LETTER: Canada knows health care

Want an answer to the health care dilemma? Ask any Canadian -- they're only a few miles across the lake from Sandusky. If they get s
Sandusky Register Staff
May 13, 2010

Want an answer to the health care dilemma? Ask any Canadian -- they're only a few miles across the lake from Sandusky. If they get sick: they walk into a healthcare provider, they get treated, they walk out -- without a thought about money, because it's all free. For every single Canadian.

They don't worry about finding a plan with a level of coverage they can afford. Or losing their house to pay for one extended stay in the hospital. Or what they'll do for health care when they get older. They just get it.

Occasionally they wait for a complicated procedure, but they don't have an insurance company telling them that they'll have to die because treatment's too expensive. No worrying about insurance exchanges or public options -- it's all one big public option.

Before the hate mail from right wingnuts begins arriving at my house -- no, I'm not going up there to live if I don't like it down here, and no, Canada's isn't more expensive than the true cost of health care in the U.S. if you factor in everybody turned down by insurance, those who can't afford it, the high deductibles, out-of-network charges and procedures that aren't covered.

We need to fix it here, like they did in Canada, Europe and countries where corporations don't control their citizens' healthcare -- where people's number one worry isn't whether they'll go bankrupt if they get sick -- where they are happy to pay a few cents more for a candy bar if it keeps them from losing their house over medical bills.

Put Congress on the same health care as the rest of us and watch how fast they "socialize" health care. They could hitch a ride with the seniors who bus to Canada for prescriptions, if they want to see for themselves.

Gary Polvinale

Sandusky

Comments

pntbutterandjelly

Apathy, scourn, disdain, anger and distrust are rampant.

pntbutterandjelly

Voter turnout at 20% of those possible.

pntbutterandjelly

Third party candidates are shut out of elections.

pntbutterandjelly

Non-biparsian Supreme Court rules it's "okay" for corporate America to give campaign funds.

pntbutterandjelly

$710,000,000,000 for an illegal war.
$700,000,000,000 annual defense fun(d)

pntbutterandjelly

Whirpool receives $19,000,000 and thenpuls 1,100 jobs out of Indian and sends the work to Mexico.

pntbutterandjelly

"What is right will seem wrong and what is wrong will seem right.

pntbutterandjelly

Caveat money
Caveat banking
Caveat elections
Caveat investments
Caveat system
Caveat people

pntbutterandjelly

An American "do do" list;

(a) break up and heavily regulate the international and national banker cartel.
(b) Set term limits for anyone elected (none are to exceed 8 years).
(c) Eliminate all lobbyits and any form of lobbying.
(d) Extradite all illegal aliens and land mine the southern border.
(e) Reduce Chinese imports by 50%.
(f) Establish strong regulations on the health care industry.

? Will all this ever be done? Answer; no
? Will any of this ever be done? Answer; no
? Why? Answer; Greed
? By whom? Read, "An American "to do" list."

This is the short answer to our massive problems.

goofus

The only thing Canada is good for is cuban cigars, hockey, and Beer.

brutus smith

Your kind gave us the Patriot Act too. What's patriotic about it??????

brutus smith

The teabaggers call themselves patriots too Jon, does that make it so???

libertarian

BSing leftwingnut collectivist thugs just proved his ignorance again. Mussolini and his National Fascist Party as well as Hitler and his Nazis considered themselves socialist. In addition, their philosophy complies with the definition of socialism. And are you going to tell me that people who call themselves NATIONAL SOCIALISTS (Nazis) aren't socialist and don't consider themselves socialist? Absurd.

Like I wrote, you'll misrepresent what I write, misrepresent my philosophy, make baseless claims that I'm not using facts, mislabel me or engage in some other form of deception to avoid addressing the facts I present.

Show me one post when I advocated anything resembling corporatism.

It really doesn't matter if you consider yourself a socialist or one of it's two forms, fascist or communist. Either way you are a leftwingnut collectivist thug. All violate natural rights and are immoral, as are you are a advocate of them.

Shame on you. All moral people should shame and ostracize collectivist thugs.

brutus smith

Jon Moron, err "Libertarian" as you call yourself now, Fascism in it's original meaning was Corporatism. I am against the Corporate state the neo Cons gave us the past 30 years. Fascism, pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/, is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists seek to organize a nation on corporatist perspectives; values; and systems such as the political system and the economy. Over the years it has been diluted to mean socialism. They are the exact opposite. You advocate the Corporate form of Fascism.

6079 Smith W

libertarian wrote on Mar 5, 2010 11:23 PM:

‘Are (they) really so ignorant?’

Yes they are.

Marxism has many derivations. Socialists in one country will argue vehemently that their wrongheaded brand of political and economic slavery is superior to that found in another country.

It’s not unlike Baptists who will assert that they are more in touch with the Word of God than Catholics. They are both classified as Christians, but they view themselves as different in their interpretation and will sometimes injure each other in an attempt to prove their point.

------------

RE: Soc. Security & Medicare

Due to the rise in chronic unemployment, seniors are increasingly applying for benefits because it is seen as their only source of income.

In 2010, for the first time in it's history, the net outflows from the so-called Social Security Trust Fund will exceed the inflows.

Technically, Soc. Security IS broke.

Read more:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/was...

libertarian

The BS leftwingnut collectivist thug wrote: "Yes P&J, the same type people who were in pre-WWll Germany (Nazi's) are the same type of people here."

Are you really so ignorant? German Nazis were just one faction of fascism and there been many others. For example, Spain (under Franco) and Italy (under Mussolini) both had fascist governments and the word "fascism" originated in Italy to describe Mussolini's party. To say that fascism equals Nazism (which means National Socialism) is no different than saying that you're a Nazi because you're a socailist (though at this point, I wouldn't be suprised). Besides, in an earlier post on a different artical, you agreed with me that we have a fascist economic system.

Of course, you'll misrepresent what I write, misrepresent my philosophy, make baseless claims that I'm not using facts, mislabel me or engage in some other form of deception to avoid addressing the facts I present. But you're really not fooling anyone.

libertarian

aj oliver wrote: "A number of the responders seems to have trouble with facts, and instead fall back on tired ideological cliches.", like, "the FACT is that the capitalist sector has had every opportunity to build a workable health care system, and has failed miserably to do so."

Haven't had a capitalist health care system here for 100 years. Aside from a few rare exceptions, when were fire departments ever private? Most fire departments were voluntary and many still are.

AJ Oliver

Excellent letter from Gary. The man does have a way with words.

A number of the responders seems to have trouble with facts, and instead fall back on tired ideological cliches. Facts: Social Security is healthy - it even ran a surplus last year. Canada is more ethnically diverse than the US. Canadians live longer than us gringos, and their medical outcomes are better than ours. They pay MUCH less than we do for health care.

Market solutions are often the preferred way to provide us with the things we need, but the FACT is that the capitalist sector has had every opportunity to build a workable health care system, and has failed miserably to do so. So just as we long ago did with private fire departments, it's time to look at alternatives other than the "free" market.

If the email responders to the Register stories put their names on their posts, I'll wager that they would do a better job of fact-checking. One can only hope!!

brutus smith

Yes P&J, the same type people who were in pre-WWll Germany (Nazi's) are the same type of people here. They just go by a different name ("free" market Capitalists). They tell you how much better it is if we funnel all the wealth to the top. And the Corporate Media is their mouthpiece.

Kimo

Social Security is on life support.
Medicare is on life support.

Social Security is allowed to go bust.
Medicare is allowed to go bust.

Millions of people without income.
Millions of people without health insurance.

Millions of "broke" people refuse to disappear.

Bob Evans loses 75% of it's business and is
forced to close, (more jobs lost).

Toyota and Kia lose 50& of their sales.
(more jobs lost).
Japan no longer loans USA money.

Hospitals and nursing homes go bust.
(more jobs lost).

Wal-Mart loses 50% of it's business,
and millions of chinese lose their jobs.

China no longer loans USA money.

USA teams up with Greece in bankruptcy court.........

Damm hungry, homeless people still will not
evaporate. What part of "Free market capitalism
don't they understand?

libertarian

pntbutterandjelly wrote: "ps. Excuse my typos."

No problem. Lord know I make enough typos myself.

pntbutterandjelly wrote: "libertarian; the cost you say are coming down, and they are, is because those items are being made by slave labor in Mexico and China."

If this were true, it would also apply to medical technology.

pntbutterandjelly also wrote: "I am a centrist not a scocialist nor a free-trader. I know there must be some degree of balance."

By definition, you are a socialist and a collectivist. Socialism is the government ownership OR control of the means of production or distribution of wealth, property, goods and services, whereas capitalism is the private ownership and control of the same. Socialism is the economic implementation of collectivism. Political economist generally classify socialism into two broad categories; communism-where the government owns the above, and fascism-where the government controls the above but allows the appearance of ownership.

pntbutterandjelly also wrote: "There isn't anything wrong with making a profit, it IS a matter of how much you made, how you made it and what will you do with the excesses. Profits by making and then breaking the rules is NOT free enterprise"

I agree with this statement completely. It's called fascism, which is also know as mixed economy or corporatism.

pntbutterandjelly also wrote: "The unregulated banking and health insurance industries"

The banking and health insurance industries are heavily regulated. Regulations are used by both the banking and health insurance industries to increase the cost of entry into a field, limiting competition.

pntbutterandjelly also wrote: "I will agree with you libertarian that to get in the mud and fight with the hogs is something akin to self-deprivation but do you have a better suggestion as how to fight for what your fair share might be?"

Why not get out of the mud and fight for the following principles: All human relationships are exchanges of values, both material and spiritual. There are two fundamental types of value exchanges, consensual or coercive. A consensual exchange of values consist of each person exchanging value for value at terms that both are willing to accept according to their own best judgment. A coercive exchange consist of one person using fraud, force or extortion to obtain a value from another person without their consent and against their judgment.

Obviously, a consensual exchange of values is moral and a coercive exchange is immoral. In addition, consensual exchanges are fundamental to creating on optimal society because to coerce a person's choices is to remove their ability to judge, evaluate and act-which destroys their ability and incentive to create values (Which is why collectivist fails).

This the moral foundation of the concept of rights. Rights are the natural application of morality to social relationships. This is why I call them natural rights (also known as individual rights, because they are based on the fact that only individuals are moral agents/actors) because they are base on the nature of human beings and the objective requirements of human survival.

Every person has the natural right to choose, act on and create the values that they believe will be optimal for their well being. Every person has the natural right to consensually exchange their values with others.

What are the limits of a persons natural rights? If a person uses fraud or coercion, force or violence (or the threat of any of these) to stop a person from acting according to their own judgment and choice, to force a person to act against their own judgment or choice or to physically take, use or harm the property of another person, they have violated the other person's natural right and the other person has the natural right to defend their natural right from the violator and to ask other to aid them in the same.

A concise statement of these principles is that every person has the natural right to do anything they want with their body, mind, wealth and property so long as they do not violate natural right of another person to do the same.

pntbutterandjelly

ps. Excuse my typos.

pntbutterandjelly

Re; Who among the economic stratifications we all reside in are being hurt the most at this time? The unregulated banking and health insurance industries (say nothing of Corporate America as a whole) and their lobbyists, the cadre of high-paid stooges who defend them in court when payola doesn't suffice, 6-figure pharmetutical salesmen with iq's less than 100, doctors who's hypocratic oath has become an oath to be hypocrites and the entire top 3%er's whose only bent on life is more money and more power are lapping at your heels and you don't even see the light. I feel there are many of you who don't realise (nor possibly care) who was and what did Prescott Bush do during WW@ to say nothing of the master of deciet; alis Carl Roves' grandfather was also doing during WW2 to generate massive amounts of wealth. Can you even suggest what Carl Roves last full and realname was? Can anyone here tell me, with a straight face, that the general populace of America isnot upset and angry because of the tyranical methods emplyoed by these same Third Reichter's bent or that that corporate America is getting the short-handed deal. Whcih is the truth? Who really is getting the role shaft-to-la? You really need to read, understand and accept the fact that elitsits, the real power-mongers are who is creating all the chaos. Mr. Joe Average sits ans struggles to find a way merely to survive from day to day. We Americans relish in the smug misconception we are the "hot stuff" on the world scene when, in actuality, we are merely teenagers in comparison to all other democracies. Therefore we have much to learn and should learn by example from our democratic predecessors. The German populous was hood-winked (ie. lied to) by their goverment (read industrialists) about the "need" to invade, concur and eliminate those around them all in the the attempt to create unregulated, unsupervised wealth. (That kinda sounds similar to the War in Iraq which had it's grounds for war created by Carl Rove!) (If you can follow this extrapilation through then you will see the thread connecting "Carl the Creator" with grandpa Roverhner. (That is NOT a mispelling.) The simple quetion I repeat is, "Who's lunch is getting eaten here? The "industrialists" or the commoner?" THAT answer is sinfully easy. I rest my case.
Re. libertarian; the cost you say are coming down, and they are, is because those items are being made by slave labor in Mexico and China. Whta's kinda difficult to understand (although not really) is why does the Ford Fusion STILL cost so much when it's being built by cheap Mexican labor. Hmm...it MUST be getting eaten up by the Mexican Union Cartel. They rascals! My point is, "The more they take, the more they want for the so-called "profit margin". There isn't anything wrong with making a profit, it IS a matter of how much you made, how you made it and what will you do with the excesses. Profits by making and then breaking the rules is NOT free enterprise.It's called economic rape. It will lead you, me, your sons and daughters down the slippery slope of Economic Euthinasia. It's difficult to legislate morality but it is imperative to at least try. I am a centrist not a scocialist nor a free-trader. I know there must be some degree of balance. We are WAY out of balance and the clock is ticking. That is self-evident based upon the talk in the streets, the news, the protests of California students, etc. etc. What is not evident is how the the money changers arfe playing thier hand behind our backs. Slowly, ever so slowly, more and more Americans are waking up and seeing the truth for the fisrt time. For some it is a rude revalation because it may have struck against their former personal belief sets and attitudes.
I will agree with you libertarian that to get in the mud and fight with the hogs is something akin to self-deprivation but do you have a better suggestion as how to fight for what your fair share might be? The far left and the far right leave little wiggle room AND the professional rhetoric creaters do their bloody best to make it as confusing and demeaning as posssible to divide the masses therby shunting the balme to the "other side" and thusly GET THEIR WAY.
Remember... I AM a centrist and therefore will come under fire from both sides of the political spectrum (for which I am ready, thank you!). But....being in the center keeps me....balanced. (smile)

libertarian

pntbutterandjelly wrote: "With the rise of medical tecnology, there is no way everybody can get all the care that is currently available or will be available in the future"

Have you ever considered the question of why, in every field except medicine, technology is becoming cheaper, better and available to more people and is bringing down costs?

pntbutterandjelly wrote: "We do NOT live in a democracy. We DO live in a socialist system (if you pay taxes and have no direct say in who or how those monies are spent...it is socilism), (agreed?). Therefore it becomes a matter of who gets the most bang for their buck.

What you offer is a false alternative. A fight over extorted loot of a socialist system is not an optimal or moral way for people to deal with one another. And, since medical cost have sky rocketed since we adopted a socialist system, the real alternative is capitalsim.

A hint to the answer to my question: There is one area of medicine field that is relatively free market and technology has been continuely bringing down the cost of this proceedure as well as it's effectivenes-this proceedure is lazsic surgery.

Hmm

pbj - you do make valid points. However, the "correct" answers are a matter of opinion. Most of us agree that our health care is superior for those who can afford it, as compared to all other countries. The reasearch and development that takes place here (driven by profits) aids other countries as well. For those here who can't affort it (and there are plenty), it stinks. What good are advanced medication and treatments to those who can't afford them? You must acknowledge that if we fundamentally change our health care system to be less profit driven, over time advances in medicine will slow down. Why are so many wonderful medications developed by US companies? Because they make big bucks. What happens if we regulate and medicine becomes less profitable? I don't know what the answer is. But I do know that the answer is not as obvious as all the bloggers think it is.

pntbutterandjelly

re. brutus smith; "Thank you".

