|
|
| Subject: to Richard Re: medical |
|
|
|
I was watching Anderson Cooper last night and he had 2 guests on discussing medicare.
I heard an astounding piece of information. More cars are now being produced in Ontario than Michigan. Simply because a US made car has $6,000 employer related medical costs tied to each and every car. Canadian employers pay $800.
Starbucks spends more on medical for its employees than it does on coffee.
I almost fell over.
[12-02-2008,14:23]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon |
|
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
I had heard this one before but 50 million people have no medical insurance at all. that is almost 1.5 times the population of Canada!!!!!!!!
[12-02-2008,14:26]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
Exactly. We´ve been seeing those same reports, and people down here are getting increasingly fed up. It´s one of the main reasons why GM, Ford, and Chrysler can´t compete with foreign brands. Of those 50 million uninsured, many die prematurely because they never see a doctor when they should (recent stats out on this).
For small business owners, it´s unrealistically expensive to provide health care coverage for their workers. Many other people are in fear of losing their jobs, not only because of loss of salary, but loss of health care. It gives the employer near life and death control over employees´ lives.
What seems to be coming out of all this is a probable big win for the Democrats this fall. Both offer universal health coverage. Not nearly on the scale of the single-payer system you guys have, but at least subsidized coverage as needed for all. And Obama is now the odds-on favorite to beat Hillary for the nomination, and beat McCain in the general election.
To me, Canada figured this out correctly long ago. Lester Pearson in my mind was a visionary. Down here, elements of the 50´s McCarthy era never disappeared, and persisted with the attitude that any social program organized by the government was somehow socialist, or read communist.
Rudy Guiliani, before he left the Rupublican race, slammed
"socialized" medicine in the UK and Canada, saying nobody would want those systems here. We see where he´s at now.
So yes, interesting to see the financial and economic cost
of what many continue to say is the "best" system in the world.
[12-02-2008,15:03]
[**.53.224.249]
Richard |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
oddly it was a preacher named Tommy Douglas that pushed the universal medical idea. Back then it was the religious left (not right) that was looking to care for those less fortunate than themselves (what a novel concept)
On the CNN show last night they were cautioning that unless something is done by the 3rd year of this next presidents term, the war in Iraq is going to look cheap. The first Baby Boomers are retiring and it is going to bankrupt medicade.
at the same time, they were suggesting premiums are only a small part of the picture and that costs will need to be controlled at the same time. Not an easy task.
I can´t believe that so many states have attempted a public system and failed.
...and I have a sinking feeling the democratic establishment is not going to let Obama be president.
[12-02-2008,15:21]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
Will check out Tommy Douglas history. Hadn´t heard the name before. Am always interested in background of how things developed there.
Yep, Medicare (65 and over here) is also getting expensive, but it´s a lot more efficient in delivering health care than the private system. The Baby boomer generation is starting to retire, and taxes are going to have to increase to pay for social services like this. (They´d flip out here if they saw the taxes you guys pay.)
Funny that Medicare here is also the same name of the health system there. Medicaid here by the way is a different system for the extremely destitute.
Speaking of Obama´s chances, this odds website is sometimes quoted in the news. It´s seen as pretty reliable in predicting actual events. One can also wager bets there. Only a few weeks ago Obama was a long shot. Today, he has a 72% chance of nomination vs. 29% for Clinton.
http://www.intrade.com/
You´re right about the unknown nature of the Democratic establishment, or I think you may mean the super delegates.
But they´ll probably migrate to Obama, as they see his popularity rapidly increasing and his winning more and more states.
[12-02-2008,16:39]
[**.53.224.249]
Richard |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
Let´s hope that the Democrats win in November and some drastic change will occur in US.
If not, I should be sitting somewhere in Canada by then, laughing at the fact that I had been living down there for too long.
I am not surprised at Sharon´s comments. The medical system here is so screwed. How can politicians be so blind ? I am glad that Canada does not have the same system, seems to be ruled by smarter people ... maybe ?
[12-02-2008,18:58]
[**.204.10.73]
CBV333 |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
I suspect there are lots of smart people in the US, but most definitely, we have a different perspective on a few things.
[12-02-2008,21:06]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
I know this is off-topic. But Obama is winning big again tonight. MSNBC commentators are already saying he appears to be unstoppable. What a refreshing change to see a man of color and world-vision representing the country, compared to what was endured for the last 8 years.
[12-02-2008,23:20]
[**.53.224.249]
Richard |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
just heard Obama speak. wow.
[13-02-2008,00:14]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
Had the same reaction. wow, what a speaker.
[13-02-2008,01:06]
[**.53.224.249]
Richard |
(in reply to: to Richard Re: medical)
I must confess I was a little jealous. Wish Canada had someone we could be so passionate about - or at least someone equally inspiring. Canadian politics is very boring and uneventful.
[13-02-2008,01:41]
[**.155.160.37]
Sharon |
|
