English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I moved to Canada recently after spending almost ten years in a country with private medical care and I have to say that the care Canadians recieve is absolutely disgusting. Emergency wait times of up to 10 hours, waiting 6 months to see a specialist or weeks for an MRI, a third of the country without a primary care physician. Could things be much worse??

Don't get me wrong, I believe that everyone deserves healthcare and that it should be a right but I think there has to be a point where we draw the line. I mean, is it really fair for someone who has worked hard for years to have to go behind some lazy criminal or unemployed person who pays no taxes?

This alone makes me want to leave Canada because I am terrified of becoming ill.

What do you think?

2007-01-24 02:27:45 · 17 answers · asked by innit_x 2 in Politics & Government Government

17 answers

I have a little different view on this ...

First, as a U.S. Citizen having moved to Canada, I agree about the lack of quality here in comparison. Most Canadians don't see this though, I guess because they hear of the horrors of U.S. lack of insurance and people in high debt from medical bills. I have experienced Canadian health care with my husband in three different hospitals in two provinces, including E.R.'s, and was astounded at the difference in quality, and the waiting times. I will say more on my 360 blog, not enough space here.

However, as a lower middle income worker in the U.S. my family struggled intensely to meet the medical needs of our children, some of whom had special needs, but not enough to qualify for assistance. We were always in medical debt, even with insurance. I have a son in law with permanent health problems because of lack of health care as an adolescent when his family could not afford care, and did not qualify for help.

Also, later, as a disabled person unable to work because of disability and illness, I experienced a health system (medicaid) that only covered some illnesses, and some conditions, and other things you were on your own and suffered. more details on the blog.

I don't think national health care is the answer, but we must also remember that it's not just "lazy bums" who can't afford health care ... there are many people out there who are too ill to work, and children whose parents may be lazy, but should the children suffer?

I don't know the answers, but I am all too aware of the problems. I would love to hear of a country that has this problem more under control and how they are accomplishing this.

2007-01-24 02:42:34 · answer #1 · answered by Pichi 7 · 0 0

I'm an American citizen residing and working in Taiwan, which has an incredible national health care system. Thank you Taiwan! The world could learn much from studying the Taiwan model. Although there is growing concern over its financing, these problems will be worked out through a combination of higher rates paid by the insured and the local/city/town government. There is however no problem finding good doctors with minimal waiting time.

2007-01-27 23:24:22 · answer #2 · answered by jaicee 6 · 0 0

The principle of universal health care is good but in practice it is filled with problems. I mean here in England the NHS (National Health Service) is free at the point of need and is paid for by public taxes. This makes it the number one source of health care for 95% of the population which means that waiting times are crazy but then people have the peace of mind of not having to worry about paying thousands and thousands of pounds when they need emergency attention. Its obviously got the problems of being underfunded, some people don't pay tax but use it, long waiting times etc, however imagine a poor,unemployed, single mother on welfare with cancer and needs emergency care only to be denied it unless she has £25,000 or health insurance...Universal health care has issues but is by far better than private.

2007-01-24 02:48:33 · answer #3 · answered by SupremeThought 1 · 1 0

wide-spread well being Care is anybody have a similar medical care and a similar charge agenda. some locate it Socialistic in practice. it would placed the authorities in cost of all issues medical. From generic practitioner expenditures to length of health midsection stay... Having a healthcare plan accessible for each body employed finished time is a good idea in idea. yet, you should element interior the expenditures of the corporation. What no matter if that is a small mom & pop keep, and they couldn't manage to pay for to grant healthcare to their 3 workers? Who foots the bill? affordable healthcare is necessary in u . s . of america. insurance organizations now dictate generic practitioner expenditures, length of stay and appropriate medical practices. in case you do not have a good insurance plan, you do not continually recieve the finest of care.

2016-10-16 01:06:04 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Your experience is the norm. Contrary to what you hear from the Left, the US has the highest quality care in the world and all the gnashing of teeth about the (hugely inflated) millions without health insurance is that the number of people who die in the US each year from lack of care is no worse than the number of people in countries with universal healthcare who die from care rationing.

Morover, the wait times under socialized medicine leave patients unnecessarily in pain for ridiculously long periods of time.

You don't need to leave Canada (thanks to the Quebec court case, the days of the state monopoly on healthcare appear to be numbered) and you can always do what thousands of canadians do every year and simply come south for care.

2007-01-24 02:35:35 · answer #5 · answered by Fletch 2 · 3 1

Socialism? Communism?

No thanks.





However we do need litigation reform to keep insurance premiums down. Also, free market drives competition. We need more competition in the medical field with posted statisitics and pricing. Medical care is becoming something we "shop" for. Free market and competition means the most advanced, comfertable and best care along with competetive pricing.

2007-01-24 02:52:36 · answer #6 · answered by CP 4 · 1 0

I wouldn't leave Canada because we are all in the same boat. I believe in government restrictions and caps of the medical monopoly that the doctors have on society. It's robbery! What happened to the days people did their job and had a love for helping people in need? Yes, it can get worse! That is why we need to petition government politicians or whatever you guys do in Canada. I don't think the answer is Communism or Socialism, the answer is putting a leash on renegade doctors!

2007-01-24 02:41:50 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 3

Health care for children yes....but for lazy unemployed adults no way...if i get an education and make something of my-self its not fair that some lazy person benefits from it too.

2007-01-24 03:16:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Healthcare is a commodity to be bought and sold; doctors are businessmen. If you want healthcare, by all means go purchase some. But keep the government out of it!

2007-01-24 02:33:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Liberals always want something for free.

I'd rather pay for my own insurance and medical treatment for medical treatments I think are necessary, and not be forced to pay for someone elses runny nose.

2007-01-24 02:40:25 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers