On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:22:35 -0600, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>
> While many Canadians proudly boast about our country’s "free" health
> care, a new study has broken down exactly how much money in many tax
> dollars go into the system each year.
> According to a new report by the right-leaning Fraser Institute, the
> average Canadian family will contribute $11,735 in taxes for public
> health insurance in 2015.

They are fully aware of that. Bernie's plan will cost on average
$8000 and it includes more than health insurance.

--

sf

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:41:03 -0500, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:44:11 -0300, wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 11:37:25 -0600, Sqwertz >
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-...us-health-care
>>>
>>>A top Canadian politician attracted national attention when he decided
>>>to abandon his country’s health care system, which has been suggested as
>>>a model for reforms in the United States, to cross the border in seeking
>>>treatment for a heart condition.
>>>
>>>Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams traveled to the United
>>>States in February to undergo heart surgery. The 59-year-old millionaire
>>>is set to spend over three months in America recovering from the operation.
>>>
>>
>> Danny Williams is sooooo wealthy he didn't even take the salary
>> offered a provincial premier. He's a very nice man (unlike you!) and
>> when he had a heart problem, opted to pay through the nose in the USA
>> and get it fixed sooner. Nobody criticised him for that, after all
>> the more common politician is inclined to take what's to hand and jump
>> to the head of the line. Way to go Danny!
>
>Don't feed the forging trolls. Don't be a sucker.
>
>-sw

I know but using Danny Williams as an example was one step too many! A
really genuine man.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On 4/10/2016 11:20 AM, graham wrote:
>> On 10/04/2016 11:15 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>> On 4/10/2016 11:07 AM, wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 11:58:08 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 4/10/2016 9:17 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I spend 4 days in ICU and another 3 nights in the hospital. I was
>>>>>> billed
>>>>>> nothing for all that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How much does the average Canadian pay for free medical? Based on
>>>>> income?
>>>>
>>>> Based on spending - a sales tax gets it so the more you have to spend,
>>>> the more you support it. Someone like me who buys a Mazda 2 pays much
>>>> less than the person buying a Merc.
>>>
>>
>>> According to data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information, as
>>
>>> The Fraser Institute of Canada
>>
>> Neither of those sources is credible! They are far RW "Think tanks" that
>> want to privatize everything and take us back to Victorian times!
>> Graham
>
> LOL, your partisan BIAS is showing again, assbag!
>
> Here, read on:
>
> http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-...us-health-care
>
> A top Canadian politician attracted national attention when he decided to
> abandon his country’s health care system, which has been suggested as a
> model for reforms in the United States, to cross the border in seeking
> treatment for a heart condition.
>
> Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams traveled to the United
> States in February to undergo heart surgery. The 59-year-old millionaire
> is set to spend over three months in America recovering from the
> operation.
>
> Not Surprised
>
> Sally Pipes, president of the San Francisco-based Pacific Research
> Institute, calls Premier Williams’ decision “no surprise.”
>
> “[Premier Williams] is a medical tourist; he went where he obviously felt
> he would get the best treatment and where he would not have to wait. He
> did not follow [political film documentarian] Michael Moore’s advice. He
> came here because in the United States we have the latest and best
> technology and treatments and very good health outcomes,” Pipes said.
>
> Opposition politicians in Canada have raised questions about why Williams
> decided not to seek heart treatment in Ontario or Toronto, the heart
> surgery hubs of the Canadian health care system. Some are wondering
> whether Williams' decision to leave Canada for treatment in the United
> States reflects an indictment of Canada's health system. He is not alone
> in his preference for American care, however, Pipes says.
>
> “[Premier Williams] is not the first. Belinda Stronach who opposed opening
> the Canadian health care system, came to America for treatment when she
> was diagnosed with breast cancer in June 2007. Robert Bourassa, twice
> former Premier of Quebec, when he was diagnosed with multiple melanoma,
> came to the United States as well,” Pipes said.
>
> http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/11/re...-care-in-2011/
>
> The nonpartisan Fraser Institute reported that 46,159 Canadians sought
> medical treatment outside of Canada in 2011, as wait times increased 104
> percent — more than double — compared with statistics from 1993.
>
> Specialist physicians surveyed across 12 specialties and 10 provinces
> reported an average total wait time of 19 weeks between the time a general
> practitioner refers a patient and the time a specialist provides elective
> treatment — the longest they have ever recorded.
>
> http://dailysignal.com/2010/02/09/th...go-to-america/
>
> A study by Steven Katz, Diana Verilli, and Morris Barer in Health Affairs
> examining the Ontario Health Insurance Plan from 1987 to 1995 found
> “evidence of cross-border care seeking for cardiovascular and orthopedic
> procedures, mental health services, and cancer treatments,” although not
> widespread. Examples include the governments of British Columbia and
> Quebec sending patients to the United States for coronary artery surgery
> and cancer treatment. Shona Holmes, a Kingston, Ontario resident in need
> of an endocrinologist and neurologist, crossed the border when she was
> told to wait “four months for one specialist and six months for the
> other.” Karen Jepp delivered identical quadruplets in Montana “because of
> a shortage of neonatal beds in Canada,” with the Calgary health system
> picking up the tab.
>
> Perhaps Canadians’ health care migration patterns are a result of their
> own centralized system of government health care planning and “free care”
> crashing into the government’s budget constraints.
>
> http://www.city-journal.org/html/ugl...are-13032.html
>
> The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care
> Socialized medicine has meant rationed care and lack of innovation. Small
> wonder Canadians are looking to the market.
>
> My health-care prejudices crumbled not in the classroom but on the way to
> one. On a subzero Winnipeg morning in 1997, I cut across the hospital
> emergency room to shave a few minutes off my frigid commute. Swinging open
> the door, I stepped into a nightma the ER overflowed with elderly
> people on stretchers, waiting for admission. Some, it turned out, had
> waited five days. The air stank with sweat and urine. Right then, I began
> to reconsider everything that I thought I knew about Canadian health care.
> I soon discovered that the problems went well beyond overcrowded ERs.
> Patients had to wait for practically any diagnostic test or procedure,
> such as the man with persistent pain from a hernia operation whom we
> referred to a pain clinic—with a three-year wait list; or the woman
> needing a sleep study to diagnose what seemed like sleep apnea, who faced
> a two-year delay; or the woman with breast cancer who needed to wait four
> months for radiation therapy, when the standard of care was four weeks.

