Windsor Star: Threat across border our Achilles heel in pandemic

The many Canadian working in Detroit's health care system [and the few Michiganders working in Windsor] is creating controversy in Windsor and Canada as seen in the Windsor Star Op-ed.

The two-way gist of this piece is a call for those Canadian medical personal to stay in Windsor so as not to become carriers from the now hot spot of Detroit [it is noted that the City of Detroit alone has more cases than Ontario at this point and of Windsor CoV cases "almost one-third of the confirmed cases here involve health care workers, and more than half travel to the U.S."]. The second point made is that they are needed in Windsor for its increasing case load.

But this begs a "fair weather friends" question. If workers flee, or are forbidden to cross and work, will any hospital be inclined to hire Canadians in the future if this shows unreliability now when they are most needed?

Also mentioned as a supporting argument is that any Canadians entering Canada are required to be quarantined for 14 Days. I know. I have Windsor friends who returned from Indonesia and are stuck in Vancouver.

The solution being offered is to set up housing on both sides.

Quote:

---

It’s a unique and tricky dilemma. The United States is Canada’s best and longest ally and its neighbour. And here on the border, not only our economies but our people are inextricably linked. We benefit immensely from our proximity to Detroit. We can not leave them when they need us most.

But we must protect our community. We need to reduce the number of people who cross daily. Are they all critical? Can part-time work be consolidated into full-time?

Windsor Regional Hospital will no longer have staff who work both here and in Michigan.

It also offers apartments for staff from outside this area. Four staff from Michigan are using them. They’ve temporarily moved to Windsor.

Windsor is even offering hotel rooms for hospital staff here who are concerned about infecting their families. More than 30 staff are using the rooms.

---

Yet another unforeseen consequence of this pandemic that now threatens to damage our relations with our international metropolis partners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

The many Canadian working in Detroit's health care system [and the few Michiganders working in Windsor] is creating controversy in Windsor and Canada as seen in the Windsor Star Op-ed.

The two-way gist of this piece is a call for those Canadian medical personal to stay in Windsor so as not to become carriers from the now hot spot of Detroit [it is noted that the City of Detroit alone has more cases than Ontario at this point and of Windsor CoV cases "almost one-third of the confirmed cases here involve health care workers, and more than half travel to the U.S."]. The second point made is that they are needed in Windsor for its increasing case load.

But this begs a "fair weather friends" question. If workers flee, or are forbidden to cross and work, will any hospital be inclined to hire Canadians in the future if this shows unreliability now when they are most needed?

Also mentioned as a supporting argument is that any Canadians entering Canada are required to be quarantined for 14 Days. I know. I have Windsor friends who returned from Indonesia and are stuck in Vancouver.

The solution being offered is to set up housing on both sides.



Yet another unforeseen consequence of this pandemic that now threatens to damage our relations with our international metropolis partners.

---

I hope that most of this is just a media storm. Prefer to think that adversity will make the relationship stronger. Did you hear the story on As It Happens [[CBC) last night. I only caught a part of it, but heartwarming.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/winds...roit-1.5523418

I've seen many more stories along these lines:

https://windsorstar.com/opinion/colu...e-time-of-need

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 401don

I've seen many more stories along these lines:

https://windsorstar.com/opinion/colu...e-time-of-need

---

Bravo to Windsor Star columnist Gord Henderson in chastising both Windsor MP's and for sticking up for the D in the grave time of need. The bravery of Windsor health care workers in Detroit hospitals harkens back to 1967 when Windsor sent fire fighters into the fury and gunfire of the 1967 riot.

"Rookie Liberal MP Irek Kusmierczyk added this week that all options are being considered, including restricting cross-border travel for health-care employees, to prevent further spread, but he at least had the decency to concede further restrictions on the 1,600 Windsor cross-border health-care workers could seriously harm Detroit’s healthcare system.

"Seriously harm? One of my relatives, working with coronavirus patients in a Detroit hospital I’m not at liberty to name, cut to the chase: “You would basically be sentencing people to death. People would die because of that and there would be blood on those Canadian politicians’ hands."

