have great schools but other countries including Canada have renowned authors, scientists, engineers, nobel prize winners, etc. who teach in their colleges and universities that are very well respected. Just because something is expensive doesn't make it the best, some of your tuition at the Ivy League school is buying you the name of the school on your degree, the education being provided isn't necessarily better.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
What international relations does Canada hold besides for sucking on Lady America's box?

What??? I'd like an explanation for this one, your ignorance is really starting to shine. There's no need for insults around here.


Originally posted by Goldenhue22
The US formed the UN and the US is the leader in prodiving treaties for causes. The US pays for 65% of the UN revenue of the ENTIRE WORLD! No other country pays more than 9%. What a joke!

Just because the UN headquaters is in the US doesn't mean they created the UN. China, the UK, the US and USSR were the 4 main countries involved in forming the UN after the League of Nations dissolved and they decided to locate their headquarters in the US. The UN budget is based on several factors determining its members contributions including per capita income and GNP. So of course the US is going to be the main contributor.


I really didn't want to get into this and I could go on further after your lengthy battering of Canada and other coutries but I'll stop now. I do applaud your pride in your country and your sense of patriotism but please don't flame other countries with blind statments when you don't have your facts straight, I have pride in my country as well.

Originally posted by Jag
S3/P3/E2 : I'm impressed you know how many provinces and territories we have up here, most Americans probably don't know or care.

B.S. in Geography, Florida State University (incidentally the campus is home to the Florida Geological Survey as well)

Ohhhhh yeah - Rand McNally and I go waaaay back. Still owes me money too.

Originally posted by S3/P3/E2
B.S. in Geography, Florida State University (incidentally the campus is home to the Florida Geological Survey as well)

Ohhhhh yeah - Rand McNally and I go waaaay back. Still owes me money too.

i heard Rand McNally was filing for banckruptcy earlier this year...a couple of my friends that work in their Chicago office got laid off...doesn't look like you'll be collecting your money anytime soon, if ever :p

Rat bastard! I knew he'd end up cheating me... :D

Originally posted by S3/P3/E2
Rat bastard! I knew he'd end up cheating me... :D

yea sorry man...but with the advent of the Internet and navigation systems, who needs to use paper map anymore?

http://refrigeratedtrans.com/ar/transportation_rand_mcnally_co/

Jag, of course, is correct. I'd much rather have some coverage than none at all. And 40% of the US population has no medical insurance whatsoever.

Further, most Americans know precious little about the Canadian healthcare system, apart from what they hear in the public statements and ads of the American Medical Association, who of course have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo). The standard of healthcare in Canada is among the highest in the world. If the Canadian system were really "brutal" or oppressively expensive, don't you think the Canadians would have voted it out years ago? Quite the contrary is true, in poll after poll, Canadians state quite clearly that they are proud of their commitment to universal health coverage.

As for the comments about higher education in Canada, most people who are familiar with such things know that the best schools in Canada are on a par with the best schools in the United States. Several of the largest research libraries in North America are north of the border. As Jag has pointed out, Canadian universities enjoy an enviable record of accomplishments in the sciences, the arts, and the humanities.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22

OK now you are talking out of line. The US formed the UN and the US is the leader in prodiving treaties for causes. The US pays for 65% of the UN revenue of the ENTIRE WORLD! No other country pays more than 9%. What a joke!

Based on this thread and previous threads it appears you are a pathological liar. The USA's contribution to the UN is 25%, not 65% as you stated. The best part is we have been in arrears for years.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
Again, you get what you pay for. Hmmm, Ivy League or....Canadian League? I choose Ivy league. The education you receive in the US is the best the world has to offer. Again, that cannot be denied, even with your Canadian bias.

I can directly compare Ivy League to a well rated USA state school. Ivy League = 3X cost, 1/2 education, 5X connected people. What a freaking joke.

lol...stick to cars everyone. The one thing that I will comment on is that yes people stay on you waiting list for transplants for years among years amoung years and more people die waiting for those transplants then any other system. You can be proud of the universal access system, all you want. But this is true.

I can directly compare Ivy League to a well rated USA state school. Ivy League = 3X cost, 1/2 education, 5X connected people. What a freaking joke. No you can't. When someone ahs a resume saying they went to Harvard and another person applying for the same job went to San Diego State U, that Harvard alum will get the job every single time.

The USA's contribution to the UN is 25%, not 65% as you stated. THat is what I meant. Typo.

American Medical Association, who of course have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo). The standard of healthcare in Canada is among the highest in the world. Oh ok, the AMA, one of the most respective medical journals in the world, is biased. Whatever you say pal. And no the STANDARD of healthcare in Canada is not among the highest in the world. Did you not read the website I addressed above. Do a google search and you can come up with endless amounts of web pages on how the Canadian system does not work as well as it did before the technology and population spike.

As for the comments about higher education in Canada, most people who are familiar with such things know that the best schools in Canada are on a par with the best schools in the United States. You keep thinking that. Whatever floats your boat. The only reason people in the US go to Canada for education is because they couldn't get into a good University here in the states.

What??? I'd like an explanation for this one... The other guy bashed American for it's international relations. I was simply saying that Canada has no international relations. Not none literally, but you guys like to stand on the sidelines and watch America do things. Canada is never on the forefront of anything. Not that , that is bad...

Doesn't the US rank BEHIND numeorus contries with goverment health care using broad measures?

The US spends the most on health care:

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/20/47/16502649.pdf

Yet, in a broad view it doesn't do so well:

http://www.crahealth.org/news/2002-10-peer_review.htm

If you have the money, you can do well here. However, IMHO there is way too little time spent by doctors with their patients and they in general have prescribed to cook-book medicine. The average time with te patient is like the 2 minute offense...rushed and finished in 2 minutes!

One point to note, is that the US spend significantly more money for the same drugs Canada buys? This is mainly due to the fact Canada centralizes the buying and the US does not - something our conservative friends pushed in the latest Medicare bill.

If you have the money, you can do well here. As it should be. Everyone, has the ability to improve their way of life. Some do not choose to and thus try to live off of welfare and such. Something called communism is not a good policy to follow.

Originally posted by selmeralto
... To take only two examples: Something like 40% of American are without medical insurance of any kind: the uninsured are left to go it alone in America. ... You've hit my hot button, selmeralto. As a person who has experienced American socialized medicine, I can assure you that it is not all that it's cracked up to be. My father, a Korean era vet, had free health care through the VA system and lived in Lincoln, NE (the state capital). What a crock that system is! One cardiologist for the whole f**king hospital and a 4 day waiting list to get a goddamn angiogram and even then they couldn't do it locally.

He went in complaining of seeing spots in his vision from time to time. They ran tests and found nothing. They couldn't diagnose the problem so decided they would put him on thinners and then do an angio. The angio could only be done 50 miles away at the VA in Omaha and as I said, there was a 4 day waiting list. All the while just 5 blocks away, there was a top rated heart center (Bryan Memorial) with a team of cardiac surgeons available and a first rate trauma center staffed 24-7.

The cardiologist at the VA over thinned his blood and he started to bleed out internally. Then they tried to thicken it and apparently, went to far in the other direction. He began to have serious chest pain. He got bumped up the waiting list, but when they tried to ambulance him to Omaha, for the angio, he had an arrest. 24 hours later, he had another and died.

I am convinced to this day that he would have survived had he gone to a different hospital with less overworked and more competent staff.

I have a Welch friend who flew his mom to the states because she has heart disease and was on a two month waiting list for tests in the UK. He's lucky he could afford to bring her here and get her the workups and care she needs.