Yep! The sleep apnea thing. Pretty much what happened to my friend. Then
they sent her off to another part of the country to an unfamiliar hospital.
Flew her on a hardship plane ticket as she had no other way to get there.
Only for her to be stranded for the weekend with nothing but the clothes on
her back. Thankfully she had an online friend nearby who put her up and fed
her for the weekend. She had to wait until Monday to get another hardship
ticket to fly back home.

And all for what? The result of the test was that she had insomnia. She
already knew that. She has had one more sleep study since. Still hasn't
gotten help for her problems. At least that study didn't require the two
year wait and it was much closer to home.

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 15:51:52 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
>> On 2016-04-10 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> That was the idea, but it did not work out that way. A few people
>>> benefited, many did not. Many low income people are forced to either pay
>>> a premium they cannot afford or pay a penalty for having no insurance.
>>> Varies by state, but if you have no income you are usually covered by
>>> Medicaid.
>>>
>>> The plan was based on incorrect suppositions. They assumed that the
>>> healthy 20 and 30 year olds would sign up, pay premiums, subsidize
>>> others. They found it was cheaper to pay a $400 penalty than to buy
>>> $6000 insurance.
>>>
>>> In another thread I mentioned situations like my son. He needs a knee
>>> operation that under the old plan would have been a $500 copay but is
>>> now $6000. He is paying the same premium, less coverage. Many people
>>> have run into that.
>>
>> That same operation here..... no copay.... no charge.
>
>If they decide to grant it to you. And if you can get to the assigned
>hospital if they do.

'Decide to grant it to me" "assigned hospital"

You don't know what the hell you are talking about. My doc decided I
needed a knee replacement, I was sent to the surgeon and six months
later it was done. No Charge!!

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:00:27 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>\
>I have a friend in New Brunswick. She has all sorts of medical problems
>that have yet to be addressed and it's not for the lack of trying on her
>part. They have also sent her for sleep studies in a faraway part of the
>country that she can't get to without assistance. She has no car and no
>income. No income because she is too sick to work. Chronic migraines,
>frequent low blood sugar, insomnia, stomach issues, rashes...I could go on
>and on.

I think either you, or your friend, is a liar. I suspect they
suggested she come to NS, next door province, for the sleep study
because we have an excellent sleep lab. She sounds like a
hypochondriac.

On 2016-04-10 2:30 PM, graham wrote:
> On 10/04/2016 11:28 AM, Sqwertz wrote:

>> Which is why you hosers head to the US for care...
>>
> Balls! What happens is that a few who are impatient or
> think the sun shines out of their collective arses go
> abroad and on their return USE THE CANADIAN SYSTEM TO
> CORRECT EVERYTHING!!!!!!!


Then there are the people like my whacko SiL who complained to her
American son in law's parents about the long wait list for her knee
replacement when the reason for her long wait was that she was afraid of
the surgery and kept putting it off.

On 2016-04-10 4:15 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 10:59:05 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2016-04-10 9:45 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I spend 4 days in ICU and another 3 nights in the hospital. I was billed
>>>> nothing for all that.
>>>
>>> My God. If that was in the USA, you would face a bill of (just
>>> guessing) over $20K.
>>
>> At the time, bypass surgery here was $10,000 for those you are not
>> covered by the government plan. In the US it was $20,000, and that is
>> just the surgery. Hospital room and medication would be extra.
>
> The cost of health care in the U.S is just insane. It's something like
> 2 to 3 times the cost of any other country.
>


It is a for profit system.

On 4/10/2016 4:41 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2016-04-10 1:38 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>
>> I did find this and it does not look so good.
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/nadeem-...b_3733080.html
>>
>>
>> In 2013, a typical Canadian family of four can expect to pay $11,320 for
>> public health care insurance. For the average family of two parents with
>> one child that bill will be $10,989, and for the average family of two
>> adults (without children) the bill comes to $11,381. As a result of
>> lower average incomes and differences in taxation, the bills are smaller
>> for the average unattached individual ($3,780), for the average
>> one-parent-one-child family ($3,905), and the average one-parent
>> two-child family ($3,387). But no matter the family type, the bill is
>> not small, much less free.
>
> I don't know about those figures.

You don't know SHIT!

On 4/10/2016 1:10 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 09:45:29 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> I spend 4 days in ICU and another 3 nights in the hospital. I was billed
>>> nothing for all that.
>>
>> My God. If that was in the USA, you would face a bill of (just
>> guessing) over $20K.
>>
>> That night 7.5 years ago that I had severe asthma and was stuck
>> sitting on the toilet all night - very labored breathing and even a 7
>> step walk to the phone to call for help would have killed me. After
>> spending about 8 hours on the damn toilet with very labored breathing
>> all night, I was finally healed enough to get up, dressed, and I drove
>> to a "minor emergency clinic." Very labored breathing even for that.
>>
>> As soon as they heard that I had no insurance, they treated me quite
>> shabbily (imo). They didn't want me there and acted like I was some
>> bum off the street after free medical care. I was told that the doctor
>> was running a bit late and I should go to the emergency room.
>
> A clinic would not have told you to drive to the ER, they would have
> called an ambulance.
>
Not if he was capable of driving.

My neighbor went to an urgent care clinic last year. They quickly
diagnosed her with an embolism/blood clot in her leg which could have
traveled to her heart/lungs. She was perfectly rational and capable of
driving a few miles further to hospital. No ambulance required. Oh,
and she had insurance.

Jill

On 2016-04-10 7:11 PM, wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:00:27 -0700, "Julie Bove"

> I think either you, or your friend, is a liar. I suspect they
> suggested she come to NS, next door province, for the sleep study
> because we have an excellent sleep lab. She sounds like a
> hypochondriac.
>


Oh come on. It is Julie. Given her record, I would not be calling the
alleged friend a liar.

On 4/10/2016 5:03 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:22:35 -0600, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> While many Canadians proudly boast about our country’s "free" health
>> care, a new study has broken down exactly how much money in many tax
>> dollars go into the system each year.
>> According to a new report by the right-leaning Fraser Institute, the
>> average Canadian family will contribute $11,735 in taxes for public
>> health insurance in 2015.
>
> They are fully aware of that. Bernie's plan will cost on average
> $8000 and it includes more than health insurance.
>

Bernie's plan will BANKRUPT all America.

My God woman, WTF is up with you?

http://moneymorning.com/2016/02/10/h...krupt-america/

According to several experts, the Bernie Sanders healthcare plan, which
he's dubbed "Medicare for All," will cost far more than the Vermont
senator says it will. And the array of new taxes Sanders has proposed
won't even come close to paying for it.

Bernie Sanders healthcare planEstimates of the deficit that the Bernie
Sanders healthcare plan would ring up over the first decade of its
existence range from $3.1 trillion to $14 trillion. That shortfall would
get tacked on the America's existing national debt, currently $19 trillion.

According to the Sanders campaign website, everyone would be covered,
and there would be no deductibles or co-pays – including for
prescription drugs. And we're talking everything, including mental
health services, substance abuse services, and long-term care.

"Bernie's plan will cover the entire continuum of healthcare," the
Sanders campaign website declares.

Meanwhile, Sanders says his plan will cost the average middle-class
American family with an annual income of $50,000 just $466 a year.
That's 92.5% reduction in what such a family currently pays – a whopping
annual savings of $5,807.

Sanders proposes a series of taxes to pay for Medicare for All,
including a 2.2% tax on workers, a 6.2% tax on employers, several tax
increases on the wealthy, and a plan to tax capital gains as ordinary
income.

Sanders is also counting on hundreds of billions in savings from the
shift away from private insurance: reductions in overhead, lower
hospital and doctors' fees, and lower prescription drug prices.

But several experts have stepped forward over the past few weeks – most
of whom are liberal or progressive thinkers – to say that the Bernie
Sanders healthcare plan makes too many unlikely assumptions.

Not only would Medicare for All end up costing trillions more than
Sanders suggests, they say, but his single-payer system would require a
lot of trade-offs sure to anger many Americans.

On 4/10/2016 5:04 PM, wrote:

>> Don't feed the forging trolls. Don't be a sucker.
>>
>> -sw
>
> I know but using Danny Williams as an example was one step too many! A
> really genuine man.
>

Plug it - hypocrite!

On 4/10/2016 5:08 PM, wrote:

>>> That same operation here..... no copay.... no charge.
>>
>> If they decide to grant it to you. And if you can get to the assigned
>> hospital if they do.
>
> 'Decide to grant it to me" "assigned hospital"
>
> You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Plug it bitch - your words are dismissed here!

On 4/10/2016 5:08 PM, Julie Bove wrote:

>>>> $700 is "hefty"?
>>>
>>> yes
>>
>> Perhaps those who don't work get it free as well as everything else?
>
> Wait! People who don't work get stuff for free? How so?

By you and I paying for it, duh!

On 4/10/2016 5:11 PM, wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:00:27 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>> \
>> I have a friend in New Brunswick. She has all sorts of medical problems
>> that have yet to be addressed and it's not for the lack of trying on her
>> part. They have also sent her for sleep studies in a faraway part of the
>> country that she can't get to without assistance. She has no car and no
>> income. No income because she is too sick to work. Chronic migraines,
>> frequent low blood sugar, insomnia, stomach issues, rashes...I could go on
>> and on.
>
> I think either you, or your friend, is a liar.


I think you're a mendacious old shrew who should **** THE HELL OFF!

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 19:28:57 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2016-04-10 4:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 10:59:05 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 2016-04-10 9:45 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I spend 4 days in ICU and another 3 nights in the hospital. I was billed
>>>>> nothing for all that.
>>>>
>>>> My God. If that was in the USA, you would face a bill of (just
>>>> guessing) over $20K.
>>>
>>> At the time, bypass surgery here was $10,000 for those you are not
>>> covered by the government plan. In the US it was $20,000, and that is
>>> just the surgery. Hospital room and medication would be extra.
>>
>> The cost of health care in the U.S is just insane. It's something like
>> 2 to 3 times the cost of any other country.
>>
>
>
>It is a for profit system.

Yep. That's what happens when you have lobbyists running rampant,
combined with quasi-legal corruption/nepotism.

On 4/10/2016 5:59 PM, graham wrote:

> There isn't a premium in Alberta, that was stopped when we were awash in
> oil royalties.
> As a senior, my prescriptions are heavily subsidized by the Alberta
> Govt. Last week I paid $11.82 for a $40 prescription.
> Graham


I paid $3 for a $93 prescription, but I also pay $40 a month for
coverage. I pay more in a year of premiums than what the drugs cost, my
wife comes out ahead with her prescriptions. Drugs cost more here at
retail too.

On 4/10/2016 5:39 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2016-04-10 7:11 PM, wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 16:00:27 -0700, "Julie Bove"
>
>> I think either you, or your friend, is a liar. I suspect they
>> suggested she come to NS, next door province, for the sleep study
>> because we have an excellent sleep lab. She sounds like a
>> hypochondriac.
>>
>
>
> Oh come on. It is Julie.

You big bully *******, eat shit and die!

On 4/10/2016 6:02 PM, Je�us wrote:

>> It is a for profit system.
>
> Yep. That's what happens when you have lobbyists

No, rabbit killer, it's what happens when you have the last vestiges of
a non-state controlled economy.

It's know as capitalism.

Now **** off and die!

On 4/10/2016 6:04 PM, wrote:
> I think underlying it all is that everyone goes into the pot to make
> the average.


https://www.solidarity-us.org/node/1679

It is ironic though that, just when interest in the United States is
rising, the Canadian system itself has become more vulnerable. Emergency
room overcrowding has reached crisis proportions in Ontario and Quebec;
hospital closings have devastated rural communities in Saskatchewan and
Alberta; the provinces are begging for federal health care cuts to be
restored to prevent a collapse of the system.

http://www.iedm.org/fr/3015-the-case...an-health-care

A 2007 international survey of seven countries by the Commonwealth Fund
(New York) found that 72% of Canadians think their health care system
needs either fundamental changes or complete rebuilding.

A 2006 Léger Poll for the Montreal Economic Institute shows that 48% of
Canadians and 60% of Quebecers would find it acceptable if patients were
allowed to pay for health care in the private sector while still
maintaining the present free universal medicare plan.

Now that the Supreme Court of Canada has invalidated Quebec’s
legislation and has concluded that access to a private alternative
health insurance would not endanger the integrity of the public system,
it is incumbent upon Quebec and the other provinces with similar
legislation to immediately rescind these legislated infringements of the
charter rights of patients while retaining present medicare
entitlements. This will reduce the associated pain, suffering, and
sometimes death that continues to be inflicted on Canadians by this
unjust legislation.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/pol...fragile-system

The reason health care privatization is stepping to the forefront in the
national debate is because the Canada Health Act has become a mangy,
cost-addled money trap fed by annual increases well beyond the economy’s
current abilities. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD), an international policy performance gauge,
repeatedly ranks Canada as a mediocre healthcare supplier at best.

On 4/10/2016 7:51 PM, carnal asada wrote:

>
> Sanders is also counting on hundreds of billions in savings from the
> shift away from private insurance: reductions in overhead, lower
> hospital and doctors' fees, and lower prescription drug prices.
>

Oh, that will work. Doctors are going to work for that $15 an hour
everyone wants too.

