America's healthcare is superior to Canada's

Why the American Healthcare System Is Superior to the Canadian System Part I- Wait times Part II- Medicaid and Medicare for seniors and the poor available Part III- Much more specialization in the technological side of medicine Part IV- Cheapest prices possible because of competition Part V- More choice of your doctor Part VI- Healthcare is not a right Part VII- More dugs available Part VII- No person is refused treatment Part IX- Paying for things you find morally wrong I " In the most recent study by the Fraser institute found indicates that, overall, waiting times for medically necessary treatment have not improved since last year. Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 18.3 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment"slightly longer than the 18.2 week wait reported in 2014. This year"s wait time is 97% longer than in 1993 when it was just 9.3 weeks. (1) However a study done by Dr. Max Gammon, a British physicist found that while the input (# of doctors) rose significantly in the last 10 years the output (Quality of care) went down by a drastic amount. (2) The wait times in Canada to just see a general practitioner vary from province to province. The lowest wait is at 6.7 weeks (Saskatchewan) compared to 28.3 weeks (Prince Edward Island). Now in PEI the # of doctors to patients is the highest in the country at 1:137, therefore the argument that the wait is longer because of shortage of doctors is invalid. (3) Now in regard to the # of people waiting to get help from a doctor in Canada is at 1,257,935, that is 3.3% of the population! In Dallas the average wait time to see any specialist is just 10.2 days, and for a family doctor a total of 5 days, vs. Canadas lowest which was 6.7 weeks or 46.9 days. Our highest in Canada vs the highest in the USA (run by Democrats, Boston) at 72 days PEI is at 198.1 days, giving a difference of 126 days. (4) II- People often think the USA has many "uninsured" Americans, but this statement is far from the truth, all thanks to Medicaid and Medicare which is a system used for a few different groups to provide medical insurance to those that can"t get it. Medicaid- A form of insurance for healthcare; provided by the federal government for low income families and individuals who cannot afford health insurance. Medicare- A form of insurance for healthcare issued state by state for seniors and others with disabilities or pregnant women who can"t afford medical insurance. Medicare has helped 44 million individuals and families every single year, while Medicaid helped 37 million, thus eliminating the problem of the uninsured. This is superior to the Socialized medicine system Canada has because the wait times are still incredibly lower compared to Canada. (6) Now of course someone has to pay for all these people so how does it affect taxes?? Payroll taxes collected through FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) and the Self-Employment Contributions Act are a primary component of Medicare funding. The tax is 2.9% of wages, usually half paid by the employee and half paid by the employer. Moneys are set aside in a trust fund that the government uses to reimburse doctors, hospitals, and private insurance companies. Additional funding for Medicare services comes from premiums, deductibles, coinsurance, and copays. (7) One in every five Americans gets their health care through Medicaid. Medicaid includes people from all walks of life"they range from middle-class individuals who have suffered a catastrophic illness, to seniors living in longterm care (70 percent of all nursing home residents rely on Medicaid), to newborns and children. Learn about who benefits from Medicaid expansion. Medicaid insures one in five Americans and one in three of the nation"s children. Medicaid helps people afford doctor visits so that they can stay healthy. And it pays for hospital stays and long-term care. Medicaid helps doctors and hospitals, too. By paying for the health care needs of low-income people, Medicaid reduces hospitals" burden of unpaid care. This helps hospitals and makes the health care system stronger for all of us. All states already participate in the Medicaid program, and half have decided to use federal dollars to expand Medicaid even further. That"s because they know that, in addition to helping keep health care costs in check, Medicaid adds jobs and helps state budgets. And Medicaid is flexible. This efficiently run program lets states tailor benefits, within broad federal guidelines, to better meet the needs of their residents. We partner with states to help them expand Medicaid. We work to protect Medicaid funding at the state and federal levels. And we engage advocates to promote best practices and help states make changes that give residents good health coverage and high-quality care. (8) III- If a person can afford it he or she will often go to the USA for a medical treatment of simply because of the advancements in technology made in the private system. One study (Murphy, 1998) reports that it is impossible to say with any certainty that new technology has led to more or less spending on health care. This view would appear to be in the minority. Fuchs (1999) who is Professor Emeritus of Economics, Stanford University, comments on the costs of technology in health care thus: Most experts believe that "technology" is the driving force behind the long-term rise of health care spending. In a survey of fifty leading health economists in 1995, 81% agreed with the statement, "the primary reason for the increase in the health sector's share of GDP over the past 30 years is technological change in medicine". Expenditures grew primarily because the medical system was delivering more and better services to patients: new drugs, magnetic resonance imaging, angioplasties, hip replacements, and many other costly interventions. Advances in medical technology have made it feasible and desirable to do more for each patient and to intervene with more patients. Now had it not been for the private system these advancements would not have been made and the life expectancy would not have thrived since these wonderful advancements and breakthroughs I the healthcare system. (9) One must simply understand that we need privatization of healthcare to ensure the best quality machines as well care for the patients. IV- From a factual and economic standpoint, the more competition and free trade in the market the lower the prices are for the services and goods. So if a business and for sake of the argument insurance companies attempt to drive their prices