Why did I tell these personal stories? Because I am convinced that government does nothing particularly well because it is not subject to the competitive pressures of the marketplace that force it to. That's not a knock on government employees or their values. It's just an economic fact of life. Government is a monopoly and just like the local phone company it won't fix its problems unless forced to by competition. Here in the states, just look at the wrenching changes the USPS has had to go through to compete with FedEx and UPS. Would that have happened without competition? Hell no. And the USPS doesn't have to pay taxes. It's exempt from all sorts of laws that apply to its competition - including the most important one of all - bankruptcy.

The 40 million uninsured in America (that's NOT 40%, more like 15%) still have access to emergency care by law and we all pay for it in our health care costs and taxes. Would it be nice if everyone was insured? Sure, but I'd rather have a system that delivers excellent preventative care to 85% and emergency care to 100% than a system that delivers crap to 100% and probably does so at a higher overall cost.

Milton Friedman, a nobel laureate economist wrote a great book for people who want government to provide them with life's necessities "There's No Such Thing As a Free Lunch." It's not an ideological hack job, just a well reasoned analysis of why socialism does not deliver as promised and never will. Perhaps his best book, though dated by now, is "Free to Choose". I would highly recommend both to anyone with a curiosity about economics and social policy.

We may differ in approach, but not in what we desire: peace and prosperity that knows no boundaries. With that, I'll jump off this soapbox.

MuzzleFlash, I have several things to say in response.

First, you have my sincere sympathy about the quality of care for your father. I have witnessed similar treatment of patients under privatized plans and the consequences are painful for all concerned.

Second, I agree with you on one very important point: bad medical practice is bad medical practice, wherever it occurs.

But you shouldn't infer from your own anecdotes that NO universal care system could possibly work or that the care people receive must be "crap" if it is universalized or run by the government. I believe that the Canadian system works and my belief is supported by what Canadians--those people with actual experience with the system--say when asked in large numbers (e.g., polls).

You may be right that the figure of uninsured in America is 40 million people. That still sounds like a lot of uninsured people to me, especially in a country as rich as ours.

And emergency room treatment is not what I mean by medical care. ER treatment is set up to deal with emergencies, not routine and preventative health care.

As far as I'm concerned it's not a matter of it being "nice" that people have adequate health care; it's a matter of common decency.

I won't mention the ONE-BILLION DOLLARS from tax payers Canada has thrown away on a gun registration scheme that has yet to be completely implemented and I also won't mention how someone was able to register a power tool under that same nonsense. But that's for another forum.

I'm sure they could have used the money more wisely......like....uh....helping with the 9/11 attack that they feel we so richly deserved, seeing as though we have spent billions on other countries and for what?

Oosik, I hardly know what to say to such inflammatory remarks so I think I'll just let your post speak for itself.

Originally posted by selmeralto
MuzzleFlash, I have several things to say in response.

First, you have my sincere sympathy about the quality of care for your father. I have witnessed similar treatment of patients under privatized plans and the consequences are painful for all concerned.
Thanks, I appreciate it.

...But you shouldn't infer from your own anecdotes that NO universal care system could possibly work or that the care people receive must be "crap" if it is universalized or run by the government. I don't use a single data point as my experience. I use my experience working for the Navy in a civilian capacity, county and city government, a well known computer company, AT&T Bell Labs (back when they were the evil phone company), and now, a privately owned competitive internet carrier. I have a brother that works for NOAA and another that is a police lieutennant in large city department. Their experiences with waste and misplaced priorities in the workplace rival my experiences with government bureauracies. I've been inside and outside government and monopoly businesses as well as competitive ones. I've lived through the conversion of AT&T from a monopoly to a competitive carrier. I know what it's like to lose a job, pick myself up and go at it again. Government and monopolies generally don't suffer these hard economic lessons. They just perpetuate and change only when forced to. Competitive business fixes itself or it goes away.

There's a reason competition works. There's a reason that the lack of competion does not. There's a reason that the US enjoyed a higher standard of living throughout the cold war than the collectivists in the USSR and China and eastern Europe. There's a reason tiny Hong Kong and Taiwan thrived when China stagnated under a failed statist system.

I believe that the Canadian system works and my belief is supported by what Canadians--those people with actual experience with the system--say when asked in large numbers (e.g., polls). That may be so, but how will anyone ever know if there's a much better way to do it? There's no competition, no one trying a variant of that system because it is run as a monopolistic, single payer model. In fact, the entrenched bureauracy is very likely to resist change because change is disruptive and threatening.

The US system has it's problems to be sure, but socializing it is the wrong way to fix it. Our problem is that there is no price competition in the system because the consumer has no incentive to shop around. Most just look for quality, convenience and service. Insurance companies have taken to managed care where they dictate terms to providers - in effect acting like little governments. That model leaves hardly anyone happy. However, even this flawed managed care system provides some level of competition to the consumer's benefit. For instance, UHC, my provider began allowing self-referrals to specialists two years ago - clearly a pro-patient pro-quality-of-care move. That was precipitated by competition with other managed care plans. Since then, others have adopted that policy.

If the US would establish a system that encouraged patients to shop on price as well as other the other traditional factors , then the steady health care hyperinflation would drop overnight. Don't believe it? Look at the procedures that are generally not covered by insurance. LASIK for instance. Consumers want quality and competence from the surgeons (it's your eyesight for god's sake), but since they're picking up the tab, they may be willing to trade convenience or service for a better price. The result is that LASIK procedure prices have actually fallen, while the rest of health care industry hyperinflates. My 1996 ultrafast heart scan is the same price today. If insurance routinely covered it, I seriously doubt it would be.

The good news is that the US is likely to pass some sort of MSA legislation. This is a long overdue because it introduces price competition (providers already compete on convenience, perceived quality and patient service). The idea behind MSA flex accounts is that they are generally used for elective or non-emergency or preventative services. The consumer has a vested interest in shopping for quality, convenience, service and now, price. They will be rewarded for smart choices. MSA's are not intended to replace catastrophic care insurance. But now we have a formula to beat down the hyperinflation in elective procedures and preventative care. Doing that, makes health care more affordable for all.

You may be right that the figure of uninsured in America is 40 million people. That still sounds like a lot of uninsured people to me, especially in a country as rich as ours. I agree, but think competition must be the basis for lowering that number. Our wealth is a result of our economic system. The USSR had similar natural resources and a similar sized population, but shunned capitalism for collectivism and centralized control. China has introduced limited competition and capitalism with limited results. I could go on about North & South Korea, but you see my point.

And emergency room treatment is not what I mean by medical care. ER treatment is set up to deal with emergencies, not routine and preventative health care.. No argument there. In fact, preventative care is the best market for price competition. When you need your appendix removed, there's no time to call around ;)

As far as I'm concerned it's not a matter of it being "nice" that people have adequate health care; it's a matter of common decency. I agree, but again, I don't believe that government can do it using failed socialist beauracies. Competition is THE way to solve this common goal we have for our country.

I'll leave you with this example of fixing a large, broken system: In 1984, the largest monopoly in the world divested itself into a long distance company and 7 regional phone companies comprised of 22 local operating companies. The history of mergers and spinoffs has been tumultuous to say the least. Billions have been made and lost. That's business.

However, from the consumer's perspective, long distance rates have dropped to about 10% of their 1984 levels before adjusting for inflation. Thank you competition. Meanwhile, the basic lifeline local service from the monopoly has gone up and in some cases, doubled or tripled. All sorts of government schemes, taxes and regulation at the federal, state and local levels - including wealth redistribution in the form of universal service surcharges and business to residential subsidies - have done nothing to mitigate the high costs of local phone service.

Even now, in the markets fortunatate enough to have local companies compete for your phone service, these competitors must lease their circuits at ridiculous prices from the monopoly. Eventually competition will be allowed to fix this problem too. It will come from wireless, cable and VoIP and force the monopolies to reduce phone service prices on par with what has already happened so long ago in the LD market. Those falling prices will do so much more to help the poor afford lifeline service than all the government mandated and managed plans put together.

We want the same thing, my friend. We just disagree about how to accomplish it.

Nothing inflammatory about it, it's the truth, if you must have proof I'll be happy to hunt for it.

If you gotta delete it go ahead.....I'm just so fed up with everything the US is required to do for the rest of the world yet no one does crap for us. Seems to be that when ever another country has issues we have to go save them because they can't fend for themselves, then when we attacked, everybody stands back and says, "sucks to be you." Exactly how many nations came over to the US and helped after 9/11......how much money was given to our cause.

Then they have the nerve to criticize how the US and it's people live. Everyeone else's way of life is just so much better.........

Sorry mods, not to be rude or disobey any rules, do what you must.

OT: If at anytime during my previous postings, whether on this thread or any other, that I may have used what may be considered inappropriate or offensive, words, phrases or dialogue, either directly or indirectly towards any individual, group or society, I sincerely apologize for my actions and for typing before thinking, that was not my intention. (Open mouth insert digits)

Originally posted by MuzzleFlash


We want the same thing, my friend. We just disagree about how to accomplish it.

Yes, I think that's where we are. I appreciate the care you take in stating your position.

Originally posted by oosik
I'm sure they could have used the money more wisely......like....uh....helping with the 9/11 attack that they feel we so richly deserved, seeing as though we have spent billions on other countries and for what?

I'm just so fed up with everything the US is required to do for the rest of the world yet no one does crap for us. Seems to be that when ever another country has issues we have to go save them because they can't fend for themselves, then when we attacked, everybody stands back and says, "sucks to be you." Exactly how many nations came over to the US and helped after 9/11......how much money was given to our cause.


I don't think these comments are quite accurate. Canada always supports the US when they are in need, we have supplied resources to the US countless times when needed such as aid and support workers. After Spetember 11th was no different, many Canadians died on that day as well you know. The hundreds of diverted american passengers that were forced to land in Canada were provided accomodations by anyone who could spare a room, just ask a few of them what they think of Canadian hospitality.

We also provide Billions of dollars in Economic aid to other countries, so don't think the US are the only ones handing out money to struggling nations. You have to remember that our population is about equal to that of California, even though our country is huge there really aren't many people here. And you don't even want to know what our taxes are compared to yours, our healthcare system is far from free.


Here's a nice little article I found:

At the request of President George W. Bush, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien today issued this statement to the Canadian people:

"I spoke early this morning with President Bush. I reiterated directly to him the sincerest condolences of the Canadian people for the horrific attacks yesterday on innocent Americans and our offer of any security or humanitarian assistance that the United States may need. I also told him that, as our closest friend and partner, America could count on our complete support and solidarity in the days to come.

He asked that I let the Canadian people know how grateful he and the American people are for the assistance that Canada has provided at this terrible time; particularly for the safe haven and warm hospitality we have given to diverted American air travellers. He said that at many points yesterday, during a very, very trying day, he was told of the extraordinary effort that Canadians have made.

I told him that the Government of Canada - on behalf of the Canadian people - would continue to coordinate its activities to deliver the most timely and effective assistance that we can."

Per US Military Central Command 70 nations are working with the USA working with the USA on "The global war on Terrorism". Canada is included and is listed as committing troops. Check it out here.

The reason many countries did not support the USA with Iraq is because they felt it had nothing to do with international terrorism.http://www.centcom.mil/Operations/Coalition/joint.htm (http://)

Consumer Reports (January 2004) has an update on the American uninsured statistics.

According the 2002 Census, 44 million Americans were uninsured, an increase of 6% over the previous year's numbers. The article notes that these numbers don't include millions more who were uninsured for short time periods or who have skimpy coverage with low benefit limits or high deductibles.

Other observations:

- minority-group members, young adults, and people with modest incomes are much more likely to be uninsured than others.

- uninsured women with breast cancer are 30 to 50% more likely to die from it than are insured women.

The UN release its list of the best countries to live in anually, Canada usually tops this list, it has for the last 7 years, unfortunately we fell to third this year. This list is based on per capita income, health care, life expectancy and educational levels.

Here's the top 20 countries for 2003:

1. Norway
2. Australia
3. Canada
4. Sweden
5. Belgium
6. United States
7. Iceland
8. Netherlands
9. Japan
10. Finland
11. Switzerland
12. Luxembourg
13. France
14. Britain
15. Denmark
16. Austria
17. Germany
18. Ireland
19. New Zealand
20. Italy

as far as GoldenHue22's comments on our healthcare system (which are unbelievably unfounded, to go right along with all the BS he's piled up from the beginning of his membership here...) based on many MANY metrics, our system could be considered better.

stays in hospital for patients (meaning longer term of care) is far higher in Canada, by almost a week. number of hospital beds per person in Canada is also higher. the cost of our healthcare per something (i'm remembering all this from my Economics of Health course a year ago... i still have the notes to go back and get all the numbers from if anyone just wants to bitch about it) is actually lower than in the US.

the biggest reason: efficiency. there is something like (literally) five to ten times less paperwork, administration, and insurance work to do per visit to the doctors or stay in the hospital. ours is completely card based, and there is nearly nothing the patient has to do to get service other than have their "Care Card" with them (or have their number on file at the institution they're visiting).

now, doctor's salaries on average are far higher in the US, meaning that yes, there are quite probably "better" (more reputable, smarter, more able, etc) doctors in the south, and i believe more doctors per person as well. also, the wait for care is shorter. the machinery used in the US is also nearly universally brand-new and always the best in the world (i think we end up buying some used machines from down south). is this worth leaving such an enormous chunk of the population out in the cold?? not for me.

now, this thread is supposed to be about how Canada and the US are different and not how one is necessarily better than the other. stop with the cock-sizing contest.

i'd like to bring another thing to the table about Americo-Canadian differences: the "Spring Break" issue.

so secular is youth culture that getting absolutely faced and "dancing" (ie stripping to validate one's insecure ego) in bubble filled clubs for days on end in Florida has become something university students live for (or for some a reason to go to university)... i don't know, it simply seems to me that Canadians simply don't have this sort of thing. UBC has Wreck Beach, which is an exclusively nude beach, but it's not really all that popular, and is really a hippy kinda thing to do less than a party thing to do.

we have lots of clubs in Vancouver, and the drug thing, well... yes, i'd say it's unbelievably easy to get pot, and a much higher number of people here do it regularly, but that certainly doesn't mean that people ask you to, or that everyone does. hell, most people i know have never smoked a cigarette.

where i'm getting to is that the sort of Canadian version of "happiness" is something wholly different from the sex (only an American pharmaceutical company would create a boner pill, and i can't imagine a per capita bigger market for those completely fake 'get a bigger penis' pills either), money, and Coca-Cola dream which seeps from the US to have permiated the third world over the last few decades... or at least mine does. just throwing it out: what's everyone's thought on that??

