Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

something has been pissing me off alot for awhile and its americas health care. i live in canada where there is free health care but 4000$ for AN AMBULANCE RIDE???? I would rather crawl to the hospital. 6500$ for fixing a finger???

its inhuman to charge for such things.
if uve seen sicko u know a women took her dying daughter to a hospital and the said her plan doesnt cover this hospital but her daughter needed treatment. she was forced to wait till she could get to another hospital but by this time her daUGHTER PASSED AWAY!!@!!$#$^$!#&^$&!

maybe America should put so much money into their war effort and put some into health care.

Every country has their own problems, and not everyone always agrees with what is going on, whether it is the war, health care, or even global warming. Bottom line is, living in a first world country, we are lucky to get any sort of treatment, and there are worse cases all over the world.

On the issue of Michael Moore, he likes to dramatize things. A lot. So yes, we are given a sad case of a daughter's passing, but do you know how often this actually happens? He will only give enough of the story to cause outrage. While I agree our health care isn't the most ideal, at least we are lucky enough to have it.

--------------------

And have you found your joy, in this near dead world of ours?

why do you care about americas health care if you live in canada? i agree with gabe...while it may not be the best, at least we are fortunate enough to have it.

--------------------

Aujourdhui a commence avec toi.

Being Canadian, it's easy to criticize the Health Care systems of others, but honestly, to do so after watching a Michael Moore documentary is absurd. As Gabe mentioned, there is an extreme bias and level of exaggeration that he is often likely to employ and very, very few things he supposedly supports does he actually stand by. He's a sensationalist and a poor film maker, delivers fiction to the masses and really is only lining his pockets with your sentimentality.

That isn't to say that the American system is not without flaw, certainly it's not as ideal as the Canadian system or whatever other part of the world that ushers in free health-care, but they also have a higher level of medicine performed, better facilities and much better trained doctors. Does it balance out? Maybe not, but it isn't like they don't have their strengths, either.

I can't believe I'm bothering to write a serious reply to this, given that you probably base your political and social opinions the same way you make your video game judgment, based on mass appeal, but regardless, I felt I had to say something.

--------------------

Okay, but there was a goat!

Quote (Gabe @ 16th July 2008 02:13)

Every country has their own problems, and not everyone always agrees with what is going on, whether it is the war, health care, or even global warming.  Bottom line is, living in a first world country, we are lucky to get any sort of treatment, and there are worse cases all over the world.

On the issue of Michael Moore, he likes to dramatize things.  A lot.  So yes, we are given a sad case of a daughter's passing, but do you know how often this actually happens?  He will only give enough of the story to cause outrage.

There are problems everywhere, and nobody will ever be satisfied about anything, to be honest. Healthcare is definitely not an exception.

And about ambulance rides...well, there are certain situations where you absolutely need one and some when you don't. You don't need one every time you go to the hospital...and I'd rather pay a lot of money for a good, safe treatment, than a cheap botched up job.

By the way, Michael Moore is completely biased, and does not show both sides of the story, as good documentaries should do. What was the hospital like that day? Crowded? Busy? They probably couldn't get to it in time. Gabe's right, it does happen a lot, but because of medical treatment, a lot of people get to live a longer life, too.

This post has been edited by Harlequin on 16th July 2008 02:49

--------------------

I say what I wanna say, I play how I wanna play.

Quote (blizzera god @ 15th July 2008 20:15)

6500$ for fixing a finger???

I've broken/dislocated several fingers over the course of the last few years, a couple of times before I found a full time job so I was without health insurance. Even in Chicago, which isn't the cheapest place around, I never had to pay more than $500 when all was said and done.

--------------------

Hip-Hop QOTW:

"Yeah, where I'ma start it at, look I'ma part of that
Downtown Philly where it's realer than a heart attack
It wasn't really that ill until the start of crack
Now it's a body caught every night on the Almanac"

"Game Theory"
The Roots

no i mean this guy had part of is finger cut off.

i saw on 60 minutes a relief company that helps people in the amazon to people who need it. well they ended up in a america helping small towns who cant afford to be insured.
i felt very sorry for these people cause hundreds of people came.

i think barock obama will be one of your best presidants and i m soooo glad he beat h clinten
she was gonna sue violent video games. ( the very nutrients i survive on )

Blizzera, stop getting your news updates from political satire cartoon strips and fat slobs who make false "shockumentaries". Seriously, Michael Moore? Who relies on him as a serious news source?

America's healthcare system is flawed, no doubt about it. You think it's bad now though? Just wait till it's free. I would keep our current healthcare system in a heartbeat over what Canada is currently sporting. A doctor here will cost you, but you are going to get immediate or near-immediate care, and you are going to receive it from top notch providers more likely than not.

