What pisses me off the most is that the governments hold study after study behind closed doors in their little ivory towers and can only come up with the known fact that the system isn't working.
The very few times I have been in the medical system (in hospital) I have witnessed time after time staff that was standing around loitering, talking about nothing that was to do with the job at hand. Millions of dollars wasted on idle time.
At those times I wondered just how fast I would have been fired for doing the same thing.
I now have a family member that has cancer and has had to prod these people at every turn. He started keeping a diary of all the B.S. He has had to go through right from the start. And if anything goes wrong he is making sure I get that diary. As well as his diary I have one on the fast tracking of an operation I had, done by the insurance company, so that they would not have to pay my wages for an extended period.
Let's get these fat cat bureaucrats of their collective asses and get them into solving the waste problems of this system. Maybe the auditor-general should have a look at the system. She might get things happening.

I have a difficult time understanding how you people cant seem to see through the fog of your ideology far enough to understand that you cannot decrease cost by adding cost.

profit is a component of cost, it adds to the cost. when you add cost components that dont exist under the public system, you increase the cost.

adding to the problem of increased cost is the corruption and graft that inevitably accompanies every feeding frenzy of the sort that these insatiable bloodsuckers cannot resist.

the upward pressure on profit is ceaseless and, in the degenerating model of democracy in this country, is becoming more powerful every day.

you argue in favour of graft and corruption and expect me to accept your position?

pfft

tks,
rjm

WE must begin to realize that our medicare system is on the verge of collapse. There are many reasons and I have come around to the belief that we need the private sector to compete somewhat with the public medical system.

I also think that the private sector must take 'public cases', with medicare paying the tab.

Dosanjh is another case, true case of an incompetent and immoral politician. Look what he did to the provincial NDP, instead of trying to save the party from oblivion, he played potentate, travelling India.

One wonders if Dosanjh, like Larry Campbell, were Liberal operatives, set to destroy all opposition, they couldn't have been so easy as just to buy them off?

just over 700 dejected ndp'ers decided this guy would become the premier of b.c. after clark self-destructed. he did nothing while in office and is nowhere near as bright as everyone assumes. he's in way over his head as minister of health. it's yet another liberal example of a disaster waiting to happen.

I support Canada's Health Care system every way I can. But I do ask: why can't Health Care leaders get a grip on reorganizing the system to be more efficient? We can't simply blame the people going to Emerg for sore throats. The systemic problems are more like this, for example:

Yesterday I was called back to get an ECG re-done, as the previous ECG had been faulty. When I walked in, they started automatically to sit me down for blood tests. No, no, I protested, just an ECG.

When the ECG was done, I had a hunch and enquired. "If an ECG is faulty and has to be re-done, is the Health Care system charged for one ECG? or two?

You guessed, didn't you. Two. Besides which, if I hadn't stopped them, they'd have charged up a batch of duplicated, unnecessary blood tests.

These people cannot re-organize themselves. It needs to happen from a very high level, with the support of us all. Continued sniping and griping only puts a smile on George W. Bush's face.

... which is not to endorse Ujjal Dosanjh who has one heck of a lot to answer for in British Columbia and ... apparently ... now nation-wide. The rotter.

I haven't read the article, jsut the headline. But I hope Dosj loses his seat. Maybe he was a good lawyer but he's sure been a bust as a politician provincially and federally.

There is a growing Tsunami of bad news swamping the Libs on the lapsed ethics front
I don't think the wave has even peaked yet.

From the latest Strategic Council poll in today's Globe:

OTTAWA -- Conservative Leader Stephen Harper has for the first time displaced Liberal Leader Paul Martin as the politician Canadians most favour to lead the country, a new poll shows.

Riding a surge of support in British Columbia, the Prairie provinces and Quebec, Mr. Harper has the trust of 32 per cent of voters, compared with 25 per cent for Mr. Martin and 17 per cent for NDP Leader Jack Layton.
**********************************

AND, ANOTHER new scandal with an attempt by the Lib gov't to cover it up!
This has to do with the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization plan, and misspent dollars,
contracts granted without public bids (against gov't rules), the top guy running it getting paid an obscene salary... The audit recommended a formal investigation into abuses in the program but that recommendation was deleted from the version released to the public!
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060112/WATERFRONT12/TPNational/Canada

Bottom Line: Libs are toast. Too much poor ethics baggage. Voters are fed up and simply want a change of gov't - any change, at what ever cost.
Unfortunately, the result is likely to be "out of the frying pan and into the fire" for Canada. I'm p*ssed off it's come to this.

I am dyslexic but that Ujjal headline still looks kind of reversed. Did someone hire a Vancouver Sun staffer to check for typos?

The worse it gets for the Liberals as we go from the idea of the inevitable Conservative minority government to the inevitable Conservative majority government, the better the third solution (the NDP) looks. How can we get all those disgusted Liberal supporters to switch to the NDP? BC has shown that powerful provincial parties can go from power to a wipeout (the Socreds) and the almost wipeout of the Provincial NDP. Why cannot the same pattern be repeated here?

Alex Waterhouse-Hayward

The libs will get re-elected in spite of themselves.

We have to eliminate lobbying completely, or as someone suggested make it ten years from leaving gov't before you can lobby and 5 years before you can receive the perk of a ceo position from industry. Kickbacks and bribes should yeild a ten year prison term.

Until we do this or something similar we will be increasingly a banana republic where bribes are the order of the day and democracy bastardized.

yield...

In other words, we will be the victims of crime until we demand these changes. And, the very serious problem we have with pollution will never be addressed resulting in premature deaths. This also will protect people who go into politics as well from undue temptation and assimilating into corruption.

Any party who ran aggressively against 'free-trade'/nafta would win a landslide. They would have to also aggressively fight the establishment which would predict the end of the world if 'free-trade' were eliminated.

As a former Argentine and resident of Mexico we all laughed when Americans were shocked to find out that Nixon was a crook. Back then you could have defined the difference between Latin Americans and Americans (I did not know much about Canada in those days to have an opinion) in that we Latinos expected all politicians to cheat and steal while Americans had high hopes; were idealists and then suffered the consequences of disappointment. I think that the solution is to instill in our schools (both at an elementary and secondary level) an awareness of political corruption and to promote that youth (with the idealism that youth can have) when older, if they do not forget, can change what they don't like.

I hated my two year stint in the Argentine Navy. My boss, an American Naval Captain (Senior Naval Advisor in Argentina whom I translated for) told me, "It is obvious you hate the armed forces. My advice to you is to not rebel know as you will be put in the brig; sit tight and when you reach a position of power in your later years, then change the system." Do we then become complacent? I think we do.

redrivergirl: what's wrong with free trade?

If Fate is kind, we'll get a minority Liberal government with an increased NDP presence.

Now, the procedure: the way these things work out, is that while at prayer, beseeching the Fates to be so kind, we must also pledge something in return.

Pledge to keep a close watch on government, pledge to let government know what you expect, to send a dart when they begin to veer off and a bouquet when they do something right ... it's what we should be doing all the time anyway. But now it's pledge-time.

It's crisis time. Darned if I want to see George W. Bush and Prime Minister SHarper singing "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" in Ottawa.

Nixon wasn't a crook. Svend Robinson is a crook.
Tell me how Nixon was a crook.
And don't even try to spew me a bunch of left wing dogma, just tell me what he stole.
I lived through his administration. It was a time when the mainstream media was in control.
Thank God now we have access to more conservative sources of information today.
Long live America.

BC Mary

I get the feeling that the health-care system suffers from three things:

An aging population boom putting strains on a generally aging infrastructure and the constant introduction of new medical techniques. The shame is that the boom issue is known and could have been better planned for.

Non-core service bloating and bureaucracy that forms in all organizations and needs periodic pruning.

Deliberate mismanagement to create the atmosphere for the demand for private clinc’s to flourish.

How much of one over the other I can’t say

When Irish eyes are smiling
The NDP go nuts
When will we be freed
From nuts
Soon, very soon
I maybe able to breath again without feeling guilty about the greenhouse gas I am expelling.
Goodbye Kyoto
Hello sunshine, shine on them, they are withered , grey, miserable people.
NDP is nowhere in this election.
They don't deserve to have any say in our country. Their ideas would ruin our standard of living.
I laugh when I here Jack Layton make promises about what he would do if elected. They are shallow statements, as they will never run this country. He is a BS artist extraordinaire.

"Nixon wasn't a crook. Svend Robinson is a crook.
Tell me how Nixon was a crook."

I guess in your view Al Capone wasn't a crook cause he never did it himself.

RE: The article...good to see old habits die hard.

Colin

Deliberate mismanagement??????????

Do you REALLY believe that?

Speaking of crooks... who had to kick someone out of their party for being a smuggler today??????

Isn't that beautiful? And he's just the first to reveal his true, corrupt venal nature (or rather, have it revealed) A Mercedes and booze? A true, cliche'd conservative's choice of vices!

A Harper minority govt. will be destroyed by its own hubris, hypocrisy and general incompetence before its first term. Lets hope he gets it so the party has to toast him. Then maybe it can work its way back to being a real conservative party and hence (for those inclined) a meaningful alternative.

And Ron Erwin? Your meds have expired. Pick up some fesh ones before your buddies get in. They're going to be more expensive soon.

" A Mercedes and booze? A true, cliche'd conservative's choice of vices!"

Does he think this is the 30s or something?

The only thing wrong with Canada's Health Care system is that people like Ujjal Dosanjh are in control.

This guy ought to be sent packing. This is the same twit who has stated emphatically on dozens of occasions he is committed to public health care.

Now we learn that the bulk of his campaign funding came from people who want to milk that public system for every penny they can.

Did voters in his Vancouver riding know he would be shilling for personal and wealthy friends who live some 3,000 km away from the riding?

Talk about larceny. Talk about hypocracy. Frankly, Glen Clark towers over this former BC premier when we talk of integrety.

Colin, people like Dosanjh are why public health care suffers. It's all about attitude and, apparently, personal gain.

The Liberals deserve this guy.

its too bad the customs service is so badly understaffed, otherwise they probably would have found the cocaine too.

Jim Gouk's personal assistant...? conservative party unaware from the very beginning...?

not likely.

The perfume of legitimacy probably wont take very long to wear off Mr. Harper. His associates will no doubt soon be wafting in the vile stench of Mulroneyism.

tks,
rjm

This campaign will turn out to be the biggest mistake of Zeisman's life. First, an essay he wrote saying Canada needs to be more like the USA came out. THEN, an editorial he once wrote saying what a great guy Paul Martin is came out.. THEN he got into a serious car accident... now this... oye!

That's a tough sell. One fancies meetings on Pattison's yacht and running a shallow, celebrity obsessed "newspaper" while the other, at least, remains in public service to some degree.

Re. "A Mercedes and booze? A true, cliche'd conservative's choice of vices!"

Jamez wrote:

Nah. If that were the case he'd've had a coupla dames wid 'im!

Ah, but its all in God's great plan.

Dear Ron,

On Nixon nobody could have said it better:

Richard Nixon is gone now and I am poorer for it. He was the real thing--a political monster straight out of Grendel and a very dangerous enemy. He could shake your hand and stab you in the back at the same time. He lied to his friends and betrayed the trust of his family. Not even Gerald Ford, the unhappy ex-president who pardoned Nixon and kept him out of prison, was immune to the evil fallout. Ford, who believes strongly in Heaven and Hell, has told more than one of his celebrity golf partners that I know I will go to hell, because I pardoned Richard Nixon." Hunter S. Thompson

And I do remember that day that I opened a Time magazine and I went to Hugh Sidey's column that had a big picture of a large car on the White House's steps. It read " Mr......(cannot recall his name) America's leading criminal council arrives at the White House to help defend President Richard Nixon.

As for Svend, he was found gilty and sentenced. Therefore he was crook.

Not that I want to go into religion with you but according to tradition, the first person to make it to heaven after Christ's death on the cross was the "good thief".

Alex Waterhouse-Hayward

Top of the world Ujj!

Do you REALLY believe that?

Yes

Its not free, border hassles are a bigger pain than ever for exporters (I am one) and it means open season on our manufacturing jobs.

It's not over for our upstanding conservative, Zeisman. Charges are also pending for dangerous driving. He was totally at fault for his car accident and seriously injured a local woman. Despsite being on the front page of the local paper 3 times, never once did he express concern or offer an applogy to her.
That's the problem with conservatives, they just don't have any credibility.

Necon

I certainly wonder if it the case or is it just incredible incompetence?

[profit is a component of cost, it adds to the cost. when you add cost components that dont exist under the public system, you increase the cost.]

rjm - what a wacko perpsective. Being required to make a profit means you seek out more efficient ways to do things. From designing to building to operating, maintaining and servicing the Health Care system the profit motive is everywhere. do you propose to nationalize every business category that touches the Health Care system? I want universal access in a single pay system. If that can be accomplished through some private involvement, what's wrong with that?