Originally posted by wakeech
i'd like to bring another thing to the table about Americo-Canadian differences: the "Spring Break" issue.

so secular is youth culture that getting absolutely faced and "dancing" (ie stripping to validate one's insecure ego) in bubble filled clubs for days on end in Florida has become something university students live for (or for some a reason to go to university)... i don't know, it simply seems to me that Canadians simply don't have this sort of thing. UBC has Wreck Beach, which is an exclusively nude beach, but it's not really all that popular, and is really a hippy kinda thing to do less than a party thing to do.

we have lots of clubs in Vancouver, and the drug thing, well... yes, i'd say it's unbelievably easy to get pot, and a much higher number of people here do it regularly, but that certainly doesn't mean that people ask you to, or that everyone does. hell, most people i know have never smoked a cigarette.

where i'm getting to is that the sort of Canadian version of "happiness" is something wholly different from the sex (only an American pharmaceutical company would create a boner pill, and i can't imagine a per capita bigger market for those completely fake 'get a bigger penis' pills either), money, and Coca-Cola dream which seeps from the US to have permiated the third world over the last few decades... or at least mine does. just throwing it out: what's everyone's thought on that??

not that you have to partake in such extreme hedonistc pleasures but what i love about the US is that it's all there...if you'd like to get nekkid for Spring Break in Miami, you can, it's not like it's not done in Cancun to an even more extreme level...if you want to gamble you can, take a trip to Vegas where i'll be for New Years...got a speed addiction, go to Six Flags and ride the roller coasters...like the sun,surfing, and beaches go to Cali, like the city life go to NYC, like snow and winter sports go to Colorado, like the country life or Cajun cooking go to Louisana...point is, the US has pretty much everything for anybody...there is no other nation so diverse in cultures

I have read BRx8's, wakeech's and Jag's posts so it is settled: Americans have larger penises than Canadians, get laid more while in college and in general live more hedonistically. I wonder if the UN used this info in figuring which nations are the best to live in?

Originally posted by babylou
I have read BRx8's, wakeech's and Jag's posts so it is settled: Americans have larger penises than Canadians, get laid more while in college and in general live more hedonistically. I wonder if the UN used this info in figuring which nations are the best to live in?

No, you misread - Americans have drug companies offering the boner pill, presumably because Americans have difficulty getting it up, and Americans have millions of spam "get a bigger penis" e-mails, presumably because millions of Americans need a bigger penis. Canadians obviously aren't in need of assistance for getting it up and are plenty big enough to start with! :p

Regards,
Gordon

Originally posted by revhappy

One point to note, is that the US spend significantly more money for the same drugs Canada buys? This is mainly due to the fact Canada centralizes the buying and the US does not - something our conservative friends pushed in the latest Medicare bill. [/B]

Canada's gov't uses legislation to price fix, in turn, the US citizens carry the burden for Canadians (the rest of the civilized world as well). It has nothing to do with a centralized health care system.

Originally posted by Digisan
Canada's gov't uses legislation to price fix, in turn, the US citizens carry the burden for Canadians (the rest of the civilized world as well). It has nothing to do with a cetralized health care system.

I'm not talking about price fixing through legislation. What I am saying, is that centralizing the purchasing of drugs will lower prices by increasing the power of the buyer. This is Microeconomics 101 and is totally Market-based. Of course, the drug companies don't want that (even though they are the most profitable mature industry aided by goverment research and subsidies).

Originally posted by revhappy
I'm not talking about price fixing through legislation. What I am saying, is that centralizing the purchasing of drugs will lower prices by increasing the power of the buyer. This is Microeconomics 101 and is totally Market-based. Of course, the drug companies don't want that (even though they are the most profitable mature industry aided by goverment research and subsidies).

The buying power in the US far surpasses Canada, centralized or not. Obviously economics have nothing to do with it.

Originally posted by Digisan
The buying power in the US far surpasses Canada, centralized or not. Obviously economics have nothing to do with it.

If you have thousands of different buyers purchasing drugs, then the buying power of the US is watered-down. Would you rather own the one and only share of a million dollar company or two shares of the million total shares of a $10 million company? That IS why congress (and the drug companies fought it) tried to centralize the buying of drugs in the medicare bill last month.

I'm not for price fixing as that reduces the incentives of producers and results in higher prices in the long run. However, working smartly within the market just makes more sense.

Originally posted by Gord96BRG
No, you misread - Americans have drug companies offering the boner pill, presumably because Americans have difficulty getting it up, and Americans have millions of spam "get a bigger penis" e-mails, presumably because millions of Americans need a bigger penis. Canadians obviously aren't in need of assistance for getting it up and are plenty big enough to start with! :p

Regards,
Gordon

Sorry, my bad. So now we know that Canadians are bigger penises than Americans.:p

Wakeech- All your credibility about everything non-car related has gone out the window with your ridiculous comments about Israel and Palestine. Be like all the other moderators and scan the site and don't post.

There are no free trips...period. If someone can't afford healthcare, than too bad. You want it, you pay for it. Can't afford it, then you don't get it. I'm sick of people using the system to get a free ride. Go out a get a job. Maybe if these people that don't have healthcare would be able to get coverage if they: didn't have a cell phone, new nikes, tommy hilfiger jeans, DKNY shirts and stopped spending their welfare checks on booze, drugs and cigarettes. Go out and get a job. It isn't that welfare isn't affordable. People don't have their priorities straight. And I don't want anybody getting a free ride. If they have an emergency, everyone has the rights to emergency care. Otherwise get a freaking job!

I see it all the time. I'm an optometrist, and everyday I do 1 free exam through a charity program. These people are supposedly hand picked and qualify for this program. Well, some of these people aren't needy at all, they just want a free exam and glasses. They have cell phones, polo shirts, new shoes, expensive cars (I see from their keychain). They aren't able to get contacts through this program and some of them ask about contacts. I tell them it isn't covered. They say, "oh that's ok, how much is it if I paid for it!". I just want to slap them silly.

If you want something. Go out and earn it. I would much rather have our system where we have better doctors, better technology, less waiting and pay for it. Instead of having a universal system where the doctors are shitty, the technology is outdated and you wait forever, BUT the lowlife scambag that can't afford coverage becuase of his alcohol and drug addiction gets coverage. Screw that!

I'm glad you all are looking out for the less fortunate. Then why not run this site for free? Why do people have to pay to advertise on your site. Be nice and run this site for free, to everyone (including other companies). Exactly, it's called capitalism. Isn't it a dream? Without it, things are stagnant, because there is no incentive to spend money to move forward. Just like your precious system. You can have your system.

I gave you all a site where officials high in the Canadian government admit that the system has significant flaws and won't be around much longer. You feed us with flawed polls asking people which is better: A) a system where everyone gets coverage or B) a system where only people that pay get coverage. Well no kidding people will say A and of course Canadians think their way is better, because they know of no other way. Tell them the ramifications of each. And the benefits of each. Then people will change their minds.

Please, spare me the babbling BS about Canada this, Canada that. You guys follow the leads of other countries. Never leading yourselves. Your economy is based on tourism mainly from the US. Your great city of Toronto was in the shitter when the SARS epidemic broke out because, no tourism was coming in. Your entire society depends on it, because you guys don't make anything of any worth. I'm glad you guys let us use your houses when a plane went down. Anyone with any worth would do that. And your 50 soldiers you gave us...thank you. You have no army, because your country can't afford it. Maybe it can't afford it because you are taxing your citizens so much to pay for your great healthcare plan, so your government doesn't have enough money to improve other things.

Don't compare the US and Canada. It isn't even close. Canada does nothing better, and your healthcare system is included. Thanks a lot for being loyal to us, while we do the dirty work, you guys (and the rest of the sane world) can cheerlead from the sidelines.

GH22
-Another in your face, back to reality post.

For those of you that kept the discussion civil, I appreciate it.

Blasting people always confused the hell out of me. I'll tell you something everyone should know already --- you will NEVER confvince someone of your argument if you insult them while you are making it. NEVER.

So no matter how angry or upset you are, you have to be polite if you want someone to even consider your position.

Some points to add:

US Colleges are not set up to give good educations, for two reasons. First, they need students' tuition to stay open. If classes are too hard and too many kids leave, they lose money. Second, the professors must go through many student reviews before attaining tenure (permanent status). Any professor that pushed the students too hard would not get tenure. As a result, few college professors are very demanding. While I wouldn't consider my college education a waste, I certainly didn't get $85,000 worth of education the four years I was there. The professors that did make the students work hard often ended up teaching classes of three to five students, because everyone else dropped the course when they discovered that they might actually have to open the book outside the classroom.

US Medical expenses are a mixture of socialistic and capitalistic, and I think the combination is much worse than anything a purely socialized system can provide. In socialism, the government sets the prices. In capitalism, supply and demand set the prices. In our current system, if prices get too high the wealthy can still afford it, the very poor get covered by the government, and the middle class gets hammered with costs they can't meet. The medical industry gets rich, the rich pay a ton in taxes to cover the very poor, and the middle class gets driven to poverty. Everybody loses money except the higher ups in the medical industry who laugh all the way to the bank.

My wife works as a Physical Therapist. She makes less than $60,000 a year but earns her employer, on average, more than $300,000 per year. A tiny fraction of the extra $240,000 covers her benefits and facility maintenance, but the rest is just pocketed by some bastard executives somewhere.

When she was pregant, we had a false alarm trip to the hospital. She wasn't even there two hours, never saw a Doctor, saw a nurse maybe 20 minutes and an intern maybe 5. The bill was $750. The two of us could have spent two hours in a 5 star hotel with the complete attention of a hired nurse for less than that. That's beyond outrageous and into the realm of pure hilarity. You thought $500 screwdrivers were bad, well just take a trip to the hospital for the flu and end up putting a down payment on some executive's Aston Martin.

Goldenhue,
If our system (in its current form) is so great, why do we spend significantly more yet lag behind in the major general health indicators (see my earlier post in this thread)? Correct me if I'm wrong, but your position is that since we have the highest possible level of medical care (even though most or many can not afford it) that makes it better? Please advise.

US Colleges are not set up to give good educations, for two reasons. First, they need students' tuition to stay open. If classes are too hard and too many kids leave, they lose money. Another ridiculous statement. That is why potential students have an interview. That is why the ACT and SAT are there. They are thre to judge a students potential to make sure they can complete the curiculum. People drop out, get kicked out, fail out, every single day. There is a reason why you didn't go to Yale/Harvard, they would have taken your money....but they knew that you couldn't handle the workload/stress (whatever you want to call it) and then you would have failed out, and THEN they wouldn't get their money. They hand pick students they (the school board) think can and will stay for the 4 years (at least) so they can get paid.

Second, the professors must go through many student reviews before attaining tenure (permanent status). Any professor that pushed the students too hard would not get tenure. What is your basis for this comment? If you aren't yelling at students then you are being too laid back? If you are liked by students then you are being too easy? So your criteria of a good professor is one that is hated by the students, which is evident by him/her being too hard and therefore will get his/her tenure. Lunacy.

US Medical expenses are a mixture of socialistic and capitalistic, and I think the combination is much worse than anything a purely socialized system can provide. Try again. They are purely capitalistic. And hasn't history taught you that socialism doesn't work!

My wife works as a Physical Therapist. She makes less than $60,000 a year but earns her employer, on average, more than $300,000 per year. A tiny fraction of the extra $240,000 covers her benefits and facility maintenance, but the rest is just pocketed by some bastard executives somewhere. Boo-hoo. Then go out and start a business. You make the big bucks by starting your own business. Tell her to start a practice. She acn then set her prices, hire employees, pay rent, pay expenses and see how much is left over. Have the drive and iniciative to do more if you are going to bitch. But no. You go to work, punch in, punch out and go home. Take the long journey to be your own boss. It isn't easy. Most people fail. Those that don't are rewarded greatly. I'm sick and tired of people crying that big corporate are making too much money, bla bla bla. How did they get there? What did they sacrifice to get to the top? Capitalism to its finest. IF you just sit on your ass, you get rewarded to that level. If you don't graduate high school or college, your chances of success dwindle. Spend the time and effort and your potential is greatly increased. Otherwise, play the effing lottery and hope you win.

When she was pregant, we had a false alarm trip to the hospital. She wasn't even there two hours, never saw a Doctor, saw a nurse maybe 20 minutes and an intern maybe 5. The bill was $750. The two of us could have spent two hours in a 5 star hotel with the complete attention of a hired nurse for less than that. That's beyond outrageous and into the realm of pure hilarity. You thought $500 screwdrivers were bad, well just take a trip to the hospital for the flu and end up putting a down payment on some executive's Aston Martin. I bet Microsoft is behind that one too right? Hospital fees are high. Why? The operating expense of running a hopital in incredible. They employ doctors that have student loans more than you can ever imagine. Your $85K college loan is peanuts to a doctors expenses. Doctors may make a lot of money, BUT they also have MANY MANY MANY more expenses. And while they keep paying their $3,000 /month school loan off, their net is much less. But why shouldn't doctors make more money then Physical Therapists (for example). The knowledge, time and effort these people put in are incredible. They can provide a service that few can, so you pay for it. Why do athletes make so much damn money. Because they provide entertainment which makes money for other companies (nike, wilson, louisville slugger, wilson, ESPN, NBC etc...). It is what makes this world go round. There is a reason why capitalism works and socialism doesn't. It's been tried, and it's over.

Liberals *sigh*

If our system (in its current form) is so great, why do we spend significantly more yet lag behind in the major general health indicators (see my earlier post in this thread)? Why are you asking me for the answer, when the article answered the question in the last sentence. Lifestyle.

but your position is that since we have the highest possible level of medical care (even though most or many can not afford it) that makes it better? In a word...YES. And BTW, MOST EVERYONE CAN afford it. It is a very small number of people (of the entire population) that can't. Some DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT. The people that can't are the homeless, rat infested, drug addicted, alcohol boozing, cigarette smoking, lowlife crackheads a-holes that try to feed off of the system. They get their welfare checks and spend it on booze. They have 12 kids with 12 difference fathers and cry help. Why do these thiings happen to these people? Is it the way they were brought up? Family life or lack thereof? Who cares. If they want to better their life, they can. There are plenty of organizations that can and will help. But they have to help themselves, no one can help them. For example, the Robert Parker Homes in Chicago. Originally built to house the homeless and the less fortunate, FOR FREE. These people made those homes into the worst living conidtions imaginable. Cops are afradi to go there. Just this year they are being knocked down and some thownhomes are being put up, to try and better the neighborhood. Screw them. The ruin everything we give them and then cry when they have to pay for services. I get nothing for free, shit, I have to pay more in taxes to get the things I have. I've gone through life and made myself successful. I play the stock market and was taxed at over 50% ON MY WINNINGS during the Clinton era. ON MY WINNINGS. I risk my own money and I win some back...but I have to pay 50% of it to taxes?! Absurd. If you want to help the less fortunate, go join the peace corps. Otherwise, stop thinking that you are helping their situation by feeling sorry for them, because you are just egging them on. This liberal attitude that the everyday Joe Blow is fed throught the lefty media, is intoxicating and suffocating.

Live your life and don't worry about the other fool. If you want to make more money- be your own boss. You don't want to take the risk, fine, just don't talk badly to those who do.

GH22
-Another in your face back to reality post.

Originally posted by babylou
I think that article is much ado about (aboot) nothing. Americans and Canadians (English speaking especially) are more similar than 49 state Americans and Louisiana.

Then again, so what! Why does America and Canada have to be clones? A little difference makes things interesting.

You know, now that I think about it I bet a joint Canadian and American plebiscite on the reuinion of Louisiana and Quebec would easily be accepted.