On 4/10/2016 6:08 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 4/10/2016 7:51 PM, carnal asada wrote:
>
>>
>> Sanders is also counting on hundreds of billions in savings from the
>> shift away from private insurance: reductions in overhead, lower
>> hospital and doctors' fees, and lower prescription drug prices.
>>
>
> Oh, that will work. Doctors are going to work for that $15 an hour
> everyone wants too.

<chuckle>

That may be more than they make in Canuckistan...

http://globalnews.ca/news/2084801/do...ge-in-ontario/

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/...b-68127053d590

OTTAWA -Nye Bevan, the British politician, once lamented that it took a
certain kind of organizational genius to produce a shortage of coal and
fish at the same time, given the British Isles are made of the former
and surrounded by the latter.

The same thought struck during a cursory examination of Canada's doctor
shortage. The Canadian Medical Association launched a publicity campaign
pointing out that almost five million Canadians do not have a family
physician and that the country would need 26,000 more doctors to meet
the OECD average of physicians per family.

Yet, there is a glut of doctors trained abroad who have moved to Canada
but cannot find resident spots in teaching hospitals to give them the
accreditation they need. Figures from last year show that only 20% of
the 1,486 foreign-trained Canadian and permanent-resident doctors were
matched with residency positions at Canada's teaching hospitals. This
means 1,188 graduates, who had passed their licensing exams, were unable
to find spots required to qualify as family doctors.

The hospitals claim the reason so many potential doctors were turned
down was because of a teacher shortage. But here's the real kicker:
While university hospitals have been rejecting doctors who might have
moved into towns and cities across Canada to provide the health care
that Canadians expect and deserve, they have been accepting trainees
from foreign countries in record-breaking numbers -- all of whom come
here at their governments' expense and then return home once fully trained.

"Brooklyn1" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 18:38:22 +0100, "Ophelia" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Brooklyn1" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 09:45:29 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I spend 4 days in ICU and another 3 nights in the hospital. I was
>>>>> billed
>>>>> nothing for all that.
>>>>
>>>>My God. If that was in the USA, you would face a bill of (just
>>>>guessing) over $20K.
>>>>
>>>>That night 7.5 years ago that I had severe asthma and was stuck
>>>>sitting on the toilet all night - very labored breathing and even a 7
>>>>step walk to the phone to call for help would have killed me. After
>>>>spending about 8 hours on the damn toilet with very labored breathing
>>>>all night, I was finally healed enough to get up, dressed, and I drove
>>>>to a "minor emergency clinic." Very labored breathing even for that.
>>>>
>>>>As soon as they heard that I had no insurance, they treated me quite
>>>>shabbily (imo). They didn't want me there and acted like I was some
>>>>bum off the street after free medical care. I was told that the doctor
>>>>was running a bit late and I should go to the emergency room.
>>>
>>> A clinic would not have told you to drive to the ER, they would have
>>> called an ambulance.
>>>
>>>>I told
>>>>them that I was doing ok just sitting there and waiting but to get up
>>>>again would be a hardship. I'm not leaving.
>>>>
>>>>So then she told me, "You know, this could be expensive"
>>>>I told her, "I've got money, I'll pay for this today"
>>>>She still didn't seem convinced. Again, I was made to feel like some
>>>>bum.
>>>>
>>>>So I finally got to see the doctor. They treated me there and I was
>>>>good to go plus I got prescriptions. Funny how just 1/2 hour treatment
>>>>in the doctors office fixed me when I really almost died of asthma
>>>>attack
>>>
>>> That's why you need medication at home, you should have an Albuterol
>>> Sulphate inhaler on you at all times, and a nebulizer at home... with
>>> a neb treatment at home you'd be fine in ten minutes.
>>
>>Yes, I have all those things and have never got into difficulties the way
>>Gary did. As soon as I have a problem I have everything I need to treat
>>myself instantly!
>>
>>I hope Gary will take better care of himself now. What he suffered and
>>the
>>way he was treated was dreadful.
>
> Essentially it was Gary's own doing. Nebulizers cost very little,
> $50-$80, they can even be obtained for free. Albuterol sulphate
> ampules are dirt cheap, they cost no more than smelling salts, usually
> free from ones doctor. If his primary care physcian knows he has no
> insurance and can't aford medication a plan can be set up with the
> pharmaceutical company to provide meds for free from a local pharmacy,
> plus doctors have lots of free samples, just need to ask. Gary was
> really nutso to sit in his toilit all night because he had no
> medication on hand that could save his life, what a low IQ jerk. If
> the story he told is true (which I doubt) he's very lucky to have
> lived, Asthma exacerbations don't get better by waiting, they become
> worse. Gary, if you are truly an Asthmatic, get educated, if you're
> lying STFU.

How about you STFU with your worthless judgments of other people? Start with
your miserable self, you old gasbag.

Cheri

"Julie Bove" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 2016-04-10 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> That was the idea, but it did not work out that way. A few people
>>> benefited, many did not. Many low income people are forced to either pay
>>> a premium they cannot afford or pay a penalty for having no insurance.
>>> Varies by state, but if you have no income you are usually covered by
>>> Medicaid.
>>>
>>> The plan was based on incorrect suppositions. They assumed that the
>>> healthy 20 and 30 year olds would sign up, pay premiums, subsidize
>>> others. They found it was cheaper to pay a $400 penalty than to buy
>>> $6000 insurance.
>>>
>>> In another thread I mentioned situations like my son. He needs a knee
>>> operation that under the old plan would have been a $500 copay but is
>>> now $6000. He is paying the same premium, less coverage. Many people
>>> have run into that.
>>
>> That same operation here..... no copay.... no charge.
>
> If they decide to grant it to you. And if you can get to the assigned
> hospital if they do.

My relative in Saskatchewan need a knee replacement, got it quickly and is
doing well.

Cheri

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
> On 4/10/2016 7:51 PM, carnal asada wrote:
>
>>
>> Sanders is also counting on hundreds of billions in savings from the
>> shift away from private insurance: reductions in overhead, lower
>> hospital and doctors' fees, and lower prescription drug prices.
>>
>
> Oh, that will work. Doctors are going to work for that $15 an hour
> everyone wants too.

$15.00 an hour for surfing the net to find cures sounds reasonable to me.
;-)

Cheri

On 4/10/2016 6:17 PM, Cheri wrote:

>> Gary, if you are truly an Asthmatic, get educated, if you're
>> lying STFU.
>
> How about you STFU with your worthless judgments of other people? Start
> with your miserable self, you old gasbag.
>
> Cheri

Ditto.

On 4/10/2016 6:21 PM, Cheri wrote:
>
> "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 4/10/2016 7:51 PM, carnal asada wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Sanders is also counting on hundreds of billions in savings from the
>>> shift away from private insurance: reductions in overhead, lower
>>> hospital and doctors' fees, and lower prescription drug prices.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, that will work. Doctors are going to work for that $15 an hour
>> everyone wants too.
>
> $15.00 an hour for surfing the net to find cures sounds reasonable to
> me. ;-)
>
> Cheri

Lol, internet outsourcing will about all that's left after the machines
take over.

http://fortune.com/2015/07/23/new-yo...inimum-wage-2/

Labor leaders are celebrating the decision to raise New York’s minimum
wage for fast-food workers to $15 per hour, but economists say the
results for low-income workers will be mixed.

A recent Congressional Budget Office study estimated that raising the
federal minimum wage to $10.10 from the current level of $7.25 would
reduce employment by 0.3%. The minimum wage hike for fast food workers
New York enacted, however, is more extreme than what the CBO looked at.
Economist Jared Bernstein has argued for the raising of the federal
minimum wage because the benefits would greatly outweigh the costs.
According to David Neumark, Director of the Center for Economics &
Public Policy and UC Irvine, however, “We know that minimum wages reduce
employment more the higher the minimum wage is relative [to the average
prevailing wage]”

"carnal asada" > wrote in message
...
> On 4/10/2016 6:21 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>
>> "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 4/10/2016 7:51 PM, carnal asada wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sanders is also counting on hundreds of billions in savings from the
>>>> shift away from private insurance: reductions in overhead, lower
>>>> hospital and doctors' fees, and lower prescription drug prices.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, that will work. Doctors are going to work for that $15 an hour
>>> everyone wants too.
>>
>> $15.00 an hour for surfing the net to find cures sounds reasonable to
>> me. ;-)
>>
>> Cheri
>
> Lol, internet outsourcing will about all that's left after the machines
> take over.

My doc routinely checks the net during visits. I can do that myself.

Cheri

On 4/10/2016 6:59 PM, wrote:

>
> I have mentioned this before but my cousin, when they were living and
> working in San Francisco with top rate health care included (only way
> the US company could get them there) found a lump on her breast. She
> went to the doc, he agreed there was a lump but thought she should
> wait a month to see if it enlarged.
>
> She was uneasy and they decided she would go home and see what their
> doc in England said. She had a mastectomy and the doc said waiting a
> month would have been cutting it very close. When back in SF and
> seeing her doctor to give him her files she asked why on earth he had
> said wait a month to see. He said that is what the insurance company
> wants him to do.
>
> She and I both feel we want doctors, not insurance clerks, calling the
> shots for us medically.
>

I've heard stories like that but we use a medical group that does not do
that at all. You move along as determined by the doctor and they have
never cared about what the insurance says. There are stories of
incompetence on both sides of the border.

On 4/10/2016 7:08 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>

>> Perhaps those who don't work get it free as well as everything else?
>
> Wait! People who don't work get stuff for free? How so?

Welfare, public assistance, Medicaid, etc.

I have a legally blind relative that cannot work for a few reasons. He
get $500 for heat, $200 a month cash, $180 a month food, 100% medical
coverage.

Not a glamorous lifestyle, but the minimums are covered.