"Its not free, border hassles are a bigger pain than ever for exporters"

-Insert Derek Zeisman joke here-

However a private based system needs to attract capital by offer profits to shareholders and as we have seen in the past few years, large corporations have become beholden to their shareholders dividend payout rather than the good of the long term health of the company.

I think private enterprise does something’s very well, but not everything. Government should hold onto infrastructure and social oriented program. We used to have a private health care system, hydroelectric system, ferry system and Insurance system. The people who nationalized them were not far left wing nuts, but actually right of centre type for the most part. They could see the systems were not working well and sought to resolve the problems and make these services accessible.

Can public systems be better run absolutely, often the problem is that decisions to do certain things are done for political rather than economic or social reasons.

Colin - good points, but a public system also needs capital and instead of shareholders you have taxpayers. Isn't the point that the system should be run in an efficient and effective fashion rather than under a specific idealogical process?

I don't agree with Dosanjh's stand on private medical clinics. That said, I don't see the point of this article, unless that it's that several prominent members of the indo-Canadian community possessed remarkable prescience in being able to read Paul Martin's mind: Dosanjh hadn't even been appointed Health minister when the donations were given. I certainly don't recall any expectation that he would be appointed. So the evidence in this article would be laughed out of court.

Speaking of which, I bet that whoever the future justice minister will be, has probably recieved donations from lawyers. That doesn't mean that there was anything wrong or any ethical lapse.

But how is that different? We just argued this on another thread. Doctors are private business. No one complains about the private components of our health care system. As someone else said, so what if nurses want to open a clinic?

As long as its single-payer and universal with no extra-billing for things that should be essential then who cares?

But the Brian Day's of the world are charging big money and therefore single payer and universal do not apply to their ops. They are attempting to skim the cream. Offering faster access for those who can afford it and ignoring the rest of Canada's health care needs.

Skip Tracer, don't forget it was the one still in public service "to some degree" who had an awful lot of involvement in Glen Clark's demise
at the hands of the police, media and Liberal Party of BC.

And then he ended with with Clark's job too, didn't he.

I appreciate you think there is a pile of irony around Clark's employment with Pattison's empire.

I am guessing, but would estimate Pattison likely has some 50,000 employees in BC. Perhaps you can explain the irony in that context.

Do you think all 50,000 or so march down to the yatch each morning, caps in hand, to get their orders? Or is it just Jimmy and Glen conspiring like a couple of media barons?

I once worked for a newspapaer that was owned by Conrad Black. I seldom ever met anyone in his employ who thought of him as anything but a pension-sqeezing, pompous jerk.

I think I'm rather to the left of Glen Clark so, in your opinion, does that mean I must have slept with chubby?

certainly the perspective is simplistic, but entirely objective as well. The example of the p3 hospitals shows that there is no competition whatsoever involved, except of course to be the group to most effeciently corrupt the politicians giving out the 30 year guarranteed welfare contracts.

Public is better. Privatization only elicits corruption.

tks,
rjm

Lesson: Machiavelli's spirit is alive and well. Comparing his spiritual heirs' claims to integrity is a slippery slope. That, really, was my point.

We should have known about Glen when he was basking in the Governator's glow when the now thankfully defunct bunker known as "Planet Hollywood" opened. Its a value thing I guess.

Gaak- the percentage of corrupt governements is dramaticaly higher than the number of corrupt businesses.

Frank - I understand that Brian Day claims to be able to perform procedures privately for 60% of the public cost. How is that skimming the cream?

Poor Nixon. He's such an abused icon for everything that went wrong during that time. He actually didn't do anything that the other slippery people back then weren't doing. His real crime is not cutting a suave & sexy figure in the public eye while he was doing it (in contrast to the Kennedys).

Even if he was a bastard, I could never resist the temptation to defend him just a little in my graduate seminars. I was one of only five civilian gruaduate students at a military college doing my M.A. with a bunch of officers in the late nineties. The irony of this sandal-wearing gay boy defending Nixon to a room full of uniforms fifteen years my senior was too much for some. At least we all got a good laugh about it.

You gotta given this to Nixon: he got America out of the Vietnam War. The terrible escalations occurred under the Kennedy & LBJ watch. Moreover, Nixon was one of the most intellectually and artistically gifted individuals ever to occupy the White House.

People never mention the good things ;-)

Brian Day is choosing who he will provide services for based on ability to pay. What if my local doctor decided he was too busy and would only see patients who could pay an extra $50 cash per visit? Universal access would be history.

You've said you're for single-payer and universal access but you also support Brian Day?

NLN, I don't know if the numbers you are quoting are actually Day's or not but you have to understand he does get to pick and choose which cases he wants to do (read: LOW RISK = less costly) which the public system doesn't.

Brian might be only accepting customers that can pay but if the government was paying he could serve everyone. Maybe he is cherry picking and that's the reason that he operates more efficiently than the public system. I don't know. The discussion get's bogged down into idealogical positions decrying private and for-profit. My point is that the exisitng system is failing. I'm open minded about whatever options provide the most effective solution.

"Good drivers ('probably' you ( lol )) will pay less.." [© Canadian Direct Insurance]

hmmn... that's an interesting point. I wonder... if Ken Lay were to use that as his defense, would he benefit from having Gordon Campbell and Larry Bell personally vouch for him, or would association with government impugn his reputation needlessly?

tks,
rjm

And to belabour the words of Maude Barlow:
"PROFIT IS NOT THE CURE"

rjm - at least when companies break the law somebody goes to jail.

tm - what does Maude know about the cure?

It's failing because of the unnecessary diversion of resources associated with privatization.

The government cuts taxes, giving the money to (often) foreign corporations,

this forces cuts to funding, causing the public system to fail.

money that was diverted into the private sector by tax cuts is then used to set up private facilities to make up the shortfall in the public system caused by the delinquent tax cuts in the first place.

recent increases in health spending (federal and provincial) are probably offset by the amounts already being siphoned off in profit.

Public money is thereby used to subsidize the destruction of the public system.

It is fairly clear, we are being assaulted by the delinquent manipulation of our own money.

If there is something I have misinterpreted, pls update me.

tks,
rjm

NoLeftNutter, you got it wrong.

When companies break the law somebody (usually the accountant) pays a fine on behalf of the company.

When someone steals say several billion dollars in pension funds or investor savings through a company someone may go to jail, but will likely get the option to cooperate and suffer tough time under house arrest.

However, if a homeless person steals food from a retailer odds are that dangerous offender will be doing real time real fast.

I am too with the proviso that access be free and universal.

Well that and because he's focusing on a narrow niche. No long-term etc. Which is fine.

.

And my point is it is only failing due to being gutted and discovering that you can't rebuild a system once you've told nurses and other technicians to find work elsewhere and also cut back on training.

The system certainly needs better administration. The business world is full of failed companies that thought they could cut corners and make working conditions worse and still have the good people available when they wanted them.

More than two years after the B.C. legislature was raided by police, a trial date has finally been set for three former government employees. The three decided against a jury trial and the case against Bob Virk, Dave Basi and Aneal Basi will start April 24.

Charges of accepting a bribe, influence peddling, breach of trust and fraud were laid a year after police raided offices in the legislature in December 2003.

Dave Basi was the ministerial assistant to former finance minister Gary Collins.

Aneal Basi is a former government communications worker, and Bob Virk worked for then transportation minister Judith Reid.

Its about damn time. Thanks Mary for keeping us posted!

I will spend my hard earned after tax money wherever I want. Why is it anyone's business if a service is provided by the Cambie St. Health Clinic and I decide to use it. Why should I be vilified for this just because someone else doesn't have the money to go there ?
I hate socialism and this is a good reason why, it just drags us all down to a common denominator. It's an evil system and I am ashamed of this aspect of Canadian life.
There should be a basic universal coverage for low income earners. For the rest of us, we should be given a huge tax break and be able to buy private medical insurance.
This existing system has no accountability.
I want out.

"It's an evil system and I am ashamed of this aspect of Canadian life."

Then leave, we don't want your kind in Canada. GO to the US and fend for yourself like an animal.

By the way Ron, how can you complain "It's my money I can do what I want with it." And get down on lefties for playing the moral card on health, when you cons do the same thing on gay marriage etc?
It may be your money... but it's my life... and I'll do what I want with it.

Dear Ron,

I have seen countless American friends leave Canada telling me what a terrible place it is and how it is culturally deprived, etc. What is amazing to me is that most of those Americans return to Vancouver. Why do they return to Vancouver? They develop health problems and cannot afford treatment in the US.

You say, "I hate socialism," and you sound so much like Ayn Rand (she also hated socialism). Your attitude to those who cannot afford private health insurance sounds both elitist and patronizing.

Why is it that you do live in Canada. You say you lived the Nixon years. So he got the US out of Vietnam. That was good. Did you avoid the draft? Did you find that war just? It is my hope that you can defend his opening of China (not the human rights side of it) so that soon your Buicks and Oldsmobiles will be history and most of those who live in Detroit will not be able to get medical treatment anywhere.

rjm - What nonsense! A large p[ortion of the costs in Health Care have always gone to private recipients, like doctors.

Cuts in taxes give you the freedom to choose how to allocate the proceeds of your productivity.

Health Care spending in BC is $2Billion per year more than it was 5 years ago and wait times are increasing.

Delinquint manipulation of our own money occurs from greater government involvement in our lives, how can you support bigger government?

Frank - Wake up. Health care is not free. More than $1000 per month of my taxes goes towards paying for "free" health care

How can you say the system has been gutted when we're paying more for it all the time?

Ron I am convinced that you are paid by the Tyee to be the foil to the lefties that haunt this site. I remember how revolutionary it was when the musical Jesus Christ Super Star opened with the premise that Judas was part of God's overall plan. Without his betrayal there could have been no calvary. Who would all the on site lefties lambaste if you weren't here? it would be most boring. So stay healthy so that:

1. They can keep lambasting you.
2. So that you will have enough after-taxes money to spend on anything you want as you probably would not be able to buy into Harper's health plan.

NLN, By free I'm sure you know I mean it is freely accessed. The system is accessible even for those with no money.

The reason I said gutted is that health care has not recovered from Martin's cuts in the mid 90's. Most provinces made cutbacks. People left the system.

Money has been returned to the system. Martin signed his 40 billion dollar agreement with the provinces but how much time will it take?

There is a start up lag to anything of a major size. It doesn't matter if its industry or a health care system. You can't make cuts and expect people to sit waiting for their jobs to come back. They move on.

All those new health dollars have not fixed the system. There's not enough doctors, nurses or technicians anymore. They weren't sitting unemployed for the last 10 years. We need those people more than ever but many have retired or left the country or found a new field at a time when we have an aging population that requires them more than ever.

Also, don't use absolute numbers. A billion dollars a decade ago bought more than it does now. Too bad there's not a health dollar conversion so we could compare dollars spent with what it actually buys.

There is the inflation index but unfortunately health costs have increased faster than that.

NoLeftNutter is correct, universal health care is not free, it costs us a fortune in taxes. Now many of you may be happy with that.
I was born in the Royal Alex Hospital in Edmonton many years ago. I am a Canadian with the right to my opinion.
I disagree with our socialist health care. I could do a lot better with a huge tax cut and let me kook after myself.
I am amazed that I am such a minotity, but then Canadians seem to love to be told what to do and see ( CRTC first thing before universal health care I would get rid of ).
Not me.

You don't spend yourmoney on health care! I and others like I spend our money on health care, you spend it on the military, or Campbell's extra security detail, or all the 'trade-trips' etc. That's how it works. What you all are trying to do is have all the money go to what your priorities are. Foul ball.

And, boy will you ever need a large one if you're paying attention to the insurance industry.

Ron, can't you get Faux if you purchace satellite tv?

Fiar comment Frank, that costs are rising faster than inflation is indicative of a problem with the process. Part of the problem is high overheads from the exisitng system. Hell, we don't even know how much it costs to perform most procedures in the country, how can you judge whether you're spending money wisely or not?

...purchase!

Talk about a red herring.

If you have effective managers controlling costs it doesn't matter when the system is public.

Day will find an attacks by other multi-nationals because of the 'free-trade' agreements. Live by the sword and all that.

Hey! You've already been doing that!
FYI Insurance premiums in the US often run higher than taxes here for Health care

If you're asking if I think we need some administrative reform that makes the system more efficient and responsive and gives us better feedback on what we're getting for our dollars you won't get an argument from me.

I think it would be good information. So much of the time it feels we're groping in the dark. Doctors want more money, nurses then ask for more money as do others and they all have good arguments. We need this and that machine, these new drugs etc. And all we can do is keep throwing money at it and hope we somehow get back to the outcomes we had in the 80's.

Not going to work.

But we can't just tear down the system either. I happen to like the principles that the system is based on and think it can be fixed but it needs to be overhauled, not just increasingly costly band-aids.