Hey now... got an administrator from Louisiana here... keep it up :D

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
In a word...YES. And BTW, MOST EVERYONE CAN afford it. It is a very small number of people (of the entire population) that can't. Some DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT. The people that can't are the homeless, rat infested, drug addicted, alcohol boozing, cigarette smoking, lowlife crackheads a-holes that try to feed off of the system. They get their welfare checks and spend it on booze. They have 12 kids with 12 difference fathers and cry help. Why do these thiings happen to these people? Is it the way they were brought up? Family life or lack thereof? Who cares. If they want to better their life, they can. There are plenty of organizations that can and will help. But they have to help themselves, no one can help them. For example, the Robert Parker Homes in Chicago. Originally built to house the homeless and the less fortunate, FOR FREE. These people made those homes into the worst living conidtions imaginable. Cops are afradi to go there. Just this year they are being knocked down and some thownhomes are being put up, to try and better the neighborhood. Screw them. The ruin everything we give them and then cry when they have to pay for services. I get nothing for free, shit, I have to pay more in taxes to get the things I have. I've gone through life and made myself successful. I play the stock market and was taxed at over 50% ON MY WINNINGS during the Clinton era. ON MY WINNINGS. I risk my own money and I win some back...but I have to pay 50% of it to taxes?! Absurd. If you want to help the less fortunate, go join the peace corps. Otherwise, stop thinking that you are helping their situation by feeling sorry for them, because you are just egging them on. This liberal attitude that the everyday Joe Blow is fed throught the lefty media, is intoxicating and suffocating.

Live your life and don't worry about the other fool. If you want to make more money- be your own boss. You don't want to take the risk, fine, just don't talk badly to those who do.

GH22
-Another in your face back to reality post.


Have you ever considered an anger management course? Anyway, you still have not addressed my question. If, we spend significantly more than other countries and have worse general health indicators, why is our system (in its current form) better? The fact is most people cannot afford it. Have you seen the cost of insurance for someone who is not employed? For Go'd sake, many people take jobs for the health insurance benefits alone. Your attempt to categorize the uninsured as a bunch of welfare queens "with 12 kids" is as erroneous. 44 million people is about 16% of the population or about one out of enery 6 people.

The reason we spend so much is due to the high administrative costs of our system, our decentralized purchasing, and an artificially low supply of doctors (anyone who has ever seen the medical school admission process can see that the medical profession tries to keep a limited number of providers). Its amazing we pay so much for a service that has no claims of actually working! Imagine if you went to get your brakes done and there was only a chance they would actually be on your car? Now, imagine that you payed $5,000 for this "work"? How about the fact that you can go to five different doctors and they all won' talk to each other, possibly injuring your health (i.e.)each giving you a full set of x-rays).

So, Goldenhue do you attribute neglect and carelessness as the cause of the lack of health insurance for these 44 million people? Why isn't the free market insuring them (since they most are not welfare queens)? Do you think the goverment has any responsibility in helping disadvantaged children (i.e. parents that are too poor to afford health insurance and are not entitled to medicaid) get health coverage or do you think they should just suffer?

BTW..I never saw the capital gain/ordinary income tax rate at 50% during the Clinton years? Speaking of taxes, did you support Bush's huge tax increase relating to steel tarrifs?

As for the state of our educational system, have you ever asked your college-educated some geography questions? Its pretty frieghtening, and don't even think about asking them history questions. Our college (and high school system) passes people for just being there and is a joke. Speaking of Ivy League schools, it is well-known that grade inflation is so strong that most kids get As, and the issuance of a C occurs as often as a Republican president baalnces the budget. Perhaps, that's how my classmates that drank, worked , and never read their textbooks (or studied much) passed even though they had no clue as to what's going on.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
GH22
-Another in your face, back to reality post.

Reality in the eyes of a general hater of all that is not a clone of him. You must be one unhappy SOB.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
Please, spare me the babbling BS about Canada this, Canada that. You guys follow the leads of other countries. Never leading yourselves. Your economy is based on tourism mainly from the US. Your great city of Toronto was in the shitter when the SARS epidemic broke out because, no tourism was coming in. Your entire society depends on it, because you guys don't make anything of any worth.

Nice to see you know absolutely nothing about Canada. Our economy is based mainly on resources, not tourism. Tell you what, well stop sending you our resources and lets see what happens, I'd feel sorry for all the people in California that would be without power. Your ignorance just keeps on shining with every post, it's people like you with no compassion and base their lives solely on greed that is bringing us down as a society. If there were no people with your self serving mentality then socialism would actually work very well.

Originally posted by Jag
Nice to see you know absolutely nothing about Canada. Our economy is based mainly on resources, not tourism. Tell you what, well stop sending you our resources and lets see what happens, I'd feel sorry for all the people in California that would be without power. Your ignorance just keeps on shining with every post, it's people like you with no compassion and base their lives solely on greed that is bringing us down as a society. If there were no people with your self serving mentality then socialism would actually work very well.

Hint, Goldenhue - if you want to attack Canada'spolicies -try some of their envioronmental policies regarding those Natural Resources. Of course, the US (especially with the current administration) is nothing to cheer about.

You know, now that I think about it I bet a joint Canadian and American plebiscite on the reuinion of Louisiana and Quebec would easily be accepted. [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm sorry to disappoint you but Louisiana and Quebec have very little or even nothing in common. the Acadians that were deported there were from what is now Nova-scotia and New-Brunswick. (maritimes provinces) the french Quebec is much more European... then again you guys don't like France much these days. :-)

This is getting ugly. How about this:

1. If you are American and think the USA is good and Canada sucks then be thankful you live in the USA and don't go to freaking Canada, don't talk to Canadians and don't watch ice hockey.

2. If you are Canadian and think Canada is good and the USA sucks then be thankful you live in Canada and don't go to the freaking USA, don't talk to Americans and don't watch b-ball.

3. If you are Canadian or American and think the other country is better and your country sucks then don't let the door hit you on the ass when leaving.

4. If you are not in any of the above groups then appreciate that you have neighbor(s) that are generally friendly and a little different. Different that makes things spicy and gets you to think out of the box every once in a while. Even if they may have one family member that is an a-hole.

If you guys don't cool it, I'm going to close the thread. This is not a bash Canada thread nor a bash United States thread. Goldenhue, there is no need for personal attacks - Although you are not the only one making them. I'll be watching the thread... if it can't be a sensible debate where people make tactful posts, I'm closing it.

Originally posted by tribal azn2
verdict:

canada sucks

Verdict: you are hopefully not a good representation of the American citizen.

Originally posted by f1michel
You know, now that I think about it I bet a joint Canadian and American plebiscite on the reuinion of Louisiana and Quebec would easily be accepted.

I'm sorry to disappoint you but Louisiana and Quebec have very little or even nothing in common. the Acadians that were deported there were from what is now Nova-scotia and New-Brunswick. (maritimes provinces) the french Quebec is much more European... then again you guys don't like France much these days. :-) [/B][/QUOTE]

Dude, the Quebec/Louisiana thing was tongue in cheek. Even our resident coonass moderator, HeTz, figured this one out.:D

Originally posted by f1michel
I'm sorry to disappoint you but Louisiana and Quebec have very little or even nothing in common. the Acadians that were deported there were from what is now Nova-scotia and New-Brunswick. (maritimes provinces) the french Quebec is much more European... then again you guys don't like France much these days. :-)

f1michel,

Dude, the Quebec/Louisiana thing was tongue in cheek but I didn't know that tidbit. Even our resident coonass moderator, HeTz, didn't correct me.:D

Originally posted by babylou
I'm sorry to disappoint you but Louisiana and Quebec have very little or even nothing in common. the Acadians that were deported there were from what is now Nova-scotia and New-Brunswick. (maritimes provinces) the french Quebec is much more European... then again you guys don't like France much these days. :-)

Dude, the Quebec/Louisiana thing was tongue in cheek. Even our resident coonass moderator, HeTz, figured this one out.:D

Haha... very funny :) I was born in Virginia Beach actually :P Damn Canuck!

Today's Ebonic word from the Louisiana Public School System:
>
>OMELETTE
>
>Let's use it in a sentence... Shall we?
>
>
>
>"I should pop yo ass fo what you jus did, but omelette dis one slide."

