Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. 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. frtzw906 |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Scott opines:
============== 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. =============== There you go! I think you've grasped the general nature of INSURANCE. Well done, Scott! frtzw906 |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:
Scott opines: ============== 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. =============== There you go! I think you've grasped the general nature of INSURANCE. Well done, Scott! Not quite. Insurance is something that people freely choose or decline, based on their own personal assessment of the various risks and costs. It's a voluntary contract with a private entity which exchanges a small sum on a regular basis for a promise of full compensation should a covered event occur. Canada's socialized medicine system is not "insurance" by any stretch of the imagination. -- 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 |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On 21-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote: 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. Proof positive that weiser doesn't have a clue how insurance works. Mike |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health; See:
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepu...XIE2003001.htm -- "This president has destroyed the country, the economy, the relationship with the rest of the world. He's a monster in the White House. He should resign." - Hunter S. Thompson, speaking to an antiwar audience in 2003. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Frederick, thanks. Sheds useful light on the discussion.
Wilf |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
KMAN:
============= I was quite surprised to find more slightly more smokers in Canada. I bet a lot of Canadians would be surprised by that, although I remember encountering "smoke free" shopping malls in areas of the US long before most places in Canada caught on. I know the gap is only 2% but it still surprised me. =============== I too was surprised by that stat. Interestingly (my anecdotal observation only), the further east one travels in Canada, the more one is likely to encounter smoking. Here on the left coast, smokers are definitely an anomaly. Wilf |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
in article , BCITORGB
at wrote on 3/26/05 3:19 PM: KMAN: ============= I was quite surprised to find more slightly more smokers in Canada. I bet a lot of Canadians would be surprised by that, although I remember encountering "smoke free" shopping malls in areas of the US long before most places in Canada caught on. I know the gap is only 2% but it still surprised me. =============== I too was surprised by that stat. Interestingly (my anecdotal observation only), the further east one travels in Canada, the more one is likely to encounter smoking. Here on the left coast, smokers are definitely an anomaly. Wilf Yes, but there is more spandex. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT Bush propaganda against Kerry | General | |||
Bush fiddles while health care burns | General | |||
OT- Ode to Immigration | General | |||
OT-Think government-controlled health coverage will work? Think again! | General |