Concerning the politicians, what are you talking about. What evidence is there that Hillary Clinton was going to target videogame makers for litigation? Is Barack Obama your favorite American candidate for the sole reason that you don't think he would sue gaming companies? (the only reason you cited)

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

umm yah he was,
and you cant compare Canadas health care to americas, 6 and a half years ago my older brother got hit by a car and the ambulance came before my mom hung up the phone. he was happy he only broke his leg and Canada's health care quality is just as good or even better then Americas.

im positive in the future America will have free health care and same with global warming being solved.
also u could say i don't like America for 1 reason,
they don't like everyone else, i hear countless stereotypes from them and they always think their the perfect nation.

The funny thing about America's health care is how much it varies from situation to situation. The costs you stated in the original post are at the very far extreme of the spectrum - I took an ambulance for free in March '07 after having an eye injury. My health insurance is very good and I pay very little for any visits to the doctor or hospital and probably end up waiting less time than I would in Canada. I have no problem shelling out a bit of cash for a co-pay or a prescription. From what I hear from Canadian friends, the most annoying part of the health care system is that too many people take advantage of it - that is to say, you wait forever to get any procedure taken care of. I'd much rather pay a bit to get through the process more quickly.

--------------------

Hey, put the cellphone down for a while
In the night there is something wild
Can you hear it breathing?
And hey, put the laptop down for a while
In the night there is something wild
I feel it, it's leaving me

it depends what situation, if u break something u go right in but if u have a tummy ache they dont rush u in and then charge u money.

and "a bit of cash" some people suffer because of the health care debt their in. not everybody can afford top notch health care in America.

Quote (Neal @ 16th July 2008 08:21)

The funny thing about America's health care is how much it varies from situation to situation.  The costs you stated in the original post are at the very far extreme of the spectrum - I took an ambulance for free in March '07 after having an eye injury.  My health insurance is very good and I pay very little for any visits to the doctor or hospital and probably end up waiting less time than I would in Canada.  I have no problem shelling out a bit of cash for a co-pay or a prescription.  From what I hear from Canadian friends, the most annoying part of the health care system is that too many people take advantage of it - that is to say, you wait forever to get any procedure taken care of.  I'd much rather pay a bit to get through the process more quickly.

You explained my sentiments much clearer than I did.

Blizzera, "free" healthcare is not free. It has to be paid for by something, somewhere. What pays for it are higher taxes.

Ask this question to the average American who goes to the doctor once or twice a year:

Would you rather pay higher taxes all year round for "free" healthcare that you rarely use, or would you rather have a small co-pay that you only pay when you actually need medical services?

Would "free" healthcare benefit the poor? Absolutely. The very, very strong chance to see the system abused would also be a very real possibility. Financially this change would not hurt the poor in the slightest, since they would not be paying for the medical care through taxes or through income (though possibly through a slight reduction in government benefits received).

Would it affect the wealthy? Possibly, in that their quality of care might decline somewhat with the loss of access to exclusive, high-end doctors.

Would it affect the middle class? In a devastatingly negative way. The extra taxation, particularly now with the economy in the state it is in, would be too much for the vast majority of Americans to bear.



As far as comparing Canada's healthcare system to that of the US, everything I've ever seen on the subject has the US rated higher on average. This is mostly due to the downtime Canadian healthcare inflicts on it's patients. Waiting three months for a vital MRI, ect, are the flavor of horror stories that I usually hear.



Your ignorance of America particularly shines through here though when you state:

Quote (Blizzera god)

im positive in the future America will have free health care and same with global warming being solved.
also u could say i don't like America for 1 reason,
they don't like everyone else, i hear countless stereotypes from them and they always think their the perfect nation.

First, "free" healthcare is nowhere near a foregone conclusion in America, which I am thankful for. Second, global warming (take your pick on whether it exists or not) will not be fixed by Barack Obama, or any other American president. Third.... well, you give your reason for not liking America as being because you've heard the steroetypes that say we ar ethe perfect nation. Do I need to point out how asinine it is to label an entire nation based off of the stereotpyes you've picked up in school? Have you ever even met an American face to face to discuss these issues, or are you just going by what your mates in the schoolyard have told you?





--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

In Denmark, we pay very high taxes. In return, everyone gets free health care among other things. It's great!

I think it's a very human thing to do, letting "everyone" pay for everyones health issues, since health is based somewhat on factors that we can't control. Some people get sick often, and it might not be their fault, why should they pay more than the rest?