I'm all in favor of steps to protect them by all means necessary but to have drawn salaries and benefits for years and then abandon their fellow hospital workers, not to mention the patients, in this dark hour would stain them with with cowardice and greed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

Bravo to Windsor Star columnist Gord Henderson in chastising both Windsor MP's and for sticking up for the D in the grave time of need. The bravery of Windsor health care workers in Detroit hospitals harkens back to 1967 when Windsor sent fire fighters into the fury and gunfire of the 1967 riot.

"Rookie Liberal MP Irek Kusmierczyk added this week that all options are being considered, including restricting cross-border travel for health-care employees, to prevent further spread, but he at least had the decency to concede further restrictions on the 1,600 Windsor cross-border health-care workers could seriously harm Detroit’s healthcare system.

"Seriously harm? One of my relatives, working with coronavirus patients in a Detroit hospital I’m not at liberty to name, cut to the chase: “You would basically be sentencing people to death. People would die because of that and there would be blood on those Canadian politicians’ hands."

I'm all in favor of steps to protect them by all means necessary but to have drawn salaries and benefits for years and then abandon their fellow hospital workers, not to mention the patients, in this dark hour would stain them with with cowardice and greed.

---

I'm certain it's not going to happen because Trudeau wouldn't even use the threat of it when Trump held up the 3M supplies. However, I don't think it would "stain them with cowardice and greed" if it was mandated by politicians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 401don

I'm certain it's not going to happen because Trudeau wouldn't even use the threat of it when Trump held up the 3M supplies. However, I don't think it would "stain them with cowardice and greed" if it was mandated by politicians.

---

Which is why no politician would do it. They would look like the cowards and have to take responsibility for the resulting job losses that would likely occur.

Through this site I understand the special relationship,but why does Detroit an American city depend on across the border healthcare workers in something as critical as this?

This virus is but 1 of a 100 different emergency scenarios and you find out the weak links at that time,do they work cheaper or are US healthcare workers banned from hospitals?

If it is true that the Detroit healthcare system will collapse without cross border workers,then there is a bigger problem then with what is being faced.

Everybody knew,but it seems like nobody had or has any kind of contingency plans,even worse after the terrorist attacks showed us anything can happen at anytime.

What happens if the next flu season is worse then the past?

Its been going on for decades, a shortage of qualified nurses in Detroit, a large inventory of well trained nurses in Windsor / Essex County, as well as great pay in U.S. dollars for them. hospitals have long desired the training and work abilities of these nurses. In recent surveys the vast majority of Canadian nurses, despite Trumps dissing of shipping masks to Canada causing great anger to Canadians, said their first priority is their patients, who badly need them and will continue to commute. They could be absorbed in Canada now, but they don't want to turn their backs on the patients who need them now more than ever.Thankfully, they get it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

Through this site I understand the special relationship,but why does Detroit an American city depend on across the border healthcare workers in something as critical as this?

This virus is but 1 of a 100 different emergency scenarios and you find out the weak links at that time,do they work cheaper or are US healthcare workers banned from hospitals?

If it is true that the Detroit healthcare system will collapse without cross border workers,then there is a bigger problem then with what is being faced.

Everybody knew,but it seems like nobody had or has any kind of contingency plans,even worse after the terrorist attacks showed us anything can happen at anytime.

What happens if the next flu season is worse then the past?

---

Many other states pay a lot more for nurses than Michigan. That's why there's a shortage. Top 3 average pay states for nurses.

1. California: $106,865
2. Oregon: $104,844
3. Nevada: $104,167

Nevada also has no state income taxes unlike Michigan and ends up being #1 for after tax pay.

Michigan is #42 at $76,161.

The after tax pay sucks in Michigan for Americans. RNs in Ontario make about the same number as in Michigan, but in CDN money so now you're talking $100K CDN after conversion.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.co...or-nurses.html

Here's how the 50 states ranked in annual average salaries for full-time nurses, according to the survey:

1. California: $106,865
2. Oregon: $104,844
3. Nevada: $104,167
4. Arizona: $102,348
5. Utah: $101,905
6. Hawaii: $101,786
7. South Dakota: $100,000
8. New York: $98,869
9. Massachusetts: $98,596
10. Minnesota: $97,143
11. Colorado: $95,357
12. Connecticut: $95,062
13. Maryland: $94,585
14. Delaware: $93,800
15. Wisconsin: $92,264
16. Missouri: $91,667
17. Washington: $91,061
18. Alaska: $90,556
19. Mississippi: $90,541
20. New Jersey: $89,298
21. Illinois: $89,073
22. New Hampshire: $88,955
23. Rhode Island: $88,929
24. Louisiana: $88,267
25. Wyoming: $87,037
26. Texas: $86,250
27. Oklahoma: $86,000
28. Idaho: $85,200
29. Virginia: $85,000
30. Tennessee: $84,085
31. Indiana: $83,968
32. Vermont: $83,810
33. Georgia: $83,520
34. New Mexico: $82,987
35. Pennsylvania: $81,623
36. Maine: $80,800
37. Arkansas: $78,205
38. North Dakota: $77,273
39. South Carolina: $77,006
40. Kentucky: $76,833
41. Florida: $76,253
42. Michigan: $76,161
43. North Carolina: $73,858
44. Alabama: $73,510
45. Montana: $71,864
46. Ohio: $69,556
47. Kansas: $68,621
48. Nebraska: $67,907
49. Iowa: $66,238
50. West Virginia: $63,416

A state like California is like ten times more expensive to live, that's not an apples to apples comparison at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Metro25

A state like California is like ten times more expensive to live, that's not an apples to apples comparison at all.

---

No sh*t Sherlock. There are 41 other states that pay more than Michigan. Michigan is near the bottom for pay.

Nevada also has no state income taxes unlike Michigan and ends up being #1 for after tax pay. After tax pay in Nevada is around 50% higher than Michigan. You can also rent an apartment in Las Vegas for $600/mth. It's not expensive to live there. There's your apples to apples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetBill

Its been going on for decades, a shortage of qualified nurses in Detroit, a large inventory of well trained nurses in Windsor / Essex County, as well as great pay in U.S. dollars for them. hospitals have long desired the training and work abilities of these nurses. In recent surveys the vast majority of Canadian nurses, despite Trumps dissing of shipping masks to Canada causing great anger to Canadians, said their first priority is their patients, who badly need them and will continue to commute. They could be absorbed in Canada now, but they don't want to turn their backs on the patients who need them now more than ever.Thankfully, they get it.

---

Detroit also is the closest metropolitan for these nurses to work at level 1 trauma centers. So you are always going to have some nurses come across the river to work if they desire that type of job while living in Windsor.

Is the term” Threat across border” just a racist code-word for “those black people in Detroit”? If the Oakland Press used the term “threat across 8 Mile Road” I suspect it would be considered hate speech and a racist dog-whistle in disguise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Is the term” Threat across border” just a racist code-word for “those black people in Detroit”? If the Oakland Press used the term “threat across 8 Mile Road” I suspect it would be considered hate speech and a racist dog-whistle in disguise.

---

FFS it most certainly is not.

What it is........is a reference to the fact Detroit is a 'hot zone'; and the rate of infection and mortality far exceeds the Ontario and Canada numbers.

The worry is importation of more Covid via the nurses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Is the term” Threat across border” just a racist code-word for “those black people in Detroit”? If the Oakland Press used the term “threat across 8 Mile Road” I suspect it would be considered hate speech and a racist dog-whistle in disguise.

---

Wow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

Is the term” Threat across border” just a racist code-word for “those black people in Detroit”? If the Oakland Press used the term “threat across 8 Mile Road” I suspect it would be considered hate speech and a racist dog-whistle in disguise.

---

I don't think you're wrong here, this definitely has those sorts of undertones to it. It's an irresponsible headline for sure.

The elephant in the room here that nobody’s mentioned is medical insurance and access to medical services. Even though they have so called free medical it is tough to get good treatment in Windsor. It’s a win win for them along with higher pay US dollars and access to our medical!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheels

The elephant in the room here that nobody’s mentioned is medical insurance and access to medical services. Even though they have so called free medical it is tough to get good treatment in Windsor. It’s a win win for them along with higher pay US dollars and access to our medical!

---

Ok, I've had enough of this misinformed bullshit.

