More Ipperwash

[Birdy]

awesome smoothedshredder.. i even printed that out for my dad to read.

Edited February 16, 2006 by Guest

[d_rawk]

Remember that we took on alot of Debt by holding on to African Debt which arose through 'aid' in the 1960's. "We can pay you back Japan, cause Africa owes us all this money, promise." You could argue that making the African Nations own up to their side of the bargain, long after any potential benefits from the aid long petered out decades ago has been oppressing these nations. Our luxurious "welfare state" in comparison to National Health Care in a place like say: The Ivory Coast, has been thriving on managed debt because someday the African Nations will pay us back, you could argue ravers, and government workers are "one step away" from this horrible poverty, but in light of what has happened in Africa over the last 30 years, and the amount of opportunity made readily available to each and every Canadian, even the homeless, honestley with all due resepct, What the fuÇk do you Know?...

Hmm. I've written pretty extensively about the situation, which isn't to say much except that 'what the fuck' I know about it probably ain't much, but certainly isn't what you seem to think it is. The loans, the cirtcumstances of the loans, and the conditions attached to the loans have been a constant source of my criticism.

The hatchets that were purchased with Western (and China's) money, with our knowledge, by Rwanda have been too. I'm not personally in favour of pissing out money for bullshit, but nor am I a nationalist who is in favour of "keeping it real by keeping it home". Debt forgiveness has been one of my major arguments, long before it was hip or Bono came around to the cause (and made a mockery of it).

As for the rest, I'm looking at the bit about the hospitals and thinking about how Flaherty was 'oh my, so bloody shocked!' to find out that there was a critical nurse shortage during the SARS crisis because of the cuts he and Harris had made. Dudes couldn't put one and one together to equal two. Ideology trumped all. That shit stinks no matter whose ass it is coming out of, left or right.

I'll have to respond to the rest in the morning.

[SmoothedShredder]

I'm sorry, I didn't mean you personally d_rawk, I meant more as those who "cry outloud" about the evils of Harris.

[SmoothedShredder]

In regards to the SARS crisis... I immediately compare that to the AIDS crisis in Africa. Sure it's apples and oranges... but it's a relatively small and far more contained pile of apples and Oranges here, and a Huge Festering Pile of Apples and Oranges there. 1 in 20 in many places of Africa have AIDs, which is just the tip of the iceburg in terms of the kinds of infectious diseases which live and thrive here... this means you as an individual living in Afican society will know someone with AIDS if not yourself (considering family sizes there have been relatively large), it probably means you're swamped with the problem... if you think Ontario has a Nursing shortage then sure as anything the world has one, and in the global game, in a relative sense, the region of Ontario is way ahead of the game... I know it's not where it could be... but whatever happened to leave no man(person) behind, and the Golden rule... I'm just extending it to the Global arena, and that's why I will accept waiting to move forward (as a political entity in charge of Health Care), until such a time as there is a positive healthy climate for all other political entities who have yet to reached our privilidged level (as poor as everyone makes it out to be with their implications).

Don't get me wrong... we have along way to go to, and I believe with an accute awarness on the cause and effect of our choices of lifestyle choices that we make, we could learn alot by working along side Africans, or merely observing their solutions to their problems if only we release them from the oppresion we've inadvertently (I hope) put them under.

The statistic/analogy that we would need six earth's worth of resources to sustain itself if every person who was alive today lived like (consumed as much) as the AVERAGE north American suggests to me, we have a lot to learn too, and self-control, and comprimise should be somewhere near the top of that list.

[ollie]

money doesn't trump all ollie, CHOICE does.

My point was that when a decision has to be made in the private sector that more often than not money is the deciding factor.

"We're not making enough profit? Let's cut the service and jack up the price."

I don't want that type of attitude in charge of our health care.

[d_rawk]

Ah, cool SS. I understand what you are saying vis a vis Africa and casting a wider net of responsibility.

(I was a bit of a stressed-out crankypants yesterday in general. Amazing sometimes what a couple glasses of wine, some good company and a night's sleep can do to turn those things around ...)

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

The statistic/analogy that we would need six earth's worth of resources to sustain itself if every person who was alive today lived like (consumed as much) as the AVERAGE north American suggests to me, we have a lot to learn too, and self-control, and comprimise should be somewhere near the top of that list.

I think you're spot on there. I wonder sometimes if we're learning too little too late. It's a bit like that Anglican Church in the West finally taking stock of all the evil they've been responsible for in the last 200 years and turning a new leaf, just in time for the African Anglicans, who now have the decisive numbers, to start pushing their own kind of corruption around (and these guys aren't powerful just on their own; they're heavily funded by US evangelical groups like Focus on the Family).

