Weiser as smarty-pants:
==============
Well, that's a particularly silly statement, given the fact that the
vast
majority of your "huge country" is uninhabited and uninhabitable.
===============

And that's a particularly stupid statement gven that your system (your
whole country, relative to Canada) has economies of scale (or is that
an unknown concept to you?).

It basically matters not what we're talking about -- healthcare,
railways, highways, telecommunications, etc -- the per capita cost of
providing services in Canada will be higher -- significantly higher --
than similar costs in the USA.

So my point remains: even at similar levels of service, Canadian costs
(hence taxes) will be higher. .

frtzw906

Wilko on rick:
==============
NB: Obviously there's enough for him to like about Canada to want to
keep on going there from Ohoho.
==============

I wonder if he's a cheap ******* and brings all his *Mart stuff with
him from the USA or if he spends the odd dollar in Ontario. If the
latter is the case, then he must be happy to know that his
contributions to Ontario's sales tax help keep KMAN healthy GRIN.

What I find curious about rick on this topic is that, while he is happy
to trash Canadian healthcare, I've never actually seen him post his
approval of the American system. In the previous thread, he
purposefully refused to get into a discussion of comparisons.
Personally, I think he's afraid of a comparative analysis. I think
beyond his constant bleating about "People have died in lines!" he has
nothing further to say.

Also interesting, he, like Scott, has not offerred an opinion of what
medical premiums for full medical coverage (no deductible) for a family
of 4 might be in the USA.

I think rick is a one note samba.

Cheers,
frtzw906

"rick" wrote in message
nk.net...

"KMAN" wrote in message
.. .

"rick" wrote in message
k.net...

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ups.com...
rick, can you not stay on-topic on the OT thread? Why do we care what
KMAN said on another thread? Why not resume your "did too" stance over
there...
========================
Because you ailed to stay on-topic of the off-topic post. You are the
one that mentioned the thead, and continued you 'side' of it.
And, in case you failed to notice, I replied to kman after he responded
to me.

LOL. After I hit him first he hit me back and all I was doing was hitting
him back!
=======================
Fine, live with your delusions. I have the satisfaction of knowing that
you have recanted your lies.
Thanks or that little laugh...

Teehee. It's pretty obvious that you try, and you try, and you try, and you
try, but you don't get no...oh no no no!

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Tink:
================
Hey frtzw, sounds like we got another dance going on, and someone got
your hot button. I'll probably set this one out, but I like to watch.
====================

Tink, it's not a hot button at all. It is simply disingenuous of Scott
to pop off with some one-off example and thereby try to discredit an
entire system.

It's hardly "one-off." It's pervasive and ubiquitous in every socialized
medicine system in existence because by its nature, socialized medicine
cannot provide effective on-demand health care to everyone.

And you know what, if the critique were coming from
someone in Australia, or Germany, or France or whereever we could lean
something about how to do things better, I wouldn't mind so much. But
what can we learn from the American system?

First, let's be clear: we tried the American system and rejected it.

Yeah, freedom and liberty are SO unnecessary...

it's not like Canada doesn't have experience with privatized medicine.
that's what we had before we went universal.

And that's what you'll have shortly, after your socialized system fails
completely. As it is, many Canadians are coming to the US to get immediate
medical care they can't get in Canada. I'll take expensive medical care I
can get on demand to cheap medical care I can't get when I need it. I'll
figure out how to pay for it later.


As to what we can learn; that's simple. America is good at providing
excellent care, quickly, if (and this is a huge IF), you can pay for
it.

Which makes it a good idea to stay healthy or save a lot of money against
future medical problems. Why should anyone else have to bail you out if you
don't use good judgment?


I don't need to know much more about the American system than what
Frederick has outlined. That's enough to convince me that it needs
fixing in a bad way. There's no way a decent, hard-working, family
should have to live with such stress.

Why not? Why should their health problems cause a financial burden for me?
Why should I have to pay for heart surgery for people who eat McDonalds till
they weigh 450 pounds and clog up their arteries with plaque? Isn't that
THEIR problem? Shouldn't THEY be responsible for their own health, and for
paying for fixing what's wrong with them? What justifies imposing that
financial burden on other people?

What a stupid way to treat the
people who make your system work and make your country great. It's
dehumanizing. It's STUPID!

It's life. Sometimes you die. So what? Big deal. There'll be another one
just like you along in a few years. Death comes to us all, eventually. Get
used to it.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Weiser on caring for others:
==============
Why not? Why should their health problems cause a financial burden for
me? Why should I have to pay for heart surgery for people who eat
McDonalds till they weigh 450 pounds and clog up their arteries with
plaque? Isn't that THEIR problem? Shouldn't THEY be responsible for
their own health, and for paying for fixing what's wrong with them?
What justifies imposing that financial burden on other people?
===============

Hmmm.... where to begin? Let's start by throwing out the term socialism
and using community instead. I think caring for your neighbors is a
part of what it means to be a member of a community.

My elderly neighbor occasionally needs a ride to the hospital. I offer
to drive her. I don't ask her whether she might not have avoided her
maladies if she'd taken better care of her health in earlier years! I
just drive her. Another elderly neighbor has difficulty getting her
trash can to the street on collection day. My kids or I take on this
task. This is what it means to be a member of a community.

