I'm still proud to live in a nation that doesn't view the sick and dying as a means to turn a profit, likewise with children in education. These institutions aren't struggling because of their design, they're struggling because idiot politicians think that the population is stupid enough to get excited over lowered taxes at the cost of their social welfare. And unfortunately, that's largely true.
Yep, but that's better than paying more at the point of service. If people have to pay to see a doctor, they are less likely to go. This means illnesses are less likely to get treated early when they will be easier, and less expensive, to cure. It also means people will remain contagious longer, if they have a communicable disease.
"The governemnt is extremely ineficient and if the health care was allowed to have competition it could be of much better quality, shorter waiting times, and lower prices." This is not true. The free market only works when the seller and the buyer have the same amount of information. This is inherently impossible when it comes to health care, because to understand even the basics required years of post-secondary education. The U.S. has shorter wait times, because most people can't afford it.
Totally false. The free market does not require the same amount of information on the part of buyer and seller. The only thing that is required is for buyers to be able to discriminate between price and quality. I don't need a post secondary education to understand the same operation is more expensive here than there.
@@rand0mletters1 You don't know if the same operation is truly the same, because you don't have the education to judge quality. In nearly all areas of knowledge, if you don't know how to do something, then you won't have skill to judge the abilities of others. The Dunning-Kruger effect is based on this fact. You won't be able to make an informed decision.
@@BrotherAlpha umm no... Most people can tell if the treatment they are receiving from a someone is effective or not. And in the instances where its hard to know, such as traumatic injury, there really isnt much of a choice involved.
@@rand0mletters1 Fuck off. You're proof of the Dunning-Kruger effect. You have no fucking clue about medicine, but you think you are skilled enough to tell if a doctor is good or not. Again I say fuck off.
@@BrotherAlpha yeah i suppose it wouldnt matter anyway if i was a surgeon. Because then of course i wouldnt know if my dermatologist was any good, because of course i wouldnt be a dermatologist. Or for that matter how could i say im working with an effective anesthesiologist. As far as i know when a patient receives an analgesic or anesthetic, it could be totally caddywhompus. Unfortunately i guess ill just have to depend on luck and good fortune to see me through the perilous activity of selecting a good doctor.
@@DonutsIceCreamAndCottenCandy Because someone replied to an old post and I got a notification. I saw that someone had a legitimate question and answered it. What is so strange about that?
@leaf16nut I totally agree with you. Considering how my mother was diagnosed with cancer last september and went through the whole chemo and radio, had the tumour removed, that it didn't cost us much. We paid private for MRI screenings that was faster, and wasn't cheap, but I am so thankful we didn't have to worry about the cost of the whole thing. Cancer is traumatic enough as it is on the patient and family without adding mounting hospital bills to the experience.
@leaf16nut Last time I needed to go to the emergency room, it took less than 30 minutes to see a doctor, get diagnosed, and leave. A short trip to the in hospital pharmacy and I was back home in less than an hour. And it didn't cost me a dime.
Yes it is true, one company makes a big profit at first, then another company comes in, cuts the profit margin slightly, then they get the customers and then they keep goin until the profit margin is razor thin, and then an innovation is required. There is no difference between politicians and greedy buisnessmen, they are both driven by self-profit, the only diff is the private buisnessman has competition so has to lower his prfoit marin to make a profit, and the politican doesnt.
"Yes it is true, one company makes a big profit at first, then another company comes in, cuts the profit margin..." Then you get cheap health care, not better health care. You won't get innovations, because the average consumer won't be able to tell which doctor or hospital provides the best service on anything but the most superficial level. Could you tell if your doctor misdiagnosed you? No, because you don't have the medical training to do so. The free market won't work with this information
"no you get less exspesive health care, and you also get better qulaity" No. No. No. The average consumer can't judge the quality of their health care, because they don't have the knowledge to make that judgement. You keep ignoring this point. Patients won't know which doctor is better at their job, so the market won't select the best. You might get cheap and fast, but not the best. "idk what ur talkin bout..." I agree with you there. I don't think you know what this debate is about.