into the ground say $200 per year all other competition will be eliminated and everyone will be happy to only pay 200 per year. Now lets say the company wants to make some bigger profits, they will evidently raise the price to say $500, however now other companies will compete again all for a lower price, giving the consumer the best price possible. (10) Some may know of the prisoners dilemma problem, here is how it goes". This applies to economics and healthcare because it is in the best interest of the insurance companies to get the least amount of time (charge the least) to try and eliminate its competition, thus the cheapest way to get healthcare is to flood the market with competition and plummet the prices for the goods. V- In a government run healthcare system the choice of your doctor is very limited, I"ll put it this way. Who in this room would simply close their eyes and open the phonebook and choose a doctor at random??? Not very many I"m sure. So what would you go off of??? Reviews? Friends, and family? Other experiences? This is a perfect example of how the private system works, rather than in the public where you have little to no choice in your doctor/ surgeon. However in a private system people choose their doctor off reviews and other past experiences that they or others that they know have had with that male or female. (11) Many times peole will not choose a doctor or physician who has had malpractice suits filed therefore he will no longer practice and thus eliminating the problem of "bad" doctors. VI- Many think healthcare is a right, however nothing could be farther from the truth here is why". When you look at a lot of political philosophers, you will find that the three basic human rights are life, liberty, and property. If something must be taken from one person to be given to another, it is not a right. Therefore, if one must be forced to pay into a system that provides free universal healthcare, it is not a right, because you must deprive one person from their right to their property. There is a big difference between a need and a right. Health care is a basic need that everyone is free to pursue. This means that the government cannot infringe on our right to pursue health care but no one owes us health care. Health care is a good just like food, clothing, and shelter. Positive rights contradict the very notion of rights. The so-called right to health care infringes on negative rights by imposing forceful obligations on taxpayers and health care providers. What about the right of the taxpayer to keep the fruit of his own labor? Should a doctor ultimately decide whom he treats"or should he be forced to treat everyone whether he likes it or not? To say that we have the right to someone else"s time and services takes us back down a dark path in American history. Those who reject the idea that health care is a right are not dismissing the importance of health care. Quite the opposite is true. Health care is too important to be left to the incompetent federal government. Due to a lack of proper incentives, government generally destroys everything they touch. The government has never been able to run anything more efficiently than the for-profit private sector. (12)(13)(14)(15). VII- In a private system where the government does not say what drugs are "safe" and "not safe" the consumer has much more freedom in the drugs and treatments he wishes to have. Now what happens in the USA is PRIVATE firms evaluate drugs on say a 3 star rating system, so suppose there is a drug- the only one available but the firm only gave it a 1/3 star rating, this means success rate=33.3% and you have a 66.7% chance of dying. The cancer is terminal, who here would take the drug?? Many would often say "I would" and the reason is because to you that"s a 33.3% better chance than what you have, now what would happen in say Canada"s system is the government would say it is not "safe" enough and not allow the drug to be on the market. Is that right?? The main reason I say it isn"t is the government has no right telling me that I can"t take a drug that could potentially save my life! Now in regards to people being afraid the firms would say lie in the rating and say it is a 97% success rate when it is really only 23%, that company will be sued and out of business so they have no reason to lie other than to short term possibly make more money even though they would soon be sued and out of business. More government regulation is never the answer. The USA also has a FDA which help inn the evaluating process and thus eliminating abuse of the system. (16)(17)(18) VIII- A major misconception about the American healthcare system is that people are denied treatment, nothing could be farther from the truth. Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires hospitals to treat acutely ill patients, whether or not they have medical insurance. Any hospital that does not treat ill patients regardless of the financial status, are breaking the Hippocratic oath as well are subject to lawsuits and malpractice suits as well loss of license. People however have the right to DENY treatment or help, that is not the same as a hospital denying someone healthcare because of no insurance. (19)(20) IX- One of the main problems with the public system is you pay for treatments you may find morally wrong such as funding cancer treatments for someone who smoked. In Canada, taxpayers pay for all abortions. In British Columbia, Alberta, , Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, and Newfoundland, abortion is paid for under the publicly funded system whether it is performed in a hospital or private clinic. One of the most controversial issues is FUNDED BY TAXPAYERS even those who DISAGREE with it completely. (21) Sex-reassignment surgeries are also paid for in all but one province (PEI), even though many people find that unmoral we are FORCED to pay for those things, something that would never happen in the USA. (22) Links 1-https://www.fraserinstitute.org... 2-http://hspm.sph.sc.edu... 3-https://www.fraserinstitute.org... 4-https://www.fraserinstitute.org... 5-http://www.medicalnewstoday.com... 6-http://www.medicalnewstoday.com... 7-http://familiesusa.org... 8-https://www.health.gov.au... 9-http://capitalism.org... 10-http://www.consumerreports.org... 11-http://www.freedomworks.org... 12-http://bastiat.org... 13-http://fee.org... 14-https://en.wikipedia.org... 15-http://www.cdc.gov... 16-http://www.fda.gov... 17-http://www.fda.gov... 18-http://people.opposingviews.com... 19-http://www.rbs2.com... 20-http://abortionincanada.ca... 21-http://www.dailyxtra.com...