Go have a look at the Newsweek list of the best hospitals in the world........several are in Ontario,

3 in the top 30 in the world; only 1 from Michigan.

Toronto General #4 in the world.......

U. Mich, Ann-Arbor #15

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

Ok, I've had enough of this misinformed bullshit.

Go have a look at the Newsweek list of the best hospitals in the world........several are in Ontario,

3 in the top 30 in the world; only 1 from Michigan.

Toronto General #4 in the world.......

U. Mich, Ann-Arbor #15

---

https://www.newsweek.com/best-hospitals-2020

So, looking @ the list, the first 50, 3 are in Toronto. Windsor has none listed. What would make more sense, drive 206 miles to Toronto, or cross the border to the Medical Center, where there are specialized hospitals to deal with specialized issues?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

https://www.newsweek.com/best-hospitals-2020

So, looking @ the list, the first 50, 3 are in Toronto. Windsor has none listed. What would make more sense, drive 206 miles to Toronto, or cross the border to the Medical Center, where there are specialized hospitals to deal with specialized issues?

---

Did you note that no Detroit-based hospital made the list?

Windsor does have a large hospital, it has level-2 Trauma Care, Neo-Natal ICU, Cancer Care, Regional Stroke Centre, CT/MRI/PET Scanners.

There are no procedures for which you cross the border routinely.

Level 1 Trauma care may, though, there is level 1 Trauma care in London, ON and in Hamilton, ON as well as Toronto, so you would only be sent to Detroit, by land ambulance, if it were life/death; and there wasn't time to get you to London/Toronto by chopper.

If, you need a procedure for which you get an appointment, and that care isn't in Windsor, you would be sent to London or Toronto.

That's how the system works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

Did you note that no Detroit-based hospital made the list?

Windsor does have a large hospital, it has level-2 Trauma Care, Neo-Natal ICU, Cancer Care, Regional Stroke Centre, CT/MRI/PET Scanners.

There are no procedures for which you cross the border routinely.

Level 1 Trauma care may, though, there is level 1 Trauma care in London, ON and in Hamilton, ON as well as Toronto, so you would only be sent to Detroit, by land ambulance, if it were life/death; and there wasn't time to get you to London/Toronto by chopper.

If, you need a procedure for which you get an appointment, and that care isn't in Windsor, you would be sent to London or Toronto.

That's how the system works.

---

And by your estimates, how long is that wait? If your medical coverage is in the US, as in the cases of the nurses, you just drive over the border. It also makes it convenient for subsequent follow-up visits. You also may have noticed there are 5 hospitals listed in the US, 3 rated higher than the 3 in Toronto. I'm going on go with Wheels post. Because the nurses are making better wages, and do have more of a choice in their medical coverage, it is a "win-win" for them. Thanx for their being here and their service.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheels

The elephant in the room here that nobody’s mentioned is medical insurance and access to medical services. Even though they have so called free medical it is tough to get good treatment in Windsor. It’s a win win for them along with higher pay US dollars and access to our medical!

---

So why do Canadians have longer life expectancy [by over three years] and lower infant mortality rates than the US?

How many Canadians have been bankrupted by medical bills vs. the US?

Speaking of things medical, Canadian and the border... nice sense of humor by the prosecutor.

Canadian Nurse Busted with 150 Pounds of marijuana at Detroit Border.

Quote:

---

She showed up at the border in scrubs and a lab coat, the feds say, then got busted with a trunk full of weed.

A Canadian nurse has been charged with sneaking more than 150 pounds of marijuana into the U.S. by using her medical credentials - including a work badge from Henry Ford Hospital - to cross the border into Detroit, which is only open to essential travel because of the COVID-19 crisis.

As the top prosecutor put it, smuggling 143 vacuum sealed bags of marijuana into the country “simply isn't essential.”

Terri Leanne Maxwell, 48, a registered nurse from Amherstburg, Ontario, was charged Thursday with conspiracy, possession with intent to distribute, and importing.
https://freep-mi.newsmemory.com?publ...840a5d_134360c

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

Speaking of things medical, Canadian and the border... nice sense of humor by the prosecutor.

Canadian Nurse Busted with 150 Pounds of marijuana at Detroit Border.

---

It's a shame one person is going to screw up border entry procedure for all essential personnel over this.