Do you REALLY believe that?"

Yup.

And it started with the rise of the Neocons, and governments bending to the will of their neoconservative policies coming out of the ruling class, and their Freidman school of Economics in the US, such as the ruling class based and financed Fraser Institute style think tanks in this country. (As Bush said, " Some call you 'the elite', but I call you my base." Catch the grin.)

And the thrust of those neoconservative policies was to provide tax cuts to the rich, guaranteeing their profits as capitalism has slid steadily into a deepening economic crisis, even while the stock markets move about in and make money on a "paper shuffling, buying and selling, expanding personal indebtedness economy". At the same time as reducing the ruling class share of financing the costs of the Capitalist State and the social services provided to the general public, the result of the victories of Labour and progressives in the aftermath of WW2, this ruling class State, masking as a more formal than real "democracy' began to make deep cuts in spending on these services. In short, they began a policy of cash starving health and the other services, driving them deeper and deeper into crisis, as a solution to which these same ruling class interests have proposed that they be allowed in with an expanding role, and its profit motive and cost additions of course, as believe it or not, the solution to the crisis which they have all been a part of manufacturing.

Which is where we are today still, with the crisis ongoing and deepening, and the hue and cry for private/capitalist style healthcare, with all its up front cash and carry, USA, two tier, one for the rich and another for the rest of us, waiting lines forcing one into the private/capitalist system character. As they siphon off cash and trained personnel which would otherwise be going into the public system, creating another kind of parallel crisis to further undermine the "what had to here been" a perfectly good "public" health care system.

And then all the phucking Neocons show up here pleading innnocence, and ignorance of the very crisis which they have themselves been the initiators in creating.

It really is necessary for ordinary folks to stop being such dummies, and to wake up and smell the friggin' coffee. That or quit yo whinin', slavefucks.

Thanks for the update BC Mary.

I do find it interesting all three opted for a trial by judge. I'm not a fire truck chaser, but that option suggests, at least to me, that none of the three see themselves caught in this mess totally by mistake.

Quit whining Ron Erwin. Socialism doesn't drag us all down. It just ensures people who earn more than average in this country return some of that national wealth to a system charged with ensuring everyone has an equal chance at health care.

Too much for you? TDB

There are all kinds of ways for you to participate in the American health care plan (if you can call it that), so please quit whining and just go and spend your extra bucks across the border.

Then you can come back and tell us how great it was.

jamez, you misqoute. Be fair. The rest of the quote is...

Ron Erwin wrote:

"Tell me how Nixon was a crook.
And don't even try to spew me a bunch of left wing dogma, just tell me what he stole."

How about someone's right to privacy? Or information. Even multinational corporations would shudder at Nixon's ethics. I mean ... stealing confidential information by illegal means! The guy was a crook.

We can all agree about this though: "I could do a lot better with a huge tax cut and let me kook after myself." Ron Erwin is kind of kooky afterall.

A quick google search revels several articles that offer a comparison between Canadian and American health care costs. Health care administration costs in Canada are one third those in America. Here are some exerts from one article.
(http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=health+care+costs+canada+vs+us&meta=)

There's a prevailing assumption that any government-run enterprise is financially inefficient and most private companies are not.
Despite the existence of a 1991 government-initiated survey showing that the administrative costs of Medicare were 3%, as opposed to 25% for private insurance companies.

In the same year, Steffie Woolhandler, MD, MPH, and David U. Himmelstein, MD, reported in The New England Journal of Medicine that people in the U.S. spent about $450 per capita on health care administration in 1987, as compared with Canadians who spent one third as much.
Now Dr. Woolhandler and Dr. Himmelstein have joined forces with Terry Campbell, MHA, of the Canadian Institute for Health Information, Ottawa, to conduct a comparison study of the costs of health care administration in the U.S. and Canada. They wanted to see whether the introduction of computers, managed care, and more businesslike approaches to health care delivery have decreased the administrative costs in the U.S. The results, published recently in The New England Journal of Medicine (August 21), were not encouraging. In 1999, health administration costs in the USA were $1,059 per capita, as compared with $304 per capita in Canada. As for individual doctors, their administrative costs were far lower in Canada.Steffie Woolhandler, MD, MPH, and colleagues concluded, "The gap between U.S. and Canadian spending on health care administration has grown to $755 per capita. A large sum might be saved in the U.S. if administrative costs could be trimmed by implementing a Canadian-style health care system."
So Ron E, would you care to tell us how a private health care system is going to do anything but take health care dollars away from those who need it most?

Ron Erwin said:

They used to care for people like this, now they let folks with mental illness roam the streets and the internet aimlessly.

Thats an interesting statement, given your debating style. :)

You hate socialism, I'm not particularly fond of fascism.

btw,
Universal Public Health Care is not socialism, indeed it is a vital component of any functional democracy.

The fact that American democracy is substandard in this regard is becoming a Canadian problem by virtue of its exceedingly imperialistic nature.

Publichealth care is better, private inclusion only elicits corruption of our government.

tks,
rjm

Thank you kootenay. Your post ought to act as a piece of duct tape of sorts so we no longer have to hear the RonE whine.

But don't hold your breath waiting. Ron has never allowed facts or logic to slow him down.

Your Google search reaped a windfall of info the Rons of the world will no doubt avoid. To all others I'd recommend following kootenay's offer and learn what both systems cost.

Only a fool or someone planning to milk the sick would want to see so much money wasted so that a tiny minority can earn huge profits.

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to the point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism."

Franklin D Roosevelt 1938

I'm not saying there is no place for private enterprise in a democracy, indeed the contrary. But it must be acknowledged that there are limits to privatization beyond which we loose what is the most dear to us.

tks,
rjm

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to the point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism." - Franklin D Roosevelt 1938

And he was cribbing from Mussolini's comments that the merging of corporate values with those of govt. are its essence...though his was a point of advocacy.

Kevin Potvin, editor of The Republic, made an interesting argument in one of his columns. Basically, the Right Wing wish to diminish the collective shareholder power and ownership of a nations wealth. Instead of all citizens holding a share in the nation's wealth, the Right want to take this public ownership away, so they (the richest in society) can seize ownership of the nation's wealth. I'm probably overstating the obvious to most commentators here, with the exception of Ron Erwin.
In the interests of discussion and debate, I'd also like to forward the theory that this may be one of the main reasons why electoral turnout is consistently decreasing: Common people have no stake of ownership of our nation's wealth, so they feel powerless to instigate positive change. The average citizen, as everything that can turn a profit gets privatized, ends up feeling like a passive consumer, not real citizens with the ability to control their own lives. Being a member of society increasingly ends up like being a consumer walking through a shopping mall (or perhaps a circus would be more apt), with no power to alter your environment or circumstance.
It's also interesting that the only industr iesthings the Right wish to privatize are ones in which there is money to be made, like the growing health care field. Do they want to privatize road construction? No.

Sure there are problems with our medical system, but nothing that can't be fixed. Costs continue to rise, but that is a result of more people using the system (population growth), and inflation. The Right has systematically been dismantaling our health care for many years. All the while they have been saying, with a grim look on their face and very serious tone of voice, "the system is broken and it can't be repaired. We need to privatize it to make it more efficient."
Even they don't really believe that crap, but they figure if they repeat over and over again and continue to withdraw services from public health care, we'll eventually believe them. Their real commitment is to their pocket book and they could give a damn if the people of Canada have an effective health care system.

I agree absolutely Kootenay. People from every corner of this country have to expose the Right for what it really is: a powerful force that is dismantling Canada as we know it.

Nice bit of homework, Kootenay. Just don't expect Ron or his Neocon pals here to be impressed by the facts. They will be back blindly asserting that private health care is more cost effective, wait and see. It should be good for a laugh though.

Thanks for this.

Ron, give us your "liberty" and Amerika Uber Alles speech again. (Have you ever noticed how much those combat helmets of US forces now resemble almost exactly those of Der Wehrmacht auf Der Reich, from WW2. Coincidence? I don't think so. More likely a Freudian slip. :-) Your presence here helps to underscore for everybody what a total Neocon basket case you and your pals are.

We couldn't ask for a better representative of the Neocon world view here. You are helping to fuel the revival of a radicalized left. Keep up the good work. LOL (And we are not laughing with you, but at you.)

Now run to Redrivergirl, or Nightbloom, for a little "kiss it all better." You are human afterall. Aren't you?

Paul Martin names all of his cabinet ministers.

Why would two Ontario families involved in health-service companies donate $16,000 in campaign donations to Ujjal Dosanjh, unless Paul Martin told them in advance that he would be naming him the health minister in his Liberal government six weeks later?

Why would Ujjal Dosanjh, who was in politics in British Columbia for years, and even a former NDP premier of British Columbia, receive more than two-thirds of his campaign funds in Ontario?

Why would Ujjal Dosanjh join the federal Liberal party just one day before Paul Martin named him as a liberal candidate?

What was being rewarded?

dosanjh is a phony and a lightweight. hard to believe he was appointed to health minister. just one more reason to turf these fools.

In 2004, Paul Martin appointed Ujjal Dosanjh directly as Liberal candidate in the riding of Vancouver South, bypassing the usual nomination election among resident party members.

Did anybody hear anyhthing about Stockwell Day putting his foot in his mouth again by accusing some organizationa (I did't get the details) of supporting terrorists. The charge was false and they are sueing for slander or something like that. I heard it on the radio early this morning but I was half asleep and didn't get the details and didn't hear any more about it????

Charity sues Stockwell Day
Canadian Press
Thursday, January 12, 2006

TORONTO (CP) -- A registered charity is suing Conservative foreign affairs critic Stockwell Day for allegedly accusing the group of raising funds for the terrorist organization Hamas.

The International Relief Fund for the Afflicted and Needy, which says it has contributed to aid projects in Indonesia, Palestine and Guyana, alleges it was defamed at a news conference held by Day and two other defendants in Ottawa in November 2004, according to a statement of claim. The claim was filed Sept. 22, 2005, in Toronto, but wasn't served to Day until Jan. 4 in Penticton, B.C., said Naseer Syed, a lawyer for the non-profit organization, based in Mississauga, west of Toronto.

Contacted while campaigning in his Okanagan-Coquihalla riding Wednesday, Day acknowledged he had been served legal papers with respect to the lawsuit, but would not go into detail on the allegations.

Day said talks have been ongoing for more than a year and suggested a settlement may be imminent. "Discussions are going on, on both sides, and my sense is this could be close to being satisfactorily resolved for all sides," he said.

Calls to Day's co-defendants Alastair Gordon and Naresh Raghubeer of the Canadian Coalition for Democracies were not returned.

The $12-million suit alleges Day, Gordon and Raghubeer accused the charity of fundraising for Hamas and abusing its charitable status by deceiving the public in a press release issued at a news conference in November 2004.

The allegations and proof of damages have not been proven in court.

© The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon) 2006

"Nobody will make you a totally blunt promise, because that is just not done in politics, usually." Going into Cabinet right away, that's a possibility," Mr. Dosanjh told MP Gurmant Grewal in a May 17th tape recorded conversation, dropping hints of a possible reward in exchange for either abstaining from voting against the Liberal government, or joining the Liberal caucus.

This was just two days before the crucial May 19, 2005 budget vote in the House could have toppled Paul Martin's Liberal government.

I guess Paul Martin's Liberal party really is a "welcome mat that has a lot of nice comfy fur on it".

Ujal is a phony spokesman for a absolutely inefficient , unsustainable universal health care system. And of course for Lib's this is perfectly fine Jack Layton, apparently used a private health care facility in the 90'S.
This doesn't pee me off.
But when Jack stated on the Peter Warren show that he would force Olivia ti wait and suffer on the waiting list, if she needed medical attention, I realised this Layton guy is as sleazy as anyone.

I just listened to the Dec, 14 2005 - 8:00AM CKNW Audio Vault clip of Jack Layton clarifying his earlier statement.

It sounds like he forgot to ask his wife first, before making that remark

It has now been announced that Jack Layton. himself, had a procedure done in a private clinic. Good for you Jack, for taking care of yourself.

Ha ha ha, how humourous that the sanctimonious Jack Laton used a private hernia clinic in Ontario.

Another champagne socialist who preaches one thing for the little people and something else for himself.

The reality is, in this deliberate destruction of public medical care environment, brought about as a result of the acceptance of the ruling class neoconservative view, more or less by all parties within current capitalism, many "little people" are no leass being pressured/forced into the "corporatist" health care system. The waiting list to get into physio-therapy here for back rehabilitation for example, is four months. If you have a non-union job you are worried about getting back to, or you will find yourself replaced by someone else, in order to get that attention quickly, and are NOT on Worker's Compensation, you have no choice but to accept the pressure and all the suggestions coming at you from doctors, employers and other private practice professionals, to come up with the cash or private insurance to jump the que and pay for that private physio therapy.

Jack Layton, whom I in no other wise defend as a leader of the NDP, if this is true, and one should never presume Neocon Nutters like Ron and Pals to actually be telling the truth, then he is but submitting to the pressures even large numbers of "little people" are likewise. This pervasive reality throughout the system, however, is but the flip side reality of allowing this Neoconservative world view to continue to hold sway throughout capitalism, and carry out its destruction of the Public Health Care system.

Still too many nice folks out there, being way too polite and playing by the rules. And in this neoconservative capitalism, nice folks get used for doormats.

(Indeed, in all other wise, I consider Jack Layton to be a major disappointment; overly timid, and much, much too genteel in his approach and style to "playing the game" and "doing it their way".

I can believe that Jack was clueless about his behaviour, I've heard him speak on policy issues.

Nice going Kootenay. That kind of hits them right where they live.

rjm - Canada spends about $4300 per year per citizen on Health Care. I am pleased that administrative costs are so low in comparison to the US, perhaps one of the benfits of a single payer system. How much to you care about how the other $4000 per year is spent?

The Liberals and Conservatives must be pulling out all the arsenals (and arsholes), like R. Erwin and company to disseminate misinformation and propaganda on this form.

How much do you get paid Erwin, et. al to spew your moronic crap?

crass
Why can’t you accept that people might just disagree with you out of conviction and don’t need to be paid. Also I don’t remember any sign on the way in here that said: “You must comply with our views”

Nor yours. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the friggin' kitchen ahole.

NLN, where did you get that number from? B.C.'s Health Budget is about $12B for about 4M people. That's about $3000 per person.

And, that's before the money funnelled to the construction industry!

NDP hopeful files complaint against Liberal
By Steve Mertl
Canadian Press
Friday, January 13, 2006

VANCOUVER -- The New Democrats said Friday they've filed a complaint with Elections Canada alleging a Liberal candidate in the B.C. riding of Abbotsford tried to bribe the NDP hopeful into throwing his support behind the Liberals.

NDP national secretary Eric Herbert wrote Elections Canada Commissioner Raymond Lavigne on Thursday forwarding claims by New Democrat Jeffery Hansen-Carlson that Liberal David Oliver and his campaign manager offered "a job in Ottawa'' and support if he wanted to enter civic politics.
"This allegation is a very serious matter and questions the integrity of the Liberal campaign," Hebert wrote.

An Elections Canada spokeswoman in Ottawa said the agency never confirms if it has received a complaint. Investigations can take months or even years to complete, she added.

A volunteer at Oliver's campaign office said the Liberal candidate was aware of the complaint but was not immediately available for comment.

In a notorized letter accompanying the complaint, Hansen-Carlson claimed he was invited to a meeting at Oliver's campaign office last Tuesday.

He said Oliver and campaign manager Gordy Kahlon told him the race between Oliver and Conservative Edward Fast was so tight that the Liberals could win if they got a couple thousand NDP votes.

"They figured they needed 1,300 votes in Abbotsford to win the riding and I should commit to this simply out of fear of the Tories," Hansen-Carlson said in an interview.

Abbotsford is a traditional Conservative stronghold. Retiring MP Randy White won it in 2004 with 61 per cent of the vote.

Hansen-Carlson said he was asked to issue a statement asking NDP supporters to back the Liberals out of fear of what a Conservative government could do to Canada and to Abbotsford, a city of 116,000 about 60 kilometres east of Vancouver.

In return, the two Liberals "guaranteed me a win in the next local general election and they also said a job in Ottawa would be waiting for me if Mr. Oliver did in fact win the riding," Hansen-Carlson said in his letter.

Hansen-Carlson, a 23-year-old graduate student who ran unsuccessfully for Abbotsford city council last year, said they told him he would also be a respected hero in the Liberal party.

"I walked out shocked," Hansen-Carlson said. "I simply said I'll sleep on it. I gave no commitment whatsoever in the discussion. I knew the meeting was set up to bribe me."

Hansen-Carlson said he didn't flatly turn down the offer because he felt cornered.

"I had two people I respected who I view as having influence in the community corner me in a private back office, completely putting me on the spot, telling me this is how Canadian politics really functions," he said.

© Canadian Press 2006

Does everybody writing on this thread know whether the specialist they're referred to, by their regular G.P., is part of a public clinic or a private clinic?

E.g., I was booked to have a maverick freckle removed from my face. I knew the name of the Plastic Surgeon and the address but I have no idea whether he functioned as part of the Health Care System, or was a private clinic sub-contracting to the Heath Care System. All I know is that I didn't get a bill.

But, come to think of it, on another occasion, I did get a bill for the ambulance when my doctor thought I shouldn't drive myself to hospital ... so are ambulance services private?

Really, it does seem petty and irrelevant to blame Paul Martin or Jack Layton for "using private services" when most of us do, without even knowing it. As both Paul & Jack explained, they did too, without realizing it.

Hey, I like Ujjal. Getting his ass kicked by the Khalistani freaks at the Ross Street Temple earns him a lifetime Good Guy award.

The problem with the public vs. private debate is that it implies that the public system is unconcerned with profit. Not so. I've yet to hear of a single worker in any industry who was oblivious to the size of his paycheque, with the possible exceptions of Lee Iacocca and Steve Jobs. We can assume it is the same in health care. The doctors and nurses and floor scrubbers expect to make a good living out of both systems. Not surprisingly, the only real measure of commitment we are allowed to hear about is whether there is enough funding. Oh no, the socialists are spending too much! Oh no, the capitalists are not spending enough!

Public vs. private is a red herring. Spending, per se, is a red herring.

All that the citizen really cares about is: will I be able to get acceptable services when I need them?

It matters not a whit whether the method is full public, public-private, or user-pay, as long as the answer is yes.

It seems to me that medical care is kind of like the fire department. Everyone has access to the fire department, by right as a resident. Prudent people pay extra for their own fire extinguishers, etc.

BC Mary
I will ask my dad, he was a psychiatrist and was working till cancer forced him to retire this year at 82. He also took part in writing parts of the first medicare bill.

My understanding is that each doctor is a private contractor that agrees to abide by the rules set down by the ministry regarding billing and such. Most doctors will share an office with a few others in order to spread out the administration costs.

Coyote

Ahole? My how classy of you, when in doubt go for the personal attacks.

, offers Yammer.

Well yes, if you just happen to be a prudent person with a few extra thousand kicking around in a rainy day fund, a few emergency operations, scans or series of long-term treatments are a snap.

Just flash the plastic and viola, a private sector doctor will appear.

Sorry fella, but I'm afraid I don't see the difference between your prudent person and a wealthy and privilaged Canadian with a open credit card.

Most poor people I've met are quite prudent with their dollars. It's either that or diet a few days near the end of the pay period.

As for medical care being like a fire department, I'd suggest that comparison raises one of the big issues about medical care in Canada and western medicine in general.

Medicine should not be an emergency only situation called upon after the house (or the body) is aflame or worse.

Yammer far too many Canadians are just old enough to remember what it was like when there was no such thing as the Canada Health Act.

No money, no service was the expectation unless some good samaritan outfit found space and took you in.

Look south and you'll see some 40 million Americans caught in that trap now with many millions more simply hanging on with substandard medical coverage and ony one medical crisis away from the poor house.

Go back to this thread and look up the link kootenay offered yesterday comparing Canadian and US costs.

I'd say the greatest threat to medicine in Canada is the push by the private sector to turn medicine into another income generator.

It just blows me away all the words tossed out about the health and wisdom of the private sector while so many of these entrepeneurs would prefer to milk a public program like medicine rather than burn a few thought cells creating or offering something new.

One of our problems is that Mike Pearson didn't go far enough when he took Tommy Douglas's Saskatchewan health Act as a model for a national act.

He should have been adamant that it would all eventually be public.

The failed strike by Saskatchewan doctors against public health, financed and directed by the American Medical Association in the 1950s was reason enough to put doctors on the public payroll.

I don't want some anonymous private sector bureaucrat in Atlanta Georgia telling me I can't have an operation in BC because the insurer thinks it's a waste of time.

Blone Pitbull - google cihi. I can't vouch for their political leanings and I'm sure their detractors think they are all running dog lackeys but they do offer lots of data.

BC Mary, if you take a ride in a BC Ambulance you will be billed $50, no ands, if or buts.

I had a minor accident a couple of years ago when my bike pedal caught an edge and sent me rocketing over the bars, across two lanes of hot asphalt and into a curb.

Despite looking like a packet of fresh hamburger and with the kind help of several passersby, I managed to untangle myself from my bent steed only to be greeted by an ambulance attenant who inisted I at least get checked over.

Dutifully I pulled myself up and climbed into the ambulance to have my pulse and blood pressure, among other vitals, checked.

The attendant, looking worried urged me to stay in the vehicle and for a ride to emergency since my blood pressure was virtually double what it would normally be.

I initially said no as I was feeling better but relented when she insisted again.

No mention of any fees or costs and thinking it was covered by MSP, I relented.

I was then patched up and kept for an xray and observation for a couple of hours.

Three weeks later the bill for the ambulance arrived.

Now, I've been told that if they drag you into the ambulance without your acknowledgement or anything then you don't pay.

And, I guess if you should happen to die on the way they won't soak you for the entire trip. lol

Frankly, I think it's double-dipping by the province but I'm sure Ron E or Elliot or other champions of their untaxed bucks would object strongly should I ever get a free ride at their expense.

Frankly, if it didn't hurt so much I'd do just that to spite them.

Hey Allan

Ya, I know it seems like I am saying that private should be allowed, just like one can buy fire extinguishers if you can afford them. I realize that some people can't afford fire extinguishers. Does that mean fire extinguishers should not be allowed to be sold, on the basis that the poor are unable to benefit from them? Or, should everyone get a fire extinguisher, regardless of ability to pay?

You make another point, which I think is that medicine is too sacrosanct to be an acceptable income-generating field. But what isn't? Even human rights workers get paid. Not sure what you're prosposing. Pro bono? Like jury duty?

When/if you answer these, please don't say I want American style abandoned-to-the-wolves type of federal indifference to the uninsured, okay. I don't. I'm just asking.

Just my 2 cents, good posts everyone but I feel there is allot of misinformation that is
Always being speak by the MSM or the Fraser Pimpstitiuate. And the Army of private
Insurers and clinics lined up on the border, Don’t believe me go Google or look up the
Supreme court decision in Quebec, 90% of the interveners were private clinic advocates

So as a public service free of charge I will clear a few things up.

1) By all measures the public system when compared to the US private system has worse
Health results and is at least 4 times more expensive.

2) We do not have major private are in Canada, you want plastic surgery or hip replacements go private, you have heart disease or cancer your going public no matter what. Same in the states , usually the private sector cherry picks the healthy and wealthy and leaves the hard stuff to the public system

3) We will not have a European system, we will have a US system. When we singed onto NAFTA we kept as a arrangement heath care out, there is a special Claus that gives the US priority if we open out system.

As a side note, I know realtors in the US who tell me their selling homes all the time for folks who cannot afford their medical bills. This is why we opted for this system folks
, let’s not try an experiments.

P.S The Fire Dep in the US used to also be private, in other words the firefighters would drive by a burning home unless that the fire seal on the front on the home. This is a service like heath care that’s to important to tamper with. Cheers

I say no thank, you,

Sorry about the typo's, on the fly

Aside from basic human rights and decency that goes along with a public health care system, there is a more insideous reason that has not penetrated dim minds who claim merit in a for-profit health care system, and this issue is what has turned me against many of my peers. I am a researcher (in immunology and experimental medicine) and many of my colleagues are more entrepeneurs than scientists. The goal of health research has moved away from preventing or curing chronic disease, but has turned towards keeping people hooked on drugs that treat symptoms and which espouses dependency for a long period of time - if not a lifetime. It is more profitable to give insulin than cure diabetes, to prescribes cholestrol lowering drugs for life than helping heart patients lower their cholesterol naturally, and the pyschoactive drug industry really sends shivers down my back. In the States over 60% of teenagers - whose minds are still forming - are on some kind of mind-altering drug that could induce long term damage or dependency. It is extremely dangerous to have an industry profit from public illness - because those who are drawn to the profession are business people not people who want to help the population stay well. The latest stats showed that over 65% of the statins (which have some pretty bad side effects) are ineffective but still prescribed in the US - it is over a billion dollar industry. Guess who will be courting your doctors in a private health care system? I am actually changing my focus to research in the ethics in health research and policy to help the Canadian Institute of Health Research and similar organizations such as BC Cancer balance these tenuous issues that are poorly managed and understood by the general public who believe that their doctors are working for them and not for profit. Stay well Ron and neocon, you are the favourite type of people for people selling prozac.