This post has been edited by Ganolink on 16th July 2008 15:37

--------------------

All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Broccoli to die.

i guess u must be surprised we have the money for free health care, were not spending too much money going to war. and i did a test today, i called up my cousin asked him about sterotypes in america.
almost all of his friends think all Canadians say "eh" and all British people have bad teeth.
they think theyre better then everyone else.

are taxes are just about the same as Americas, im not sure whos is higher but in my opinion i hope our taxes go up more cause it goes to a good cause. ( unlike paying American solders who through dogs off bridges ) (yes that happened)

lets end this argument now so someone close the topic.

ps. America has tons of awesome stuff and is a very great nation (not the best cause there is no "best") and i dont hate ALL Americans.

without there is no halo 3

Quote (Hamedo @ 16th July 2008 11:28)

Would it affect the middle class?  In a devastatingly negative way.  The extra taxation, particularly now with the economy in the state it is in, would be too much for the vast majority of Americans to bear.

Whoa whoa whoa, I think that might be a pretty gross oversimplification of the issues. The middle class are already the ones picking up the greatest amount of the burden for healthcare in this country, IMO, for two reasons:

1) In terms of percentage of salary/wage, it's clear that middle-class Americans who have health insurance through their employer are paying a greater amount than the top 10% of earners, or even the poor/working poor (who are more likely to either not have jobs, or have hourly jobs that do not confer any benefits such as health insurance, subsidized or no). This is due to premiums that are jumping, on average, several percent a year through this decade.

2) Emergency-room providers have an obligation to treat anyone who comes in, whether they have any realistic chance of paying or not. This means those who have no insurance can go to the ER for something as severe as you can think of, or something as mundane as you can think of, and they will be treated. Those who pay are keeping up their end of the bargain - those who don't, while they face the spectre of collections agencies going after the money, pass the burden on to others as hospitals are forced to cover those bad debts by charging other patients more and more. This dovetails nicely with the notion that premiums are increasing, as stated above; insurance companies charge more because they're having to pay bigger bills to the healthcare providers, and that cost just keeps trickling down until there's nowhere else for it to turn.

In theory, this means that the burden would not necessarily become larger on the middle class if all healthcare was nationalized - if configured properly, the transition from private healthplan to federal healthplan would take place right on the paystub, and a good many people would barely notice. Of course, it could just as easily be set up poorly and add that burden to which you refer, but it's anything but a foregone conclusion, is what I'm saying.

Note: I don't actually think I'm for federal healthcare at the moment, FYI, because for one, I'm not confident that Congress is yet capable of setting it up properly, as mentioned above; additionally, and I know this is selfish but, I'm looking at my budget right now and I see that I'm covered for medical, dental, vision, and my flexible spending account all for only 5.1% of my family's combined gross income. That seems pretty reasonable to me.

Also, blizzera, I refuse to close the topic just because you want to make comments about how Americans are clearly all warmongers and then guarantee yourself the last word.

This post has been edited by Rangers51 on 16th July 2008 15:52

--------------------

"To create something great, you need the means to make a lot of really bad crap." - Kevin Kelly

Why aren't you shopping AmaCoN?

how pathetic i just stated i don't hate all Americans.
maybe u should read the posts before u put up insults.

Moderator Edit

I didn't say that you did, actually, but I understand your point well enough. However, I definitely didn't insult you, and I definitely am not closing the thread because there's plenty to discuss regardless of the fact that you're not interested in it any more. -R51

This post has been edited by Rangers51 on 16th July 2008 16:11

Quote (Hamedo @ 16th July 2008 08:37)

A doctor here will cost you, but you are going to get immediate or near-immediate care, and you are going to receive it from top notch providers more likely than not.

I'm not going to deny that the Canadian health care system does require a good amount of taxation and certainly, it gets abused. What's nice, however, is that we -have- the option to abuse it and will get treated regardless. Don't get me wrong, I don't mean that everyone should be running to hospitals and clinics for paper cuts and stomach aches, but I do rather like that we can get treated for anything without worrying about a cost. Of course, we don't have the option to turn to that "more expensive, better drained Doctor", but we do have a choice of facility in most cases, and if you're smart enough to do your research, you'll end up with a high quality Doctor all the same. Now, sure, there are some horror stories about the Canadian system too, mainly about terribly long waiting times and overcrowded hospitals, resulting in rushed care, but that, just like the American's extreme costs, isn't something that happens regularly. I've been hospitalized for a long list of reasons ranging from something minor (dislocated shoulder) to some...more interesting things. Honestly, I've never had to wait that long. Maybe that's just because I live in Montreal, where there are a number of hospitals that coordinate between each other the number of people they treat at once.

One complaint, however, is that while you do not have to pay for medical treatment thanks to our Medicare system, you do have to pay for the ambulance ride and that can be just as expensive as a small procedure! I don't know if they do this everywhere, but I do think it's ridiculous, especially to charge 200$. At that price, never mind an ambulance, I'll just take a cab!

Now, I don't mean any of that to say that our system is better or that the Americans should employ the same Health Care services that we do, but, for reasons Josh has already posted, I do not think such a change would be as drastic as Hamedo has stated. If done properly, of course. At any rate, I'm getting away from my point, that as it stands, the system doesn't really need to be changed, regardless of what Michael Moore would spoon feed to you.

--------------------

Okay, but there was a goat!

You say something in your first paragraph DF, and that Josh stated earlier in his post, that is a very good thing about the Canadian healthcare system. The fact is, it *is* avaialble to all, and that is a great thing.

There are pros and CoNs (heh) to both countrys' systems that are easy to point out. The wait times in Canada, the high cost in the US, ect. I suppose the prudent thing to do would be to declare neither as "better", but I still stand by my belief that what we have currently is what works for us.

Could universal healthcare work for the US? With a LOT of work, possibly. I honestly don't look for it to happen, if it does at all, within my lifetime. I'm with Josh in that the system would have to be balanced on a razors edge in order to ensure that it runs properly, and with the crowd we have in Washington now (dems and reps alike), I don't think we have the people who can get it done the right way.

Josh, you went very in-depth on ideas that take what I was saying about the impact on middle-class families and expanding on them. I enjoyed the read.

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

I stopped reading this thread after I saw you said Barrack Obama will be a great president based on a myth about video games.

Are you really that ignorant and bored that you need to make up wild, baseless claims on a final fantasy related forum to make yourself look intelligent/get attention? I'm sure everyone here has brought up valuable points, and anyone with common sense would just give up the fight and admit defeat, but you're so thick and dense that you keep trying to refine your argument; and yet, you still get shot down.

Everyone on this board would be wise to just stop replying to Blizzera God, because he obviously just makes these threads for people to bite and talk. There are other ways to initiate conversation. Maybe if you quit playing your video games and got out more, you'd understand some conversation techniques.

Moderator Edit

C'mon, keep it less personal, please. You're only feeding it further, man. -R51

This post has been edited by Rangers51 on 16th July 2008 20:47

--------------------

And have you found your joy, in this near dead world of ours?

Well, I don't like America's health system, (especially my town's hospital) but will making it "free" on taxpayer's money solve it? Hardly.

First of all, our tax dollars are being used for other things. The regrettable war effort, (in my opinion) which we DO need to spend money on, whether or not we stay there or not. Millions of children's schoolcare, Millions of miles of roads to upkeep and maintain. We have millions of government officials in thousands upon thousands of towns to pay. And probably at least a hundred things I'm forgetting, AND we are nearing recession. Some of the places our money coudl definately be of better use of improving our Health Care, but unfortunately it's not.

Second, would people exploit it? Most certainly. America has the highest number of lawsuits per person in the world, and many are silly, frivolous, or just plain stupid. So I believe that many greedy people will attempt to abuse a free health-care system.

Third, I do believe that Hamedo, R51, and several others bring up great points in their posts, if you are interested in this topic, take the time to read the thought out posts by several members.


Sorry for my little soapbox standing. I have given this a bit of thought.
(I started thinking about it when I saw a program about how Danes were the happiest country 'or at least most content' and they have free Health-care, daycare, education 'up to college even', and senior care even. Probably a few others. Am I right Ganolink?)

--------------------

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter, and those who matter, don't mind."
-Dr. Seuss

First of all, I would like to say one thing:

I believe in freedom.

By adopting socialist policies, you might lower the costs that we have to pay for medical services. But for whom? For the people who require constant or extensive services. For those Americans who do not, the extra tax burden certainly does not help.

Socialism is a big pooling system: everybody gives X amount, and then whoever needs help receives the money to pay for it from the total. So that way, HYPOTHETICALLY, no one would go without the services they need (since there are holes in every system). But in such a system, you will find that EVERYONE has to share the burden. That means that, no matter what, you will have some people in the group who are getting a great return on what they give the government, say three times what they pay in taxes.

As Hamedo has stated, nothing is free. So when that said person requires three times what they paid in 'free' health care taxes, someone else in the group is going to have to make up the difference. And who will suffer this burden? A healthy citizen who does not require these medical services but is required to pay the tax regardless.

