'My heart, my choice"

[Woodruff]

No, the people who are hit the hardest are the small business owners, the low-income WORKERS, and many others who pay into insurance, then get really really sick. The insurance companies then scour through their policies to find even the minutest of errors and use that as reason to retroactively deny a policy in effect for years.

This is really what pisses me off the most. If they don't bother to "check the policy" for all of those years when they're taking your money, then it should be ILLEGAL for them to cancel the policy when a serious problem arises. I don't care if the person INTENTIONALLY decieved them, quite honestly...it's their job to check into things BEFORE they take your money. But certainly when it's not intentional.

[Woodruff]

So as Medefe pointed out this is more a case of " I can't get the healthcare I want" rather than need.

Hmmm, other people deciding what procedure one needs....... sounds scary.

Let me get this straight...you find "doctors deciding what healthcare is necessary" to be "sounding scary", but you're perfectly happy with "insurance companies deciding what healthcare is necessary"? Really? I don't get that.

[Phatscotty]

So as Medefe pointed out this is more a case of " I can't get the healthcare I want" rather than need.

Hmmm, other people deciding what procedure one needs....... sounds scary.

Let me get this straight...you find "doctors deciding what healthcare is necessary" to be "sounding scary", but you're perfectly happy with "insurance companies deciding what healthcare is necessary"? Really? I don't get that.

its ok, i was talking about the poster specifically, with some emphasis on Canadian socitey(as I detected from the poster). not the doctors! nice edge tho, keep it sharp!

did you find anything wrong with the rest of this tho?

not to mention the impact on the economy (it sounds like you guys are ok staying out of work for 500-20,000% longer...)

But I digress, if you are saying you health system is so great because everyone has access to the same shitty bone breaking procedure, then that's your opinion. I like the freedom of choice to the best health care I can get, and would not feel comfortable traveling to and depending on a different country to get it. Health Care delayed is health care denied....

I just don't understand where the hell is Canada's ambition? Why Canadians are so content on settling for less. Why don't they strive and work hard to create and invent ways to get their subjects their own access to state of the art health-care. This is even a more funny quote..

- "But I wrote out the cheque myself and paid for it myself and to this point, I haven't even looked into the possibility of any reimbursement. I don't know what I'm entitled to, if anything, and if it's nothing, then so be it.



This is not the first time I have noticed you Baron so willing to accept second class care. I enjoy that even the Premeir does not have a clue as to how the entitlement process works, and that he is in a way already expecting nothing, and he's ok with that. In the end, he didnt get it in Canada, and he probably isn't getting it paid for by Canada.

Universal health care....If you don't mind being bed ridden for months, while watching people who can afford to get care in America bounce right back up and enjoy a life that is always too short.

[Woodruff]

So as Medefe pointed out this is more a case of " I can't get the healthcare I want" rather than need.

Hmmm, other people deciding what procedure one needs....... sounds scary.

Let me get this straight...you find "doctors deciding what healthcare is necessary" to be "sounding scary", but you're perfectly happy with "insurance companies deciding what healthcare is necessary"? Really? I don't get that.

its ok, i was talking about the poster specifically, with some emphasis on Canadian socitey(as I detected from the poster). not the doctors! nice edge tho, keep it sharp!

You don't tap-dance very well. Perhaps if you moved over to a wood floor it would help?

[PLAYER57832]

But I digress, if you are saying you health system is so great because everyone has access to the same shitty bone breaking procedure, then that's your opinion.

No, everybody's opinion is that it would be nice if you actually paid attention to the facts. The procedure was, in fact, available in Canada.. just not in Labrador.

I like the freedom of choice to the best health care I can get, and would not feel comfortable traveling to and depending on a different country to get it.

How was he denied freedom of choice? His choice was simply to come to the US?

Health Care delayed is health care denied....

EXACTLY -- precisely why Blue Cross and many other insurance companies are being blamed for so much of our problems. Perhaps you think this "denial of claim" bit for spurious reasons is baloney. I suggest you review the evidence. If you have not encountered those problems, then you are just plain lucky.

[Phatscotty]

So as Medefe pointed out this is more a case of " I can't get the healthcare I want" rather than need.

Hmmm, other people deciding what procedure one needs....... sounds scary.

Let me get this straight...you find "doctors deciding what healthcare is necessary" to be "sounding scary", but you're perfectly happy with "insurance companies deciding what healthcare is necessary"? Really? I don't get that.

its ok, i was talking about the poster specifically, with some emphasis on Canadian socitey(as I detected from the poster). not the doctors! nice edge tho, keep it sharp!

You don't tap-dance very well. Perhaps if you moved over to a wood floor it would help?

well, if you want me to slam dunk it....fine!

I said - "Other People saying"
You put in my mouth - "Doctors saying"

Here. Here's my Butchers Dick.

Please give it back to me when you are done.

[Snorri1234]

I said - "Other People saying"
You put in my mouth - "Doctors saying"

Except that in this case it is doctors saying.

[Woodruff]

Hmmm, other people deciding what procedure one needs....... sounds scary.

Let me get this straight...you find "doctors deciding what healthcare is necessary" to be "sounding scary", but you're perfectly happy with "insurance companies deciding what healthcare is necessary"? Really? I don't get that.

its ok, i was talking about the poster specifically, with some emphasis on Canadian socitey(as I detected from the poster). not the doctors! nice edge tho, keep it sharp!

You don't tap-dance very well. Perhaps if you moved over to a wood floor it would help?

well, if you want me to slam dunk it....fine!
I said - "Other People saying"
You put in my mouth - "Doctors saying"

Correct - thank you for solidifying my point for me. The TRUTH is that it is DOCTORS saying that, not just "other random people".
Or was that somehow meant as an argument against my point?

[Phatscotty]

Let me get this straight...you find "doctors deciding what healthcare is necessary" to be "sounding scary", but you're perfectly happy with "insurance companies deciding what healthcare is necessary"? Really? I don't get that.

its ok, i was talking about the poster specifically, with some emphasis on Canadian socitey(as I detected from the poster). not the doctors! nice edge tho, keep it sharp!

You don't tap-dance very well. Perhaps if you moved over to a wood floor it would help?

well, if you want me to slam dunk it....fine!
I said - "Other People saying"
You put in my mouth - "Doctors saying"

Correct - thank you for solidifying my point for me. The TRUTH is that it is DOCTORS saying that, not just "other random people".
Or was that somehow meant as an argument against my point?

I see where we are going wrong. I reread the article, and although it does not say specifically, I surmise it was the "Canadian Health Care system" that only gave him two options (both including breaking bones). I assume that there were not only doctors involved in that decision just as much as you assume there were only doctors that made that decision.

However, I understand there to be a board in the Canadian Health Care system that decides who needs what treatment (if they are too old, if the sugery costs $100,000 but the benefits are 1 extra month of life...etc) I do not assume everyone on that board is a certified doctor.

And thirdly, we have the person himself, Baron, who was opining on what kind of health care the subject needed or not.

In short, I see the bone you are trying to pick, although it just isn't there. In long, mind your own business and you can avoid these kinds of trivial concessions.

[Woodruff]

its ok, i was talking about the poster specifically, with some emphasis on Canadian socitey(as I detected from the poster). not the doctors! nice edge tho, keep it sharp!

You don't tap-dance very well. Perhaps if you moved over to a wood floor it would help?

well, if you want me to slam dunk it....fine!
I said - "Other People saying"
You put in my mouth - "Doctors saying"

Correct - thank you for solidifying my point for me. The TRUTH is that it is DOCTORS saying that, not just "other random people".
Or was that somehow meant as an argument against my point?

I see where we are going wrong. I reread the article, and although it does not say specifically, I surmise it was the "Canadian Health Care system" that only gave him two options (both including breaking bones). I assume that there were not only doctors involved in that decision just as much as you assume there were only doctors that made that decision.

However, I understand there to be a board in the Canadian Health Care system that decides who needs what treatment (if they are too old, if the sugery costs $100,000 but the benefits are 1 extra month of life...etc) I do not assume everyone on that board is a certified doctor.

And thirdly, we have the person himself, Baron, who was opining on what kind of health care the subject needed or not.

In short, I see the bone you are trying to pick, although it just isn't there. In long, mind your own business and you can avoid these kinds of trivial concessions.

I'm not sure why I'd want to avoid even a trivial concession coming from you, but whatever. At any rate, even if it were a Canadian Health Board that made the determination (I can't find anywhere at all that it is documented as doing so, by the way), that is STILL VERY PREFERABLE to a health insurance company making that determination.

[Gypsys Kiss]

while watching people who can afford to get care in America bounce right back up and enjoy a life that is always too short.

As a matter of interest, what percentage of the US population has the required medical insurance for this sort of operation?

And of those who dont, how many could afford to pay for it?

[Phatscotty]

while watching people who can afford to get care in America bounce right back up and enjoy a life that is always too short.

As a matter of interest, what percentage of the US population has the required medical insurance for this sort of operation?

And of those who dont, how many could afford to pay for it?

You have something there, different conversation though. However, I want the option, no matter how costly, to decide to access the best operation that is available to my family, and the right to decide if I want to go into debt and sell my house for my sick wife (theoretical), or if it's not worth it and to get the pills to help cope. The overlying point is the overall system that created/sustains state of the art medical technology, aka USA, should not take a route the takes away incentive and money for research to keep pushing the medical envelope. Incorporating an extra 30 million peoples worth of Demand into the Health Care system will certainly create such an overwhelming demand for basic services that at least some of the professionals will have to be pulled away from specialized medicines and technologies.

[Snorri1234]

while watching people who can afford to get care in America bounce right back up and enjoy a life that is always too short.

As a matter of interest, what percentage of the US population has the required medical insurance for this sort of operation?

And of those who dont, how many could afford to pay for it?

You have something there, different conversation though. However, I want the option, no matter how costly, to decide to access the best operation that is available to my family, and the right to decide if I want to go into debt and sell my house for my sick wife (theoretical), or if it's not worth it and to get the pills to help cope. The overlying point is the overall system that created/sustains state of the art medical technology, aka USA, should not take a route the takes away incentive and money for research to keep pushing the medical envelope.

And it won't. Because it has nothing to do with whether or not you have everyone on health insurance.

Why exactly would this procedure not be done or developed if the USA had a "socialized" system?

Incorporating an extra 30 million peoples worth of Demand into the Health Care system will certainly create such an overwhelming demand for basic services that at least some of the professionals will have to be pulled away from specialized medicines and technologies.

So uhm....train more professionals? You have one of the lowest amount of doctors per capita. (Not to mention that you can't actually force a doctor to go treat poor people instead of doing expensive heart-surgery.)

[PLAYER57832]

The overlying point is the overall system that created/sustains state of the art medical technology, aka USA, should not take a route the takes away incentive and money for research to keep pushing the medical envelope.

Yes, like the National Institute for Health. Except ..oops, it already is the government.

Incorporating an extra 30 million peoples worth of Demand into the Health Care system will certainly create such an overwhelming demand for basic services that at least some of the professionals will have to be pulled away from specialized medicines and technologies.

So you consider following the greatest need to be a problem?

[Baron Von PWN]

not to mention the impact on the economy (it sounds like you guys are ok staying out of work for 500-20,000% longer...)

Hmm any citation on that one? didin't think so. in fact 10% of americans were unemployed in feburary while in Canada we had 8% unemployment. The average length of our unemployment was 14.8 weeks, in the US it was 22.5 weeks intresting how that is the opposite of what you sugessted. http://research.cibcwm.com/economic_pub ... 090819.pdf

But I digress, if you are saying you health system is so great because everyone has access to the same shitty bone breaking procedure, then that's your opinion. I like the freedom of choice to the best health care I can get, and would not feel comfortable traveling to and depending on a different country to get it. Health Care delayed is health care denied....

Canadians actualy demand allot more than americans. We aren't content to allow our elites watch the poor die we demand care for all Canadians no mater their income or place of employment. We demand and receive care, we don't let insurance comapnies deny us care for random BS reasons.

I just don't understand where the hell is Canada's ambition? Why Canadians are so content on settling for less. Why don't they strive and work hard to create and invent ways to get their subjects their own access to state of the art health-care.

From where I'm sitting, it seems americans settle for allot less, 30 million get no care. many others pay for partial coverage that they might not even receive if the insurance company can weasel out of paying. Of course some do get full coverage but they (or their company) overpay for it causing a real drag on the US economy. You pay more for healthcare and have worse health indicators. You tell me who should be demanding more.

- "But I wrote out the cheque myself and paid for it myself and to this point, I haven't even looked into the possibility of any reimbursement. I don't know what I'm entitled to, if anything, and if it's nothing, then so be it.

This is not the first time I have noticed you Baron so willing to accept second class care. I enjoy that even the Premeir does not have a clue as to how the entitlement process works, and that he is in a way already expecting nothing, and he's ok with that. In the end, he didnt get it in Canada, and he probably isn't getting it paid for by Canada.

Universal health care....If you don't mind being bed ridden for months, while watching people who can afford to get care in America bounce right back up and enjoy a life that is always too short.

I stands the Premier was rejected for the best possible procedure by Canada.

The way it works in Canada is you go to the Hospital or clinic and you get care or an apointment. You don't have to deal with insurance companies, banks, loansharks or however else amercians go about getting care. The reason the Premier doesen't know if he can get anything acredited is because it's so rare for someone to leave the country for care and frankly doesen't come up often. Canadians expect allot and we are constantly hassleing our governments (federal and provincial) to improve services. that's why healthcare is almost allways an ellection topic, and healthcare doese get improved, sure we've got problems but who doesn't.