Cheapskate should have spent a few bucks for a Nexus card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 401don

Cheapskate should have spent a few bucks for a Nexus card.

---

She couldn't get a Nexus card because from the article, "According to court records, in 2007, she was cited by CBP for possessing 5.8 grams of marijuana at the border."

I have a Nexus card and know many others from the yacht club who have one and border guards. Any issues with the CBP, even forgetting to declare a $5 knick knack from Walmart at the border and getting caught, forget it, you'll never get a Nexus card again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

So why do Canadians have longer life expectancy [by over three years] and lower infant mortality rates than the US?
...

---

Single stats like this mislead, I believe. Yes, Canadians have longer life expectancy. There's a non-medical reason for this. Lies in demographics and accident rates. I've seen stats that say if you make it to 40, your Life Expectancy is about the same. But that's just my hand-selected stat to refute your point. Truth is that there are differences between the two systems.

Canada values centralized control. In many provinces, a doctor can't open a clinic and bill someone for a service. The province has monopoly on billing. So when I get a colonoscopy in the States, I wait 4 days and get excellent care in an outpatient setting in and out in an hour. Meanwhile my relatives in British Columbia wait 5 months for an appointment, and get treated in an expensive hospital environment where it took half a day and a trip into town to where the province runs their colonoscopy department. One isn't necessary better than the other at care, but they are different.

The posters comment was that Windsor nurses have great options. Ontario provincial medical care, but when they need private care they can take their much higher US nurse wages and buy it -- an option not so available to most Canadians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

How many Canadians have been bankrupted by medical bills vs. the US?

---

No argument from me here. The US medical billing world is a complete steaming mess. Needs to be fixed, mostly be eliminating the tax deductions for health insurance and what President Trump tried to do with requiring fee disclosure [[that was struck down by the courts in their lust to get Trump more than concern for citizenry.)

btw, AFAIK, there's little/no pharmacy coverage in Canada [[except seniors and illegals? and in-hospital care). So death by inability to afford your meds is possible in Canada, AFAIK.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

So when I get a colonoscopy in the States, I wait 4 days and get excellent care in an outpatient setting in and out in an hour. Meanwhile my relatives in British Columbia wait 5 months for an appointment, and get treated in an expensive hospital environment where it took half a day and a trip into town to where the province runs their colonoscopy department. One isn't necessary better than the other at care, but they are different.

---

I'm shocked to hear this in British Columbia. Here in Ontario I have several private clinics to choose from within a couple miles of my house for a colonoscopy. I had the same one week appt. and excellent care.

I doubt I could get an appointment with my PCP in under four days. Any procedure? There never seem to be appointments available less than two months in the future. I suppose if i had Bill Gates' [[or even Jimmy Kimmel's) money, and was able to pay list price out of my pocket, I could get in right away, but that's not for us mere mortals [[kind of like Republican tax cuts - they're only for people whose AGI includes the word "million").

Forget Canada for a minute - life expectancy in the U.S. is the lowest in the entire developed world. Now I'll grant some of this is because of our wide-open spaces, where the nearest hospital might be two hours away, but still, we [[either directly or through lower salaries and wages) pay huge amounts for health care that's not all that great. The best U.S. hospitals are among the best in the world, but on the whole the U.S. healthcare system is at best mediocre.

“Smoking weed and coronavirus: Even occasional use raises risk of Covid-19 complications
By Sandee LaMotte, CNN
Updated 8:22 AM ET, Fri April 10, 2020”

“If you're smoking weed to ease your stress during the coronavirus pandemic, experts say it's time to think twice.
“Smoking marijuana, even occasionally, can increase your risk for more severe complications from Covid-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.”

How many hospital beds are being occupied by otherwise healthy patients who contracted the virus because of their marijuana addiction??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CassTechGrad

“Smoking weed and coronavirus: Even occasional use raises risk of Covid-19 complications
By Sandee LaMotte, CNN
Updated 8:22 AM ET, Fri April 10, 2020”

“If you're smoking weed to ease your stress during the coronavirus pandemic, experts say it's time to think twice.
“Smoking marijuana, even occasionally, can increase your risk for more severe complications from Covid-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.”