I heard Harper say they believe in essential services to be covered. His voice warbled when he said essential. I wonder why the journalists, or the liberals don't ask him to define essential? Some of us know already.

redrivergirl, I was wondering what your opinion has been on Layton's performance in exposing the conservatives and their utterly incompetent approach in leading this nation. I was really hoping that the NDP would take on Conservatives with as much enthusiasm as they are on giving the Liberals "a boot". The Liberals on their part are trying their darnest to keep head above water and have concentrated their efforts on trying to make clear to canadians what Harpers and the CRAPers are really about, but I haven't heard as much from the NDP. With CanWest media doing the reporting - nobody is hearing abouth Kyoto being scrapped under CRAP and Canada signing on with the Americans missile defense - which is scientifically a joke since the system has only proven not to work and is a costly gift to industries making a living making weapons.

Is the media asking any questions at all? It seems all they're doing is commenting on the horse race. Let's just all agree right now that the Conservatives have run the best campaign. No question about it. But so what? George W. Bush also ran a great campaign in the States. Running a great campaign doesn't mean you'll run the country well, nor is the reverse true.

So to the media: Stop telling us about miscues or who's leading or what the polls say. Tell us more about each party's policies. Do some homework.

Ah, it's "red river" not "red driver". That makes way more sense. All this time I'd been reading it wrong.

Yes, it is red river. :-) I'm sure others read it as red driver too. Interesting because words evoke so much.

Avicenna, bearing in mind I have no contact with any political party at all (and thus have no inside view and am just surmising) I think it is partly because the media gives him slightly less time and thus doesn't cover him in as great detail and he is trying to avoid the stampede from the NDP supporters because they think Martin is better than Harper. But, we still have over a week to go and I expect a lot will change between then and now.
The NDP are in a hard place because really they do represent the viewpoint of most Canadians (the cons and libs know that and that's why they lie about their platform) and while it is important to have a lot of NDP seats in order for those concerns to be addressed, people are spooked by all the dire warnings of business that business issues when it may not get everything they want.

We should be talking about what the heck Canada is going to do about the mess that 'free-traders' are creating and be the first in the industrial world to say, no. We tried it and it is a failed experiment. We'll do what we think best thankyou.

The best thing for Canada and Canadians would be to have a majority NDP.

Increasingly, honest people with conscience are and will be moved to try to save their country/the world and be attracted to running for the NDP, while dishonest opportunists are attracted to the Cons and Liberals.

I suspect our country has been completely corrupted by bribes and 'ways of doing business' that we were not used to and we are in real trouble. sigh. But, for every action, there's a reaction and an unintended consequence. We, in the western world have been under a sustained external (and thanks to the traitors internal) attack and much like a ship in a black and terrible storm our ship, democracy and county, is groaning and moaning. But, we haven't come apart yet. And, there is sun above the storm. And, so I have faith that we will prevail. This too shall pass.

Anne McLellan, Deputy Prime Minister:

"The ad was never approved by the prime minister and should have never seen the light of day."
____________________________________
Ralph Goodale, Federal Finance Minister:

"The ad running in Quebec was never endorsed, approved or released by the Liberal Party."
____________________________________
Keith Martin, parliamentary secretary for the Minister of National Defence:

"Some idiot inadvertently sent out an ad that was not approved and not supported by the party"

____________________________________
Paul Martin, Prime Minister:

When asked on CTV's Canada AM whether he personally approved all the Liberal ads.

"Oh, sure, sure," Mr. Martin replied.
____________________________________

Paul Martin actually announced he wants to increase Liberal MP presence in our cities. Canadian cities. MP's on television. In our cities. In Canada.

I did not make this up.

Oh my gosh, the hypocrisy of the `we have the best system` crowd is so depressing.

Let us not forget that it was the NDP that opened up the private clinics that we have, and that the majority of clients of the Brian Day Clinic are Union members through the Workmen`s Compensation Board.

C`mon people - wake up!

This just in, people who don't believe in public medicare which is freely accessible use that system more than the private system.

O the hypocrisy.

No wonder Brian Day isn't happy to just run his business without the big public speaking tour and all the personal drama stories. Too many people who say they want a private system don't go to one.

Lets just say there was much lamenting.

It's interesting who's names are being mentioned as a successor to Paul Martin, ten days before his assumed defeat. The clown mentioned above is one of them. Who wouldn't question the integrity of anyone who abandons leader support this close to an election, in the name of self preservation?

It reminds me of rats scurrying from a sinking ship, postering themselves as the next captain for their own vision of repeated history. The names that don't belong on this growing list of leader back stabbers are worth a second look. As for the Cons... the western separatists and the religious wingnuts and their moral agenda were never worth a first look.

As for the health systems, failures... how can we have a healthy system, when Canadians are so unhealthy to begin with? I talk prevention and people get tired of it, I talk subclinical malnutrition, and people get tired of it. I talk corrupted food and drug standards set by a corporate agenda, and people get tired of it. We all want to have our "cake" and eat it, without ever facing the dangers.

As long as this exists, our public system and public spending will suffer. As long as we "CHOOSE" disease, we will suffer, not just as individuals, but as a whole, and the greedy ones will be right there, bribing us with a profitable solution.

Belinda where have you gone ?
The game has changed in this town.
What tune will you sing ?
As you throw in the ring.
To avoid being a clown.

Am I mean ? or realistic ?
The Liberal/NDP coalition is toast, let the Cons male the most of this Bermuda Triangle we have happening right now.
Oops they disappeared ( Lib ) off the radar, gone, gone, gone.
We may be soon to be freed from the liberal ( too liberal ) control of Canada.
Who said I wasn't a patriot.
Remember the Boston Tea Party ? Sit right down and I will bring you a bagel.

To Avencia: Its sad that you are the only person posting the need for prevention as a missed and necessary component to reduced health care costs.

From an ealier Noleftnutter post -
"Canada spends about $4300 per year per citizen on Health Care. I am pleased that administrative costs are so low in comparison to the US, perhaps one of the benfits of a single payer system. How much do you care about how the other $4000 per year is spent?"

Noleftnutters earlier posts in terms of individual health care costs is accurate.
In 2004, we spent 38 billion federally, with another 38 billion matched by the provinces for a total of 76 billion. Privately, we spent 23 billion on healthcare, for a total of 99 billion. 2006 estimates are budgeted at 41 billion each from the feds and provinces, with 25 billion privately spent on healthcare. Crunch 107 billion divided by Canada's current population, and $4300 per man, woman or child is a real number.

Private health care, "pay as you go" works for the healthy individual, until some marajuana smoker or bald tire driver broadsides you and puts you into emergency. We all know how banks love to take chances on car wrecks with no moe.

Public health care works for the individuals and their trails of victims from the love of smoke and drink and crap foods, and those who like to live in pollution and smog to make a buck in the markets off of the polluters and profit takers, and lets not forget the car wrecks. the public system helps them, too.

Its not our health care system that is to blame for failure. Is our attitudes. Its our love for booze and drugs, presciption or otherwise and shit foods and easy tolerance of pollution and smog for money and the refusal to recognize that our lifestyles and diets and wants are at a great cost to ourselves, the health of our loved ones (sad that some of us don't even believe in love) and the health of the systems of government and life overall.

There is worse than corruption and stupidity. It's not to care, that's the worst of all. We can't even get a voter turnout beyond 25 to 30% of eligable voters in what we call a democracy.

All wealthy people have to do to set their agenda of tax breaks and public health care erosion, is show up and vote. If I could loosely quote one Edmund Burke, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing."

Half assed mocking sorries to the dummies who think this is all to sublime.

The budget now for universal health care is 42% of our budget. At 8% growth per year, by 2017 the price will be 71% at our current rate.
Hardly any of us are wealthy ( I know I'm not )
So I say don't compare any of us as wealthy capitalists or anything like that.
I am personally a working man like the rest of the posters.
I won't stoop to the level of criticizing the BRAIN who tries to be something he ( or she ( god save us )THE superior thought police.

Good points Brain. We have to keep the public system public, but too many people don't look at what makes people sick in the first place. Studies have shown that urbanites are generally more healthier than suburbanites, because they get out of there cars more. But auto makers and many politicians want more urban sprawl to sell more vehicles. Politicians, at the behest of multinational pharmaceutical companies, are treating the symptoms of disease. This bodes well for there short term agenda of getting re-elected, but is obviously detrimental to the long-term health of citizens. I think we eventually have to re-think our whole economical and social system to come up with some long-term solutions. In the end it seems profit is driving most of what is negative and unhealthy in our society. Lets shorten the work week, curb suburban sprawl, encourage the conditions for healthy and supportive communities, and collectivise our natural resources so they are democratically run with the interests of the whole community (not just shareholders) taken into consideration.

Ron Erwin is a tool
Who thinks writing bad poems is cool
They're not even clever
But... whatever
Ron Erwin is also a fool

Why is our healthcare system so broken? A bigger percentage of each tax dollar (over 40%) goes towards health care than it did, say ten years ago (over twenty percent) so why is it so that there isn't enough money for health care, even though more and more is put into it.
If one has ever been to emergency you will notice kids with colds, people with a sore arm or someone with a samll abrasion, stuff that could be dealt with at a walk in clinic or a GP but all too often ends up at emergency. At the same time the hospital staff (most not all) seem to have two speeds, slow and slower.
I noticed that in hospitals in California the system seems more efficent, the staff move faster and the hospitals are much nicer, almost feel like you're at a hotel.
The system here is broken, a two tier system would allow those with the resources to pay for service if they chose to privately, which would take a burden off the public system.
So what is the problem, in Europe they have a two tier system and it works fine, there are hardly any wait times for surgey in the various countries in Europe, so why is Canada so adamant that we have to fix something that we have proven can't be fixed.
We throw ever increasing amounts of money at the problem, as stats show, but it isn't providing solutions.
If we look at other countries, particularily European countries and it works there, why are so we so resistant to change here.
I know all the lefties and union workers will bristle at the thought of this but why? Just wondering...

Brain, define "privately spent" please ...

To Blonde Pitbull: Well, I don't know the numbers, or true breakdown of what is spent where privately, and I would love that information, but I have a good idea of where it is spent. Most of us are now aware that doctors are privately contracted, along with a host of other services, including labs and bloodwork. (its funny how someone mentioned in a post, who pays for it twice if its botched once. Gov. pays, but the services on both ends from Doctors to labs are private)

As children become older, we realize through their getting older, growing percentages of what public healthcare won't pay for, and how costly it can be. Dietary treatment (naturalpaths) and disease prevention. Teeth. Eyes. Most (but not all) plastic surguries. Ambulance fee's. In fact, anyone who takes a look at a blue cross brochure, will get a good idea of what the public system won't cover.

So where does that lead the public? In a position of being forced to go private for a lot of services that are unavoidably needed, when we factor in what we do know or don't, in terms of accurate information on disease prevention.
A major concern we should have, is also with the term, "insurance" that is used to describe the health "tax" we are forced to pay. Insurance implies that we can take it or leave it. I don't have to insure a car if it sits, at no risk to accidents or failure... why should I have to manditorily pay for "insurance?" Now, if they called it a tax... to continue with the insurance word, paves the way for private care in terms of how this word is applied.

And if anyone's paying attention to the large mergers south of the border with food manufacturers and pharmacuticals... this is a major conflict of interest to anyone in the know.

The bottom line is, the medicare system is privately contracting doctors who rely on sick people for a job. Are we supposed to expect doctors to laud the voice of disease prevention? Some doctors do, don't get me wrong. And some go through the motions, and some are there for the money and prestige.

This last group of docs that are in it for the money and prestige group is what's tearing Canada's public system apart, as they are doing everything they can to privatize everything, and push corporate agendas (profit). And the markets aren't full of former University professor HMO CEO's? What, they have the time to discover the next organ transplant drug, or cancer treatment during their professor roles? Often, the students unwittingly hand it to them on a silver platter.

There are some major conflicts of interest here in all walks of health care, and next to no one is saying a word, other than to cry fiscal imbalance for more money. Scary. And is our health care minister a part of this mess? Ujjal Dosanjh's record speaks for itself, but our problems have been there long before he got the job.

Brain: I agree, good points made in both your and Avicenna's piece, but I think Crass targets the real villain in health care...a corporate world that lusts for more and more profit by robbing the public purse...and in the process decimates our quality of life.

I would add that the wonderful world of advertising is a necessary and parasitic appendage that rides side-saddle with this corporate world view...its indoctrinator extraordinaire.

But you are right, brain, we are the ones who continue to foolishly buy what that world view relentlessly promotes.

Blonde Pitbull asks a really good and pivotal question, though, I think. :-)

An interesting characterization, I think. And entirely accurate.

And colourful. :-) I like colourful imagery.

Yes, good commentary, Brain.

Sadly, our greatest health risk is from toxins in our environment by industry and food and water contamination from GMOs, factory farming, and squeezing out profit by feeding animals to vegetarian cows etc.

