From: ckincy@cs.umr.edu (Charles Kincy)
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft the next
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 01:54:56 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla, Rolla, MO

In article <93Jan03.221000.20637@acs.ucalgary.ca> bauwens@acs.ucalgary.ca (Luc Bauwens) writes:
>In article <1993Jan3.092308.13063@umr.edu> ckincy@cs.umr.edu (Charles Kincy) writes:
>
>Stuff about medical system in Canada.  I wonder what this got to do
>with comp.os.os2.advocacy...   So, see the follow-up line,
>redirected to soc.culture.canada.

Well, ok, my knee jerked, and I got in over my head.
 
*munches on a plate of crow*

But I will answer a coupla things...

>Wrong.  Canada is quite decentralized.  Probably more than the
>US.  Furthermore, the average population of the Canadian province is less
>than half the average state population in the US.  Furthermore, medical
>care fall within the *provincial* responsibility.

Ok.  I was thinking more in terms of parliamentary systems vs. republics,
but, you win.

>
>>  It's designed to be inefficient.  Unfortunately,
>>that means socialized health care in the US would cost oh, so much more.
>
>I won't argue with your claim that the US government may be designed
>to be less efficient than the Canadian one.  I wonder why one would
>want to *design* a governement to be inefficient, though.  As for
>the result, you probably know better than I do :-)..

The idea was to prevent the rapid spread of tyranny.
 
Didn't work, did it?  :(

>Two more points: in the Canadian system, health care is provided by *private*,
>non-government medical organizations.  It's merely the *insurance* business
>that's run by the provinces.
>
>And you can have universal, governement-garanteed health care entirely
>run by private organizations, and even have them compete against each
>other.

Sort of.  Except the US Government always seems to make a mess
of even the best ideas.  Social security, for example.  Oh, sure, 
let's borrow from the surplus to fight wars in Korea and Vietnam!

Idjits.

*sigh*  Well, we elected them, didn't we?  :(

>It seems to me that the major problem of medical costs in the US is
>that it's in effect a monopoly totally controlled by the medical 
>profession, that over the last twelve years has transformed itself
>from what was then a bunch of individual practitioners with a traditional
>sense of medical values, into corporate medical organizations purely
>profit-driven and in conditions of virtual monopoly.  And the only
>way out is to put togrther some kind of a player that's powerful enough
>to put the health business under control.

BINGO!  And you won't get much argument from me in obliterating that
monopoly.  But, then again, I don't want to let the gubment run anything.


>I don't say that the best way to do that is necessarily the Canadian
>system.  But in Canada right now, that problem does not exist.

Ok, Canada's system works better, currently.  There, I said it.

But I don't want our government to implement it.  They'd just 
screw it up.

>Furthermore (and this is a key to the issue of cost-effectiveness),
>the Canadian system does a great job at spending enough money where
>it's most cost-effective: in preventative medicine.  

Yah, like taxing the hell out of cigarettes.  :)

>And yes, there may be some basis to the argument that 8% of the
>GNP to medical costs is still too much.

Yah, there is.  But, what can you do?

>>   [...]
>>
>>Trying to use a Canadian solution to an American problem is laughable.
> 
>I guess I read you here...   :-)  Indeed, wouldn't that be too much...
>

Before I see the government jump into nationalized health insurance,
I would first like to give deregulation and demonopolization and
private insurance reform a chance.  If that works, maybe a *limited*
government health insurance program to catch people that fell through
the cracks.  [Kinda like Medicaid, but much better.]

Just those three things would probably bring the American system
closer to the Canadian system in fairness and efficiency.
 
I resist a suddenly-imposed governmental health insurance scheme
with every bone of my body, though.  I just don't think it would do
any good without taking the above steps first.

Sorry to boot you with my jerking knee.  I think I might've learned
something from it.  :)

cpk
-- 
"The WHITE ZONE is for loading and unloading only.  If you gotta load or un-
load, go to the WHITE ZONE.  You'll love it.  It's a way of life!" --Zappa

Technology always seems to keep one step ahead of human wisdom.