Heck if he was notgetting paid so much by the his political party maybe he could not afford to go, but since he went, we should have given him a
harder time to re-enter.
A. Lafond, 2010-03-24 10:16:02
The Crusher,
Actually I think it would be a great incentive if politicians were stuck using the programs they force on us.
Do you think they would be allowing long wait times, and refusal of necessary treatment if they themselves had to wait, or got refused treatment?
Clearly many of the politicians today have no interest in using the services they force us to use.
It's everyone from Private clinic Jack Layton, to take a cab, not the TTC Adam Giambrone.
Matt, 2010-03-19 15:34:33
I'd like to see more people suffer the consequences of their own decisions.
It's shocking so many people disagree. I guess taking responsibility for your actions is just an old fashioned value that people don't have today.
Matt, 2010-03-19 10:59:42
World wide health waiver?
I merely think that it should be mandatory for politicians to be made to suffer the consequences of their own decisions.
I think politics as we know it should be abolished.
We may not be ruled by a monarchy any more, but the psuedo democracy bears a striking resemblance to one...
The uber rich deciding what's best for themselves and letting anyone else eat cake.
uplink, 2010-03-17 11:49:36
You sure don't leave much incentive for an older person with health issues but much to offer to enter politics, not when it comes with worldwide health waiver.
The Crusher, 2010-03-16 11:11:42
The Crusher:
Politicians, of all people, know the appearance game.
Politicians (like the Dolt McSquinty) ARE the ones who decide what medical services the public system will cover.
For them to make these decisions and then to go to the US for care is bad optics at best, hypocritical at worst.
I have no issue with anyone going to the US for health care (on their own dime), but politicians are the ones who chose to be politicians, knowing full well that their actions are always going to receive more scrutiny than anyone else.
Therefore in the case of politicians, it is different than someone like your electrical contractor example who goes somewhere outside Canada for health services. Private people such as this should be able to spend their money on whatever they choose and can tell anyone criticizing them for doing so to take a hike.
Not so with politicians, who chose life in the limelight. They know very well that going outside the public system will be perceived as elitist.
This is one of the reasons why I think the rich should be ineligible to hold public office.
uplink, 2010-03-15 14:36:11
The Crusher, 2010-03-14 10:55:35 Posted:
"Cause I don't think there is a politician sitting in the house today that actually had a hand in setting up the public health care system some people seem to despise so much."
Naw, they are all reposing in the SENATE by now.
I stated earlier that anyone should attempt to get health care wherever they may with the caveat that they are actually going to PAY for it.
I know you didn't mention pensions, I did because they are considered income the proof being they are subject to INCOME TAX which for us normal mortals starts at $37,XXX (FOR pensions as sole income, last time I looked-2008) and is referred to sometimes as a "clawback".
In any case if the average income is about $40K and you say you make $90K and can't afford to trpase to the U.S. for a SERIOUS operation then such services are well out of reach of the average Canadian.
Of course, a more important statistic would be the "median" income above and below which 50% (minus 1) of Canadians earn. Average income may be distorted by individuals pulling down outrageous salaries.
Finally, more Canadians could afford foreign private health care if they hadn't blown 30-40 years of "descretionary dollars" buying useless crap.
Not_the_Daddy, 2010-03-15 13:42:23
The Crusher,
It's quite simple.
We want politicians to be subject to the systems they promote and operate.
They have a serious responsibility to the people of Canada.
Rather than work on the problems, they work against the solution, and attack those who would fix things.
Then when the system here in Canada remains broken, due to THEIR actions, they run off to other countries to escape it.
This significant failure to do their job must stop. Holding them to their stated position is a pretty reasonable demand.
If public only health care is good enough for the Canadian public, it's good enough for you.
If it isn't (which is obviously why they're choosing private) then the Canadian public should have access too.
When i say Canadians should have access, I mean IN CANADA.
Matt, 2010-03-15 07:59:46
True enough Uplink, if you take the average of all working stiffs across the nation, maybe 36K is the right figure, thus making politicians in general well above average. Point conceded K?
But I don't thing I'm too far off base in suggesting the middle class is average too (thus the tag "middle"). And withput splitting hairs on the top and bottom cutoff points, and pensions notwithstanding, that can put many politicians (Boobs and other leaches, I mean lifers, excluded) within or just a cut above middle class.
I guess the point is that a persons income or career alone doesn't translate directly into ones ability to afford whatever, so many other factors come into play. But affordability of medical care outside Canada is not limited to the top 1-2% of wage earners. I have no idea how far down it reaches, but I feel it is far enough to make politicians quite a minority. But no one says boo when the electrical contractor down the street, of which there are thousands alone across Canada, pops down to the states for a quick repair. But oh, a politician of any stripe or colour, and whether or not your've even voived an opinion on health care, well your not allowed to go anywhere....even if yesterday you were that same electrical contractor. That doesn't make sense to me.
Dalton said it nicely in the e-health scandal. It is the minister who currently sits that takes the fall, while the minister who created the scandal but now happens to sit in another chair, gets off scott free. The British way perhaps, but that's justice? If we're going to play it like that we may as well hand over the keys of the country to the Indians and pay for the sins of our forefathers, even if they weren't really considered sins then but just the normal practice of a less enlghtened world. Cause I don't think there is a politician sitting in the house today that actually had a hand in setting up the public health care system some people seem to despise so much.
