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

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

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

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

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

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.

Frederick, thanks. Sheds useful light on the discussion.

Wilf

in article , Frederick Burroughs at
wrote on 3/25/05 10:01 PM:

Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health; See:
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepu...XIE2003001.htm

That's an interesting read. It's amazing how close so many of the numbers
are.

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.

The 6% gap of obesity (21% US, 15% Canadian) is quite something, I guess
SuperSize Me had it about right. I see so many Canadians lining up at Tim
Horton's (donuts) that I can't believe there's a people somewhere that could
be 6% more obese!

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

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.