Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

BC's Declining Healthcare: Man Sells Everything to Pay for Brain Surgery in the US


TOMapleLaughs

Recommended Posts

Perhaps we'd have the money to properly fund our healthcare if we didn't have to send so much to Quebec and Ontario?

ya B.c was have not province for years not sure what you're talking about giving money to Ontario and Quebec. I think you mean receive mmoney. I'll add to what toml said bc's health care is pathetic, the msp premiums are ridiculous let alone the service is horrible in B.c.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nation wide mandate? What?

They received 39.5% of the vote...

MP representation from all areas of Canada, coast to coast.  Alberta's a bit of an island, but if they just brought in the Ndp provincially, I think they'd be alright with the mandate as well.  While this has been understated because of the Liberal majority, the combined popular Liberal & Ndp vote is double that voted Conservative.  A nation-wide mandate on this issue is there, so hopefully more than finger-pointing results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eqaulization.

Bc was a have not province for years. Thought you were old enough to know that?

I'll do you one better, why do us in Alberta fund free daycare in Quebec and give money to British Columbia, Ontario, etc?

My point is that Ontario actually isn't a "have not". They are propping up artificially and government subsidized industries that shouldn't exist in the first place. It's a broken system. My bigger issue is that instead of modernizing our economy, Canada is using equalization payments, that BC needs to fund its medicare, to prop up archaic industrial and financial sectors in Ontario.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest issue is that healthcare is open and free to the masses.  Why should those who don't contribute to this economy benefit from healthcare?  This is a philosophical issue, as much as an economic one.

Go to any emergency room in a major city, and you will see it full of people who pay nothing into the system.  They can't pay, don't pay, and never will pay.  It's not an economic issue; it's a social one.  Do we provide health care to those who don't contribute at the expense of those who do?  Would the man in the article need to go to the States if there were not 'those who don't pay' taking up medical resources?  It's a social question.

If you don't want those not paying into the system to be able to get healthcare, what alternative do you propose to having poor people getting sicker, even less likely to pay into said system, and eventually succumbing to what ails them? Would you be alright with an increased crime rate, as some would be driven to crime to pay for their illnesses, and increased police and justice spending instead?

And of course, everyone contributes to an extent. Even the poorest people pay sales taxes, don't they?

I wonder what our society would look like if we didn't take care of those who can't pay. Something tells me it wouldn't be one I would like to live in.

BC is paying to Ontario and BC has shortages in its own healthcare. Meanwhile the financial sector in Ontario is rolling and the manufacturing sector in Ontario is highly government subsidized. You don't see a problem here?

And what's "fair and equal" about any of that? We aren't talking about providing fair and equal health care across economic lines, but correcting an unequal distribution amongst provinces. 

You are aware that transfer payments come from general revenue, right? BC isn't paying anyone, neither is Alberta. The federal government transfers its money where it sees fit. 

Who would have thought living in a country that takes care of its people across the land would cause so much bellyaching. Personally, I don't have any problem with ensuring a comparable quality of life across the country.

Lastly, why do people focus on Ontario when it comes to transfer payments, when per capita they get the lowest amount? Do people think each province is equal, number of people be damned? 

Hell, what's fair about some in bum-fark interior of BC getting equal care? I want my taxes to only contribute to society within a stone's throw, goddammit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember hearing in the UK (or perhaps another place in Europe), they have public health care, but some hospitals are run as if they are for-profit.  Cost savings and improved efficiency means more bonuses for the staffs and administrators.  It's pretty much like everyone have vouchers for health services and can spend them at any location they wanted.  Those that ran as for-profits were significantly had better service, higher feedback, etc... compared to those that just operated regularly.

Also, I believe the bureaucracy of health care is too great.  I do have a buddy who is a lab tech in one of the hospitals here, who applied and took an exam for a full-time positions.  He was able to beat others who had seniority over him, but they complained to their union.... so the position got terminated instead to be "fair".  Then I heard from other friends about certain co-workers they have that probably spends about 1/3 of her time (probably exaggerated I hope) writing up reports and complaints about others. 

Chances are this isn't really a funding issue, as it is proper allocation and maximization issue.  When the province of BC pays 35% of it's budget on health care (not included Federal amount)..... the amount isn't the issue anymore IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't want those not paying into the system to be able to get healthcare, what alternative do you propose to having poor people getting sicker, even less likely to pay into said system, and eventually succumbing to what ails them? Would you be alright with an increased crime rate, as some would be driven to crime to pay for their illnesses, and increased police and justice spending instead?

And of course, everyone contributes to an extent. Even the poorest people pay sales taxes, don't they?

I wonder what our society would look like if we didn't take care of those who can't pay. Something tells me it wouldn't be one I would like to live in.

You are aware that transfer payments come from general revenue, right? BC isn't paying anyone, neither is Alberta. The federal government transfers its money where it sees fit. 

Who would have thought living in a country that takes care of its people across the land would cause so much bellyaching. Personally, I don't have any problem with ensuring a comparable quality of life across the country.

Lastly, why do people focus on Ontario when it comes to transfer payments, when per capita they get the lowest amount? Do people think each province is equal, number of people be damned? 

Hell, what's fair about some in bum-fark interior of BC getting equal care? I want my taxes to only contribute to society within a stone's throw, goddammit!

I agree with you.  It's a social issue, not an economic one.  Do we pay for those who can't (or won't) pay for themselves, even though it affects our personal level of care?  Social, philosophical issue - not economic.  We agree!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't want those not paying into the system to be able to get healthcare, what alternative do you propose to having poor people getting sicker, even less likely to pay into said system, and eventually succumbing to what ails them? Would you be alright with an increased crime rate, as some would be driven to crime to pay for their illnesses, and increased police and justice spending instead?

And of course, everyone contributes to an extent. Even the poorest people pay sales taxes, don't they?

I wonder what our society would look like if we didn't take care of those who can't pay. Something tells me it wouldn't be one I would like to live in.

You are aware that transfer payments come from general revenue, right? BC isn't paying anyone, neither is Alberta. The federal government transfers its money where it sees fit. 

Who would have thought living in a country that takes care of its people across the land would cause so much bellyaching. Personally, I don't have any problem with ensuring a comparable quality of life across the country.

Lastly, why do people focus on Ontario when it comes to transfer payments, when per capita they get the lowest amount? Do people think each province is equal, number of people be damned? 

Hell, what's fair about some in bum-fark interior of BC getting equal care? I want my taxes to only contribute to society within a stone's throw, goddammit!

And where do you think general revenue comes from? It's tax collected from every citizen. Some citizens don't get as much back as others.

I have no problem providing standard levels of care to all Canadians. I have a problem with Western funds being used to prop up environmentally dirty and economically inefficient industries in Ontario. Meanwhile their financial sector is dodging taxes and the West has a skilled labour shortage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And where do you think general revenue comes from? It's tax collected from every citizen. Some citizens don't get as much back as others.

I have no problem providing standard levels of care to all Canadians. I have a problem with Western funds being used to prop up environmentally dirty and economically inefficient industries in Ontario. Meanwhile their financial sector is dodging taxes and the West has a skilled labour shortage.

General revenue is collected equally among Canadians, we in the west don't pay any more than those in the east. It's not a provincial issue at all, as we're paying into federal coffers. The fact the revenue is collected from people in BC or New Brunswick is irrelevant. In other words, these are not "western" funds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

General revenue is collected equally among Canadians, we in the west don't pay any more than those in the east. It's not a provincial issue at all, as we're paying into federal coffers. The fact the revenue is collected from people in BC or New Brunswick is irrelevant. In other words, these are not "western" funds. 

So if everyone puts X amount of dollars into a fund and some people get way more back than others, that doesn't count as paying more? I'm pretty sure it does. And yes they are "Western" funds. It's money collected from taxes paid by people in the West being given to people in Ontario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's bad breaks, untimely job loss, denied insurance claims etc, but I bet the majority of Americans who go broke because of medical bills is due to plain and simple financial mismanagement.

You live in a country with world beating buying power, set aside some money for medical contingencies.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if everyone puts X amount of dollars into a fund and some people get way more back than others, that doesn't count as paying more? I'm pretty sure it does. And yes they are "Western" funds. It's money collected from taxes paid by people in the West being given to people in Ontario.

If people are all putting in X amount, how does that count as paying more? X does not equal X if one X is from Ontario, and the other is from BC?

Federal taxes aren't collected from provinces, they don't vary by province, and they don't get distributed to where the provinces see fit. The funds aren't western, they were just collected from people in the west. You can argue that money should be applied to regions in direct proportion to their share of federal taxes (I disagree. I think funds should be applied to where they're needed), but don't misrepresent the facts.

In terms of who pays for what and who benefits, like I said, Canada's inter-provincial economy is complex, and focusing on this single aspect of where federal funds get applied is overly simplistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If people are all putting in X amount, how does that count as paying more? X does not equal X if one X is from Ontario, and the other is from BC?

Federal taxes aren't collected from provinces, they don't vary by province, and they don't get distributed to where the provinces see fit. The funds aren't western, they were just collected from people in the west. You can argue that money should be applied to regions in direct proportion to their share of federal taxes (I disagree. I think funds should be applied to where they're needed), but don't misrepresent the facts.

In terms of who pays for what and who benefits, like I said, Canada's inter-provincial economy is complex, and focusing on this single aspect of where federal funds get applied is overly simplistic.

You are all paying the same price. Some people are getting back more. If we are buying groceries and we each put in $20, but I get 1 days worth of groceries and you get 2, then one person is paying more.

In this case, less is going back to certain provinces. The Provinces have to make up the shortfall somewhere else. IE: collecting other taxes from the residents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was forced to seek treatment in the U.S., the worst part of it wasn't even the expense but the arrogant attitude I got from know-nothing doctors after I returned to Canada "Why did you waste your money even though it probably saved your life and we weren't helping you?" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh. I live in America and given my parents careers and my current one I have never had health care. Dealt with things straight edge most can't handle. 

With that said if you have an extreme condition I would start something like a gofundme and make some noise. People will chip in a good bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You are all paying the same price. Some people are getting back more. If we are buying groceries and we each put in $20, but I get 1 days worth of groceries and you get 2, then one person is paying more.

In this case, less is going back to certain provinces. The Provinces have to make up the shortfall somewhere else. IE: collecting other taxes from the residents.

Government isn't groceries, what every single person gets out of it varies. People next door to each other could be using vastly different amounts of federal funds. We are all getting two days worth of groceries out of our federal government, though. You can go anywhere in the country and have a comparable quality of life, and your federal tax burden won't change.

In this case, nothing is going "back" to the provinces. The money was never the province's, was never included in any provincial budgets, or is in any way related to the province where it was collected. 

Tell me, what is the shortfall for the province? What other taxes get collected to make for it?What do we in BC pay for in Ontario? Seems you me you're conflating a handful of separate issues in order to be mad about this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...