On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:26:20 -0800, Jim wrote:

Canuck57 wrote:
Jim wrote:
Listening to the anti abortion people protest any health plan that
would possibly include abortion, I was wondering what they do in other
countries to appease these opposite beliefs.

From:
http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/postionpaper...lly-Funded.PDF


The politicizing of abortion led to the current situation of one-half
of all abortions in Canada being performed at mostly private clinics.
Abortion clinics opened in the first place because hospitals were
failing to provide adequate services on a fair and equal basis for
Canadian women.

Hard to read that document and not see the logic.

Canadian liberals are a dogmatic bunch. They don't believe in freedom
of choice in much of anything from abortion, taxation, etc. They are
the first to impose their often myopic views on others.

As for our hospitals, the government services are not that good up here.
You should take note as at the rate the government is going, they smell
health care as a source of general revenue. It is coming to a hospital
near you in the USA.

Despite what you might hear, medical services aren't that good down in
the good Old USA either.

I had a sudden hearing loss issue that wasn't treated even though I was
in the doctor's office the next day. You have one week for treatment,
then it's permanent.

The doctors (several of them) diagnosed it as long term hearing loss,
which isn't treatable. Eventually United Health intervened and I got
treatment. Five weeks too late.

"Gee we are sorry," was all I got from the initial doctors.

My lesson was that I should have had hearing tests as part of my regular
physical so that there would be no argument about long term versus
sudden hearing loss.

I had the tests, but they chose, initially, to ignore them as they
weren't THEIR tests. Eventually someone looked at them and said this
isn't long term hearing loss.

Now I know something that's pretty damn important.

Oh, they already know about profit based health care. Trust me.

How many doctors did you see in that week? Did they all give you
hearing exams and examine your ears? If you have only one week to
correct the problem, why get any treatment five weeks later?

In any case, denigrating the entire spectrum of medical services in
the United States because of a hearing problem you had seems somewhat
harsh, wouldn't you think?
--

John H