Simple solution: stop voting Conservative! (Need to give the parties an incentive to try.)
Actually I would argue it's up to the other parties to try and make an effort. Let's all remember Nenshi's campaign for mayor. Basically a tax and spend candidate won a conservative city like Calgary over a favored blue tory type because he put in the effort to connect to voters using social media and engaging them in a new dialogue about his message.
Contrast that with the Federal election, I e-mailed my Liberal candidate a few questions about Liberal policy and I got a disjointed answer two weeks later. As for the NDP, their candidate in my riding isn't even living in Calgary and doesn't even campaign here. It appears the only purpose of running candidates in Calgary for the NDP and the Liberals is to get that $2 subsidy per vote.
This isn't just about making an effort locally. There's a policy gap that parties use to demonize Alberta to create a boogyman to gain seats elsewhere. As mentioned in the globe article, it's not like it's always been Ignatieff's schtick to demonize the oil sands. Putting in cap and trade, when the US won't, and banning tanker traffic on the west coast would cripple the future of oil and gas in Alberta. The Nenshi example also proves that we're not totally against tax and spend, provided that the spend part happens here in as much quantities as the tax part.
The Following User Says Thank You to Cowboy89 For This Useful Post:
The problem with this is that while it decreases demand for the public system, it also decreases resources available to the public system (doctors, nurses etc.) and possibly also increases the per-unit costs of those resources.
Removing a price floor should increase the supply for services, not decrease it.
Have you noticed the shocking abundance of Dentists vs Doctors...?
Actually I would argue it's up to the other parties to try and make an effort. Let's all remember Nenshi's campaign for mayor. Basically a tax and spend candidate won a conservative city like Calgary...
Rubbish.
Calgarians neither hated Nenshi's parent's with a burning passion nor ignored his policies simply because he wore purple. Also, Nenshi follows a long line of so called 'tax and spend' mayors in a, not as conservative as you think, modern-day Calgary.
__________________
“Such suburban models are being rationalized as ‘what people want,’ when in fact they are simply what is most expedient to produce. The truth is that what people want is a decent place to live, not just a suburban version of a decent place to live.”
- Roberta Brandes Gratz
Last edited by Addick; 04-19-2011 at 09:38 AM.
Reason: Re-Ordered My Thoughts
Attack adds that quote non Canadian news sources because they cant find anything in Canada - that is terrible.
Honestly, quoting a hack station like msnbc - and not even the TV channel, the WEBSITE. Of course if the cons quoted foxnews.com they would get crucified by CBC, the Libs quoting msnbc.com - meh - its ok. No double standard or media bias in Canada.
__________________
MYK - Supports Arizona to democtratically pass laws for the state of Arizona
Rudy was the only hope in 08
2011 Election: Cons 40% - Nanos 38% Ekos 34%
Calgarians neither hated Nenshi's parent's with a burning passion nor ignored his policies simply because he wore purple. Also, Nenshi follows a long line of so called 'tax and spend' mayors in a, not as conservative as you think, modern-day Calgary.
That was my point, Calgary's not really that conservative. We're fine with tax and spend. So long as we're recieving the spending on priorities we care about as much as we're getting taxed.
I'm fine with being taxed, as long as the taxes are going to benefit my city directly. What I can't stand is being taxed and propping up the rest of Canada with transfer payments and other sharing programs.
Don't get me wrong, I think it is important to help maintain our quality of living throughout the country, and a certain amount of wealth sharing is important. Transfer payments for provinces that have no desire to curb their expenditures is just enabling them to expect the rest of Canada to pay for their free lunch.
I am against private health. I know that dental is private, and frankly I think that is a short-coming in the system. I would love to see that nationalized as well.
I'm not in favour of making it necessary for people to pay for more insurance for care. I don't see how that makes things more efficient, and it absolutely costs society more than it otherwise would.
If this becomes an election issue (where there is an open and frank discussion about healthcare, not just platitudes from the parties) I think that would be great. It might actually differentiate the parties a little bit (I actually think that policy-wise there are not major differences between the Liberals and Conservatives in their election platforms).