Universal medical insurance is also about community. It's about giving
a damn about your fellow human.

Spit out the bile, Scott.

frtzw906

"Scott Weiser" wrote in message
...
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Tink:
================
Hey frtzw, sounds like we got another dance going on, and someone got
your hot button. I'll probably set this one out, but I like to watch.
====================

Tink, it's not a hot button at all. It is simply disingenuous of Scott
to pop off with some one-off example and thereby try to discredit an
entire system.

It's hardly "one-off." It's pervasive and ubiquitous in every socialized
medicine system in existence because by its nature, socialized medicine
cannot provide effective on-demand health care to everyone.

Why do you have socialized education?

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
oups.com...
Wilko on rick:
==============
NB: Obviously there's enough for him to like about Canada to
want to
keep on going there from Ohoho.
==============

I wonder if he's a cheap ******* and brings all his *Mart stuff
with
him from the USA or if he spends the odd dollar in Ontario. If
the
latter is the case, then he must be happy to know that his
contributions to Ontario's sales tax help keep KMAN healthy
GRIN.

What I find curious about rick on this topic is that, while he
is happy
to trash Canadian healthcare,
==========================
Actually all you've seen me do is trash a lie. Unlike you, I
have never claimed any one system better than all the others.
That wasn't the purpose of my original post. That you have to
continue to make the subject something other than what I posted
tells me that I was right on the money the first time, because
you have spent alot of time replying without ever refuting what I
originally posted.


I've never actually seen him post his
approval of the American system. In the previous thread, he
purposefully refused to get into a discussion of comparisons.
===============
Because that wasn't what I was replying to. Again, that you have
to change the subject indicates I was right.


Personally, I think he's afraid of a comparative analysis. I
think
beyond his constant bleating about "People have died in lines!"
he has
nothing further to say.
====================
LOL What part of the original post don't you understand? I
replied to a lie. I backed up my assertions, and all you've een
doing is changing the subject.



Also interesting, he, like Scott, has not offerred an opinion
of what
medical premiums for full medical coverage (no deductible) for
a family
of 4 might be in the USA.

I think rick is a one note samba.
================
I think you'll do anything to keep rom discussing the originl
post I made. Says alot about your ideology.



Cheers,
frtzw906

rick:
===============
I think you'll do anything to keep rom discussing the originl
post I made. Says alot about your ideology.
=============

This has NOTHING to do with your original post. Please check the first
post in this thread... I believe it is by Scott. You've come in after
the fact and are as much a one-note-samba as before.

It is clear you have nothing to add.

frtzw906

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott Weiser:
==============
"The average Canadian family pays about 48 percent of its income in
taxes
each year, partly to fund the health care system. Rates vary from
province
to province, but Ontario, the most populous, spends roughly 40 percent
of
every tax dollar on health care, according to the Canadian Taxpayers
Federation."
================

This is perhaps an interesting basis for discussion. While I'm not sure
how accurate these figures are, let's just accept them, for the time
being, and try to establish a discussion around healthcare costs.

By those figures, a Canadian earning $50,000 per year pays $800 per
month for full coverage (no deductible) medical care (for his/her
entire family -- let's assume a family of 4). Now we need to know how
much a family of 4, in the USA, would pay for full medical coverage.

First you need to recognize that Canadians aren't paying for "full coverage"
for themselves, they are paying for full coverage for everyone, whether they
themselves ever need any medical care at all, whether they like it or not,
and they have absolutely no choice in the matter.

In the US, if you pay for full coverage, you are at least only paying for
YOUR coverage, not for covering some chain-smoking, 450 pound diabetic with
emphysema and heart disease.

Thus, you'll get far better care in the US for your $800 than is even
possible in Canada, because all of those premiums are dedicated to your
benefits, not the benefits of everybody else in the country.


What we know from Frederick is that it is, from his perspective, an
onerous amount (greater than his mortgage). Perhaps Scott can provide
us with this information and others can confirm the veracity.

The second thing you need to realize is that each person's (or family's)
health care needs are different, and are the responsibility of the
individuals affected, not the taxpayers. If Frederick doesn't like his
situation, it's up to him to change it, or accept that he may not be able to
afford the finest of all possible health care for every sniffle and scraped
knee. Kids in the Sudan, and most everywhere else in the third world don't
get much, if any, health care, so whining about how much one's insurance
costs seems rather petty and insignificant.


--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
oups.com...
rick:
===============
I think you'll do anything to keep rom discussing the originl
post I made. Says alot about your ideology.
=============

This has NOTHING to do with your original post. Please check
the first
post in this thread... I believe it is by Scott. You've come in
after
the fact and are as much a one-note-samba as before.
======================
LOL Try to keep up, or at least don't dishonestly snip out
entire posts and then reply to them the way you want them to say
now.
I did reply to YOU at the first of this thread, not scott. If
you wouldn't have snipped it all out, you would have noticed that
you referenced me, by name, about the previous posting and
subject. Too far back for you to remember that?


It is clear you have nothing to add.
===============
It's clear that you have nothing to refute the sites that I
posted, and are desperate to again change the subject, even after
bringing it up yourself.



frtzw906