This is not freedom, and it is not what America stands for. America is all about each man or woman being entitled to earn a living in their own fashion according to their own will, and spend their earnings in whichever way suits them. It is not only unfair but unconstitutional to strip Americans, or any other person, of their hard-earned dollars.

So what happens when everyone plunders everyone for healthcare services? EVERYONE loses, by way of giving up their freedoms, if not by loosing a considerable amount of money.

Another reminder for the socialist policy makers: regardless of what Michael Moore wants us to believe, innocent little girls are not the only ones that will receive the benefits of Universal, Socialist Healthcare. So will every gangster who is shot in a gang fight. So will every idiot who overdoses on drugs. The list can go on and on. This isn't abusing the system: this is how the system will be used! Why should the hard-working middle class be forced to reward idiotic and dangerous activity by paying for medical bills out of our own paychecks?

In a Communist system, workers could slack off and be unproductive while keeping their jobs, earnings, and relative well-being. What does this mean for a "free" health system? The very same. When people count on a safety net to be there, regardless of what happens, they will gradually neglect to prepare for the future. Are we to repay irresponsibility?

Taxation and Socialism are not the answers to our problems. We shouldn't have to re-defeat communism, here in the so-called Land of the Free. Americans, and all peoples, should be free to pursue whatever financial path they choose (and be held responsible for its successes or failures) on an individual basis. It is unjust to burden people with costs that do not relate to their own well-being. Universal Healthcare clearly goes against what our Constitution stands for by destroying our freedom of choice.

We've already seen how Communist, utopian ideas turn out in the end. I don't care if everyone else is going Socialist when it comes to healthcare. America must stand by the values which created her. Amen.

This post has been edited by Death Penalty on 16th July 2008 23:33

--------------------

Currently Playing : Final Fantasy V
Most Recently Beat : Elder Scrolls: Skyrim
Favorite Game : Final Fantasy X

The newest CoNcast is up! Have a listen!

Quote (Death Penalty @ 16th July 2008 19:20)

First of all, I would like to say one thing:

This wall of text is all to say one terrible simple point: That you, in fact, completely missed the point.

I don't even know where to begin with you, apart from saying that you can't have possibly flew further off the handle with this. Is there something wrong with even "gang bangers" or those who overdose on drugs receiving medical attention? If the Doctors who heal them do not turn them away, why should you? Everyone has a basic human right to health and "socialist" or current Health Care system, these people are -still- being treated.

Don't bring "freedom" into this, because the point is about whether or not the health care system works, a question you never even bothered to state your opinion on in the first place. Adopting a Health Care system like the one we Canadians have would not take away your right to spend your dollars on whatever you see fit, it would only mean that rather than paying a whole lot to ensure you get treatment, you'd be paying a tax year-round that guaranteed, should anything happen, you're covered.

Is that right for the USA at the moment? Probably not, but not because of any of the reasons you've listed, I'm afraid.

--------------------

Okay, but there was a goat!

Ok guys, despite the fact that the opposing perspective is being made by someone who doesn't use English very well, he does have a point.

I sprained my ankle, just a sprain. Well that sprain would up costing me 1,100 bucks in the long run, and a two year long billing issue because of complications due to not having insurance. My workplace has insurance, but it's premiums, co-pay and deductibles are ridiculous. Tennessee had covered me, but at the end of this month, I'm not sure if I will be. Americans need realistic health care that is adjusted to what they make, or assists them in covering what they can't and their insurer won't. I paid $75 bucks for a pair of crutches. That's $37.50 per crutch, wtf? I mean, I don't mind paying a bit of money for health care, but I don't want to constantly foot the bill because for every one of me that walk into an ER ready to fork over cash, there's thirty of them running in using the ER for a walk-in clinic.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think what we Americans are doing is working, but I don't think a transition from private to federal health care is a bad thing either.

Last but not least, stop this wall of text crap, if someone yammers on all day just tell them to edit the post and summarize better.
WALL OF TEXT BAAAAWWWW!

--------------------

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)

Quote (AnarchistDream @ 17th July 2008 01:27)

Americans need realistic health care that is adjusted to what they make, or assists them in covering what they can't and their insurer won't. I paid $75 bucks for a pair of crutches. That's $37.50 per crutch, wtf? I mean, I don't mind paying a bit of money for health care, but I don't want to constantly foot the bill because for every one of me that walk into an ER ready to fork over cash, there's thirty of them running in using the ER for a walk-in clinic.

I'm amazed that you can complain about the high cost of your health care in one breath and in the next criticize people who are forced to use the emergency room for non-emergencies because of the high cost of health care.