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 15:51:52 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
>> On 2016-04-10 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> That was the idea, but it did not work out that way. A few people
>>> benefited, many did not. Many low income people are forced to either pay
>>> a premium they cannot afford or pay a penalty for having no insurance.
>>> Varies by state, but if you have no income you are usually covered by
>>> Medicaid.
>>>
>>> The plan was based on incorrect suppositions. They assumed that the
>>> healthy 20 and 30 year olds would sign up, pay premiums, subsidize
>>> others. They found it was cheaper to pay a $400 penalty than to buy
>>> $6000 insurance.
>>>
>>> In another thread I mentioned situations like my son. He needs a knee
>>> operation that under the old plan would have been a $500 copay but is
>>> now $6000. He is paying the same premium, less coverage. Many people
>>> have run into that.
>>
>> That same operation here..... no copay.... no charge.
>
>If they decide to grant it to you. And if you can get to the assigned
>hospital if they do.

If your doctor decides you need a specific treatment, you get it. And
there's no such thing as an "assigned hospital" in Canada.

While we're on the topic, Americans (including you, Julie) frequently
go on about not having access to doctors outside of their insurance
company's group. I forget exactly what you call that. In Canada, there
are no restrictions like that.

Doris

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 19:32:25 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 4/10/2016 1:10 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 09:45:29 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I spend 4 days in ICU and another 3 nights in the hospital. I was billed
>>>> nothing for all that.
>>>
>>> My God. If that was in the USA, you would face a bill of (just
>>> guessing) over $20K.
>>>
>>> That night 7.5 years ago that I had severe asthma and was stuck
>>> sitting on the toilet all night - very labored breathing and even a 7
>>> step walk to the phone to call for help would have killed me. After
>>> spending about 8 hours on the damn toilet with very labored breathing
>>> all night, I was finally healed enough to get up, dressed, and I drove
>>> to a "minor emergency clinic." Very labored breathing even for that.
>>>
>>> As soon as they heard that I had no insurance, they treated me quite
>>> shabbily (imo). They didn't want me there and acted like I was some
>>> bum off the street after free medical care. I was told that the doctor
>>> was running a bit late and I should go to the emergency room.
>>
>> A clinic would not have told you to drive to the ER, they would have
>> called an ambulance.
>>
>Not if he was capable of driving.
>
>My neighbor went to an urgent care clinic last year. They quickly
>diagnosed her with an embolism/blood clot in her leg which could have
>traveled to her heart/lungs. She was perfectly rational and capable of
>driving a few miles further to hospital. No ambulance required. Oh,
>and she had insurance.
>
>Jill
It is possible to walk around with a clot in the leg for weeks and
weeks and not have it move. (BTDT, I didn't know why my leg had a
sore spot) I didn't have to drive myself to the hospital after the
tentative diagnosis because the doctor's office was within the
hospital campus and I was sent for an ultrasound. They withheld
surgery until the next day because I had already eaten several meals
that day. Having a blood clot is something to be taken care of but
not a 5 alarm fire.
Did the urgent care use ultra sound to detect the blood clot or was
she sent to the hospital to have an ultra sound done?
Janet US

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 20:08:17 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 15:51:52 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
>>> On 2016-04-10 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> That was the idea, but it did not work out that way. A few people
>>>> benefited, many did not. Many low income people are forced to either pay
>>>> a premium they cannot afford or pay a penalty for having no insurance.
>>>> Varies by state, but if you have no income you are usually covered by
>>>> Medicaid.
>>>>
>>>> The plan was based on incorrect suppositions. They assumed that the
>>>> healthy 20 and 30 year olds would sign up, pay premiums, subsidize
>>>> others. They found it was cheaper to pay a $400 penalty than to buy
>>>> $6000 insurance.
>>>>
>>>> In another thread I mentioned situations like my son. He needs a knee
>>>> operation that under the old plan would have been a $500 copay but is
>>>> now $6000. He is paying the same premium, less coverage. Many people
>>>> have run into that.
>>>
>>> That same operation here..... no copay.... no charge.
>>
>>If they decide to grant it to you. And if you can get to the assigned
>>hospital if they do.
>
>'Decide to grant it to me" "assigned hospital"
>
>You don't know what the hell you are talking about. My doc decided I
>needed a knee replacement, I was sent to the surgeon and six months
>later it was done. No Charge!!

agreed!
Janet US

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:19:19 -0700, "Cheri" >
wrote:

>
>"Julie Bove" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 2016-04-10 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> That was the idea, but it did not work out that way. A few people
>>>> benefited, many did not. Many low income people are forced to either pay
>>>> a premium they cannot afford or pay a penalty for having no insurance.
>>>> Varies by state, but if you have no income you are usually covered by
>>>> Medicaid.
>>>>
>>>> The plan was based on incorrect suppositions. They assumed that the
>>>> healthy 20 and 30 year olds would sign up, pay premiums, subsidize
>>>> others. They found it was cheaper to pay a $400 penalty than to buy
>>>> $6000 insurance.
>>>>
>>>> In another thread I mentioned situations like my son. He needs a knee
>>>> operation that under the old plan would have been a $500 copay but is
>>>> now $6000. He is paying the same premium, less coverage. Many people
>>>> have run into that.
>>>
>>> That same operation here..... no copay.... no charge.
>>
>> If they decide to grant it to you. And if you can get to the assigned
>> hospital if they do.
>
>My relative in Saskatchewan need a knee replacement, got it quickly and is
>doing well.
>
>Cheri

too many people have been guzzling the conservative Kool-Aid because
by nature they want to feel put upon.
Janet US

On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:52:56 -0600, carnal asada >
wrote:

> And the millions who LOST their insurance can testify as much!

