Why do conservatives alwways refer to Canada's health system as "poor"?

Question

Most Canadians I know--and I live very close to Canada and visit often--think it's great.

edit: our system is OK, but only if you casn afford it. I have insurance, and I can't afford the 20% co-pay. I've been sued by the hospital where I had needed surgery, and I only make about 13,000.00 per yr. So, now, I don't even go to the dr. for needed check-ups.

edit: Thank you to everyone who gave well thought-out answers. I've learned a lot.
"No, thank you" to all who have heard a few stories about "heart surgery" and want to make broad statements about the whole Canadian health care system.
Canada DOES have some of the best health care in the world; please quit denigrating it. I was simply asking about the economic and intellectual reasons for the conservatives' lack of support for "socialized" medicine. Some very intelligent "cons" have answered, and I truly appreciate the dialogue.

Answer 1

As a conservative I'll take a stab at it hopefully in an intelligent manner and avoid the partisan comments of some. First I would point out that the available medical care in the US is by a fair margin the best in the world. The key word for some in that statement is available.Yes there are people in the US without any coverage and their care is limited to emergent care which can not be refused by a hospital. But far fewer than is sometimes portrayed in the media. According to the census bureau 88.7% of all Americans enjoy some type of health insurance coverage either through employers, Medicare/Medicaid, or private policies. That leaves the temporarily uncovered and truely indigent people who can not afford health policies.

Now some clame that government health care is better because it covers all and is so called free. But you see it isn't free and it doesn't distribute health care equally as claimed. If you take Canada for example the avg. marginal tax is about 35% in the US the average marginal tax rate is about 17%. the increased taxes are what pay for the socialized system in Canada. so if u take the median household income in the U.S. of about $45000 you can see that he is paying an additional $675 for that added security. if you take your example of $13k it works out to $195 a month. Now the proponents of national health care say this would cover those who can not afford health insurance.and it would.. That said however if they can't afford health insurance haw are they going to afford the increased taxation to cover that so called "free" health care. As for it being equal believe me those with the money will still be able to pay for private supplemental policies that allow them access to better medical care it happens in Canada all the time. Where do they go to the U. S. of course. Those not able to afford this luxury are left with what the government offers alone. So you can see the system may be fairer but certainly not equal health care for all. While the Canadian model provides pretty good wellness care, Birthing/neonatal and emergent care when it come to elective procedures many Americans would consider it unacceptable. What do I mean by elective? Well, The hip replacement surgery was one example but others are Repair of an infants cleft pallet, Carpel tunnel surgery reconstructive surgery after a disfiguring injury or illness. In Canada you can be on a waiting list from 6 months to 2 yrs for elective procedures. would this be acceptable to you if you had a degenerated knee or hip and couldn't leave your house, work or visit family and friends.The main objection most conservatives object to government health care is simply the government does not spend its dollars wisely or efficiently for the most part. Witness all the pork barrel programs, the $xxx toilet seat etc..We believe government is bureaucratic by nature and is not the most efficient means of providing health care we believe it is wasteful in spending and subject to the pressures of the give me more electorate.
Now I am not blind to the need for better health care for all including the working poor. This is what I would deem a better alternative.
1-Make employers contribution to health plans 100% deductable
2- Require Employers to cover all full time employees with basic catastrophic care benefits
3- Require all employees to contribute 5% of earning to a medical savings acct. up to a capped amount say $100,000 lifetime.
a. the medical savings account could be used for any medical
expense form a bottle of aspirin to physicals to paying the
deductible on the employer catastrophic plan
b. The Medical savings account would accrue tax free and
never expire as current medical savings accounts do.
4. Retain the current Medicare/Medicaid system for the truly
indigent and elderly.
While no system is perfect, our current system,The Canadian model or the one I proposed. I think my model would provide the broadest choice while covering about 95% of the population while maintaining financial viability in the face of an aging populace. My plan would also make people consumers again responsible for spending on their own health daily health care which I believe is much of the problem in our current system. People now a days because insurance covers it or they are on public assistance go to emergency rooms for simple illnesses like the flu where costs ant up to 400% higher because someone else is paying the bulk of the bill or they have no insurance. While I served in the military where care is free I saw this all the time. Mothers would bring little johnny in after hours to the ER because they couldn't be bothered to take an hour off work to come into the clinic during regular hours. It was a matter of convenience, apathy and it cost them nothing to do this. Most people today put more thought in to choosing a hair stylist or buying a TV than in making sound financial decissions regarding their health care.
Well those are this this Conservatives views take them for what they are my humble oppinion

Answer 2

What the conservatives mean by "poor" is for lengthy waits and the coverage is provided by the government. This is also a classic outlook from the view of american politics because essentially, with how our form of government is *intended* to function, healthcare is at the discretion of the patient, not a federal entity.

