Quote:
Originally Posted by maskedmelon
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Anyone have thoughts on either of my two conundra? They really apply more broadly to social aid and redistribution in general, not just medicine. Looking for alternative views, because there are a lot of people who support redistribution on moral grounds, rational grounds or both. How do you get passed those question? Have they occurred to you? Do you ignore them? Do you care about humanity as a whole? How do you reconcile the conflicts?
|
I live in Canada (same town as Yumyums in fact). All people have the right to be put in a position to be successful. For those who are not able to be (whether for mental health or whatever reason) a civlized society bears that burden and tries to help them become productive, or their children. Assigning services to people based on their worth is discriminatory and opens the door to racism, profiling etc.
My country has a single payor health care system with universal access. Doctors are independant contractors who have a collective agreement with their province that sets rates at a sustainable level. Despite what you might hear from the Right, the Canadian system works - not flawlessly. Just like democracy, it's not the best system, it's just better than all the other options. There's all the usual fuckups that happen in any system, but my personal experience with it has been extremely positive. People get the care they need when they need it. Does someone line up for a diagnostic scan for something not life threatening? Yup. Does someone with cancer/CI/stroke etc. go to the front of the line? Hell yes. Thats how it /should/ work.
My Dad had a mild heart attack, was in the hospital Wednesday, and was out with a couple of stents in the following Friday and placed on a rigorous rehab program. All zero cost, very competent, and very fast.
Single payor systems just work, bitches.
Regards,
Mg