Canada's Private Clinics Surge as Public System Falters

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


But of course, you have a men's magazine on your side.

I should concede, right?

No, I've got every objective measure so far on my side.

I've got deaths as a tracer, I've got a quote saying 2 to 5 times for hospital admission (not visit, which falls under the choice of the injured).

You've got self-reporting and doctor's visits. Which is the whole point.

[Sikander]

IIRC in the U.S. women account for 2$ of health care spending for every 1$ men spend. I have no reason to doubt it, women have babies, live longer and unlike me go to the emergency room when they break bones.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by notyoueither

There's a point, and a good reason not to completely privatise the system. That may be why nobody is saying go totally private.

The real question is whether the current problems would be best served by raising taxes, or by allowing private insurance.

It's odd that people say that the state cannot afford the current healthcare system. Canada, like all other western nations, is richer than it has ever been. The obvious explanation is that people want to have their cake and eat it too. They are spending too much on consumer goods and not enough on healthcare.

The problem is caused by certain unscrupulous politicians who promise unnecessary tax cuts. Everyone would like a tax cut, but no-one wants a cut in services, so they all hope that someone else will end up paying for the shortfall and the health system suffers. The more sophisticated form of this involves politicians who claim that cutting taxes will cause growth and enable us to have our cake and eat it too. I've heard the same thing for over 20 years now, and it hasn't really worked.

The lie that informs this heresy is that markets are necessarily more efficient than collective spending. The truth is that they generally are, except when it comes to things like healthcare and education. So siphoning money away from collective spending to private spending just causes problems rather than solving them. Pointing to growth in GDP is pointless, since every decent economist acknowledges that GDP is actively biased against measuring the value of public spending.

It's all rather depressing, but unless someone can clearly demonstrate how Canadians will end up paying less, and not fall into the trap of paying more, like the Americans do, I tend to think that reform would be at best a waste of time, and at worst a public menace.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


No, I've got every objective measure so far on my side.

I've got deaths as a tracer, I've got a quote saying 2 to 5 times for hospital admission (not visit, which falls under the choice of the injured).

You've got self-reporting and doctor's visits. Which is the whole point.

Funny, but hospitalization rates for injury seem to mirror StasCan 'self reporting' numbers.

http://dissemination.statcan.ca/english/freepub/82-221-XIE/tables/htmltables/c1t02.htm

Table 1.2:
Injury hospitalization, age-standardized rate per 100,000 population, by sex, Canada, provinces and health regions with populations greater than 100,000, 1997/98

       Total Male Female
Ontario 543   603  467

Your turn to punt, sir.

[notyoueither]

Oh, and don't forget,

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Admission to hospital is the gold standard.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Agathon

The real question is whether the current problems would be best served by raising taxes, or by allowing private insurance.

It's odd that people say that the state cannot afford the current healthcare system. Canada, like all other western nations, is richer than it has ever been. The obvious explanation is that people want to have their cake and eat it too. They are spending too much on consumer goods and not enough on healthcare.

And then that growth in healthcare expenditures are outstripping growth in the economy, and show every sign of accelerating due to advances in technology (keep people alive longer with expensive interventions) and the simple fact that our population is growing older (would cost more even with no new advances). Combine the two for the dynamite that is buried under our health care systems, whether publically or privately financed.

The problem is caused by certain unscrupulous politicians who promise unnecessary tax cuts. Everyone would like a tax cut, but no-one wants a cut in services, so they all hope that someone else will end up paying for the shortfall and the health system suffers. The more sophisticated form of this involves politicians who claim that cutting taxes will cause growth and enable us to have our cake and eat it too. I've heard the same thing for over 20 years now, and it hasn't really worked.

No. The problem is caused by clever humans figuring out how to prolong lives with ever more expensive interventions.

It doesn't matter what you do to grow the tax base if healthcare expenditures outgrow even the best model, whatever model you may choose as best.

The lie that informs this heresy is that markets are necessarily more efficient than collective spending. The truth is that they generally are, except when it comes to things like healthcare and education. So siphoning money away from collective spending to private spending just causes problems rather than solving them. Pointing to growth in GDP is pointless, since every decent economist acknowledges that GDP is actively biased against measuring the value of public spending.