The sad thing thing is even back when you said this it was actually very easy except in big cities for the average consumer to observe being treated by doctors in a way that makes you want to abolish all doctors until death, unless you know how utopian even the freaking CUBAN healthcare system is capable of being. The only saving grace is the incompetent idiots will at least push a good intentioned treatment that might actually be appropriate, as opposed to whatever costs the most money like in America.
@leaf16nut If your concern is that we don't have enough doctors (and with 4.2 million Canadians without a family doctor, it's hard to argue the opposite), what should we do? Do you want to get rid of the doctor quotas?
UA-cam error. Ignore the previous post. If you went to the doctor with three symptoms but the doctor misdiagnosed you, you wouldn't know if that happened because he was a bad doctor, or because there are two diseases with nearly identical symptoms, or perhaps your disease was presenting itself in an atypical way. Because of that, there's no way for you to know if your doctor is good or bad, because you don't have seven years of medical school needed to make that judgment. Dunning-Kruger effect
many other Canadians cannot say the same. The governemnt is extremely ineficient and if the health care was allowed to have competition it could be of much better quality, shorter waiting times, and lower prices. "And it didn't cost me a dime." < LOL
@hanksnow82 And why to Americans come to Canada for prescriptions. And it's not better in the United States, it's faster, because so many people don't even bother going to their doctors because they can't afford it. Of course, this leads to more emergency room visits, which are more expensive and put people's lives in danger. Maybe that's why Canada gets better overall results while spending less money per person than the United States does.
No. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying medicine is too complex for the average person to understand, so they can't judge if a doctor is truly good or not. Bad doctors won't get weeded out under the free market system. Friendly doctors might have an advantage, cheap doctors might have an advantage, but not good doctors.
The way that the electoral system works in Canada and how many seats each party receives isn't really representation of the percentage of Canadians who actually voted for those parties. It's a little confusing if i say so myself. If anything needs reform, it's that. There is only one party that represents conservatism. There are 4 parties that represent more socialist values. I wonder why the Conservatives keep on getting a minority.
since this goin nowhere, Id urge you to search "Top Three Health Care Policy Proposals" and itll be the first video, maybe that will help you understand what im saying. When you talk about "information", are u saying "how can a patient trust a private doctor?"
This isn't going anywhere because you are not listening.If I gave you a list of three symptoms, could you tell me what disease was the cause? No. So if you went to the doctor with certain symptoms and the
I have to say, that if you look at the vote share, and see how much the conservatives actually get, you will see that Canada is not a right wing country, it is because of our parliamentary system that we have a conservative minority gov't.
In my dreams are we a more conservative country, maybe compared to like suchafool990 said to Stalin Russia lol It would be to smart to be conservative I guess
no you get less exspesive health care, and you also get better qulaity because the company with the best balance of price, quality and wait times will get the buisness. and I garuntee you that company will have better quality, prices, and wait times than the governemnt could ever provide. idk what ur talkin bout info, people get misdiagnoased all the time in Canada.
why would you trust the governemnt to make sure your doctor is a good one, over a private buisness, there is no difference between them. Only diff is, the governemnt doesnt have competition so they can make a profit even if the service is shitty, because they have nobody to compete with.
progressive or conservative... both healthcare and education in Canada are services in which Canadians can hardly be 'proud' of anymore
I'm still proud to live in a nation that doesn't view the sick and dying as a means to turn a profit, likewise with children in education.
These institutions aren't struggling because of their design, they're struggling because idiot politicians think that the population is stupid enough to get excited over lowered taxes at the cost of their social welfare. And unfortunately, that's largely true.
Yep, but that's better than paying more at the point of service. If people have to pay to see a doctor, they are less likely to go. This means illnesses are less likely to get treated early when they will be easier, and less expensive, to cure. It also means people will remain contagious longer, if they have a communicable disease.
"The governemnt is extremely ineficient and if the health care was allowed to have competition it could be of much better quality, shorter waiting times, and lower prices."
This is not true. The free market only works when the seller and the buyer have the same amount of information. This is inherently impossible when it comes to health care, because to understand even the basics required years of post-secondary education.
The U.S. has shorter wait times, because most people can't afford it.
Totally false. The free market does not require the same amount of information on the part of buyer and seller. The only thing that is required is for buyers to be able to discriminate between price and quality. I don't need a post secondary education to understand the same operation is more expensive here than there.
@@rand0mletters1 You don't know if the same operation is truly the same, because you don't have the education to judge quality. In nearly all areas of knowledge, if you don't know how to do something, then you won't have skill to judge the abilities of others. The Dunning-Kruger effect is based on this fact. You won't be able to make an informed decision.
@@BrotherAlpha umm no... Most people can tell if the treatment they are receiving from a someone is effective or not. And in the instances where its hard to know, such as traumatic injury, there really isnt much of a choice involved.
@@rand0mletters1 Fuck off. You're proof of the Dunning-Kruger effect. You have no fucking clue about medicine, but you think you are skilled enough to tell if a doctor is good or not. Again I say fuck off.
@@BrotherAlpha yeah i suppose it wouldnt matter anyway if i was a surgeon. Because then of course i wouldnt know if my dermatologist was any good, because of course i wouldnt be a dermatologist. Or for that matter how could i say im working with an effective anesthesiologist. As far as i know when a patient receives an analgesic or anesthetic, it could be totally caddywhompus. Unfortunately i guess ill just have to depend on luck and good fortune to see me through the perilous activity of selecting a good doctor.
Why is this whole comments section just a debate between two people but not replying to each other?
It's the old comment system that didn't have nested replies.
@@BrotherAlpha Lol you replied 8 years later
@@DonutsIceCreamAndCottenCandy Because someone replied to an old post and I got a notification. I saw that someone had a legitimate question and answered it. What is so strange about that?
@@BrotherAlpha Nothing. Cool
@leaf16nut I totally agree with you. Considering how my mother was diagnosed with cancer last september and went through the whole chemo and radio, had the tumour removed, that it didn't cost us much. We paid private for MRI screenings that was faster, and wasn't cheap, but I am so thankful we didn't have to worry about the cost of the whole thing. Cancer is traumatic enough as it is on the patient and family without adding mounting hospital bills to the experience.
@leaf16nut Last time I needed to go to the emergency room, it took less than 30 minutes to see a doctor, get diagnosed, and leave. A short trip to the in hospital pharmacy and I was back home in less than an hour.
And it didn't cost me a dime.
Comment did not age well....
Yeee, Layton!
Yes it is true, one company makes a big profit at first, then another company comes in, cuts the profit margin slightly, then they get the customers and then they keep goin until the profit margin is razor thin, and then an innovation is required.
There is no difference between politicians and greedy buisnessmen, they are both driven by self-profit, the only diff is the private buisnessman has competition so has to lower his prfoit marin to make a profit, and the politican doesnt.
"Yes it is true, one company makes a big profit at first, then another company comes in, cuts the profit margin..."
Then you get cheap health care, not better health care. You won't get innovations, because the average consumer won't be able to tell which doctor or hospital provides the best service on anything but the most superficial level.
Could you tell if your doctor misdiagnosed you? No, because you don't have the medical training to do so. The free market won't work with this information
"no you get less exspesive health care, and you also get better qulaity"
No. No. No.
The average consumer can't judge the quality of their health care, because they don't have the knowledge to make that judgement. You keep ignoring this point. Patients won't know which doctor is better at their job, so the market won't select the best. You might get cheap and fast, but not the best.
"idk what ur talkin bout..."
I agree with you there. I don't think you know what this debate is about.
The sad thing thing is even back when you said this it was actually very easy except in big cities for the average consumer to observe being treated by doctors in a way that makes you want to abolish all doctors until death, unless you know how utopian even the freaking CUBAN healthcare system is capable of being. The only saving grace is the incompetent idiots will at least push a good intentioned treatment that might actually be appropriate, as opposed to whatever costs the most money like in America.
@leaf16nut
If your concern is that we don't have enough doctors (and with 4.2 million Canadians without a family doctor, it's hard to argue the opposite), what should we do?
Do you want to get rid of the doctor quotas?
UA-cam error. Ignore the previous post. If you went to the doctor with three symptoms but the doctor misdiagnosed you, you wouldn't know if that happened because he was a bad doctor, or because there are two diseases with nearly identical symptoms, or perhaps your disease was presenting itself in an atypical way. Because of that, there's no way for you to know if your doctor is good or bad, because you don't have seven years of medical school needed to make that judgment. Dunning-Kruger effect
George has a really good style.
Does he?
@@TyEats2200 bro has a question for someone 12 years in the past
@@laseri2089 yes
many other Canadians cannot say the same. The governemnt is extremely ineficient and if the health care was allowed to have competition it could be of much better quality, shorter waiting times, and lower prices.
"And it didn't cost me a dime." < LOL
@hanksnow82 And why to Americans come to Canada for prescriptions. And it's not better in the United States, it's faster, because so many people don't even bother going to their doctors because they can't afford it.
Of course, this leads to more emergency room visits, which are more expensive and put people's lives in danger.
Maybe that's why Canada gets better overall results while spending less money per person than the United States does.
No. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying medicine is too complex for the average person to understand, so they can't judge if a doctor is truly good or not. Bad doctors won't get weeded out under the free market system. Friendly doctors might have an advantage, cheap doctors might have an advantage, but not good doctors.
The way that the electoral system works in Canada and how many seats each party receives isn't really representation of the percentage of Canadians who actually voted for those parties. It's a little confusing if i say so myself. If anything needs reform, it's that.
There is only one party that represents conservatism. There are 4 parties that represent more socialist values. I wonder why the Conservatives keep on getting a minority.
@BrotherAlpha I got an MRI within a few weeks of it being scheduled.
okay, you didnt answer my question: When you talk about "information", are u saying "how can a patient trust a private doctor?"
since this goin nowhere, Id urge you to search "Top Three Health Care Policy Proposals" and itll be the first video, maybe that will help you understand what im saying.
When you talk about "information", are u saying "how can a patient trust a private doctor?"
This isn't going anywhere because you are not listening.If I gave you a list of three symptoms, could you tell me what disease was the cause? No. So if you went to the doctor with certain symptoms and the
I have to say, that if you look at the vote share, and see how much the conservatives actually get, you will see that Canada is not a right wing country, it is because of our parliamentary system that we have a conservative minority gov't.
If you would now know, about the NDP party now, 2024. NDP party is a real garbage dump
@ulty777 Canadian history goes back farther than 1967
Yeah, 1867
In my dreams are we a more conservative country, maybe compared to like suchafool990 said to Stalin Russia lol It would be to smart to be conservative I guess
@hanksnow82 Fine. I guess private vet care is superior.
no you get less exspesive health care, and you also get better qulaity because the company with the best balance of price, quality and wait times will get the buisness. and I garuntee you that company will have better quality, prices, and wait times than the governemnt could ever provide.
idk what ur talkin bout info, people get misdiagnoased all the time in Canada.
@hanksnow82 Damn! Your dog must have connections!
I think more and more Canadians are becoming Progressive Conservatives.
why would you trust the governemnt to make sure your doctor is a good one, over a private buisness, there is no difference between them. Only diff is, the governemnt doesnt have competition so they can make a profit even if the service is shitty, because they have nobody to compete with.
Private doctors publically funded buddy
That's what Canada does
Ignorant moron showing his ignorance.
Because the government doesn’t restrict you to the choice on a single doctor. Don’t like them? Find a new one.