The great debate of healthcare, private or public?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan H

Hmmm I'm getting a strong whiff of hypocrisy here.

Fiero, you've been arguing over and over again that healthcare isn't a right, it is something that should be bought. You've talked about the benefits of a market system and how profit motivates hospitals to be efficient.

Then you've seen doctors firsthand playing the game not only by its rules but by the spirit of the rules as you want it to be played and you don't like it.

Which is worse, the doctor who works the system as its meant to be or the guy who demands that the system is the way it is?

---

I don't think he has a problem with it. The non-profit hospital admins did....

I don't know. Spritually, I agree with Fiero. I question the idea of all of these rights when it comes to entitlements from the state. I understand if we are going to pay for something, healthcare would be right up there, but I do feel too many people in socialized care abuse the system and too many doctors are not really rewarded in ways maybe they should. Then I read Fiero's accounts, and realize it isn't perfect either. I am on the fence. I can see the merits and detriments in both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

I don't think he has a problem with it. The non-profit hospital admins did....

---

That is not the interpretation I made, Fiero has criticised the profit seeking behaviour of doctors he has seen in two posts now which is odd for someone who supports the profit seeking nature of private companies to keep his costs down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dylan H

Hmmm I'm getting a strong whiff of hypocrisy here.

Fiero, you've been arguing over and over again that healthcare isn't a right, it is something that should be bought. You've talked about the benefits of a market system and how profit motivates hospitals to be efficient.

Then you've seen doctors firsthand playing the game not only by its rules but by the spirit of the rules as you want it to be played and you don't like it.

Which is worse, the doctor who works the system as its meant to be or the guy who demands that the system is the way it is?

---

Good Afternoon Dylan, sorry I'm late.

I've been known to confuse folks from time to time and part of that is what I am and part of it is what I isn't.

I would describe myself as a realist, with a sometimes uncomfortable side order of pragmaticism. Hypocrisy, although I am unconvinced of my guilt in the manner to which you point or whiff, is a lady that all of us end up having to dance with at one time or another. Still, there is much to be said for hypocrisy. Hypocrisy led directly to rationalization and without rationalizations, human beings couldn't survive.

I'm not sure, but I don't believe I'm one of those that constantly praise the market system but I do appreciate the benefits it offers and saddened by those that fail to acknowledge it's limitations. In addition, I can't remember where I said profit motivates a hospital to be efficient. I think Rollo accused me of that via a misquote. However, back in post #10 I did say that insurance companies and hospitals are both businesses and entitled to make a profit.

I have stated my opinion that I believe that some medical services are over priced and the actual need for constant health care is oversold through a good marketing campaign. Some doctors charge vastly more than their services merit but so do some lawyers, auto mechanics, and building contractors. I asked you to address some questions along those lines and you did, thank you. By the way, the guy in the first paragraph wasn't a joke, he was my Dad. You and I could argue all day long, but at the end of the day you, as a man of integrity and education, would have to admit some services and doctors fees are overpriced and I, as a man of integrity and education, would have to admit that some of the high costs are justified. Even with me thinking costs are too high, nowhere have you seen me advocating the regulation or imposition of artificial price controls on doctors or hospitals. I believe it's the patient's responsibility to explore other options, up to and including, going to a different doctor.

As far as the 2 hospitals go I really wasn't condemning one or the other. I was merely pointing out that working there turned me on to how the game is played. The doctor's hospital was built by the doctor's through a corporation they formed. They invested in their business, built it, and deserved to make a profit from it. They could have lost their butts for starting the construction without a "certificate of need" but the state board ruled that since no public money or money insured by public funds was used for it's construction, it was legally a huge private clinic and a "certificate of need" was not required. Although I don't know what the prices were compared between the two, they were both in business to make a profit, the only difference being the profits made by the non-profit hospital had to be put back into and used for the benefit of the hospital. To say either hospital was above gamesmanship would be inaccurate. This would have been going on about '73-'75. The private pysch hospitals for addiction, depression, etc were just starting to rear their ugly heads. We were on the cutting edge of a new profit center. We converted the entire 3rd floor to a psych floor and the local shrinks started filling it up with disobedient teenagers, wives that, now that the kids were gone, were lost. They didn't know anything about areospace and their husbands didn't know jack about Big Bird. Not to mention the rare patient that was milking the system for a free vacation. Any way, all these people presented such a danger to society and themselves that they were locked up on the 3rd floor, except for lots and lots of supervised field trips and outings, until such time as their condition improved and they could be released back into mainstream society. You'll be glad to know that each and every one of them were fit enough to return to society on the same day their insurance ran out, usually 30 days.

If a society wants to make health care a right, that's their business. That I know of, nobody in the USA is telling the UK or any other nation they can't have a national health care plan.

In the USA, we have 2 national health care plans now, both broke. Massachusetts has a state plan thats a complete mess. The majority of Americans have let Obama know they don't want his health plan and that is a right they have.

In all honestly, I'm puzzled by the mindset of any individual that thinks they have the absolute right, by virtue of the fact that they exist, to obligate other individuals to care for them.

Lastly, I have no objection to how any doctor conducts himself as long as it is legal. They are free to charge what the market will bear and partake of any incentives offered. Thats business and business is what they are in.

Thyroid and COPD have finally taken me down to where I can't work. I managed to work 3 weeks in Feb, but thats been it. When I told my doctor I no longer had medical insurance he immediately cut his fee to me by 37 % so please don't go thinking I'm down on doctors. Because of years of self-directed investments, I've gotten on quite well without public assistance.

Apparently the healthcare system in Canada is great unless you are the Newfoundland Premier......Then it isn't good enough.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Apparently the healthcare system in Canada is great unless you are the Newfoundland Premier......Then it isn't good enough.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700

---

Believe me Tony...it goes on all the time. The Premier of Newfoundland at least flew down on his own dime. Prime Minister Chretien used to fly to the Mayo Clinic using the plane from the Air Force that I help pay for. But of course...our healthcare system is GREAT. Just ask Danny Williams or Jean Chretien.

Healthcare is truly the 3rd rail of Canadian politics if you threaten it but at some point, the electorate will wake up...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Apparently the healthcare system in Canada is great unless you are the Newfoundland Premier......Then it isn't good enough.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700

---

Medical tourism..check it out.

People from all over the world go to different countries for treatment, including people from the USA.

Most people that go abroad for treatment actually come from the USA. They go to other countries as its cheaper and get the same if not better treatment and care.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve_spackman

and get the same if not better treatment and care.....

---

You Funny!

Sure some American's go offshore for treatment. Most of those go for treatments that aren't allowed in the US.
Those that go for cheaper treatment are idiots because if they had been actually paying for insurance it would have come out cheaper than going offshore.

The thought that Americans go offshore for better treat is laughable. Even a High Canadian Government official came to the US for treatment. He could have seen the best Canadian doctors free of charge but yet he hopped on a plane to the US.

Tony...apparently it was some specialist. The spin doctors are in full spin, but if you are from St. Johns Newfoundland, a not big city in a small outpost that is about 550000 people, you know you are going to need special care elsewhere for some treatments. I guess he figured he would get a little sun and pay for it. Since Danny Williams was a millionaire before he entered politics, he whistled up his private jet and went south. No one is saying, but he has some weird cardiac thing.

I don't care that he is getting treatment in the US, heck, it probably is as good or better than what he got in Toronto or Montreal but the weather would be nicer BUT this is one of the politicians who is always blathering about how good our health care is. Well you know what, if you are going to go out on that limb, than suck it up and stay home. The truth is Tony, we are not using leeches and amputating limbs up here. We have a decent enough healthcare system but the fact remains it could be that little bit better and polticians like Williams keep getting in the way of discussing how we can do that.

Contrary to what you think Tony, it aint a third world country up here and our healthcare is in most cases as good as anywhere, but if you want specialists and the BEST possible care money can buy, than ya, maybe you will end up going to the UK or the US of some place exotic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

You Funny!

Sure some American's go offshore for treatment. Most of those go for treatments that aren't allowed in the US.
Those that go for cheaper treatment are idiots because if they had been actually paying for insurance it would have come out cheaper than going offshore.

The thought that Americans go offshore for better treat is laughable. Even a High Canadian Government official came to the US for treatment. He could have seen the best Canadian doctors free of charge but yet he hopped on a plane to the US.

---

You simply have no idea what your on about do you? I really pity you sometimes.

Here's something that I honestly don't know about, I'm sure you all will educate me.

Aren't you sort of stealing if you are a US citizen and you go abroad for some sort of treatment? I mean that care is cheaper because it's subsidized by that government. And since I, as a US citizen, didn't pay taxes in country X, aren't I stealing from those taxpayers?

Boil the question down a bit: Is treatment in other countries cheaper because it is subsidized by the government? At least to some extent?