|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kimbop
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 7:26 pm Post subject: UFC champ Brock Lesnar slams Canadian healthcare |
 |
|
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100120/sports/mma_ufc_lesnar_comeback
| Quote: |
The six-foot-four Lesnar, who has to cut weight to make the UFC heavyweight limit of 265 pounds, said he had been ailing for some time last year, before falling seriously ill during a trip to Canada. What had started as flu-like symptoms was upgraded to mononucleosis and then diverticulosis.
Asked about the low point during the last few months of his illness, Lesnar said: "Probably the lowest moment was getting care from Canada."
"They couldn't do nothing for me," he noted in a later media conference call Wednesday. "It was like I was in a Third World country."
"I'm just stating the facts here and that's the facts," he continued. "I love Canada. I own property in Canada but if I had to choose between getting care in Canada or the United States, I definitely want to be in the United States. |
Anyone who has experienced a Canadian hospital would concur with Mr. Lesnar. Which got me thinking: Good luck finding a member of the 'Hollywood elite' who would espouse the benefits of Canada's totalitarian healthcare system, and actually get treated there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
riverboy
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Location: Incheon
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's kind of funny considering he was originally misdiagnosed in the US... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:24 pm Post subject: Re: UFC champ Brock Lesnar slams Canadian healthcare |
|
|
| Kimbop wrote: |
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100120/sports/mma_ufc_lesnar_comeback
| Quote: |
The six-foot-four Lesnar, who has to cut weight to make the UFC heavyweight limit of 265 pounds, said he had been ailing for some time last year, before falling seriously ill during a trip to Canada. What had started as flu-like symptoms was upgraded to mononucleosis and then diverticulosis.
Asked about the low point during the last few months of his illness, Lesnar said: "Probably the lowest moment was getting care from Canada."
"They couldn't do nothing for me," he noted in a later media conference call Wednesday. "It was like I was in a Third World country."
"I'm just stating the facts here and that's the facts," he continued. "I love Canada. I own property in Canada but if I had to choose between getting care in Canada or the United States, I definitely want to be in the United States. |
Anyone who has experienced a Canadian hospital would concur with Mr. Lesnar. Which got me thinking: Good luck finding a member of the 'Hollywood elite' who would espouse the benefits of Canada's totalitarian healthcare system, and actually get treated there. |
What, you mean incredibly wealthy people prefer a system which favors the incredibly wealthy? Indeed, this is newsworthy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Middle and upper middle class Canadians, and especially those in border areas, will use American services. You don't need to be hyper wealthy to get a scan or Dr visit. In Canada, (and especially in the big cities) you wait and wait and wait. Though this has improved. Now, it will get worse again (budget can't expand sufficiently to cover immigrants and graying society). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Middle and upper middle class Canadians, and especially those in border areas, will use American services. You don't need to be hyper wealthy to get a scan or Dr visit. In Canada, (and especially in the big cities) you wait and wait and wait. Though this has improved. Now, it will get worse again (budget can't expand sufficiently to cover immigrants and graying society). |
Canada should just change its retarded immigration policy and kill two birds with one stone. As you say, matters have been improving, and they can be improved more by tightening up your borders and stabilizing the system. If a new citizen wouldn't contribute more than the average Canadian to Canada in terms of productivity, why let them in? And if they do produce more, they're helping the system rather than hurting it.
Also having to wait isn't necessarily the end of the world; the only reason Americans don't have to wait as long is because a sizeable portion of the American population is essentially cut off from non-emergency medical services entirely. It's just a different -- and from a humanitarian perspective, much worse -- sort of rationing.
I also have to say, if middle class Canadians have enough money just sitting around to cross the borders and use American services, it makes how much the average Canadian is paying for health care in terms of taxes seem quite reasonable, given they still have plenty of money left order to travel to another country and pay out of pocket for additional health care. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Canada should just change its retarded immigration policy and kill two birds with one stone. |
I agree. The country takes in far too many for public services to cope. Where I'm from it isn't a problem. In Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, it is a serious problem. Immigration is the deciding factor.
| Quote: |
| As you say, matters have been improving, and they can be improved more by tightening up your borders and stabilizing the system. If a new citizen wouldn't contribute more than the average Canadian to Canada in terms of productivity, why let them in? And if they do produce more, they're helping the system rather than hurting it. |
Why let them in? It's an industry. Right now, real estate agents are in China looking for buyers of Vancouver condos (Canadians can't afford to live in Van anymore). It's a huge industry.
| Quote: |
| Also having to wait isn't necessarily the end of the world; the only reason Americans don't have to wait as long is because a sizeable portion of the American population is essentially cut off from non-emergency medical services entirely. It's just a different -- and from a humanitarian perspective, much worse -- sort of rationing. |
My younger brother was told he potentially had a brain tumor. That was in January (a few years back). He was scheduled for a scan of his noggin the following July. Can you imagine? We flew him to Helena that night and he was home with the results within 48 hours (he was fine). The cost was 5k I think. I have family in Ontario who go to Dr's visits in Buffalo. They can get in any time and it costs 80$ or so.
| Quote: |
| I also have to say, if middle class Canadians have enough money just sitting around to cross the borders and use American services, it makes how much the average Canadian is paying for health care in terms of taxes seem quite reasonable, given they still have plenty of money left order to travel to another country and pay out of pocket for additional health care. |
Priorities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| My younger brother was told he potentially had a brain tumor. That was in January (a few years back). He was scheduled for a scan of his noggin the following July. |
I'm interested in this. According to data on Wikipedia (which is sourced to government data), the median wait time for scans is 2 weeks, and 86.4% of people wait under 3 months. Your brother's wait time was 7 months. That seems statistically anomalous. What do you feel was the cause of it? Is the government data a lie, or is your brother's case strongly unrepresentative? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dunno. I have strong opinions on government stats. Anyways, this was before the boom in Alberta. Things have improved a great deal in the past few years (health spending in Alberta 2005-9 averaged 10%+/yr). My uncle had a similar issue in Medicine Hat about 6 months ago and waited less than a month. Given the size of the bust in Alberta (and soon Canada) the spending increases will have to stop and the service will begin a decline.
It is unfortunate that the Canadian system is always compared with the American one (and the American one with Canada). The Canadian system is inflexible and unprepared for the demographic disaster now beginning. The American system is, well, crap. But there are more than 2 possible systems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| But there are more than 2 possible systems. |
This is true, especially since one of the things raising health care expenses everywhere in the Western world is rarely discussed at all: the legal requirement for excessive qualification in medical practice. Most of what a general practicioner does doesn't require a full medical doctor to do. Hell, many mothers could diagnose common illnesses as well as a doctor could. Reducing general practicioner to a bachelor's degree while delegating all actual doctors to specialist status would, on its own, both drastically increase health care availibility and reduce costs. The prescription system should also be abandoned; in many cases it might be wise to get an experts opinion before taking medication, but if I know I have the flu, why should I need to see a doctor -- wasting time, money, and a limited national resource -- before I can get some basic antibiotics?
Often when people talk about health care reform, they're looking in the wrong places. Sure, payment reform (which is all that's really being discussed) is important, but there are other things which are equally important and not even on the table for discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kimbop
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Middle and upper middle class Canadians, and especially those in border areas, will use American services. You don't need to be hyper wealthy to get a scan or Dr visit. In Canada, (and especially in the big cities) you wait and wait and wait. Though this has improved. Now, it will get worse again (budget can't expand sufficiently to cover immigrants and graying society). |
the aging baby boomers are definitely a problem. But immigrants? They have higher unemployment rates; granted, but lower crime stats (except for Haitian and Jamaican gangs in Toronto, I'm sure). But I've never considered their healthcare use: is it really higher?
| Fox wrote: |
Canada should just change its retarded immigration policy and kill two birds with one stone. As you say, matters have been improving, and they can be improved more by tightening up your borders and stabilizing the system. If a new citizen wouldn't contribute more than the average Canadian to Canada in terms of productivity, why let them in? And if they do produce more, they're helping the system rather than hurting it.
|
I'm a traditionalist. Multiculturalism should end. But I'm afraid Canada NEEDS immigrants. (Although perhaps not Haitian or Somali. Koreans and Philippions are very responsible/hardworking people, on the other hand.)
Anyhoo, welcome to the ponzi scheme of capitalism/economics 101. Read below for other reasons that Canada NEEDS immigrants.
| Fox wrote: |
Also having to wait isn't necessarily the end of the world; the only reason Americans don't have to wait as long is because a sizeable portion of the American population is essentially cut off from non-emergency medical services entirely.
|
Personal responsibility. Many Americans who are "cut off" regard iphones and gold chains as higher on the priority list. These people choose to be irresponsible.
For trudeaupian socialist tax-loving liberal Canadians, on the other hand; the concept of life without nanny government is beyond comprehension. Poor, aboriginal, inner city, & poverty-stricken federal ridings tend to vote ndp or Liberal as these people have been trained to demand/expect handouts. Visit a poverty-stricken Indian reserve: these people are trained to be irresponsible.
