From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Death of America
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 04:14:28 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.022801.9260@news.columbia.edu> gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
>cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
>>>cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>>>if you want to see where the US will be in five years, look 
>>>>north of the border. especially anyome who covets canada's 
>>>>despicable health care system.
>>>
>>>Other than insurance, what else is Canada's so-called "system"?
>>>(BTW, I'm Canadian and have lived and worked in many provinces.)
>>>Factor out geography, low population, its lop-sided distribution,
>>>a monopoly of private doctors just like America ... what else???
>>
>>the "insurance" was my point, and it is obscene enough to make
>>the system despicable, IMO, regardless of the rest of it.
>
>So what's the problem with it?  I've pointed out the problems with our
>system that have *always* been there ...  maybe you want that people
>should go without insurance and run up gigantic tabs later for others
>to pay?

i'm not sure what this means.
i *do* know that i am not interested in paying for others' health care,
with the exception of emergency care.

>
>>>Just trying to add perspective here ... we Canadians don't think
>>>much about how we do our health care, and tend to think that there
>>>is more government involved (it's only insurance) than there really 
>>>is when you start to break things down ...
>>
>>you see?  that is the kind of attitude that is dangerous. 
>>"it's only insurance". right.
>
>So what's the problem?  Take out every other factor that could be
>duplicated in the American private system (hard, 'cos there are
>things that they do here that we don't do up north, like cut off
>and weasel on payments) and ... where's the government?

the government decides how much doctors are allowed to be paid
for the ten years they spend learning their trade (which is why
they are leaving as fast as they can get their green cards).
the government decides what the "insurance" will pay for and what
it will not.
the government decides that doctors are not allowed to charge
extra to those who can afford it for extra services.
the government decides how many hospital beds are appropriate
for another area.
the government also spends millions of dollars sending patients
to US-border hospitals because there is no room for them in
canada.

centrally planned health care.

>
>>>by the way, if you know
>>>anyone who works for the Canadian insurance industry in London, ON
>>>they can tell you that our private insurers are glad that they did
>>>not stay in basic medical coverage when they off-loaded it onto the
>>>public sector (do you know who Paul Martin, Sr. was?).
>>
>>i don't know who he was. maybe you could tell us a little more if
>>you know more about that sub-topic.
>
>Paul Martin, Sr. died a couple of months ago and his bio was in all
>the papers (even the New York Times; otherwise, I rely on UPI).  The
>only reason I know anything about this topic is that as a Canadian,
>I've been asked a million times about our "socialized medicine" and
>have had to think about it to realize ... it's not!
>
>[history deleted]

ok, thanks for the historical perspective, but i don't see how
you can claim that it is not socialized medecine. please explain.

i don't deny the problems with the american system. i *do* deny
that the canadian system is a viable solution.

>
>So ... what's the problem?

1. doesn't work well
2. unfair to doctors
3. can't meet demand
4. no incentive not to use the system
5. government decisions
6. more i don't have time to list

--
charles
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc