If America adopts Canada's health care system

[Bane]

Every nation has an obligation to protect their citizens from foreign attack. These governments dont have an obligation to actually "take care" of their citizens.

I don't even know what to say to that...

What ever happened to the individual's responsibility to provide for his own retirement/healthcare ?

Many live pay check to pay check, or worse, in the biggest economy in the world. And the reality is is that many can't provide for their own care. It is not just personal defects that make the poor.

 

[Flip]

P.S.  I failed to make my point in my last post.

The delivery of healthcare matters.

The current administration is what we do a lot less of.
Administration and overhead are where the money goes anyway.
This is what has grown the most in the last few years.

Public vs. private is the wrong question.
How do we fix the problems we have?
How can the Americans, with a totally different system fix their problems.

The Americans spend 10 times the amount we do on admin. and
overhead because it's all done by insurance ,HMO and healthcare
companies.  Apply that money instead to delivery of service........
Then Americans will have healthcare.  All Americans.

 

[tomahawk6]

Otto your benfit may indeed be taxable. Best bet would be to talk to a tax professional when you get to the US.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) considers disability benefits under your employer sponsored plan a continuation of your salary; better known as a Third Party Sick Pay plan. Whether your disability benefits are taxable depends on your level of premium contribution. In general, if you pay 100% of the premium for your coverage with post-tax dollars, your disability benefits are tax-free. If your employer pays 100% of the premium, benefits are taxable. If you and your employer each pay a share of the premium, benefits are taxed proportionally based on applicable IRS rulings. Each claim is unique and your taxability will be dependant on the information provided to us by your employer at the time your claim is submitted

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p15a.pdf; pg.13, Section 6: Third Party Sick Pay

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Or perhaps some people can't save their money to invest because they have nothing left after they pay the bills and feed themselves.  Must be nice to live in your world where everyone has had the opportunity to put money away while meeting their other financial obligations as well as their own basic needs.

If I were paying half the taxes I was now that might actually be possible.....

 

[Blackadder1916]

The Americans spend 10 times the amount we do on admin. and overhead because it's all done by insurance ,HMO and healthcare companies.  Apply that money instead to delivery of service........

Actually the numbers are more like 31% of US health care spending on administration vice 17% for Canada.  (those figures from a 2003 study)

 

[Brad Sallows]

People don't have to make rational choices or be perfectly informed for the free market to still provide the most beneficial outcome, because the benefit of an exchange is only the recipient's to judge.  The measure of market success isn't what you or a group which thinks like you decide others should have; it's what others decide for themselves they should have.  The only thing intervention has the potential to do is improve economic efficiency - not the same thing as benefit - but the intervenors likewise lack information and are burdened by their own biases and political obligations and dogma and extended decision cycles which tend to make interventions even worse.

All Americans do have access to health care; not all Americans have health insurance (many by choice) or access to all the health care they might like.  But, with respect to the latter, neither do we.

People who live paycheque to paycheque are simply not planning their finances well.  2 weeks out of 52 is a little under 4%.  Set aside 4% of your gross pay each year for 6 years and you will have more than a 3-month cushion of the expenses you pay out of your after-tax income.

 

[Bane]

People who live paycheque to paycheque are simply not planning their finances well.  2 weeks out of 52 is a little under 4%.  Set aside 4% of your gross pay each year for 6 years and you will have more than a 3-month cushion of the expenses you pay out of your after-tax income.

:

 

[aesop081]

:

Care to elaborate on you  : or are you just going to leave it at that ?

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

I think he means that the only thing more diverse then people are their finances and its a little to easy to say a person should simply do this and they will be fine as EVERY family and their personal finances are different.  Kids, medical bills, age, income etc.

 

[Bane]

What Quagmire said.

I thought it was just a little bit ignorant on the subject of poverty.

 

[Brad Sallows]

A person living right on the edge of his paycheque is effectively living beyond his means - inflation is practically assured and wage gains are not.

What's a deck of smokes now - $5.00 or more?  What's minimum wage in most provinces - $8.00 or so?  5 / 64 > 4%.

I have yet to meet someone who has not a single luxury (any non-necessity) he could deny himself to save a little security.  Please don't pretend the nation is full of virtuous poor people who spend money only on rent, simple clothing, and fresh groceries.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>the only thing more diverse then people are their finances

Yes, but my prescription isn't to spend in an exact way - it's to illustrate that with a little bit of planning and self-denial one need not live "one paycheque away from the streets" in the hope or certain knowledge that a safety net exists.  Each person needs to do his own arithmetic and make his own plan.  The problem of saving for the rainy days is wholly within a person's control.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Please don't pretend the nation is full of virtuous poor people who spend money only on rent, simple clothing, and fresh groceries.

Full, no.  Enough people that can't afford to fix a broken leg at $28,000.  Yes

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

The problem of saving for the rainy days is wholly within a person's control.

To make sweeping generalizations about peoples ability to save money is asinine.  Life is full of so many surprises and inconsistencies that there are situations that some people can't prepare for.  Should they try?  Absolutely.  Should they be penalized with refusal of treatment?  Absolutely not. 

 

[Reccesoldier]

What's a deck of smokes now - $5.00 or more?  What's minimum wage in most provinces - $8.00 or so?  5 / 64 > 4%.

I have yet to meet someone who has not a single luxury (any non-necessity) he could deny himself to save a little security.  Please don't pretend the nation is full of virtuous poor people who spend money only on rent, simple clothing, and fresh groceries.

Try almost $9.00 a pack (even bought as a carton) Since I quit smoking last January 1st, calculated at $8.00 per pack at a pack a day I have saved my family a total of $2640.  Roughly equivalent to a car payment, $240.00 per month.

 

[Flip]

Brad,

What you have failed to account for, and it's a biggie...
Bad luck.  I'm all for personal responsibility but, stuff happens
and good people lose their homes, cars and health.
Sometimes it's not their fault.

And by the way while were talking about personal responsibility
and healthcare.....Reccesoldier......Congratulations!!!!!!!
I'm very glad for anyone who quits.
I've seen far too much of what happens when you don't.
Smoking has killed most of mature males of my family.
Smoking and it's effects are my favorite cause.

Oh, by the way  ....ever try to get life insurance while you're a smoker?
Try medical insurance in the US.
What happens when your HMO decides that you caused your own
treatable but likely to be fatal disease.
In the US, your choice might come down to selling the farm or skip treatment.
That's exactly the choice our healthcare is designed to prevent.   
In my opinion the Canadian healthcare system has it's warts but is
far more humane - all that stuff about market forces doesn't mean much.

The very people who need the most from the healthcare system
are usually the least able to afford it.

If you want to challenge my position, I can provide meaningful examples.

 

[Reccesoldier]

The problem with our healthcare system is not that it exists but that regulation and legislation by government negates the possibility of any alternative. 

The point isn't to deny people the right to enter into a system where they can have their "universal" healthcare but is rather to allow people to make that determination on their own. 

Should I choose to be a member of the system some 30% (approximately) of my taxes can be taken and placed into the healthcare system, should I decide not to that 30% should be mine to do with as I wish.  If I decide it's going to beer and popcorn so be it.  If I break my leg and don't have the $28,000 to pay for it then I will have to go into debt for whatever services are rendered.  That is my choice, the freedom is mine to make rational decisions based on what I see/feel/think are the necessities of my life.

 

[Flip]

On the face of it ....fine.

But there would be a finanacial premium on finite resources.
The private system would tend to do what has been demonstrated south of the
border.  Huge inflation and some profiteering.  The insurance companies would suddenly get to say how things are treated, not your doctor.

Breaking your leg at 28k would be cheap.
My step dad knows a former multimillionaire in California.
His cancer wiped him out.  He'll probably die in a public
hospital anyway.

Canadians do have the option to go south for treament if they want.
I don't think we should destroy our superior public system to
go all free-market. Your taxes wouldn't come down anyway.... ;D

 

[observor 69]

Again +1 Flip. I got tired of fighting this argument a while ago but you're doing a good job. 

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Should I choose to be a member of the system some 30% (approximately) of my taxes can be taken and placed into the healthcare system, should I decide not to that 30% should be mine to do with as I wish.  If I decide it's going to beer and popcorn so be it.  If I break my leg and don't have the $28,000 to pay for it then I will have to go into debt for whatever services are rendered.  That is my choice, the freedom is mine to make rational decisions based on what I see/feel/think are the necessities of my life.

Now this is where I disagree with you......oh, we all still  pay our taxes. I just want a system where if you {I] have the coin, and are willing to pay extra, then you {I] can go private.
This takes some of the burden of the public system and still keeps it financed.

We already have it anyway if you are a "somebody" ala Mats Sundin, Paul Martin, Steven Harper, Chris Bosh, etc.......why shouldn't I be able to spend my after tax dollars in Canada if I wish?