So which is worse? Look at demographics: people who are "trained" to be irresponsible reproduce much faster than hardworking Canadians. Statistically, Canadian jailbirds have more children than do university grads. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. This is another reason we NEED immigrants: without them, the hardworking/responsible (but lowr birthrate) segment of Canadian society will shrink, while the nanny state 'irresponsibly trained' segment will grow. Wait a few generations, and voila: Canada becomes South Africa. Crime, dependency, illigitimate children, broken homes, private foster homes, etc go UP UP UP; while our population ages, and the PRODUCTIVE segment of our society shrinks. (as it is now, except for the educated immigrants that we import)
So yes, thanks to trudeaupian liberalism, we NEED immigrants. Thank free universal healthcare. Thank Tommy Douglas.
| Fox wrote: |
I also have to say, if middle class Canadians have enough money just sitting around to cross the borders and use American services, it makes how much the average Canadian is paying for health care in terms of taxes seem quite reasonable, given they still have plenty of money left order to travel to another country and pay out of pocket for additional health care. |
Only the hardworking ones. Lazy Canadians are welcome to wait 12 weeks for an MRI or 5 months for elbow surgery. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| the aging baby boomers are definitely a problem. But immigrants? They have higher unemployment rates; granted, but lower crime stats (except for Haitian and Jamaican gangs in Toronto, I'm sure). But I've never considered their healthcare use: is it really higher? |
The problem is the demographic deficit. Immigrants tend to have more kids than those born in Canada and are also able to bring their parents. The only group that is a net-benefit to public services are 22-40 (or so, can't remember the exact number but I'm referencing a McKinsey study) individuals without kids. Everyone else is a drain. Singapore deals with this by importing people only for the time in their lives that they are a net-gain.
| Quote: |
| I'm a traditionalist. Multiculturalism should end. But I'm afraid Canada NEEDS immigrants. |
Recent studies from the CD Howe institute and the Fraser Institute have demonstrated otherwise. The FI found that immigrants are a huge net-loss to the country. CDH found that they made the demographic problems with public funding worse.
Canada has whatever % unemployment now (can't trust the stats..say, 15% if calculated properly) and we will import around 400k people this year. In Toronto, 33% of homeless people are immigrants. We're importing poverty and driving down wages of Canadians. This, for the benefit of the banks (RBC wants the target raised to 500k from 250k, plus refugees, family reunification, students, temp workers etc). This because of the nature of fractional reserve banking. The more deposits they have (we import the middle class from India and China + their life savings), the more loans the banks offer. The more loans they offer, the higher asset prices. The higher asset prices, the more people need to borrow to have a house. Etc. It is all a devious plan. Works well.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/712762--one-third-of-homeless-in-city-are-immigrants
Canada will have to deal with the baby boomers. Immigration is no solution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kimbop wrote: |
| Personal responsibility. Many Americans who are "cut off" regard iphones and gold chains as higher on the priority list. These people choose to be irresponsible. |
This is not a strong argument. Americans can be cut off from insurance for a number of reasons that have little to do with personal responsibility. The fact is, our society has a lot of positions that need to be filled which simply don't offer health insurance as part of their compensation package, while simultaneously not providing enough money to afford health insurance. One might say, "Well, then they shouldn't take those jobs," but the reality is many such positions exist, they need to be filled, and if people don't take those jobs, then the higher paying jobs that rely on those positions (such as middle and upper management) also won't exist. So let's not pretend like we don't need to consider people who are in positions like these, and let's not call them irresponsible.
Now add in the unemployed. Now add in people with pre-existing conditions. Now add in people who were booted off of their health care plan as soon as they got sick so their health insurance companies could avoid paying for them. It's very clear that there's a substantial number of people who are cut off from non-emergency health care for reasons far more complex than simply being "irresponsible."
| Kimbop wrote: |
| So which is worse? Look at demographics: people who are "trained" to be irresponsible reproduce much faster than hardworking Canadians. Statistically, Canadian jailbirds have more children than do university grads. |
You're painting a false picture here. Reproductive rates are influenced by level of education and success, not by being "hard working" or "irresponsible." A hard working farmer is more likely to have many children than an irresponsible middle manager with a college degree. You're falsely equating level of education and financial success with whether or not one is hard working or irresponsible. I find this is something conservatives often do. Condemning the impoverished is ridiculous when poverty is built into the system. Everyone can't come out on top; everyone can't be in the top 50%. And the only reason people who are on top are able to make so much money is because they manage to get people on the bottom to work for far lower wages than their labor is actually worth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, to be frank, Canada's system favors the middle class and the lower class. Thus, it represents the majority of Canadians. So many Americans die because they can't even afford to go to the doctor and don't go. I mean you read about this in the American media. I am not saying the Canadian system is the best for wealthy people. It's better in the US, perhaps, if you are wealthy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:24 am Post subject: Re: UFC champ Brock Lesnar slams Canadian healthcare |
|
|
| Kimbop wrote: |
| Anyone who has experienced a Canadian hospital would concur with Mr. Lesnar. |
I've experienced the Canadian health Care System and do not concur.
-toxic substance in the eyes was immediately treated
-gash to the hand was immediately treated
-possibly cancerous tissue was tested within weeks, and removed a month later even though it was non-cancerous
-My mother lived for 3 years after being diagnosed with late stage lung cancer
-my mother's care was free
-my mother's hospice was free
-my mother's cremation was paid for by the government
I have very few complaints. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