How many hospital beds are being occupied by otherwise healthy patients who contracted the virus because of their marijuana addiction??

---

I would also love to know the percentage of people over/under age 60 who end up on ventilators/die that are smokers. My sister and brother-in-law are both smokers over 60 and don't think their immune systems are much different than non-smokers.

Regarding Canadian health care what this pandemic exposes in glaring contrast is the failure of the American Lose-your-job-Lose-your-healthcare system.

Forget Covid19 for a minute and think about millions who have suddenly lost their jobs and coverage [on top of the 27 million+ already uncovered].

What happens to them if they have a heart attack, or just a broken arm, or an EMS-delivered emergency room visit that easily top $10,000?

With 40% of America said to be in crisis if they get bill over $500 the result will be a flood of bankruptcies.

On the other hand are the many who do not seek healthcare out of fear of costs allowing preventive illnesses to grow to more expensive ones, or worse yet avoidable fatalities. Hence our abysmal outcomes in spite spending nearly twice or more than advanced nations with national healthcare for all.

The chief whine I hear about Canadian health care is how people have to wait in line for procedures.

Well guess what? At least there is a line--always a line whether you lose your job or not. Here there is none.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

Regarding Canadian health care what this pandemic exposes in glaring contrast is the failure of the American Lose-your-job-Lose-your-healthcare system.

Forget Covid19 for a minute and think about millions who have suddenly lost their jobs and coverage [on top of the 27 million+ already uncovered].

What happens to them if they have a heart attack, or just a broken arm, or an EMS-delivered emergency room visit that easily top $10,000?

With 40% of America said to be in crisis if they get bill over $500 the result will be a flood of bankruptcies.

On the other hand are the many who do not seek healthcare out of fear of costs allowing preventive illnesses to grow to more expensive ones, or worse yet avoidable fatalities. Hence our abysmal outcomes in spite spending nearly twice or more than advanced nations with national healthcare for all.

The chief whine I hear about Canadian health care is how people have to wait in line for procedures.

Well guess what? At least there is a line--always a line whether you lose your job or not. Here there is none.

---

I hear that too Lowell when I talk with people when I visit Florida. You really only wait for minor procedures. In the past 10 years I've had a heart attack and my wife had an aneurysm just behind her eye. I was rushed to the hospital, stent placed and no damage. My wife had 3 surgeries and is fine. They even flew a new non-FDA approved stent [[the stent itself was 40K) in from California along with a surgeon from the U.S. manufacturer to observe her procedure. We never waited an extra minute.
Now for my sore tennis elbow I waited about 6 months to see an orthopedic surgeon but eventually it got fixed. It's so funny these guys in Florida I play tennis with saying "I don't know how you can live with that socialized medicine." I try to explain that the U.S. is pretty much the only country in the world without it but to no avail.
One other thing, part of the reason we wait to see specialists is because so many have gone to the U.S. for the higher pay. If the U.S. had gov't healthcare probably the pay would level somewhat and fewer Canadians would leave.

That is a state by state decision,every year the federal government allocates billions of dollars in healthcare funds for the state oriented healthcare options.

Many states do have an income based healthcare option,both in state and county based clinics and Medicaid plans.

ninsured immigrants who are unauthorized likely receive about $4.6 billion in health services paid for by federal taxes, $2.8 billion in health services financed by state and local taxpayers, another $3.0 bankrolled through “cost-shifting” i.e., higher payments by insured patients to cover hospital uncompensated care losses, and roughly $1.5 billion in physician charity care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

Ok, I've had enough of this misinformed bullshit.

Go have a look at the Newsweek list of the best hospitals in the world........several are in Ontario,

3 in the top 30 in the world; only 1 from Michigan.

Toronto General #4 in the world.......

U. Mich, Ann-Arbor #15

---

Ok I can tell you I am not misinformed or bullshitting! I spent nearly a year in and out of Henry Ford hospital and I know at least 30 nurses from Windsor. I have heard many stories of the struggle to get basic medical service in Windsor!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheels

Ok I can tell you I am not misinformed or bullshitting! I spent nearly a year in and out of Henry Ford hospital and I know at least 30 nurses from Windsor. I have heard many stories of the struggle to get basic medical service in Windsor!