Being against private health care if fine in theory. I understand and agree to a point about everyone have access to decent health care, no matter if you can afford insurance or not.
But the system is broken, and we can't afford to just throw more money at it.
I used to be anti-private health care, but I am starting to change my tune.
I have moved around a lot in my adult life and because of that, I can never seem to get a family doctor. The waiting lists are just too long. I make enough money that I could afford to pay for it, but that option isn't readily available in most places. Waiting in a walk-in clinic for 5 hours during a work day isn't an option either. I've let a couple of health issue slide because of the logistics of our health care.
I'd love for the NDP to come in and solve it with more doctors and all that, but I don't understand how that happens. Do we invade Cuba and kidnap their doctors? My heart wants to support the NDP, but my head won't let me.
Same here.
Just things like scheduling a blood test once a year to keep on top of things. I push it off because its turned into a headache to actually get in and not have to wait for hours and hours.
Which in itself is a big problem, because doing a yearly blood test is VERY important for everyone. It would help prevent a lot of other problems.
So, can the private side provide that? Sure it could. And I would gladly pay for a plan that allows me to schedule things like a blood test and have it done in 15 min, with the results emailed to me by my doctor.
I've moved recently too, and am having the same problem finding a good family doctor.
Is there any data that suggests that privately run health care is actually more efficient cost wise? The United States has great health care (if you're properly insured), but it costs almost twice per capita what Canadian health care does and it's one of the things bankrupting their country. It's hard to see the efficiency there.
Perhaps the public/private systems in European countries are a model we should emulate, though we're not really too different as it stands now.
Just things like scheduling a blood test once a year to keep on top of things. I push it off because its turned into a headache to actually get in and not have to wait for hours and hours.
Which in itself is a big problem, because doing a yearly blood test is VERY important for everyone. It would help prevent a lot of other problems.
So, can the private side provide that? Sure it could. And I would gladly pay for a plan that allows me to schedule things like a blood test and have it done in 15 min, with the results emailed to me by my doctor.
I've moved recently too, and am having the same problem finding a good family doctor.
Our system does let you schedule a blood test - Calgary Lab Services has an online appointment system, and when I had mine done last year I'm pretty sure I waited less than 15 minutes. My doctor doesn't email me the results though - but a lab report on its own is pretty meaningless without an expert to put it into context, so I'm not sure people getting their results by email would be a good thing.
The shortage of family doctors is a huge problem though. I don't see how privatization (in the user-pay sense - doctors offices are already private businesses) would help that - aside from allowing those who can pay extra to get in while those who can't are even less likely to find a doctor than they are now. There needs to be an incentive for doctors to go into family practice instead of a higher-paying field.
Its funny, I looked up health spending per person just to get a feel.
Canada sits in 5th as of 2007 spending $3895 per person. France which I believe has a hybrid system spends $3601 per person. The U.S. spends an awesome $7290 per person.
In terms of percentage of GDP Canada is 7th with 10%. the US. is far and away the highest at 15.3% France is 11%.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Its funny, I looked up health spending per person just to get a feel.
Canada sits in 5th as of 2007 spending $3895 per person. France which I believe has a hybrid system spends $3601 per person. The U.S. spends an awesome $7290 per person.
In terms of percentage of GDP Canada is 7th with 10%. the US. is far and away the highest at 15.3% France is 11%.
Hey hey hey...if we are going to start using actual facts and figures and not just 'stuff i heard/read/saw somewhere/sometime...i think' this debate is going to go right down the tubes entertainment wise
Oh and to contribute myself in that vein...saw a CBC report last night, they spent a day with Layton... if he ever has any real power in government were all doomed. He scares the crap outta me.
Is there any data that suggests that privately run health care is actually more efficient cost wise? The United States has great health care (if you're properly insured), but it costs almost twice per capita what Canadian health care does and it's one of the things bankrupting their country. It's hard to see the efficiency there.