Originally posted by revhappy
, and an artificially low supply of doctors (anyone who has ever seen the medical school admission process can see that the medical profession tries to keep a limited number of providers).

Amen.

In a few years, the requirement to be a Physical Therapist in the USA will be a PhD. If you became a PT in the early 1990s, a Bachelor of Science degree was sufficient. So what's the difference?

The difference is that the American Physical Therapy Association wants to keep the number of Therapists relatively small so they can charge artificially high prices for their services (like the $50 for 15 minutes that my wife's employer charges). It's a monopoly. They keep making it more time consuming and expensive to get into the field so that fewer and fewer people will do so.

I love the US and I think there are many great things here - but it's foolish to just declare that it is superior to every other nation in every measurable category.

And just for the record, a huge chunk of the people collecting government money for food and medical expenses are retirees, who paid taxes for 40 years so that the government would take care of them when they retired. It's not their fault that the Social Security money they paid was appropriated by Congress for other uses and the modern day taxpayer got stuffed with the bill. It's a joke anyway, trying to live in retirement on $12,000 a year. 50 years ago that was rent for a nice apartment and a Cadillac. Today it's living in a used van and barely being able to afford a set of tires for a Cadillac.

Originally posted by HeTz
Haha... very funny :) I was born in Virginia Beach actually :P Damn Canuck!

Today's Ebonic word from the Louisiana Public School System:
>
>OMELETTE
>
>Let's use it in a sentence... Shall we?
>
>
>
>"I should pop yo ass fo what you jus did, but omelette dis one slide."

I ain't no damn Canuck! I'm a Texan but omelette ya slide dis time.:D

Originally posted by babylou
I ain't no damn Canuck! I'm a Texan but omelette ya slide dis time.:D

LOL :D

[old Kia commercial]

AAAIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!

[/old Kia commercial]

hahaha... sorry :) had to.

Swamp thing, duh-nuh, duh-duh-duh, duh-nuh... :cool:

Haha :) *HeTz hovers his pointer over the ban button* :D

Originally posted by HeTz
Haha :) *HeTz hovers his pointer over the ban button* :D

yeah, i can't seem to find any of the good stuff.... :confused:

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
There are no free trips...period. If someone can't afford healthcare, than too bad. You want it, you pay for it. Can't afford it, then you don't get it. I'm sick of people using the system to get a free ride. Go out a get a job. Maybe if these people that don't have healthcare would be able to get coverage if they: didn't have a cell phone, new nikes, tommy hilfiger jeans, DKNY shirts and stopped spending their welfare checks on booze, drugs and cigarettes. Go out and get a job.

Wow, my first post in I don't know how many months, and it's not even RX-8 related. :(

This sort of thinking really frustrates me. It sounds logical, but has no basis in fact whatsoever. My mother is without healthcare insurance. She has applied to over 20 insurance companies, and is always either refused coverage or the cost is far out of reach. Why? Because she suffers from migranes. That's an automatic disqualifier for most insurance companies. She has recieved offers for insurance with riders for anything head related, but the cost is always over $10,000 per year. She is unable to get a job for 2 reasons. First, she is in her 50s and has never held a job outside the home. Before my dad left her, she was a homemaker for 30 years, and even though she does have a college degree, the jobs she could get would certainly not come with health coverage.
Second, she is taking care of her parents, so even if she could get a job with health insurance (yeah right!), she wouldn't be able to care for her parents.
How is someone in her position supposed to get healthcare GH22? Pay for it? How can she come up with $10,000+ a year? Get a job with health care benefits? How can someone with a 30+ year old degree and zero experience get a job with insurance when only the best jobs come with that benefit? Besides, with unemployment as it is now, how can she compete in the marketplace? If she was able to get a job, who would care for her 89 and 93 year old parents?
My cousin also was without insurance for a while. After he graduated from a respected school with a bachelor's degree in physics and a master's in aeronautical engineering, he couldn't find a job for over a year and a half that came with health coverage. He had great grades and good degrees, but with no experience he couldn't compete with the unemployed people who *did* have experience. He worked 50 hours a week wiring homes for home automation systems, home theaters, and high-end audio systems, but that job didn't come with health coverage. Pay for it himself? Again, trying to get coverage with *any* kind of a medical history is nearly impossible. He was treated for depression in high school, so no one would offer him insurance at a price less than 50% of his after tax income. Who can afford to spend half of their money on health coverage, particularly when they're not sick? He did what most people do, which is simply roll the dice. Fortunately nothing bad happened to him, and he now has a job with a major aerospace company that provides health coverage.

One thing that may be educational for you is to try to get health coverage for yourself without going through work. I don't think there's anything wrong with getting a quote on what it would cost even though you have coverage. If you don't have any medical history, it probably won't be quite as difficult or expensive, but if you have any history of any medical condition you'll see that it's not a case of going without shoes, a new car and a cell phone. It's a choice between food and shelter or health coverage.

btw, I'm also curious how many people on here bashing Canada have been there. I've visited many times, and in addition to being a beautiful country, the people there are the nicest I've met in all of my travels.

Rich,

I'm sorry about your mother and her grandparents. That's got to be really tough.

Please let me throw in my two cents, speaking strictly from a hypothetical/theoretical perspective on it. Your mom's health insurance would cost over $10,000 a year. It costs over $10,000 a year because a trip in an ambulance with medics costs over $700 even if they administer no medications or medical aid beyond driving you to the hospital. Renting a taxi for the same trip might cost $20. Ambulance medics do not go through the same training as paramedics - but even if they did, is it worth an extra $680 in fees just to pay for the privilege of having the medic around? It costs over $10,000 because if you receive Tylenol in a US hospital it costs around $5.00 a pill (instead of $5.00 for 100 pills in a supermarket). If your mom breaks her leg and gets outpatient Physical Therapy 4 days a week for half an hour, for 6 weeks, the total bill will be $2400 plus equipment fees. If, after she recovered, she wanted to spend a half an hour 4 days a week with a personal trainer for 6 weeks, it would probably cost $850. Is the Physical Therapist's expertise worth almost three times as much as that of the personal trainer? No.

Medical insurance costs an outrageous amount because medical services cost an outrageous amount. I believe Medical services cost an outrageous amount because the government pays the bills for the poor. Maybe if Uncle Sam stopped picking up the tab, multi-billion dollar HMOs and Pharmaceutical companies will be forced to lower prices. What the US has now is capitalism without competition, which in my humble opinion is worse than anything pure socialism or pure capitalism could provide.

It's like the Prescription benefit Medicare changes the government just enacted. This is the terms: the government will cover up to $2200 in perscription drugs per year. Sounds great, right? Wrong. My wife works as a Physical Therapist in a retirement community. A portion of the community population have $800 a month in prescription drugs. That's how f'ed up this is. $2200 in help per year won't do much for them.

Originally posted by Rich
Before my dad left her, she was a homemaker for 30 years, and even though she does have a college degree, the jobs she could get would certainly not come with health coverage.
Second, she is taking care of her parents, so even if she could get a job with health insurance (yeah right!), she wouldn't be able to care for her parents.
How is someone in her position supposed to get healthcare GH22? Pay for it? How can she come up with $10,000+ a year?

HeLLLOOO -- Last time I checked, a 30 year marriage entitles a non-working spouse to LIFETIME spousal support from the working spouse when the marriage ends. A decent divorce attorney would have gotten your mom covered under your dad's medical insurance as well. Why doesn't your mom receive adequate spousal support from your dad? If he was one of those snakes (my apologies to innocent reptiles) who dumped his wife and hid his income and claimed poverty to avoid paying alimony, I hope you don't speak to the bastid anymore.

