Article supports Canada's health care system

First, anything that comes from the Huffington Post should be taken with a grain of salt. The writer is a Canadian citizen. She was having a 2 year-old child treated. If it had been a 70 year-old the situation might have played out differently. Here in the States we do not go on waiting list for treatment especially for life threatening illnesses.

Canadian medicine does not have med-flight as we do here. No helicopters to sit down and lift off to the hospital within a matter of minutes. How well do you suppose RN's will be paid? I worked hard to get where I am professionally and one of the perks is my employer provided insurance and I do not wish to work my butt off to pay for someone who does not try to improve their lot. Especially when this one payer insurance will be much less than I have now. I lived through no health insurance and the debt it brings. It helped me to get up and go to school to improve my life.

Private insurance cannot compete with the government type health insurance. They would go belly up and we get to participate in that one payer insurance. Also, many citizens from Canada cross over to use our health insurance because it is not just better but they do not have to wait months for treatment.

Our health system is not perfect, but it is better than Europe's or Canada's. Someone who wants better healthcare, then work for it and do not expect people who have advanced themselves to pick up the bill for them. That is the American way and custom. Capitalism only in this country.

I'd say that depends on who you are and your needs are. No systems perfect, they all have faults. For me, I prefer our system over what I have heard of Canada's but I have health insurance.

Only if you're a conservative.

Yes, under our fantastic health care system, anyone who doesn't have health insurance is simply not working hard enough to improve their lot. Never mind that private health insurance companies deny coverage to anyone with pre-existing conditions, or that coverage is so costly that many people simply can't afford it if they want a roof over their heads and to feed their families. As long as you have coverage paid for by your employee, screw everyone else.

Social Security, Medicare...the Bush administration basically nationalizing the banks and mortgage industries....yeah, the American way.

The article is interesting, but one person's experience. I can only remark on my experiences with the Canadian health care system, as well as dispel, I hope, some myths about it.

I'm Canadian, but live in the U.S. now, although certainly not for the health care system; I met my dear husband and moved here for him. In my 30+ years in Canada, prior to moving to the U.S., I had to have several surgeries for various issues beyond my control. For those surgeries, and to see the associated specialists, I had little wait. For one surgery here (in MI), I waited 3 months. For the other, only 3 weeks, but that was because of the urgency of the situation and my yelling. The 4 I had in Canada were done in the following times: less than a week, 2 @ about 4 weeks, and 1 @ about 5 weeks, but was an elective procedure related to fertility. So, while I hear and read that so many Canadians wait forever for surgeries, I truly believe it comes down to: 1) where one lives (if you live in Toronto or Vancouver, i.e., millions of people, you wait - supply and demand; 2) if you need a specialist, it may take time to arrange an appointment because anyone outside of a major city may have to make arrangements to get to see one, although specialists are certainly less available in Canada as compared to here; and 3) Of course, the type of surgery you need. There is no way hospital space is as available there as it is here. In my opinion and experience, which is all I can speak to, I believe the biggest waits occur in cities with many people all competing for the far less number of doctors available. I come from a place with about 100,000 people, and I never waited at all for regular family doctor visits. Here, I have to book my PAP 3-4 months in advance, though I can get in for blood testing, regular appts., mams, x-rays, etc., fairly quickly.

As for the costs of health insurance, well it is true that the system is government run, but it is certainly not a welfare system. The costs for coverage are paid by each and every working Canadian. The taxes pay for the health care system. Some provinces, such as B.C., where I'm from, have an amount that had to be paid each month. Mine was like $50 per month, but not all provinces have that and it is income-dependent. I believe Alberta and Ontario do not have a co-pay, but that may have changed? On top of regular coverage, one may choose to have extended care insurance, which covers things like private rooms, etc., but it was like $20 per month. Unless something has changed, dental is not covered, but I paid $20/month for my coverage, which paid for all regular care, fillings, etc.

A bonus, definitely, of government-run health care is that prescription cost gouging is non-existent. The government barters and sets the price of prescriptions. I do not specifically know about air ambulances/helicopters, but I'm pretty sure they are available, though may not as readily available as here. Canadian nurses, from what I've read on this board, make pretty decent money, certainly comparable to here.

Anyhow, I could go on and on, but I definitely do not believe the U.S. health care system is better than the Canadian system. Neither is perfect for sure, but at least in Canada one NEVER loses their home because of a health issue and its associated costs; never is told that they cannot have the treatment they need because they don't have insurance (I transcribe for oncologists who are not able to give the needed and ordered treatment and must settle for something less desirable - heartbreaking); never have to go without even the most basic care; don't die because the cost of getting care far outweighs what someone has, who then does not get it at all and later pays the consequences; never is saddled with lifelong medical bills of thousands and thousands; etc., etc. I completely understand that nobody here wants the same system as a Canadian or European system, but seriously the only ones happy with the system here in the U.S. are those who have insurance and even that doesn't guarantee satisfaction. Not having health insurance has absolutely nothing to do with not being a hard worker, imo. I've met many who make minimum wage and work their butts off, but they don't have health insurance. Does that mean they don't deserve it? They do, and health care should be a right, not a privilege.

Thanks for your interesting perspective. There are some people here who wouldn't mind a Canadian or European-style or hybrid system, but that's because we agree with you that health care should be a right. A right doesn't necessarily mean it should be free, but that affordable health care should be available to everyone.

I think a system where everybody pays something would be necessary. In Canada, even low wage earners pay something, although many pay nothing. My son makes $13/hr and he pays about $50/month. So people who make only minimum wage could pay say, half of that. And i think they should be given a rebate or tax credit on premiums if they don't use any healthcare, so healthy people would pay less than people who abuse it. You wouldn't be penalizing the people who need it, because they would just pay their share, as everyone else. That would perhaps encourage people to practice preventative health and adopt a healthier lifestyle.

Its always conservative or republicans fault or someone blaming the dems for it. I agree with the first post that the Huffington ppost has a liberal slant, just as fox news is conservativly biased. now that being said. those who want it can apply ofr state run medicaid or medicaid. it is a state run option in almost every state. most people do not know its available or just do not avail themselves of the opportunity to use it. I was eligible for it while in nursing school but chose not to use it due to the private pay i was working for was better. that was the only reason i worked wa sfor the insurance. btw the bush admin didnt nationalize the banks. we arent there yet. the auto industry is though. the mortgage rules were changed in the early 90's. the rules were relaxed to allow for greater access to housing. http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/bu...e-lending.html

most insurance companies have the right to deny pre-existing conditions. but employer provided ppo's and hmo do not. you just have to be craeful what you go see the md for in the first 90 days. some can deny coverage for only a speicified amount of time. http://healthinsurance.about.com/od/faqs/f/preex.htm. so lets get off the dmes and repubs and whos to blame. yes insurance is costly. the main reason is the misuse of the system ie going to the er for an earache instead of waiting to see your primary the next day. as well as the costs of covering those who do not have insurance at all. the hospitals have to write off those charges most of the time. most of the time to the tune of millions of dollars per year. where do you think those costs are made up at? they get passed along to us, those who have insurance. also the amount of regulations we are forced to comply with because we have so many sue happy people out there. watch the boob tube for any length of time and you will see and ad for some class action lawsuit for something involving medical care. i personally do not want universal or government run healthcare. i think it places a damper on initiative and innovation. and do we truly want the people who have bankrupted medicare and social security and operate the DMV running healthcare?

It is a conversation I've had many times in the ten years I've been here. Given that I have been here 10 years, it is possible things are not quite the same in Canada, also, so I would like to hear about differences that may be in effect now. I completely agree with you about costs, though. While, of course, I think health care is a right, I agree that it won't pay for itself and the gov't can't pay for it all, so some type of payer system is needed. In my view, I don't care how it all happens, but something has to be done to ensure that everyone qualifies for at least some care, something. I'm glad to see that at least there is a move in that direction.

Just my two cents-- there is the story of the Mom who came down to have her multi in Great Falls, MT (national news!) because the care simply was not available up north. Also read an article that, at one point, the waiting list for maternity care was over nine months. ?!?! Better here.