Perhaps the public/private systems in European countries are a model we should emulate, though we're not really too different as it stands now.
Depends on your definition of 'efficiency' I guess.
Nobody in the US dies on a waiting list. But it costs more to get state of the art treatment.
Nobody flies from the US to Canada to recieve treatment, but plenty go the other way.
How do you define 'efficient' health care?
Also, there are very few similarities between European health care, with plenty of private insurance and delivery, and Canada, where it is illegal to have private insurance and delivery. We are similar to Cuba and North Korea only.
Our system does let you schedule a blood test - Calgary Lab Services has an online appointment system, and when I had mine done last year I'm pretty sure I waited less than 15 minutes. My doctor doesn't email me the results though - but a lab report on its own is pretty meaningless without an expert to put it into context, so I'm not sure people getting their results by email would be a good thing.
The shortage of family doctors is a huge problem though. I don't see how privatization (in the user-pay sense - doctors offices are already private businesses) would help that - aside from allowing those who can pay extra to get in while those who can't are even less likely to find a doctor than they are now. There needs to be an incentive for doctors to go into family practice instead of a higher-paying field.
You mean, like allowing them to charge directly for their services?....
The Following User Says Thank You to crazy_eoj For This Useful Post:
You mean, like allowing them to charge directly for their services?....
They already charge directly for their services - the charge just goes to Alberta Health. Unless you mean charging the patient directly, in which case the only way it will help is if they charge more than they do now, which again means those with lots of money will have more access to doctors and those without will have less access than they do now. Being paid more by Alberta Health might help. Or perhaps a total change to the system and making family doctors well-paid employees of the health system rather than contractors (might also discourage doctors from rushing visits).
I was formerly with Alberta Health and Wellness and can maybe provide some perspective.
The whole shortage of health care professionals theme should be defined. Over the last 30 years, by per capita, Alberta has actually been quite stable in the number of physicians getting their license to practice here.
However, what has changed are a number of things:
- Fewer family physicians. Primary care is the backbone of our health care system. Unfortunately, family medicine isn't very popular with today medical school students. Perhaps due to status, money, appeal, and other host of other reasons, most medical students are striving for specialist positions and surgery as their top choices
- Working hours have changed. As I said above, statistically, the number of health professional haven't really declined much. However, in the old days phyicians worked full time hours, 5 days a week seeing their patients. In today's modern world, physicians on average only work 3 days a week seeing patients. The rest of their time is spent on ever increasing adminstrative duties, clinical research, medical rotation, and professional development.
- I'm hesitant to put this next point in as it is controversial, but it is a statistic the Government tracks. There are now more women physicians than ever before, and that increases the need for locums to fill in when female physicians take maternity leave.
- The baby boom generation is now reaching the point where they require more long term care and management of chronic disease. Despite the push to get more people into Home Care, the need for long term care beds are a big issue in Alberta. Emergency rooms are packed because patients can't be moved until those spaces free up. As a result, they stay in ER or in a hallway somewhere.
__________________
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to LChoy For This Useful Post:
Depends on your definition of 'efficiency' I guess.
Bang for the buck. If other countries are getting better care for a similar price (and many are), Canada should seek to emulate that.
Quote:
Nobody in the US dies on a waiting list. But it costs more to get state of the art treatment.
How many people in Canada die on waiting lists? And what is the net benefit of the United States paying double in health care costs?
Quote:
Nobody flies from the US to Canada to recieve treatment, but plenty go the other way.
And many Americans travel abroad for affordable health care. I don't think that suggests that India, Thailand, or Latin America have medical systems that should be emulated.
Quote:
Also, there are very few similarities between European health care, with plenty of private insurance and delivery, and Canada, where it is illegal to have private insurance and delivery. We are similar to Cuba and North Korea only.
I agree, and that's something that should be explored. Though medical practices are already private entities, with only hospitals being wholly public, so Canada already has plenty of private delivery.