These are things that strict regulation can remedy. Nothing else will do it. We may already have lost our current generation to premature death and illness. Perhaps not though, fresh air, good food and sunshine can go a long way to aid our health.
Kyoto is red herring. As long as we are talking about kyoto, we are not talking about regulating and penalizing the polluters. The only answer to pollution.

Give up this endless, futile,impossible attempt to defend our universal medical system as it is. The biggest problem this system has is highlighted above by those hopeless attempts at justifying socialism.
It cannot be defended, and it won't get fixed until some of us get real.
Again, I offer a solution.
We should have a basic, stripped down medicare for the poor. Anyone else pays a pro-rated insurance payment, equal to a tax cut we would give them from the savings of going universal.
I am warning everyone that failure to do this NOW, will result in a huge decline in your standard of living.
Give up this stupid battle and surrender to logic.

What tired crap. Blame the consumer, blame the uneducated, but don't blame the friggin' system that pushes crap out faster than we can say no.

Yes, some of us drink, take drugs, have heart attacks, work far too long for far too less and thousands of other silly things I'd describe as human.

Yes there is a surge of boomers flushing through the system and driving up costs. So what, boomers are a 40 to 60 year old phenomena well known to all.

Of course there will be higher costs until they (we) get through old age.

Why hasn't government planned for this? Perhaps because the right-wingers who prefer profits first have been just too influential in demanding their short term tax breaks.

I happen to think cancer isn't a lifestyle disease unless living in a polluted environment, encouraged by coupon clippers who want profits without cleanup costs deducted is a lifestyle choice.

Why is it on the rise?

Of course consumers buy trash that only worsens their health and the health of others through a degraded environment.

I'd ask when will investors stop putting their money into pollution machines when they know it's slowly killing us.

Basically we are back at greed as the primary problem. What the profiteers wants is the ability to push the costs of health care up to the maximum potential return for them.

Sorry folks, but the needs of the poor and middle class don't fit into that factoring.

I see my friend barryjo is trying to once again sell us on the capitalist sink or swim approach to health care.

I'm curious barryjo, when you visited that grand hotel like hospital in California, did you have an opportunity to look at their daily rates or ask what happens when a homelss person with no means shows up seeking help?

Amnerican health care can be the best in the world if you happen to be wealthy enough to afford it, but 90 per cent of Americans can't, including about half of them who don't have any kind of health care insurance at all.

Barryjo, if we can't afford our health care costs, as you claim, how can your revered American system be sustainable when its three or four times more expensive?

I'm not surprised one iota barryjo that you think it's great, just like you think leaving the sick and addicted in BC to fend for themselves rather than have compasionate resources aimed at reducing harm is the best approach.

Oh, in California they have daily rates ? according to Allan. Maybe they even have a fee structure for, say a hernia operation, a vasectomy, whatever. Our system is unable to quote a price on anything.
We have no idea what anything costs in our system. This is crazy, and anyone perpetuating this folly is stupid.
Give your head a shake, we are not going to get out of this nightmare until people like Allan wake up and stop promoting socialism.

The only nightmare we're having is the crime racket we're undergoing right now.

Cost of procedure in the public system is a red herring. At first glance it appears reasonable and logical. But when one looks closer, one sees that it is inane. In the public system it isn't relevant how much a procedure costs. What is relevant is good departmental management, cost effective purchasing, and making good decisions, such as not closing care homes and leaving people to take up the more expensive hospital beds, while even closing hospital beds!

We had this in Canada before the whole sale sabotage of our system.

barryjo, we have a two tier system. If you want to go to a private clinic or a Brian Day-like surgical centre why do you not just go?

Or is it that you don't want any of us to go either?

I have a friend on another forum who is a US bankruptcy lawyer. As he often tells us his biggest source of income is people who can't pay their medical bills and are forced into bankruptcy. Guess someone has to pay for that "hotel-like" experience of yours.

What the hell?

Should read, Or is it that you don't want any of us to use the public system?

Ron, I didn't say any such thing.

Perhaps if you go back and read my post you might note my issues about the California hospital was within a question, not a statement.

Here's a clue Ron. When you see this ? sign, assume someone is not making a statement, but rather asking a question.

If you see . or !, you are free to think of it as a statement.

I realize this Inglishe is tough to master when it's only your mother tongue, but at least pay attention Ron E.

Canada had a very successful mission in Kashmir this past fall helping all the earthquake victims. The locals there were very gratefull for the Canadians, and their attitude towards them. One of their greatest compliments was in regards to the universality of medical care received by everyone, regardless of economic status. They are so used to not getting medical care there unless you can show the money. I, for one, am proud that we can behave in this civilized manner. If is very unfortunate that there are so many Canadians wanting to have our own citizens not receiving care because of economic circumstance.

I once said I didn't think to highly of so called men who buy prostitutes. Allan ranted non stop over that for awhile and ever since that time Allan has attacked me every time he gets a chance. Get Over it Allan.
As for me wanting to leave the sick and addicted in B.C. to fend for themselves,ya right Allan, I've dedicated the last twelve years to working with addicted and homeless populations, helping the ones out that want to better themselves. I don't believe in the harm extension, I mean reduction crap that enables addiction but I will drop whatever I am doing to help someone who wants a way out of the mess called addiction.
As for the American medical system, I agree ours is better, but I was surprised to see homless people getting prompt care, the mission statement at the front door said no one would ever be turned away. It just surprised me after all the bad stuff I've heard.
If one looks at what works and what doesn't, Europe (many countries)has a two tier sytem and people have access to immediate healthcare and surgery, in Canada we have a broken one tier system that can't be fixed in spite of a record percentage of every tax dollar being thrown at it. Why is there fear of a sytem that already works when ours obviously doesn't?

You can't compare California and use it as an example of the US health care system because California has traditionally been a very progressive state.

Barryjo, you've heard the expression, sober up a horse thief and what do you have? A sober horse thief. Addicts have to be careful not to exchange one addiction for another. Whether it's the pursuit of making money, and/or religion. Two of the quasi socially accepted ones.

bolding mine.

The Big Book of Alcoholics Anonomyous - the origional 12 step from whence NA appeared - is very clear that some people are constitutionally incapable. According to the 12 step program, you too, have only 'a daily reprieve contingent on your spiritual condition'.

It seems to me from your statements that you appear to be taking a lot of credit for that which is the Grace of your HP and blaming others who haven't been as fortunate.

And, re California being a progressive state? It is, but even there you lose your house if you can't pay your hospital bills.

Anonymous and original.

It's interesting, lately, I've been noticing a fairly recent lexicon in our language and that is the phrase, 'in reality'. 'The reality of it', may be even more used. I find it fascinating because I think it reflects that unconsciously we understand we are being deceived and are attempting to find the reality among the deliberate frustration of truth. I think it reflects that we know we in a fog and that gives me some hope.

barryjo, We have private clinics, private surgical centres, private labs. Perhaps you don't know you're using private establishments?

Define how a two-tier Euro sytstem is different from ours? Not with repetitive simple statements but actual facts.

Sure it can. People can either stop getting sick or we'll only provide care to those that can afford it. If you have another system in mind please tell the world, they'll want to know about it as much as us.

Fear of what system? The US one? It doesn't work. Which other one? A particular Euro model? Why not tell us which one? There are a lot of different systems in Europe. And how is it different from what we have?

Redrivergirl,
I don't take any credit for anything I've done for myself or the help I've given others, it is part of what I have to do to stay clean, helping others is the antidote to the self centered, selfish behaviour all addicts have, self centeredness is the core of the disease.
There are some that incapable of change and for them there should be harm reduction measures. In Sweden they have limited harm reduction, only for those who can't stop, as opposed to Switzerland from which Vancouver copied their harm reduction program. Sweden has about six hundred addicts on Methadone while Switzerland has thirteen thousand plus.
Switzerland is a drug mecca with rampant addiction everywhere while Sweden is not. Sweden was one of the first pro active harm reduction countries in Europe and from 196-66 had prescription heroin available to addicts. Addiction rates soared and they soon made the changes they have today, a three pillar program of prevention, treatment and control measures, and it seems to work well.With a Conservative majority we won't have to worry about money being wasted on free heroin and government shooting galleries.

Frank
The two tier system here isn't much different than the one we have here except that in its current form the private side is limited. If the private side was wide open for business instead of all the political wrangling pro and con. it would work much better here.
You are correct it is two tier here, has been for a long time with contracting out in many areas but there is still a lot of resistance to it being publicly and politically declared as such and the bi-partisan games will continue. It is slowly being adopted little by little though and it won't be long before it is an offical two tier system.

To Barryjo: (I can relate) Still, the U.S. system doesn't work. Thats the point. Its pay as you go, and thats great if you've got money, or insurance, but it sucks if you don't. You found a hospital in the U.S. that didn't turn anyone away, great. Its an exception to the rule.

The states has expenses we just don't have up here in Canada. Never mind insurance company administration costs that we don't have... Everyone likes to sue down there. They'll sue, some of them, without a reason. In Canada, the average person isn't quite so greedy. And is our system perfect? You won't find one that is, but there are some European systems worth exploring, especially with the countries where citizens are living the longest, and the citizens within the countries that are the healthiest.

What we'll find, is what we've always known. It takes honest governments and the people who serve them. It takes an honest media. It takes an honest education system with major emphasis put on disease prevention and healthy lifestyles. It even takes honest CEO's. Emphasis on clean environments, disease prevention, strict governmental regulations on food and drugs, and non profit care, are the driving factors to health as a whole.

It's a no brainer to agree with the reality that a healthy population creates a medicare system that is easy to sustain economically. This should be the goal, but in Canada and even moreso the U.S., its fix and bandage the effect, (because that's where the money is)without any kind of serious looks to the cause and that, is, well, just plain stupid, because now everyone suffers, including the pigs at the trough. So very ordinary. How drull.

When our doctors and politicians, and university professors get serious and treat healthcare with a 50/50 prevention/cure mandate, we'll begin to see an end to the corruption. Until that time, all we are seeing is a coverup of ugly truths, driven by greed, pride and ignorance, at the expense to everyone we know who is unhealthy, including for the majority of us, our own selves.

How many of us know someone right now who is suffering, in some cases dying from diseases and illnesses that are preventable? We don't even know how preventable most diseases truly are and who's fault is it? There isn't a system full of individuals who are letting us down with this. Media. Education. Government. Courts. Corporations. Environmental pollution. They are all to blame, but ultimately, the finger still points at us as individuals. Health begins at home.

It begins at home, and that's not easy. Not when over 90% of whats on the shelf in grocery stores either has nutrients stripped from processing and re-added to avoid blatant subclinical deficencies, or its loaded with toxins. We sucker ourselves into thinking deficiencies don't happen on a regular basis. Over a lifetime, it happens to almost everyone.

Eat healthy? Is that even a choice now? Perhaps the saddest truth of all, is that some of us won't create that choice until we dust off the library card, learn to sprout, learn nutrition, learn to read, take the wise grandmothers advice of eating fruits and vegetables (just make sure you scrub the chemicals off first), ah, why do I bother. Some dummy will blast me with some self projected accusational rant about egos or fake knowledge, again... what a bore.

Brain,
I know the U.S. system doesn't work well, from what I had heard through the media, I thought it would be worse than what I witnessed. I thought poor folk had no access to health care but I saw many who did, maybe it was the exception rather than the rule.
We live in a society where we have a freedom of choice in a lot of matters, including what we eat. For me personally, I eat a diet rich in fruit and vegtables and with a major portion of my meats being fish and I sure feel a lot better, not to mention I don't have go to doctors. Once one gets their body detoxed from all the foods with additives and MSG etc., it is amazing how calm one feels.
But to each his own, thats the beauty of living in this great country of ours.

To Barryjo: To each their own, yes, as long as it isn't at anyone elses expense.

That's right. We won't have to 'worry' about any money 'wasted' on anything except themselves. In spite of the fact that my taxes and others like I, have different priorities. That is not democracy. Gov't used to balance interests. Now, it's the neo-cons, monopoly capitals, 'winner takes all' and the hell with you.'

I was reading about the founder of the Salvation Army Catherine Booth. She would roll over in her grave at BC's deal they made with the Libs which cut the salaries of their female workers in the care homes. The organization today and their deals with gov't is the exact antithesis of the vision of reformer Catherine Booth.

Barryjo, you don't get to choose whether you are eating GMO foods because Monsanto says so. At least Europe said no to that at this point. GMO soy and corn is causing terrible upset and cancer in lab rats. Voting for the cons is voting for that too.

Imagine! We don't even get to have labelling on our foods to tell us whether it's GMO food that might potentially kill us. And, we're free? We don't get it because Monsanto obviously owns our gov't and they know we wouldn't buy it.

And, we tried to watch our favorite figure skating tonight, but even that has been spoiled. The corporate sponser banners conflict with the skaters making it impossible to view the skaters with enjoyment.

I don't like this new, "...great country of ours."

Brain, I too have my own pretty good idea on what privately spent means...which is why I'd question the inclusion of all the dollars spent his quotes.