That's complete bullshit.

--

sf

On 4/10/2016 6:37 PM, Cheri wrote:
> everyone wants too.
>>>
>>> $15.00 an hour for surfing the net to find cures sounds reasonable to
>>> me. ;-)
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>> Lol, internet outsourcing will about all that's left after the
>> machines take over.
>
> My doc routinely checks the net during visits. I can do that myself.
>
> Cheri

Wow.

On 4/10/2016 7:44 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 4/10/2016 7:08 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>
>>> Perhaps those who don't work get it free as well as everything else?
>>
>> Wait! People who don't work get stuff for free? How so?
>
> Welfare, public assistance, Medicaid, etc.
>
> I have a legally blind relative that cannot work for a few reasons. He
> get $500 for heat, $200 a month cash, $180 a month food, 100% medical
> coverage.
>
> Not a glamorous lifestyle, but the minimums are covered.


For "free"?

Nah.

On 4/10/2016 8:32 PM, Doris Night wrote:
> While we're on the topic, Americans (including you, Julie) frequently
> go on about not having access to doctors outside of their insurance


Plug it bitch, you socialists can **** up your own rope!@

On 4/10/2016 9:14 PM, Janet B wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:19:19 -0700, "Cheri" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Julie Bove" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 2016-04-10 11:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That was the idea, but it did not work out that way. A few people
>>>>> benefited, many did not. Many low income people are forced to either pay
>>>>> a premium they cannot afford or pay a penalty for having no insurance.
>>>>> Varies by state, but if you have no income you are usually covered by
>>>>> Medicaid.
>>>>>
>>>>> The plan was based on incorrect suppositions. They assumed that the
>>>>> healthy 20 and 30 year olds would sign up, pay premiums, subsidize
>>>>> others. They found it was cheaper to pay a $400 penalty than to buy
>>>>> $6000 insurance.
>>>>>
>>>>> In another thread I mentioned situations like my son. He needs a knee
>>>>> operation that under the old plan would have been a $500 copay but is
>>>>> now $6000. He is paying the same premium, less coverage. Many people
>>>>> have run into that.
>>>>
>>>> That same operation here..... no copay.... no charge.
>>>
>>> If they decide to grant it to you. And if you can get to the assigned
>>> hospital if they do.
>>
>> My relative in Saskatchewan need a knee replacement, got it quickly and is
>> doing well.
>>
>> Cheri
>
> too many people have been guzzling the conservative Kool-Aid because
> by nature they want to feel put upon.
> Janet US
>


https://www.solidarity-us.org/node/1679

It is ironic though that, just when interest in the United States is
rising, the Canadian system itself has become more vulnerable. Emergency
room overcrowding has reached crisis proportions in Ontario and Quebec;
hospital closings have devastated rural communities in Saskatchewan and
Alberta; the provinces are begging for federal health care cuts to be
restored to prevent a collapse of the system.

http://www.iedm.org/fr/3015-the-case...an-health-care

A 2007 international survey of seven countries by the Commonwealth Fund
(New York) found that 72% of Canadians think their health care system
needs either fundamental changes or complete rebuilding.

A 2006 Léger Poll for the Montreal Economic Institute shows that 48% of
Canadians and 60% of Quebecers would find it acceptable if patients were
allowed to pay for health care in the private sector while still
maintaining the present free universal medicare plan.

Now that the Supreme Court of Canada has invalidated Quebec’s
legislation and has concluded that access to a private alternative
health insurance would not endanger the integrity of the public system,
it is incumbent upon Quebec and the other provinces with similar
legislation to immediately rescind these legislated infringements of the
charter rights of patients while retaining present medicare
entitlements. This will reduce the associated pain, suffering, and
sometimes death that continues to be inflicted on Canadians by this
unjust legislation.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/pol...fragile-system

The reason health care privatization is stepping to the forefront in the
national debate is because the Canada Health Act has become a mangy,
cost-addled money trap fed by annual increases well beyond the economy’s
current abilities. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD), an international policy performance gauge,
repeatedly ranks Canada as a mediocre healthcare supplier at best.

On 4/10/2016 9:35 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 17:52:56 -0600, carnal asada >
> wrote:
>
>> And the millions who LOST their insurance can testify as much!
>
> That's complete bullshit.
>
No dearie, that's a total and easily proven FACT!