Re: State of the Union Address I'm not intellectual. I was just being polite to dragon. Usually id probably tell him to piss off in a lot more words. @is Canada socialist though Black-Dragon? They are largely free market. Social programs are paid for by business owners if I'm not mistaken. Which is expensive. Especially for medical insurance. I could be wrong though. I'm not a economics major. It would be hard to debate economics with poaching someone else's works.
Re: State of the Union Address Anyone telling you they are working hard to make your life better is selling something
Re: State of the Union Address In Canada Employment Insurance is funded by both employees (in 2014 1.88% of insurable earnings - set at a maximum of $48,600 in 2014, which in 2014 means a maximum annual EI premium of $913.68) and employers (1.4 times their employees' payments) - the government does not contribute to it. we should note that both premium (rarely) and the maximum insurable earning (yearly) move upward. The latter in 2014 went from $47,400 to $48,600. EI is set up as a separate insurance fund in the budget and it is quite large and healthy. It is by no means a free pass to people staying off work. it is supposed to help out for a limited period while you seek new employment or reskill or go on maternity leave. To qualify, you also have to have worked for a specific # of hours over the previous year. A general point about social net provisions in Canada about Hydra's point, you are quite right that Canada is not socialist. With the exception of our medical insurance (which is anyways often supplemented by private insurance for things like dental and vision benefits) these provisions are intended to provide a bare minimum and to be supplemented by private schemes. For example, historically in Canada there has been very little social housing developed (unlike many parts of Europe) we encouraged home ownership. Government pensions are very low but the government provides incentives to people to set aside yearly tax sheltered and tax reducing contributions for their pension (Registered Retirement Savings Plan - RRSP) and for their children's education (Registered Education Savings Plans - RESP) which are administered by private banks (who get the profits) and so forth. To move to medical insurance, in Canada the various Provinces provide medical care according to the principles laid out in the Federal Canada Health Act (not gonna go into much detail here but basically on the premises of a key Canadian principles that aims at maintaining a similar standard of living throughout the Federation and on constitutional structure the Federal government can impose similar standards across the country). we should say that the CHA does not mandate how health care is delivered as long as it is done respecting the principles. Basically as a Canadian you can travel across the country and walk in a clinic or hospital and get most services for free. In return you pay a medical service plan premium as an individual. Employers do not have to play a cent of their employees' medical insurance but may do offer coverage as part of their benefits package and often offer private insurance medical plans. Premiums are not elevated because it is a nation-wide scheme; they do vary by Province so for example in British Columbia the maximum premium (income above $30K per year) is the following: Single individual: $72/month Family of 2: $130.50/month Family of 3 or more: $144/month There also are premium temporary and regular fee reductions for economic hardship, disability, etc. for example if you earn less that $22k per year you pay nothing. but again it is different by Province - so in Ontario people earning above $200,600.00 per year will pay a maximum of $900 per year in health insurance. Not a terrible deal. Ok. Lecture finished, but this should give people an idea of a market-based model with decent benefits
Re: State of the Union Address i like the Obama's Speech..he has two more years to go sit back and enjoy. He will definitely make some changes
Re: State of the Union Address Guys... If you can't afford the obamacare increase then you are spending money irresponsibly. The amount you PAY is based on the amount you EARN. If you are making more than the mean income, it will increase, if you make less you pay less. The majority of Americans make about $34 000 per year. That means most people are getting better, cheaper insurance and are covered. P.S look at Breaking Bad
Re: State of the Union Address As a Canadian I can say that a real benefit of having subsidized health care is that the government will work towards making it more efficient. In a capitalist health care system, the doctor will try to maximize profits earned from patients. In a universal health care system, doctors will treat the illness/injury. Patients get the proper medicine and care without having to worry about paying thousands of dollars that they don't have.
Re: State of the Union Address This is also real life,a discussion and a social app. It takes time to regen troops and discussions are a thought-provoking way to pass time.
Re: State of the Union Address Some really good points in here for socialized medicine, but profit motive is double speak. Saying that in a free market the only thing companies (in this case doctors) care about is profit is ignorant. It is an argument made up for the masses to spew when they get stuck trying to rationalize consolidating power. A company does have to make a profit to stay in business which is a very good thing! To make a profit they must either provide a product or service superior to their competition. The competition for your business spurs innovation and invention. If the company tries to abuse their clients in a free market the client can choose a different company to do business with. A doctor that continually runs unnecessary tests to bolster their bottom line and increase profits will be dropped by insurance companies and clients as well, thus eliminating him from the marketplace. There are numerous counter measures to the "evil profit motive" built in to a free market. The second and most important thing to consider for those who believe that a free market is inherently evil due to the profit motive is law. Laws against criminal and ethical behavior of companies. Laws passed in a democracy by the people and for the people to protect the consumer. Anti trust laws, epa regulations, insider trading, all need to be monitored as everyone including companies need to have laws in a civilized society. Take driving for instance and assume every person is their own corporation. Their are laws that outline exactly how we can drive our companies. If we violate the law we get tickets, fines, or even our ability to drive revoked. Do some people violate the law and endanger others, of course we are human. The answer is not to take away everyone's right to drive and implement only public transportation that everyone must use. A purely "fair" way to get from one place to another. There has to be common sense used in every discussion about the best way forward. I did not know very much about Canada's health system, but ash you laid it out very nicely. I want everyone to be able to get health care when needed, and for those with pre existing conditions or small incomes to be taken care of I am just always leery of politicians controlled by special interests setting it all up.
Re: State of the Union Address To start, I will agree with you that many doctors are good doctors. I disagree with your points about important types of health care becoming more effective/efficient under a free market capitalist systems. This is especially untrue when it comes to pharmaceuticals and drugs. In Canada, what happens is the government will appoint one manufacturer to make drugs at a low price. If they don't make them cheap, they don't get the contract for next year and someone else will get chosen. This brings prices down for everyone. Another thing that makes health care more effective is that since health care is paid for by the government, the government will actively play a role in trying to make it more efficient. Your driving analogy doesn't really fit correctly into this and I don't really understand what it means. If you mean to say that each individual capitalist hospital is like a car and that universal health care is like a bus, then I think you're wrong. We're not taking away anyone's rights by this. However, I will say this: The flaw in the Canadian system is that people often don't get health care fast enough. There is a shortage of doctors and sometimes people with urgent worries (and lots of money) go to the USA to get faster treatment. The last thing I have to say about efficiency is that per capita, Americans still pay more than Canadians and Britons, mainly due to cheaper medicines produced by centralised production. Edit: this is also why I think that Obama should've went further than Obamacare and instead just modelled something similar to UK or Canada, because of the cheaper medicine.