You are asking an exemption for this one segment from what is in all other respects a market economy.

Healthcare costs are exploding. Complaining about the reality of our economic system is not going to ease the crisis, and no, socialised programmes are not immune from the effects of the larger economic system they exist within.

It's all rather depressing, but unless someone can clearly demonstrate how Canadians will end up paying less, and not fall into the trap of paying more, like the Americans do, I tend to think that reform would be at best a waste of time, and at worst a public menace.

You have to start looking beyond Canuck-Yank health dualism, for a start.

[Agathon]

You are asking an exemption for this one segment from what is in all other respects a market economy.

Actually, take the percentage of tax Canadians pay and you will see that it's about 2/3-3/5 a market economy.

Healthcare costs are exploding. Complaining about the reality of our economic system is not going to ease the crisis, and no, socialised programmes are not immune from the effects of the larger economic system they exist within.

We can more than afford it.

[notyoueither]

Sophistry on taxation aside, we still exist in a market economy, and it's not just a market of Canada.

And we ill afford it. The more we pump into healthcare, the more we neglect other factors of health like education and other social programs that promote a better society and a population better able to look after its own health.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by notyoueither
And then that growth in healthcare expenditures are outstripping growth in the economy, and show every sign of accelerating due to advances in technology

Wrong again Charlie.

In 1994, Canada's health care costs were 9.9 percent of GDP. In 2003, Canadian health care spending was the same percentage of GDP, 9.9 per cent.

So health care spending has not outstripped economic growth.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/9/34969633.pdf

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:Zy9BidY4FHsJ:collection.nlc-bnc.ca/100/201/300/cdn_medical_association/cmaj/vol-160/issue-12/1730.htm+health+care+costs+canada+per+capita+oecd&hl=en&gl=ca&ct=clnk&cd=8&lr=lang_en

[notyoueither]

1994 was around when cutbacks started. 1998-9 was when spending started to increase again. We are now back where we were in '94, and the costs are escalating due to technology and aging population.

But of course, you are free to contradict 13 health ministers and 13 premiers, and 13 finance minsters, Tinkai.

[notyoueither]

Or, we were in 2003. Since then we have had another three years of increases in cost ot treatment and increasing age of population.

[Tingkai]

You can talk all you want, but that doesn't change the facts that show you are wrong.

Health care spending has not outstripped the economic growth.

One of the reasons why your assumptions are wrong is that you incorrectly assume that new technology leads to higher costs. In fact, technological innovations can reduce costs.

[notyoueither]

'The facts' as you see them amount to Romanow. An ideologically bent excercise in maintaining the status quo.

'The facts' as I see them are trends in the the industrialised world, and the warnings we are receiving about trends in health expenditures other than those found in Roy's la la land.

You keep yours. I'll keep mine.

[St Leo]

Originally posted by Wezil
What did Martin do to prevent it from happening? Went to a private clinic himself according to media reports.

Which is why Martin is a hypocritical scumbag who deserved to lose. I hope the Liberals get someone worthwhile as their next leader, but their delegate-driven convention system with tightly controlled memberships seems to be stacked against improvement.

What did Layton do to prevent it from happening? Went to a private clinic himself according to media reports.

He went to the non-profit Shouldice Hospice. All hernia procedures in Toronto are done there transparently through medicare. Its technically private nature is non-obvious, because everything is covered by our public health insurance.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by St Leo

He went to the non-profit Shouldice Hospice. All hernia procedures in Toronto are done there transparently through medicare. Its technically private nature is non-obvious, because everything is covered by our public health insurance.

Strange. Everyone who has been there knew it was private - except Jack. Not very observant is he? His claim that he did not know it was private is pure unadulterated BS. Jack was a Toronto councillor for years. Shouldice is well known in T.O. and elsewhere but Jack didn't know? Pull the other one Jack, it has bells on it.

Yes, Shouldice is private and works within the public system. It will be beautiful when the healthcare debate in this country finally moves forward from the Cuban and North Korean models.