Barryjo, you want to investigate European Healthcare? Okay. If we can find ways that their facilities are run that would help bolster ours I'm game. Just remember
1)that in Switzerland, Germany and France(the top providers) the people pay between 14-20% of their income for their healthcare.
2) right now NAFTA protects Canada from US giants from moving in but once they get their foot in the door they aren't going to go away without a fight. Wanna talk about throwing money away we will spend a large fortune on the legal bills alone.

I understand those countries pay considerably higher premiums, I guess we can't have it both ways, either we pay more or our current system limps along the way it is going.
It does seem though that every time the governemnts of the day have a surplus doctors and nurses want more money. I am not saying its wrong it's just an observation. Campbell announces a surplus in B.C. and predictably the doctors and nurses immediately start jockying for position in the line-up for a raise.

wouldn't it be awful if canadians got to choose what kind of health facility they wanted to use? my god, what next? private schools? private daycare? whatever will the public sector unions do then?

Oh boy Redrivergirl, the BS meter is off the dial.
I urge all to learn about Google. Just search for it on tour internet explorer search engine. They will offer to make Google your home page and you are into the BS filter business.
The Salvation Army is such an interesting Google.
What a noble beginning, and what a great man William Booth, the founder of this NGO was.
And Catherine Booth, his wife, was an angel.
My Grandmother worked for The Salvation Army ( Sally Anne kitchen in Edmonton ) from 1950 until she died in 1975.
She worked whenever they needed her, Christmas or whatever.
Her house burned down in 1945 and they found her family, and my Dad, a new house and furnishings. She was born in Ireland and my Grandfather fought for Britain in WW1.
Legend in my family was that he changed his name from Irwin to Erwin because the British Govt. was sending out cheques based on alphabetical order. They emigrated to Canad when Ireland was dirt poor.
MY Grandma was paid minimum wage by Sally Anne for 25 years.
She had 12 children that lived. ( 14 pregnancies ).
Two of the died, one in the fire and another was run over by a truck.
Of these twelve children, ( 10 ) many hated the Army for what they thought, was taking advantage of her.
She never looked at it this way. My Grandfather was a drunk. This job supported her family.
She was lucky to even get a free turkey dinner at Christmas.
She did it because of altruistic intentions.
I remember when a Public Sector Union was trying to take advantage of the Army, you know, with the head office being in Barbados to avoid taxation, how sickened I was.
If the Salvation Army created employment conditions, and there are 40 or 50 jobs created only because of their charitable work, why should they be socially engineered out of existence ?

The reality is that she was the driving force that began the Salvation army. Not to take away the good work her husband did. Nevertheless, some writings have started to erase her into 'help-mate' and water down the great social justice work they did.

They started a match factory where they paid two or three times the going pay rate and used a harmless substance rather than the toxic one. Therefore, it is safe to extrapolate that
they would not have been for an action that halved the salary of mostly women workers in a Salvation Army, government contract ie paid for by my taxes, facility. It belies everything they stood for as evidenced by their own words!

The Salvation Army, is not the organization it used to be at all! I'm sure some in it still have integrity. But, obviously, the organization is not the same. It's lost it's social justice compass in my opinion.

Catherine Booth had a lot to say about 'rich people' in her fight for social justice and the conditions that you are your pals are trying to bring to this country. They even start a money drive that takes bottles from the poor who collect them. Most people don't even know that they receive so much gov't funding! So, Ron, I suggest you do some more googling.

edited...

Catherine Booth had a lot to say about 'rich people' in her fight for social justice and the conditions that you and your pals are trying to bring to this country. The new Salavation Army even start a money drive that takes bottles from the poor who collect them. Most people don't even know that they receive so much gov't funding! I will not give them another penny until when and if they return to their roots. So, Ron, I suggest you do some more googling.

Barryjo writes,

Actually, Barryjo, our current system will stop limping when the people we elect to be our public servants who are kicking to death what we the taxpayers of this country want, public health care, are kicked to the curb.

barryjo,

This is a totally ideological statement that has no relation to reality. Considering that every country is looking for a magic bullet you'd think that a simple answer like this would be jumped on. Unfortunately it is simply your own ideological "wish-it-was-true".

Not one of the "best" health care systems in Europe you alluded to earlier as to copying for advice have adopted this principle.

"It was while working with the poor in London that Catherine found out about what was known as "sweated labour". That is, women and children working long hours for low wages in very poor conditions. In the tenements of London, Catherine discovered red-eyed women hemming and stitching for eleven hours a day. These women were only paid 9d. a day, whereas men doing the same work in a factory were receiving over 3s. 6d. Catherine and fellow members of the Salvation Army attempted to shame employers into paying better wages. They also attempted to improve the working conditions of these women.

Catherine was particularly concerned about women making matches. Not only were these women only earning 1s. 4d. for a sixteen hour day, they were also risking their health when they dipped their match-heads in the yellow phosphorus supplied by manufacturers such as Bryant & May. A large number of these women suffered from 'Phossy Jaw' (necrosis of the bone) caused by the toxic fumes of the yellow phosphorus. The whole side of the face turned green and then black, discharging foul-smelling pus and finally death.

Women like Catherine Booth and Annie Beasant led a campaign against the use of yellow phosphorus. They pointed out that most other European countries produced matches tipped with harmless red phosphorus. Bryant & May responded that these matches were more expensive and that people would be unwilling to pay these higher prices."

spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Wbooth.htm

And, what else do I find googling? That they entered a contract with Bush to allow them to discriminate against gays while still receiving gov't funding. Well, it's one or the other if you're interested in social justice. A Christian organization can hire only other Christians, but if they receive taxpayers money, forget it! Gay people pay taxes too.

And, here they enter into a dirty deal with Campbell. Sorry. I once had enormous respect for them as most people do/did.

Ron, as a Canadian with Irish heritage how can you bear the oppression of these times?!
Have you forgotten your genetic memory?

What if your granny received a decent wage and a free turkey for heavens sake! The children would have been so much better off for one thing. And, that would have been passed on to you as well. sigh.

Women always worked in the church. And, were exploited by the church too. I'm not against women being active in the church, but it is free, unrecognized labour without which capitalism would collapse. The Catholic church would fall apart tomorrow if all the women withdrew their services for two weeks!

Where's your ire Ron Irwin! To allow such a bunch to do this to our country? Has the Irish been colonized right out of you?

Oh, I see, you are Northern.

Thanks for sharing about your family. I find history and geneology very interesting.

Headline: Conservatives Step Up Activities Overseas

You think they're here, too? (Easy question, I know)

Full story: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060114/ap_on_re_us/exporting_culture_wars

No the Irish hasn't been erased from my makeup.

If you follow the Irish ( I mean Ireland, not Northern Ireland that is part of Great Britain ) They embraced republican like values and lowered taxes and regulations in order to do some business. Bring money into the country.
If you view this country now, you will see they are as Fu....up as any modern liberal entity.
I suspect that all of you who fear this new right wing party , The Conservatives, don't be.
They will end up a centralist party that has to appeal to all the same special interest groups that plaque the Liberals.

Redrivergirl,
Actually Redrivergirl, our current helthcare system cannot be fixed by politicians being kicked to the curb. It wouldn't matter who is in power, this problem is not bi-partisan. As the last ten years shows, throwing a bigger percentage of each tax dollar at it won't fix it either.
Fixing the system begins with us the people. Next time you have the misfortune of going to a doctors office or emergency room look around and check out just how sick people are and why they are there. People seem to go to a doctor for the littlest thing and usually leave after a doctor looks at it does nothing but they feel better because they went to see him/her. The problem is the government of the day can't even do a campaign to bring awareness of the fact that too many unneccesarily go to the doctor because if they did you can bet someone would die and the relatives would sue the government for suggesting people go to doctors too much for petty matters.
Its a complex issue with multi components to it but for sure we the users of the system are where the solutions to it will have to come from. Lifestyle choices and abuse of the system have to be addressed or we have no hope of fixing it. I for one, would like to see a surcharge for medical care for those who want to risk their health with multiple negative lifestyle chioces with things like diet, smoking. obesity etc. Whoops I forgot, people should be able to live life any way they want regardless of the health consequences, people should be able to go to a clinic for a hangnail and our tax dollars should pay for it all. No wonder their is no hope for our currnet health care system.

BC Mary

Spoke to my father, interesting Tommy Douglas approached him about medicare back in 62, my dad was an MLA in 65(?) All of the parties forced the Socreds to implement the program, (they would have lost the election if they hadn’t) although 50% of the doctors were initial against it. At the time there was 2 non-profit health plans run by the medical association and by credit unions with perhaps half of BCer covered.

Currently each doctor is self-employed, MSP issues them a ID number, the doctor sees the patient and then bills MSP. MSP will fix the rates for various procedures and visits. According to my dad the current rates reimbursed to GP’s is not enough to cover expenses and contributes to the shortage of GP’s. The same goes for clinic’s each visit is billed to that doctor, who then reimburses the clinic for admin costs.

He feels that most of the problem with the system is built in inefficiencies, and despite the waiting list, many operating rooms are empty half the time. He would like to see hospitals have specialized rooms that only do certain types of surgeries so to cut down the time it takes to reconfigure the OR’s. He is also unimpressed with the health authorities as they mainly add another layer of bureaucracy rather than reduce costs.

He says the biggest complaint that US doctors have is that their office must navigate through a huge amount of paperwork and rules coming from over 30 different insurance companies. This makes life complicated and increases admin cost greatly.

When a doctor retires they are considered self-employed and must have their own pension.

So both the doctors and labs in our system are private already. The key seem to be in the rates MSP pays.

I don’t agree with the Sally Ann religious views, but I sure respect their work. If there is a cesspool, you will find a Sally Ann worker there, offering warm food and a kind word. They don’t care about your religion and will help anyone, that’s way I donate to them.

Barryjo, while I don't disagree that there is some behaviours that need changing I actually would rather have people who were unsure about some minor medical need go to a doctors office than a hospital; dollar wise it's about $30 for an office visit as compared to about $150 minimum for a hospital visit. I would, to combat this, like to find a way to educate the general public so that they know when to go to a hospital, a Dr office, or just take care of it at home. But that, IMO is not where the biggest strain(s) are. What I see is this, the lack of long term care facilities of all levels for the elderly and the mental health patients.

You know what bugs me when I hear people yapping on about adopting "European style" health care is that they rarely realize how much more it will cost them to go for it and how much more our system would do with similar funding. This problem, I believe, is entwined with the fact that our system's funding is tax based which makes it ambigious at best.

barryjo isn't pushing for a Euro model in health care at all, it all boils down to simply pushing his own ideology. I'll stick to looking at what other nation's actually do rather than what the Cato Institute would like them to do.

Ron,

"They embraced republican like values and lowered taxes and regulations in order to do some business. Bring money into the country."

This is the Vancouver Sun version. According to the Irish themselves, their ex-finance minister was in Canada, the reason for their economic turn-around was joining the EU and getting massive subsidies from countries like France and Germany. That money was used to build infrastructure like better roads and to provide things like universal education. The economy picked up and as it did they lowered taxes.

The Fraser Institute and Mikey Campbell and US think tanks etc have pushed the propaganda line that it was the lower taxes. The finance minister himself said that's not true or they wouldn't have needed the subsidies in the first place. He said lower taxes were a result of the
economic turn-around, not the cause.

This is such bs I hardly know where to begin!

Firstly, for every person who goes to the dr too much, there is one who never goes! I can't tell you how many people I know who NEVER go to the doctor, even though they should.

Second, you're going to penalize people based on your own view of 'good health'. People who smoked etc, or overweight. What about the healthy guy who works out at the gym every day eats perfectly and who hikes on the mountain or does other things potentially dangerous, Barryjo? How those who travel more to places like Tailand etc, maybe women who don't leave men who beat them up and use medicare. They guy who drives too fast etc etc Please.

People don't go to emerg for a hang nail. THe problem in emergency is lack of hospital beds because Campbell closed so many and at the same time closed gov't care homes where the backload of frail seniors would have gone. This is a mostly neo-con created problem! And, their 'solution' is more privatization. If you are being sincere, I hope you do some more research about our health care system because you appear to be making an extremely ill informed choice on election day.

Yes, Frank and Ireland also has an excellent taxpayer subsidized education system where no one pays to go to university. As well they carved out a high tech niche for themselves. Plus they are a small country which is highly literate. Everything there is comparatively very expensive as well. They most certainly did not adopt neo-liberal 'reform'. Every country that does goes into chaos and after the money is sucked out of the country reverses the policies. See New Zealand, Argentina etal.

Barryjo, you appear to belong to the same school of paranoia as another writer here who sees every response to his overly lengthy blather as a personal attack.

When you come out with silly ideas and simply rant on about how unaffordable Canada's health system is because you think it's unaffordable, then I will respond.