This post has been edited by karasuman on 17th July 2008 16:22

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

Quote (Dragon_Fire @ 16th July 2008 17:39)

Is there something wrong with even "gang bangers" or those who overdose on drugs receiving medical attention? If the Doctors who heal them do not turn them away, why should you?

Yes, as a matter of fact, there is something wrong with people who place themselves in situations that require medical attention through actions that they know may cause it. Here's the problem: It's not my problem, why should I pay for it? I'll give the bum on the street $1 cuz he asked and I'm a good person (even if he's going to use it for some cliche reason), but our government should not rip the money out of my paycheck to do the same.

Let's run some numbers for governments and healthcare:

Sources:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...k/print/ca.html
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...k/print/us.html
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...k/print/da.html

Denmark: Population 5,484,723 (July 2008 est.)
Canada: Population 33,212,696 (July 2008 est.)
^^ That's about 7X as much!
United States: Population 303,824,646 (July 2008 est.)
^^ That's 55X Denmark, and 9X Canada!

In a smaller country, the people can support eachother easier, however, you may think that more people means more money in the pool, right? Well, it does, but it also means more people are drawing that money from the pool, and since many of the people drawing from that pool aren't contributing (my biggest gripe), the money required : population curve moves exponentially. Meaning Little Denmark may have a great system, but I've heard stories of the disturbing flaws in Canada's (Viable Infant Mortality Rate anyone? I'll explain later.), which means if 7X the population throws some minor kinks in the system, what is 55X the population going to do?

Okay, let's talk about babies for a minute.

Infant Mortality Rate:
US: 6.30 deaths/1,000 live births
Canada: 5.08 deaths/1,000 live births
Denmark: 4.4 deaths/1,000 live births

Numbers look very anti-american... right?

I can't find data to back this up at the moment, but governments that have free healthcare have an Infant Mortality Rate, and a Viable Infant Mortality Rate. The Viable Infant Mortality Rate is the number of babies that died that had no complications upon delivery. The ones that (according to them) "Should have lived." If a baby dies because there were medical complications, that (again, according to them) "Doesn't count, because that baby was going to die anyways." That number gets reported to the regular Infant Mortality Rate, but that number is kept so hush-hush I can't even find it right now. The rates listed above are the ones reported by the countries themselves, and you'd better be darn sure that they're reporting that pretty "Viable" number, not the one that includes all the babies they let die.

Quote

Canada has been struggling the past few years with its infant mortality rate that high-risk pregnant Canadian women are being sent to the U.S. to ensure safe deliveries and newborn survival.In 1990 Canada was sixth ranking in low infant mortality rate, down to 25th spot in 2005, on the same ranking as Estonia with 5.4 deaths per 1,000 live births.

Source

Canada's dying babies are dying in the US! Their IMR should technically be 0, yet it's not!
The Canadian government doesn't even trust its own medical system! Why?

Socalized Health Care:

Pros: Everyone can use it.

No cost to the people.

Cons: Tax Increase

Lack of Specialization.
--- Meaning: There is no benefit to pursuing an extended docorate degree into a specific branch of health care, as all Doctors are subsidized equally by the government. So the least educated doctor gets all the same pay and benefits of the most educated doctor, except that the most educated doctor had fork out a %$^&-ton more money to earn his degree... I wouldn't be motivated either. Also meaning that there are less Obstetric doctors in Canada, which is why the mothers that may lose their babies are being shipped to the US to pump up our Infant Mortality Rate, because we won't lose ALL of them.

Waiting Lists
--- Meaning: For argument purposes, you get Appendicitis.
In the US, you go to the ER, they do a CT (cat) scan to see that the Appendix is inflamed and needs to be removed. They page a surgeon, and prep you for the OR. Within the next 6 hours, your Appendix is out, you spend a couple days in the hospital, and are then on your way.
In Canada, you go to the ER, maybe 5 hours later they'll get you in to do the CT scan, see that you have Appendicitis and need your Appendix removed. They write you a prescription for strong painkillers, and send you home... FOR TWO WEEKS (if they can get you in for surgery that early even). Two weeks later, if you're not dead, they'll remove your Appendix.
Wow! Good thing that it didn't rupture!


Also, the united states is incredibly fat, as obesity is now an "epidemic." And although people don't typically go to the doctor on a regular basis for being obese (yet some do), Type II Diabetes tends to compliment Obesity (and old age for that matter, as your body begins to build insulin resistances over time if genetically prone to it). Diabetes is an expensive disorder to have, as it involves many drugs and doctor visits because people are too lazy to just lose weight.