The Crusher, 2010-03-14 10:55:35
The Crusher,
Well I'd say that any individual who makes double the average family income is "high income".
I honestly don't even know how to debate this with you. You don't even have a grasp of the term average.
Matt, 2010-03-14 06:23:24
Is it wrong for Canadian politicians to seek medical care in the U.S.?
harder time to re-enter.
A. Lafond, 2010-03-24 10:16:02
Actually I think it would be a great incentive if politicians were stuck using the programs they force on us.
Do you think they would be allowing long wait times, and refusal of necessary treatment if they themselves had to wait, or got refused treatment?
Clearly many of the politicians today have no interest in using the services they force us to use.
It's everyone from Private clinic Jack Layton, to take a cab, not the TTC Adam Giambrone.
Matt, 2010-03-19 15:34:33
It's shocking so many people disagree. I guess taking responsibility for your actions is just an old fashioned value that people don't have today.
Matt, 2010-03-19 10:59:42
I merely think that it should be mandatory for politicians to be made to suffer the consequences of their own decisions.
I think politics as we know it should be abolished.
We may not be ruled by a monarchy any more, but the psuedo democracy bears a striking resemblance to one...
The uber rich deciding what's best for themselves and letting anyone else eat cake.
uplink, 2010-03-17 11:49:36
The Crusher, 2010-03-16 11:11:42
Politicians, of all people, know the appearance game.
Politicians (like the Dolt McSquinty) ARE the ones who decide what medical services the public system will cover.
For them to make these decisions and then to go to the US for care is bad optics at best, hypocritical at worst.
I have no issue with anyone going to the US for health care (on their own dime), but politicians are the ones who chose to be politicians, knowing full well that their actions are always going to receive more scrutiny than anyone else.
Therefore in the case of politicians, it is different than someone like your electrical contractor example who goes somewhere outside Canada for health services. Private people such as this should be able to spend their money on whatever they choose and can tell anyone criticizing them for doing so to take a hike.
Not so with politicians, who chose life in the limelight. They know very well that going outside the public system will be perceived as elitist.
This is one of the reasons why I think the rich should be ineligible to hold public office.
uplink, 2010-03-15 14:36:11
"Cause I don't think there is a politician sitting in the house today that actually had a hand in setting up the public health care system some people seem to despise so much."
Naw, they are all reposing in the SENATE by now.
I stated earlier that anyone should attempt to get health care wherever they may with the caveat that they are actually going to PAY for it.
I know you didn't mention pensions, I did because they are considered income the proof being they are subject to INCOME TAX which for us normal mortals starts at $37,XXX (FOR pensions as sole income, last time I looked-2008) and is referred to sometimes as a "clawback".
In any case if the average income is about $40K and you say you make $90K and can't afford to trpase to the U.S. for a SERIOUS operation then such services are well out of reach of the average Canadian.
Of course, a more important statistic would be the "median" income above and below which 50% (minus 1) of Canadians earn. Average income may be distorted by individuals pulling down outrageous salaries.
Finally, more Canadians could afford foreign private health care if they hadn't blown 30-40 years of "descretionary dollars" buying useless crap.
Not_the_Daddy, 2010-03-15 13:42:23
It's quite simple.
We want politicians to be subject to the systems they promote and operate.
They have a serious responsibility to the people of Canada.
Rather than work on the problems, they work against the solution, and attack those who would fix things.
Then when the system here in Canada remains broken, due to THEIR actions, they run off to other countries to escape it.
This significant failure to do their job must stop. Holding them to their stated position is a pretty reasonable demand.
If public only health care is good enough for the Canadian public, it's good enough for you.
If it isn't (which is obviously why they're choosing private) then the Canadian public should have access too.
When i say Canadians should have access, I mean IN CANADA.
Matt, 2010-03-15 07:59:46
But I don't thing I'm too far off base in suggesting the middle class is average too (thus the tag "middle"). And withput splitting hairs on the top and bottom cutoff points, and pensions notwithstanding, that can put many politicians (Boobs and other leaches, I mean lifers, excluded) within or just a cut above middle class.
I guess the point is that a persons income or career alone doesn't translate directly into ones ability to afford whatever, so many other factors come into play. But affordability of medical care outside Canada is not limited to the top 1-2% of wage earners. I have no idea how far down it reaches, but I feel it is far enough to make politicians quite a minority. But no one says boo when the electrical contractor down the street, of which there are thousands alone across Canada, pops down to the states for a quick repair. But oh, a politician of any stripe or colour, and whether or not your've even voived an opinion on health care, well your not allowed to go anywhere....even if yesterday you were that same electrical contractor. That doesn't make sense to me.
Dalton said it nicely in the e-health scandal. It is the minister who currently sits that takes the fall, while the minister who created the scandal but now happens to sit in another chair, gets off scott free. The British way perhaps, but that's justice? If we're going to play it like that we may as well hand over the keys of the country to the Indians and pay for the sins of our forefathers, even if they weren't really considered sins then but just the normal practice of a less enlghtened world. Cause I don't think there is a politician sitting in the house today that actually had a hand in setting up the public health care system some people seem to despise so much.
The Crusher, 2010-03-14 10:55:35
Well I'd say that any individual who makes double the average family income is "high income".
I honestly don't even know how to debate this with you. You don't even have a grasp of the term average.
Matt, 2010-03-14 06:23:24