I think I may have struck a cord for those who are against civilty and morality in their most altruistic form. If everyone would only take a few THOUGHTFUL moments, step back from all the rhetoric of politics (them vs. us) and look at the various issues in their most simplistic content....the correct answers are readily found. "That" though may be the easiest part of the equation because the sum answers are still going to be in the hands of corporate America (unless..."we" do something about it).

brutus smith

Once again you are right on P&J.

The General

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained profanity or obscene remarks. href=http://www.sanduskyregister.com/legal/discussion_gu
idelines/>Discussion Guidelines

pntbutterandjelly

Where to begin. "That" is the question.
Shall we begin with "the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth?" Okay. Let's begin....

#1 With the rise of medical tecnology, there is no way everybody can get all the care that is currently available or will be available in the future. Period. That means, unfortunatley we will all die one day. That leads to #2.
#2 We would all like to live longer and more healthily, ie. "feel better". That leads to #3.
#3 How do we find a common denominator to bridge #1 against #2?
My opinion goes along these lines (pay attention).
"We do NOT live in a democracy. We DO live in a socialist system (if you pay taxes and have no direct say in who or how those monies are spent...it is socilism), (agreed?). Therefore it becomes a matter of who gets the most bang for their buck. Now, the unregulated health insurance system, pharmetcutical companies, lobbyists and a whole range of "others" are feeding greedily off the trough of the system. We, the little folk, are paying for it. We are paying for it in many ways beyond monetary. So....the real question becomes,"Are we to be held hostage BY the insurance cartle FOR the insurance cartel OR....regulate the 7ell out of them, eliminate ALL lobbyists, find other graft, waste and greed (and prosecute with force) and THEN impliment some form of standardised care for everyone?" Hypothetical question..."If your neighbors house was being broken into....would you call the cops? If your house was being broken into...would you want me to call the cops?" My point with those hypothetical questions are two fold. (a) being.."Nobody cries out until the shoes pinch their feet VS. the "Not in my backyard syndrom". (b) is the the robbers here ARE the insurance cartels. THAT is an obvious fact. So, in conclusion...I hope you have enpough $$$ for the forseeable future to pay for your insurance or out-of-pocket premiums and deductibles becquse at the exponetial rate insurance premiums are rising and coverages are decling... (I think you see my point.)
It IS true that we all can't live forever but can't we at least live with some dignity and help from the "neighbor" I mentioned above? (remember, he too is paying taxes right now for YOUR benefit) Oh, but wait....I'm pretty sure that anyone who still thinks we should allow TOTAL, unrequetted insurance "free enterprise" to rein would NEVER ask for a hand when, not if, they get into trouble and need a helping hand. Oh no. Not them. They have their short-term, ill-advised "principles" to help get through the night. Good luck with those "principles". My principles tell me that when there is a thief out there causing chaos and havoc...you put him out of his misery. Kinda like we should do with all predatory people. (Heck, I'd be all for public execution staged on tv. Think what a popular show THAT would be!)
Look....you can't play any kind of game without rules. So....why should the health insurance game be any different? (Try passing strict regulations on the banking industry! HA!!) The problem is "they" make the rules as they pay our representatives to pass the rules who then get jobs of other high-paying positions with other "firms". It's one MASSIVE revolving door. It's truly out of control.

Thank you.

Judy Kayden

Gary, My Daughter-In-Law is from England and my brother is now a Canadian citizen. My Daughter-In-Law had cancer and I can tell you that the wait for cat scans etc. is too long. Plus the Doctors are given an allowance for medicine. If they exceed their allowance, it's taken from their pay. Does that tell you something?

I don't know what the answer is at this point. The Libertarians want less government intervention and more competition among health care providers.

Pages