titles Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 Oh, the delicate dance between the fed and provinces. I processed the information, but I'm not sure how much I really understood. What are your thoughts? Is this really the most significant policy change to Canadian health care since Tommy Douglas? Big statement. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/01/25/shaun-francis-freeing-the-provinces-from-a-made-in-ottawa-health-care-solution/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I just love the pro-Conservative slant that the National Post puts on everything they write. It completely negates any credibility the paper could have. Aren't you in favour of privatized health care? Edit: I agree with you on their pro-conservative slants, however, there is no such thing as unbiased media any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 I read the article and sounds like gibberish where the author is promoting his point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 So is "6% our-final-offer" a big deal? Is innovation around the corner now? Can we anticipate improvement? Is this a step in the right direction? I remember reading a think tank article way back about how this "innovation" (feds backing off, setting a funding cap) made the administration of social assistance better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 What's funny, I keep reading the same old garbage that I've read for the past 8 years and where it really hits home is when I am doing research on various system issues. The reports, articles and journals I read from 2, 3, 5, 8 years ago bring up much of the same issues that are being talked about today. Provinces have had plenty of time to get their houses in order and while improvements are being made, the same issues are being talked about. Well, the message is loud and clear: provinces have til 2016 to get costs under control because your 6% annual increases are going bye bye. Time to get after it but I suspect in 5 and 10 years from now we'll still be hearing the same things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bambi Posted January 25, 2012 Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 The players will change though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2012 What's funny, I keep reading the same old garbage that I've read for the past 8 years and where it really hits home is when I am doing research on various system issues. The reports, articles and journals I read from 2, 3, 5, 8 years ago bring up much of the same issues that are being talked about today. Examples please and thank you! What issues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 examples!!!!! you're welcome "Among the long list of services not covered are: out-of-hospital drugs, psychological counselling, community mental health services, nutrition advice, fertility treatment, ambulance services, addiction treatment, long-term care, eye care and dental care." http://www.ottawacitizen.com/health/Health+service+delisting+coming+Ontario+minister+says/6053073/story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apache Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 for what reasons? i've gone to mexico and europe to get treatment from the semi-private/public health care... if i stayed here i'd probably still be hearing my rare condition was psychogenic or some sort of conversion disorder, at 4 month intervals, i'm educated, value my health, and enjoy the freedom to decide what interventions or diagnosis i want, when i want... instead of listening to patronizing idiots declare what's apropriate treatment for me, and what behind the times tests to use, while billing the federal purse at liberty, irregardless of competance. the cloak defence of the entirity of "canadian" public health care and the uncriticizable, almost religious devotion to what's at best, a flawed system is almost reminiscint of talking to religious zealots (i remember questioning a friends of medicare worker, and her eventually snapping, even though i was moderate on the issue, it seems like we're all supposed to swallow the current system without any kind of discussion or debate, that sound's pretty uncanadian, for the people who actually believe we have free liberty, anyways. I read the article and sounds like gibberish where the author is promoting his point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apache Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 BANG! When I was on Keppra and Naltrexone for my neurovisual stuff, I shelled out 4000 dollars a year on medications, with full insurance. I think it's an atrocity psychologists are not covered, or dieticians for that matter, they have the potential to save the system tons of money, what about chiropractice, physiotherapy, orthotics and podiatric care, dental care, weight loss medications, vision care... the only ones who get a cut of the pie are MD's... I hope nurses and psychologists (most likely two), can get their foot in the government gold mine (more nurse anesthesia and please, prescribing psychologists, psychiatry is an archaic relic, that needs to do a swing dance with dentistry, which belongs in medicine to far greater extent)... I'll quit whatever job I have, get a PhD in clinical psych, and practice outside of the intimidatory tactics of the medical lobby. examples!!!!! you're welcome "Among the long list of services not covered are: out-of-hospital drugs, psychological counselling, community mental health services, nutrition advice, fertility treatment, ambulance services, addiction treatment, long-term care, eye care and dental care." http://www.ottawacitizen.com/health/Health+service+delisting+coming+Ontario+minister+says/6053073/story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 I'll quit whatever job I have, get a PhD in clinical psych, and practice outside of the intimidatory tactics of the medical lobby. Yeah, lobbies are problematic. Unfortunately the vehicle that turns ideas into public policy is of course open to corruption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLengr Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 BANG! When I was on Keppra and Naltrexone for my neurovisual stuff, I shelled out 4000 dollars a year on medications, with full insurance. I think it's an atrocity psychologists are not covered, or dieticians for that matter, they have the potential to save the system tons of money, what about chiropractice, physiotherapy, orthotics and podiatric care, dental care, weight loss medications, vision care... the only ones who get a cut of the pie are MD's... I hope nurses and psychologists (most likely two), can get their foot in the government gold mine (more nurse anesthesia and please, prescribing psychologists, psychiatry is an archaic relic, that needs to do a swing dance with dentistry, which belongs in medicine to far greater extent)... I'll quit whatever job I have, get a PhD in clinical psych, and practice outside of the intimidatory tactics of the medical lobby. Some of the stuff you listed is covered in many provinces. PT and dietitians being the most obvious although there may be access issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 From what I can tell, it's a bit piecemeal. Some provinces give physio, others don't. Universality of same services across jurisdictions has been identified as an issue. I would hope that the "most significant health care policy change since Tommy Douglas" will address universality, though I'm not sure how a 6% federal cap will. I guess the provinces will need to collaborate! Working in teams, so easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Romanow/Wall's two cents... http://ca.news.yahoo.com/video/cbc-25709718/premiers-on-health-care-27910568.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 If this reduction in size of government were to occur, maybe we'd have a chance to improve our monetary policy, which is the root of our economic problems. Thank you for sharing your insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titles Posted January 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Sorry, if my post came across sarcastic. I actually meant "thank you" because it was a good explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.