The difference between the two systems comes from the source of funding. In Canada you're granted care by the government. In the States, that care is provided directly from a physician. This forms the basis of reasoning touted by the conservatives that the Canadian government is in complete control of the healthcare with the possibility of corruption; whereas in America you have the -*freedom*- to seek any healthcare you choose; the denial that any part of the medical system is corrupt. Our goverment only provides the hospitals (such as the Veteran's Administration Hospitals), unless other hospitals are constructed under a private entity.

The fact of the matter is in America, you can't trust anybody in the medical profession. In Canada, the students get a much better education than med students in America. Pay for nurses in Canada is not so great from what I hear and understand, and further, not to mention that in America there is currently a heavy shortage of nurses where the pay is decent, which is why Canadian med professionals seek work in the States instead. The Canadian gov't only has so much to spread out into their healthcare system.Another reason why it's "poor".

The irony is that America is actually at fault for such long waits in Canada's ER. But when Canadian hospitals *do* have a full house on staff, they're one of the best countries in the world for healthcare. This may or may not be true, but seems reasonable after when putting 2 and 2 together.

Another little tidbit is that, in America, when you hear a politician wants to "privatize" healthcare, they're not giving you the full story. He/ she is saying that the United States government, under the privacy of the Federal Reserve, wants to control the healthcare system. What they don't tell you and they expect you *not* to know is that the healthcare system is already privatized by banks, insurance companies, and many other corporate entities of the oligarchy; all of which are exchanging a dollar with the debt of the United States government to the central bankers.

This is usually a move by a politician in order to provide a compassionate service to the American people. I give you Bill Clinton's proposal of national healthcare cards; starting with the elderly. He wanted to start reelin' everybody in, it never got approved, and that is just one example. G.W Bush openly suggested the "privatization" of healthcare. It's why we have union busters trying to break apart the nurse's union in V.A. Hospitals.

American politicians no longer try to convince the people that a government-funded healthcare system is a step toward socialism. Canada isn't really so socialist, it's just that early on, american citizens were spoonfed this fear around the time of McCarthyism of the '50s. Republicans had previously viewed democrats and privatized healthcare as borderline socialist, which they feel undermines the very fabric of our constitutional republic. Enter stage right- F.D.R. His entire New Deal is socialism. He went to school in England, the hub of all socialism in the world, and he learned to be a socialist. The republicans finally accepted his New Deal in the time of crisis and it flourished into what we now have today with little complaint from the right, if not the downright initiative to tool with the system even more so that would create a rich, corrupt, bureaucratic entity and not a legitimate and ethical system of medical professionals and provisions.

Sorry that this is a tad long, but it really is a twisted mess to say the least.

mystik

.

Answer 3

Whenever the gov't gets involved, the whole system will fall apart. The Canadian system will not work here in the states because most people will not stand for a 2 year wait for a elective surgery. Salaries {including Md's} will go down, so you will have a mass exodus of well trained professionals. Competition will suffer, new research will diminish. The rich who can afford private health care will do so, and then there will be whining about the rich get better health care...and so on ....and so on... It has been proven that social health care is not the answer here in the states. We need to find out where the waste is and go from there. Stop frivolous law suits, so malpractice insurance can come down, raise nurses salaries {just kidding}, just a few thoughts.

Answer 4

I wonder if they mean "poor" as in not making enough money to sustain itself?

I hear that Canadians are heavily taxed (at least it's joked about) for their universal health system. But a health system that helps everybody the same, and gives everyone the same treatment can be VERY expensive. Maybe it's slowly bankrupting the government?

Answer 5

Canada has a good health system and one of the best in the world.

Answer 6

Because they do not know anything about it and only repeat stupid anecdotal nonsense. It is irrelevant in their logic that Canadians have longer life expectancies and lower infant mortality rates (to go along with their equal or better standard of living) than Americans. I guess they just are not interested in long healthy lives, working less, and enjoying life more.

Answer 7

Because we would only be trading our problems for theirs. Their system has a lot of problems you don't know about. Talk to some people with serious health problems, like needing heart surgery.

Answer 8

It may give everyone health care, but it certainly does not rank high in quality. Listen, what you are expected to pay for health insurance would be what you'd pay in taxes living Canada.

Answer 9

You haven't talked to one who needed something like a hip replacement, and had it done in the US because in Canada there is a year and a half wait.

Answer 10

I thought Sam Adams was great until I drank a Newcastle. How can they know any different?

Well, how can we know any different you may respond. Socializing health care takes away my freedom of choice. It's not American. Why do liberals want to remove freedoms to create freedoms?

Staunch moderate here, who is getting tired of the ideal of the left.