We still reap what we've sown. We are where we are today as a result of the violence that's been heaped on others. It makes it pretty much impossible to convince any other peoples from a position of some moral high ground - I mean, Britain was the world's biggest drug dealer in the 19th c., the way it forced opium into China (and fought a couple of wars there to preserve its turf - they understood perfectly well the economic benefits of keeping your clients hooked on smack), but all we ever saw of that was the stereotype of the addicted chinaman in his opium den (I expect there are parallels with the way the US has handled cocaine). Now there's this massive resentment in the Muslim world about that whole history of colonialism as well, and it's coming from a place where they clearly identify themselves as holding the moral high ground.

And, to come full circle, Native Canadians have every reason to be resentful as well (as the bumper sticker says, "Canada: Love it, or give it back"). So when I see Harris characterised as a racist thug who used the bottom line to short-change his own people, I don't have too much trouble with that. He's in part set out to preserve a pretty awful legacy, and doesn't have the historical consciousness to see or do otherwise.

[AD]

You guys are SMRT

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

It's seems to always come back to health care, doesn't it.

SMRT

[AD]

S-M-R-T

In "Homer Goes to College," Homer gleefully sets his high school diploma aflame, while singing, "I am so smart, I am so smart, S-M-R-T, I mean S-M-A-R-T!" Behind him his living room is going up in flames.

The now legendary "S-M-R-T" line was actually not in the script and was a genuine error by voice actor Dan Castellaneta. However, the error was so much in Homer's character that they chose to include it in the finished product.

People now chant either "S-M-R-T" or "I am so smart, S-M-R-T", particularly when they're feeling stupid, celebratory, or both.

I am not making fun or insulting any of you. I think you are all smart, apologies for the ambiguity. Back to the Cavern for me.

AD

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

I must be too out of touch with timouse if I'm not keeping up with my Simpsons trivia .

Me, I've always wanted to go to Clown College.

[Birdy]

money doesn't trump all ollie' date=' CHOICE does.[/quote']

My point was that when a decision has to be made in the private sector that more often than not money is the deciding factor.

"We're not making enough profit? Let's cut the service and jack up the price."

I don't want that type of attitude in charge of our health care.

well unfortunately for us all, money has to be the deciding factor. cat scans, MRIs, EEGs, doctors and nurses salaries, etc. etc. etc. all cost money ollie. whether that money is being managed by the private or public sector, is still has to be "managed".

i'm not advocating a completely privatized system, but a two-tier in which the private sector would maintain some sort of social responsiblity to the public system in order to keep the quality up to par. there's no comparison between the quality of US health care and Canadian. it's no wonder why people cross border shop for doctors. a two-tier system would alleviate some of the burden that is falling on the public system. like i've mentioned before in some thread, for those of you who live in urban centres you don't see a problem because the money is given to you. it's rural canadians who are suffering. no doctors, overworked doctors who are prone to misdiagnoses, waitlists, having to travel hundreds of kms to see a specialist, the list goes on. and this isn't a recent phenomenon... it's been happening for years and has been a major issue for ndp, conservative and liberal governments alike, all of whom have been unable to do a thing about it. what does that say? i'm sick of people saying well we'll rework the system and take it from there. hell we've been reworking the system for too long and it's gotten us nowhere. it's time for a new system, a two-tier system, that by all accounts, is already in place. just recognize it by law and get on with it.

there is a MASSIVE problem with health care in this country and hearing people say Canadian heath care is great sends shivers down my spine.

Edited February 16, 2006 by Guest

[d_rawk]

no doctors, overworked doctors who are prone to misdiagnoses

Not being argumentative, just want to point out generally that I spend a lot of time in health groups, reading the medical literature and talking to people in healthcare advocacy on both sides of the border. The above problem is universal, and delays of as much as 10-12 years from onset to diagnosis is common on both sides of the 49th.

The quality may not be the same on average, I agree. But accessibility is a huge issue. I know more people who have been absolutely crushed and decimated in the US because of health issues than I do in Canada. But you aren't arguing to emulate the US system entirely, and I get that. Just want to pre-empt any idea that things are rosy there ... and the US government (public money) still pays more per capita in terms of healthcare than the Canadian government does.

I believe I have more contemporary statistics at home, but the data from 1999 is along the same lines: $1,059 per head of public spending in healthcare in the US, and $307 per head of public spending in healthcare in Canada.

The comparative study in the New England Journal of Medicine concludes:

“The gap between U.S. and Canadian spending on health care administration has grown to $752 per capita. A large sum might be saved in the United States if administrative costs could be trimmed by implementing a Canadian-style health care system.â€

It is a very complicated subject, for sure.

[edit:] one of my little "what the hell am I going to do with my life??" fantasies is to set up a clinic specifically for the homeless who I think by and large are mis-, under-, or entirely un- diagnosed. It will probably never happen, I'm sure, but the fact that it could happen under this system (or a not too dissimilar variant) gives me some hope.

Edited February 16, 2006 by Guest

[Birdy]

i no doubt agree with you d_rawk that problems we routinely face with our health care system are experienced by all in the profession; however with the current public system and "funding", there are areas that get overlooked simply because the money isn't there or the population isn't there.

perhaps it's a rual/urban thing as i know more people who have been crushed and decimated by our system that i do in the US. i guess accessibility for americans is if you have the cash, and accessilbity for canadians is if you can live the hour to two hours it takes to drive to the nearest doctor, or if there is a helicopter that can lift you because your local hospital can't perform the tasks needed to save your life, or if the emergency room has a bed available because it's overridden as a walk in clinic for the sheer amounts of people without doctors. different types, but still accessibility issues.

but again, i'm not advocating a private system, but a two-tier in which accessilbity comparisons with the US don't really apply. perhaps a rosy picture can be painted with a little give and take.. a two-tier system, a choice?

[ollie]

well unfortunately for us all, money has to be the deciding factor. cat scans, MRIs, EEGs, doctors and nurses salaries, etc. etc. etc. all cost money ollie. whether that money is being managed by the private or public sector, is still has to be "managed".

Ok, maybe this will be more clear: I trust the public sector to manage the money more than I trust the private sector to manage the money.

[d_rawk]

Ollie: which makes sense, because the public system has proven itself to deal with the money more efficiently. In the US, the government pays a whopping more than ours does, employeers pay a ton, and the individual pays a ton. The expenditure is out of this world, and not consistent proportionately with quality gains.

Birdy: Gotcha. Part of the distinction, besides rural/urban is with acute/chronic. Dealing with chronic illness in anything even resembling a sane manner (not to mention dealing with prevention, but that involves a whole lot of 'others' outside of the medical establishment proper) would free up a lot of resources that would improve acute care tremendously. Sadly, we are a long way off from any such sane approach, and Canada is definately not alone in that regard.

[Birdy]

well unfortunately for us all' date=' money has to be the deciding factor. cat scans, MRIs, EEGs, doctors and nurses salaries, etc. etc. etc. all cost money ollie. whether that money is being managed by the private or public sector, is still has to be "managed".[/quote']

Ok, maybe this will be more clear: I trust the public sector to manage the money more than I trust the private sector to manage the money.

see i find this odd. the public sector are the ones guilty of mismanagement. the private sector has never gotten a chance to manage.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

I think the private sector has had a pretty extensive track record of ripping people off over the last couple of centuries. There is an innate tendency towards slavery and unlimited profit acquisition, unless checked. Watch what public health measures did to stem what private companies would do for cruddy and even dangerous product (quality control, i.e.). I don't trust private interests when they're left unchecked.

[ollie]

see i find this odd. the public sector are the ones guilty of mismanagement. the private sector has never gotten a chance to manage.

Governments can be held accountable. Witness our last election.

[Birdy]

i'd prefer that we argued two-tier and not privatized. i'm not advocating privatized health care, nor is the CPC. a two-tier health care system can be held accountable.

[d_rawk]

the private sector has never gotten a chance to manage.

Private health insurance in the US (who dictate what can be done by doctors, by controlling the purse strings). Doctors and patients both are hamstrung by private industry in the US.

There is less incentive here to make a self-perpetuating industry out of disease. Elimination of disease is savings. If we were less enamoured by a place of enormous influence with which we happen to share close proximity that bases its healthcare decisions more on the interests of pharmaceutical giants, the AMA, and other profit barons of the infirm, we would be much further along in this project of 'saving' (both lives and money) than we are today.

The increasing tendency of abstracts to not at all correlate with the data presented in the same studies, the failure of peer-review to demonstrate itself as effective in any meaningful sense opposite the desire to placate established peers, and the tendency to make medical decisions based on those same peer-placating abstracts causes me daily stress-induced digestive issues.

Damn it, I'm becoming stressed-out asshole d_rawk all over again! :laugh:

[d_rawk]

two-tier health care system can be held accountable

Would if it were so ....

There is no potential of two-tier in Canada. I mean, we have it already, on the sly ... but NAFTA precludes the notion of having it in any official capacity.

We made our bed. And so here we lay.

[Birdy]

well i suppose there's always plan b...

when all else fails..

[d_rawk]

"We very politely - but violently - (...)"

Hahaha. Thanks for that.

[deranger]

check out Milton Freidmans experiment with priviting an entire country. General Augusto Pinochet's Chile - late '70's. Or Argentina early 2000's. Public sector can be held accountable - private sector - far far less accountability for public welfare. The profit motive has been shown to disregard the welfare of the public.

Enron

Worldcom

Monsanto

The list gioes on and on....

How anyone thinks that the private sector will look after the public good, better than the elected representatives of a community is beyond me.