I pay for my own health insurance, and I'm darn glad I have it. If somebody wants insurance, I'm sure that Blue Cross - Blue Shield will pick up anybody for the right cost. Now THAT is equal: Everybody has the opportunity to get insurance. Leave my money alone. America is an equal opportunity country, not an equal give everything away to everybody else country. That the opposite of Capitalism, taking the power away from people who either a: earned it, or b: fell into it.

I whole-heartedly disapprove of the latter, but it exists, and should be accounted for. But give me a reason why I should be okay with ruining the healthcare system, I like free things too, but you're talking Quantity over Quality, and I'm going to go with a killing strike here: You're stupid if you think that.

--------------------

If internal struggles were as enjoyable and glamorous as the self conflicted wars within video game characters, we would all be statues, reveling in perpetual self war. -Me

Play me on Rock Band 2, GH-WT, or any other Xbox GH!
Xbox Gamertag-MeanJerry

Quote (blizzera god @ 16th July 2008 10:44)

are taxes are just about the same as Americas, im not sure whos is higher but in my opinion i hope our taxes go up more cause it goes to a good cause. ( unlike paying American solders who through dogs off bridges ) (yes that happened)

lets end this argument now so someone close the topic.

hold on hold on. step the hell back. you are on uncharted turff here. do not go making statements like this. YOU are the one being biased now. you think its a waste of money to pay our military just because 1 out of 10000 soldiers has a messed up brain? our soldiers do a hell of a lot for this world. (removed jingoism)

Moderator Edit

Whoah, whoah, whoah. I hate Canadians as much as the next guy, but that's because of this nasty french fry stuff I heard about in chat. Let's not insult each other based on nationality, okay?

and you wanna end this topic right when you throw out a blow like that? ha. talk about hit and run...

comming from a family of soldeirs and military-men, i take that extremely offensive.

This post has been edited by karasuman on 17th July 2008 20:03

--------------------

"Life: The deepest cut that wilt not heal. Fore it bleeds on and on as if an eternity. An endless river of blood in which death is thyne only escape. And as the tainted years pass, that escape muddles us with temptation."

Quote (karasuman @ 17th July 2008 11:22)

I'm amazed that you can complain about the high cost of your health care in one breath and in the next criticize people who are forced to use the emergency room for non-emergencies because of the high cost of health care.

I'm amazed at how little you think about a post before retorting with condescending rash responses. Kara, if you ever had a rapier wit it'd be with a wooden sword. For clarification, I don't like that people use the ER for non-emergencies. The (failed) logic of high cost of clinics is dwarfed when compared to the fact that lying down in an ER bed will run to $200 to $250 bucks. That is more than what most walk-in clinics run for an examination/consultation. Not to mention that the room itself is only one portion of an ER bill. So if anyone had a brain, they'd know that the ER was not the way to save money because of the high cost of health care. My wife had a tongue infection, went to a walk-in clinic, and was charged roughly $180 bucks. You know what the only thing they told her was? They told her she would be charged a minimum of $100 dollars for the visit, she didn't have to pay it up front.

So in the long run you're amazed about how I'm upset about health care costs, and how I complain about people making poor financial decisions? Wow you're sharp.

--------------------

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)

Quote

I'm amazed at how little you think about a post before retorting with condescending rash responses. Kara, if you ever had a rapier wit it'd be with a wooden sword.

Oh, SNAP.

Quote

So if anyone had a brain, they'd know that the ER was not the way to save money because of the high cost of health care.

Here's the part you're missing--it's the high cost of health care that FORCES people to use the ER for non-emergencies. Clinics like the one you mention are great, when they're available. In a city, sure, it'd be foolish to go pay for an ER visit when you could pay a fraction of that at a clinic. In a rural area with one major area hospital? Hahaha.

That's not the only situation that makes ER visits the only practical option, either. Some forms of cheap insurance will cover a much higher percentage of the cost of an "emergency" visit than they will a routine doctor's visit. ERs are also one of the only ways to obtain medical care without paying first.

The "poor financial decisions" you're lamenting are as much as result of the nature of the health care system as the higher prices you end up paying. One doesn't cause the other--they're both part of the same problem. Just like low-income individuals end up paying vastly more for a mortgage through required insurance and higher rates, they also suffer a double-whammy from not being able to afford quality health coverage.

If I didn't know by now to expect little better than this out of you, I'd be astonished at your blithe assumption that people who use the ER for non-emergencies are simply too stupid to make better "financial decisions." Why don't you just say that anyone with a brain wouldn't be poor in the first place?