As for your conversation about men seeking out prostitutes, I did respond to your statements because once again you were spouting nonsense based on your own confused moral beliefs.

Should you want to revisit that issue, feel free to do so. I suspect anyone reading it will see how often you had to backtrack from you ill-thought positions as soon as a ray of logic burned the veil of ideology off your thinking.

Frankly, I don't think you have done much over the past 12 years other than try to project your own limited understanding and extreme biasis onto others, all the while worried that people with a bit more smarts are actually having a positive impact on those you've given up on.

You have certainly shown you don't even have a grasp of how the current health-care system in Canada compares with the American or European models.

You simply run on about cutting costs and allowing people free choice, when most of the people who need medical services in Canada would be bankrupted immediately under a US model.

Free choice, what a sad illusion some of us labour under.

Wake up and talk to people who were around before Tommy Douglas and a few other brave souls initiated the best universal medical care system in the world.

You are nothing more than a poorly informed mouthpiece for the neo-con gallery that wants to profit off sick people.

I lost the recent "thread" of this thread, but scrolling quickly, something piqued my attention: Harper's opposition to safe injection sites.

The BC gov't and people like Vancouver Chief Medical Officer John Blatherwick are behind safe injection sites, and are pronouncing the pilot program a resounding success.
There have been many overdoses at the site BUT NO DEATHS, because medical personnel are there to intervene and revive people. The program is SAVING LIVES. If programs are shut down by a Con gov't, in defiance of addiction/medical experts who know they help save lives, overdose deaths that otherwise wouldn't have happened WILL happen, and Harper will have blood on his hands, in my view.

I wonder if Harper would have the authority to
ban the sites, or merely to withdraw funding - ? If it becomes a mere funding issue, perhaps the BC gov't, the City of Vanc., and others could fill the funding gap, making Harper look like the compassionless redneck he is, but at least preventing him from allowing preventable deaths to occur.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/science/national/2004/09/21/safe_inject040921.html

Frank, you are absolutely correct about the so-called Irish miracle. Just like Scotland, Ireland's infrastructure, such as roads, was more or less third world until massive infussions of European cash helped modernize things.

Of course, the influence of Europe was felt in other ways as well, especially on the social side.

People can now actually divorce and remove themselves from terrible marriages and the right of women to have abortions is now in their hands rather than under the control of a male dominated religious system that had enjoyed far too much political clout.

And, yes, just as redrivergirl noted, the so-called Irish neo-con success story is very much dependant on a good old socialist approach to education, which ensures if you are capable you have access to an education without having a wealthy daddy.

Redrivergirl,
As long as we blame the government of the day for of our problems as a society we will never come up with any real solutions.
Bottom line is that a liberal society where folks aren't acountable for most of their behaviours is a society that needs a lot of tax dollars to deal with the problems that go along with the lack of accountabiltity.
Your logic about people being reponsible medically for accidents like mounatin biking etc. is a little bit different than lifestyle choices, so its like comparing apples to oranges. As well a woman or a man, for that matter who needs medical care after being hurt by a spouse is, again, different than one whose self centered behaviour leads to poor health.
I like a many Canadians have done some research and will make a very informed choice next Saturday. Family values, personal responsibilty and stable uncorrupt government is what I'm voting for.
Frank, I'm not pushing any model, I would like a healthcare system where we can get timely access to specialists and surgery and if it costs more and those paying for service free up doctors on the public side of the system I'm all for it.
The situation with the elderly is different and it begs for immediate solutions. No government should ever shut down old folks homes the way Campbell has.

Not at all, Barryjo. It is only right. Who is going to decide just what is a lifestyle choice' that is putting preventable stress on our public system. You? It is exactly the same thing. They know some people metabolize food differently in some cases of obesity for instance. Certainly body type would logically confirm that idea.

But, the Conservatives will. And, worse. And you must know it on some level, at least. So please don't give me 'family values' because the last time I checked 'family values' meant quality of life. The ability to send your child to university. To provide health care to your family without bankrupting your family. The ability for your family to count on their gov't to provide the 'peace, order and good gov't' that Canadians want.

Don't the lies Harpers Cons are telling bother you morally?

Alberta will soon be offering free secondary education, with conditions ( like you have to keep up your marks ). Now when this happens will we all be saying it's a good old socialist approach ?
We shouldn't, it's a good old capitalist approach.
I would like to see this approach be selective, for instance free plumbing, electrical, carpentry,nursing, medical technicians, teachers you know, practical and needed vocations.
I would hope it wouldn't be available for Women's Studies or Philosophy or such flaky endeavors.

the lefty freaks are googling everything. as sure as sign as any that they're in full panic mode. lock up your daughters, the neo-cons are coming!!!!!!

'I would hope it wouldn't be available for Women's Studies or Philosophy or such flaky endeavors'. it will if the teacher's union (team trotsky) has anything to do with it. oh, wait a minute, you're talking about alberta, not b.c..

Philosophy is flaky? Uh, sure.

Tell me if it were proposed by a Liberal or NDP government you wouldn't say it was a good old socialist approach? Of course you would.

barryjo, don't let ideology blind you to what works. You can't "free up" public resources by moving those resources into the private sector.

Its a zero-sum game. No amount of moving things back and forth between public and private will work.

If you want more doctors, you have to train them to import them. Same with nurses. if you want more equipment you have to buy it, either publically or privately. Moving them between the two won't add anything new to the overall system.

Better administration of public resources can and should occur so that operating room times are maximized and so on. That's a management issue.

Who cares what ALTA is doing with some of the money they are getting exploiting a resourse that we all have paid for via infrastructure with our taxes and the ensuing pollution? I could care less. If H gets in and he won't, it would be a treat to see what happens to Klein without the federal gov't as a foil, however. lol

...resource!!!

And, any movement of resources between private and public, is moving from the public paid for by us over the last 45 years and more, to private.

Frank,
Almost fifty cents on every tax dollar goes to healthcare already and you say train more nurses and doctors thats the answer. That costs money and the healthcare share of taxes is alraedy too high.
Let those who can pay for it, why not.
My wife noticed I get really irratable when I argue with you lefties so I am going to sign off. Goodbye and God bless you all.

Most of the comments here are about the pros/cons of public vs. private
funding and delivery of healthcare. I would like to take a step off that track and discuss the probity of a politician accepting contributions from favoured interests in the area where he/she specializes in.

This is a major issue in the Parkdale-High Park riding in Toronto where the incumbent Liberal MP, Sarmite (Sam) Bulte, who is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Chair of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage is in hot water. She's accepting campaign contributions from vested corporate interests who want more restrictive copyright laws who she calls her friends. Anyone making a copy of music for their own personal use is not one of her friends.

http://comfyfur.blogspot.com/2006/01/liberal-sam-bulte-doesnt-get-it.html

I don't think this is solely a Liberal problem. We need real systemic changes to prevent influence buying or even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Well, I would think Dosanjh ought be under the same cloud of suspicion about contributions for his campaign.

I am not suggesting his 2004 contributions were illegal, just quite questionable on a couple of fronts. Much of it came from people deeply involved in private medical practices and very little came from his own constituents.

However, because he is health minister up until the end of this election much scrutiny should be put into his finances now.

A health minister who has sworn to uphold the Canada Health Act is certainly in a conflict of interest in taking money from people working to eliminate the act.

These are not varying shades of conflict, they are direct conflicts with no room for ifs ands or buts of any kind.

This gets back to real election reform, not the choice of a second or third place vote, but the certainty that it is voters who are driving the election rather than vested interests who get to hide until after the election is long over

Bullshit. Happily ignoring federal and municpal etc as well as overlooking numerous other issues such as the effect on the relative numbers when you cut taxes.

But if you cut taxes enough, eventually you will get to this figure.

And what would be the answer then, pray tell? Reduce the number of sick people?

Why not? How about those that can't? Where will the doctors come from to help those that can? The moon?

When you come up with a better idea please call the Pres of the US, the PM of Canada and all the leaders of Europe and let them know. They'd love to hear a cheap way of providing healthcare. Unfortunately for you the only proviso they insist on is that it actually works. Your idea is akin to saying that we could cut our health care costs in half by only treating people whose last name begins with a letter between A and M.

Seems to be a consistent problem among the righties on this board. Everybody likes to spout off but few have the ability or the gumption to actually argue their twisted lines of logic to the bitter end.

or they don't have the time to try to reason with a bunch of dogmatic commercial drive ideologues who have never learned to think rationally about anything.
or maybe they just don't give a rat's ass whether or not you spaced-out nutballs agree or not.

You're a pompous little twit who's inability to form a sentence has remained as constant for the past year as your inability to remember your password. Get a job low-life

i have an excellent job frankie. good pay, good benefits, lots of time off, very rewarding work, and no union. how about you? you seem to be angry a lot. maybe you need to change your line of work.

Frank
I will have to disagree, what I find that as the debate gets heated, a number of the left wing posters here (I am not including yourself as I don’t remember you doing so) resort to name calling and smearing tactics. It’s a shame as there can be some interesting stuff posted here, but signal to noise ratio can be a bit high.

Colin, I usually never do but the only thing Elliot has ever done in his entire time on this board, under various names, is name call.

I've challenged him many times to at least be part of the debate and make some points but all he does is throw out these stupid little snide comments on a consistent basis.

If somebody wants to argue I'm all for it but if all I get in response is repetitive bs then I'll call them on it.

There did used to be better arguments on this board but guys like Elliot have a lowest common denominator effect over time.

little ellioit writes above:

"I have an excellent job frankie. good pay, good benefits, lots of time off, very rewarding work, and no union."

And, you must remember that little elliot did this all on his own:

"i was born in the east end many years ago in a very poor neighbourhood. no money, no car, single working mom, the works. do you think i've used that as an excuse to suck off the hind teat of government for the rest of my life? today i make a very healthy living and support a wonderful family. didn't take help from anyone and felt very good about doing it myself."

So, little elliot has every right to dump on those less fortunate than he. After all, he did all own his own. Or did he? When I asked if he really did it on his own, I put it this way:

"Congratulations Elliot. Your background sounds pretty much like mine. My old neighbourhood is gone to redevelopment. And I too now manage to keep my family in some comfort. But, you say you didn't take help from anyone? How about your Mom? Seems she managed to instill in you a sense of self. Oh yah, how about the public school system that provided the readin' and writin' and enough of an education to enable you to succeed? But wait, that would mean thanking those lefty teachers. Can't do that. How about health care? I have a suspicion that regular health care had a part in your development. But wait, that means thanking Tommy Douglas. Can't do that either. I don't know your vintage Elliot, but I remember the days when a visit to the Doctor or Dentist meant paying a bill, so that meant few trips to the Doctor or Dentist, even when needed. And, I'm pretty sure that minimum wages laws, health and safety standards in the workplace, paid vacations and statutory holidays have nothing to do with your comfort level. Because hey, ah crap, to accept that would mean having to thank the trade union movement. We surely cannot do that. Mom or Gramma on a pension now Elliot? Old age security? Prescription drug coverage? Perhaps living in assisted care? It really is too easy to point out that none of us, successful or otherwise, has done it, or is doing it alone. What is easy to point out is the evident hypocrisy in knee jerk responses to complex problems."

Guess what folks? little elliot has never responded to the obvious. He benefited from socialist public schooling. He benefited from public health care. He benefited from working conditions and standards that began when organized labour demanded it. All the great wages and conditions are built on the standards created by the workers who are in unions, but little elliot is to small a person to acknowledge reality. And, no doubt, his Mom is benefiting from socialistic support for seniors.

Everyone knows someone like little elliot and most of us treat such folks like we would a dog. A little comfort and encouragement perhaps, but we would not trust such a simpleton with anything important.

hard for lefty freaks like you to believe that anyone could do anything on his own eh wally-boy? yes it is possible, despite what your union leader and you local ndp candidate tell you. and you obviously don't like it. are you sure you aren't planning to move to sweden anytime soon? you might feel more accepted there. less anger, less stress. you could suck off the hind teat of gov't well into your nineties.

To Blonde Pitbull: Your right. I stand corrected. My numbers don't match.

These are accurate: I'm quoting CBC News online.
Canada spent approximately $130 billion on health care in 2004, according to Health Care in Canada, a report released by the Canadian Institute for Health Information on June 8, 2005.

Of that, just over $90 billion was spent by governments delivering public health care. Almost $40 billion was spent on private health care.

Dr. Albert Schumacher, president of the Canadian Medical Association estimates that 75 per cent of health-care services are delivered privately, but funded publicly. However, other bloggers have contested this statement.

Where the Canadian system stands out is in the financing of hospital and physician services. Canada's 93 per cent funding of hospitals and 98 per cent funding of physicians is higher than any of the other countries, where patients must bear part of the cost.

Of the private component of health care funding, half is accounted for by private insurance. For the other half, Canadians are out-of-pocket to pay for dental care, drugs, nursing homes and vision care.