My cousin also was without insurance for a while. After he graduated from a respected school with a bachelor's degree in physics and a master's in aeronautical engineering, he couldn't find a job for over a year and a half that came with health coverage. He had great grades and good degrees, but with no experience he couldn't compete with the unemployed people who *did* have experience.

Uhhh, he obviously didn't investigate teaching. Schools are crying for math and science teachers... particularly physics teachers! He could have been employed in a full time teaching position on an "emergency" credential with full health benefits straight out of college. Yeah, teaching will never make you rich, but the benefits and job security (once tenured) are excellent. But let me guess... he was probably holding out for a job that paid a "real" salary, right?

Sorry if I sound harsh, but sob stories always have another side. I do have sympathy for your mother's situation, but your father should be doing the right thing and taking care of her instead of (just guessing here) his new girlfriend who's about your age.

Uh oh. :mad: This is my second man-bashing post in the last two days. Must be TTOTM...

And now the obligatory sentence to keep this on-topic: I think the Canadian health care system is a vast improvement over the out-of-control, profit-obsessed, multi-tiered American mess. I'm just grateful I'm healthy and have good PPO medical insurance provided free of charge by my employer.

Originally posted by Aratinga
Yeah, teaching will never make you rich, but the benefits and job security (once tenured) are excellent.

Plus, if you teach long enough you get a pension -- something few jobs offer nowadays. You can probably do better than a pension with some judicious investing, but it's nice to have the peace of mind that comes with a guaranteed retirement income.

Originally posted by Aratinga
HeLLLOOO -- Last time I checked, a 30 year marriage entitles a non-working spouse to LIFETIME spousal support from the working spouse when the marriage ends.

The 30 year thing was approximate. She recieves support, but not enough that she can afford personal medical insurance.

Despite the sob story, there's another thing about the sort of thinking displayed by many in this thread that bothers me. There is the misconception that anyone who really wants it enough to work for it can get medical insurance in this country. That is not true. If you have a pre-existing condition of any kind and do not recieve coverage from an employer - you cannot get individual medical coverage. Even if you are willing to work to earn a job that comes with medical coverage, that cannot be done by everyone because of the simlpe fact that not every job comes with medical coverage. There will always be tens of millions of jobs that do not get medical coverage, so there will always be people without that coverage. That is a given unless there is government provided health care.

The question we have as a society is whether or not health coverage is a right or a privelige. Is health care something that should be available to all members of a society, or only those who can afford it? That's really what the debate comes down to in my mind. Everyone draws the line of right/privelige in a different place. I often fall on the conservative side in terms of entitlement programs, but I do believe that in this country we should be able to provide minimal health coverage for everyone.

Originally posted by Aratinga
HeLLLOOO -- Last time I checked, a 30 year marriage entitles a non-working spouse to LIFETIME spousal support from the working spouse when the marriage ends.

I'm not an attorney but I do know that there is no spousal support (alimony) in Texas. There is only child support.

If you have a condition (migraines) then why switch carriers? Obviously, this was pre-existing when she tried to apply for coverage. Why didn't she have healthcare before? And if she did why did she leave it? She should have stayed with the original carrier and things would be rosey.

I feel sorry for your mom's situation, however, your father should have never had allowed he to not have a built up credit history, health coverage etc... Basically he bossed her around and told her what to do. She stayed home and tried to raise a family by herself. A lot of people do that but they always have something to fall back on if something goes wrong. Your father is to blame for this mess. Why didn't she get a job (any job) just to bring home enough money for coverage? I don't by the "I can't find a job" excuse. She could have gone into any doctors office that was looking for a secretary or a receptionist and gotten benefits. You need no prior experience for those jobs and can get paid quit well in private or group practices. And 10 grand a year for coverage? What the hell kind of coverage was she trying to get? She could have gotten a 5K deductible for somewhere between 100-200 bucks per month. With no medical history, that total comes down to about 50-60. Oh well.

While your mom has a legit excuse, there are far too many people that abuse the system. That amount of people overwhelm the people that have legit gripes. Any system isn't without its flaws, but again, the US or Canada...I choose the US every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
What the hell kind of coverage was she trying to get? She could have gotten a 5K deductible for somewhere between 100-200 bucks per month. With no medical history, that total comes down to about 50-60. Oh well.


It seems every time you write you freaking lie and sprinkle it with a large dose of hate! I searched exhaustively, found and pay for health insurance for my mother. Those costs you speak of are fantasy. I am paying $420/month and her deductible happens to be $5k. She has a near perfect medical history and is a non-smoker. $50-60 my ass!

You know what Goldenhue, i think we (Canadians ) are better off with you down south then up here. Our system if not perfect, the waiting lists are sometimes long and the ER crowded but anyone up here will get medical care, no matter the problem, no matter the cost. Yes, the richest will bypass the system and go tO THE STATES, pay big big bucks and be treated faster... better? that remains to be seen.

Oh, i am tempted to talk about the French health system, one of the very best on earth and govmt funded but i somehow don't think you care much for anything done outside the States and specially not from France.

I am paying $420/month and her deductible happens to be $5k BS! $420/month. What a load of crap that is. I pay $32/mo through my medical company and my fiancee just got hers setup last week, with a 1K deductible, no medical probs for $89/mo. She has no affiliation with any company. If you are paying $420/month, for coverage on someone with no medical problems...you are getting raped! But oh well to you.


Our system if not perfect, the waiting lists are sometimes long and the ER crowded but anyone up here will get medical care, no matter the problem, no matter the cost. Yes, the richest will bypass the system and go tO THE STATES, pay big big bucks and be treated faster... better? Boy that makes a lot of sense. Long waiting lists...ER crowded...slow treatment times....not as good as the US?.....but your system is perfect as you put it. There is a reason why people come to the US from around the country for treatment.

And the French? Yeah I agree. F*ck the French. They are good for nothing expect for wine. And before BabyLou says, "what about French fries", they are made here in the US.

Socialist suck.I guess Canada can afford nationwide health care since their army consist of 3 helicoptors and a pt boat.If the US didnt have to play cop to the rest of the world we could solve alot of our own problems here at home.

Originally posted by Goldenhue22
BS! $420/month. What a load of crap that is. I pay $32/mo through my medical company and my fiancee just got hers setup last week, with a 1K deductible, no medical probs for $89/mo. She has no affiliation with any company. If you are paying $420/month, for coverage on someone with no medical problems...you are getting raped! But oh well to you.


Boy that makes a lot of sense. Long waiting lists...ER crowded...slow treatment times....not as good as the US?.....but your system is perfect as you put it. There is a reason why people come to the US from around the country for treatment.

And the French? Yeah I agree. F*ck the French. They are good for nothing expect for wine. And before BabyLou says, "what about French fries", they are made here in the US.

Babylou was stating that he looked for insurance for a family member on the open market. Your medical company can get you lower rates because they provide the insurance company with a large number of beneficiaries (i.e. lots of premiums).

You still have not answered my question (earlier post in this thread) as to how the US system can be better if we pay significantly more and as a whole are less healthy? Oh, that's right, you said its the "stupid people" (which you essentially called Babylou) that brings us down. If that's so, how does that explain our wonderfully superior educational system? :confused:

Originally posted by revhappy
Oh, that's right, you said its the "stupid people" (which you essentially called Babylou)

I would only be concerned if GoldenHater considered me intelligent.

and you guys wonder why Americans are not welcome almost anywhere but in their own backyard. WTF and goldenhue are the reason why. Too bad 99% of American are nice and the world only hears from these two. You truly deserve M. Bush as president. I'm sure you two still think there are weapons of mass destruction in Irak. BTW, i'm not even sure we have 2 helicopters in working order and frankly, i'm glad !

Ok, this is getting ugly again. Closing.