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

If you're complaining about reading my opinion on the matter, then you can simply skip over it in the future. This is a topic about health care, and I plan on making my arguement, regardless of who is incapable of reading a handful of paragraphs. Sorry if all these words are too challenging for anybody!

Quote

Here's the problem: It's not my problem, why should I pay for it?

Thank you! Why should I have to pay for someone else? Why should someone else have to pay for me? Why can't all of us just be responsible for our own health bills?

I don't object to anyone being able to recieve medical assistance. I object to the fact that the responsible, working public would have to pay for those who lead dangerous lifestyles. Also, I never used the term "gang bangers", which really has nothing to do with the situation.

This has everything to do with freedom. We should have the freedom to chose what we pay for! I should not be FORCED against my own free will to pay for someone else. If someone wants to DONATE the money that they earn to a charity that helps people pay their medical bills, then I congratulate them. However, NO ONE should be forced against their will to give their money to any charity cause.

BASICALLY, I believe that if someone wants to buy something for themselves, they should also have to pay for it... themselves!

In my last post I spoke of a lack of motivation. Leilong said it himself: If doctors get paid the same regardless of their skill or field, then what reason do they have to work hard? I tell you what they don't have: greed. Which is, believe it or not, the driving force behind the entire idea of a capitalist economy.

--------------------

Currently Playing : Final Fantasy V
Most Recently Beat : Elder Scrolls: Skyrim
Favorite Game : Final Fantasy X

The newest CoNcast is up! Have a listen!

Quote (karasuman @ 17th July 2008 15:00)

Here's the part you're missing--it's the high cost of health care that FORCES people to use the ER for non-emergencies.  Clinics like the one you mention are great, when they're available.  In a city, sure, it'd be foolish to go pay for an ER visit when you could pay a fraction of that at a clinic.  In a rural area with one major area hospital?  Hahaha.

That's not the only situation that makes ER visits the only practical option, either.  Some forms of cheap insurance will cover a much higher percentage of the cost of an "emergency" visit than they will a routine doctor's visit.  ERs are also one of the only ways to obtain medical care without paying first. 

The "poor financial decisions" you're lamenting are as much as result of the nature of the health care system as the higher prices you end up paying.  One doesn't cause the other--they're both part of the same problem.  Just like low-income individuals end up paying vastly more for a mortgage through required insurance and higher rates, they also suffer a double-whammy from not being able to afford quality health coverage. 

If I didn't know by now to expect little better than this out of you, I'd be astonished at your blithe assumption that people who use the ER for non-emergencies are simply too stupid to make better "financial decisions."  Why don't you just say that anyone with a brain wouldn't be poor in the first place?

First off, I did not advocate that the local walk-in clinics are the only option anywhere. My pal Ian is available to ER visit based health care as well as appointment based care on the conditions that his wages are so crap, that they feel no need to charge him inflated prices. They know they're not going to make a lot, but because Ian makes well informed decisions to consult billing professionals in case of emergency, he came out the better in the long run when something happened. Do I think it is right that rural areas suffer from poor medical care from lack of doctors in walk-in clinics, no I didn't, you assumed such statements. I've gone without health insurance most of my life, I empathize with those individuals, and I've gotten the short end of the stick as a result of poor medical coverage. I've come out the wiser only through experience. I think it is criminal that anyone else should be in the situation as well. I advocate a form of privatized medical coverage supported by socialized health care, if not socialized on a final basis.

So you think it is alright to believe that using the ER in order to file a medical situation as emergent simply to pay less of a premium is alright? When have I ever defended the sharks in the medical insurance field? I do not advocate the unbalanced coverage of medical providers. I cannot persecute individuals over making the best of what their insurance covers, but I can blame the result. If insurance providers can cover a higher rate of an emergent bill, they can cover the same for a non-emergent. I never claimed that the insurance providers were clean.

Of course these "poor financial decisions" I'm lamenting are as much as result of the nature of the health care system as the higher prices I end up paying. I said that in my first post when I said that these inflated prices were a result of people flooding the ER and getting out with little to no bill as a result of the insurer's bulldog tactics, or the lack of the poor's ability to pay. I just said it in a way to say that for every one of me in the ER there are thirty of "them." If you could gain an understanding of my posts beyond a shallow glance you'd understand the perspective, you blind twit.

Moderator Edit

Seriously, DF is right in his next post. What possible motivation do you have to start calling names? What are you gaining by this other than reminding everyone that you hate Karasuman? I honestly don't think anyone will be impressed or convinced by cheapening the argument this way - I don't think I've seen anyone else calling names, well, at least not in your direction. -R51

This post has been edited by Rangers51 on 18th July 2008 11:49

--------------------

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)