---

That is called an 'anecdote'.

You could, instead, consult this site, which shows the waits times for most procedures, at hospitals throughout Ontario.

https://www.hqontario.ca/System-Perf...and-Procedures

You search by procedure type; then you can filter for priority level and by hospital or City.

Priority levels are 1,2,3 and 4.

One is generally not shown, as that typically means emergent, level 2 is just below that, 3 is urgent and 4 is non-urgent.

You'll see a fairly wide range of procedures available in Windsor, and most have reasonable wait times. Some could certainly be shorter, particularly for level 4 patients [[non-urgent).

But in the Ontario system, nothing prevents you from getting a referral to any doctor in Ontario, choosing your own family physician or accessing a walk-in clinic; or going out of town to a different hospital.

Though high-demand hospitals may decline a referral if they feel that a patient could be better served elsewhere. [[non-emergent, obviously)

It is certainly true, in the U.S. that if you have money and/or connections and you're willing and able to travel, that you can get non-urgent care more quickly.

But that is offset by all those who lack money, connections, and ability to travel getting stuck w/whatever care they can afford or their insurance will cover; which is often no more timely than what you'd see in Canada; and sometimes, you just don't get care at all.

I spend a lot of time with Canadians when I’m in Florida. Heath care is a big topic of conversation. Most are from Toronto or close by, in Pompano Beach there is also a huge amount of people from Montreal, some are from Winnipeg. Most are satisfied or very satisfied with their heath care coverage. Also I would like to point out most seem to harbor some resentment towards Americans. It’s underneath the surface, but it’s definitely there.

^ I do not notice resentment,more so a sense of entitlement and feeling of superiority,the resentment probably comes from the unwillingness of others to bow in their presence.

The ones that filter down that are not from the major cities are pretty cool though and actually know how to drive fast in the fast lane.

Its really no different then in the states.

The US is considered a leader in acute care.

^A leader in acute care--if you can get it and if you can get it without being bankrupted because your coverage got dropped.

The American health care system is an over-priced embarrassment.

If Canada's health care system is so terrible why is there no major party calling for its abolition? Any politician who did would be kicked so hard out of office he wouldn't know what hit him.

Ditto for any American politician who tried to abolish Medicare.

Canada’s largest province is projected to see health-care costs soar to the point where they will consume 80 percent of the entire provincial budget by 2030, up from 46 percent in 2010.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/...utionary-tale/

the question remains,how sustainable is it and the provinces that see a reduction in tax revenue with job loss,who makes up the difference?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

Canada’s largest province is projected to see health-care costs soar to the point where they will consume 80 percent of the entire provincial budget by 2030, up from 46 percent in 2010.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/...utionary-tale/

the question remains,how sustainable is it and the provinces that see a reduction in tax revenue with job loss,who makes up the difference?

---

That simply is not happening, will not happen, there is no evidence to support that, period full-stop.

The TD report, which is from 2010, assumed increases in costs that have never materialized.

Appropriate actions were taken to restrain cost growth, which has generally been held to under 3% per year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by softailrider

I spend a lot of time with Canadians when I’m in Florida. Heath care is a big topic of conversation. Most are from Toronto or close by, in Pompano Beach there is also a huge amount of people from Montreal, some are from Winnipeg. Most are satisfied or very satisfied with their heath care coverage. Also I would like to point out most seem to harbor some resentment towards Americans. It’s underneath the surface, but it’s definitely there.

---

On healthcare; satisfaction will obviously vary with experience.

Money still matters too.

Generally speaking government healthcare [[which varies by province) covers almost all hospital-based services, and most outpatient prescriptions for seniors, or those on social assistance.

But generally omits most dental care, most prescriptions for working age adults, most physiotherapy and most non-emergent mental healthcare.

So there are gaps here and there.

Wait times are mostly reasonable but vary by province and procedure and one can always find some unacceptable waits for non-emergent care.

But overall, healthcare related debt is not a thing in Canada and no one fails to see a doctor or get a required surgery or chemo etc. for lack of funds/coverage/debt worries.

******

On resentment.

Obviously individual Canadians as with Americans will vary.

But overall, I wouldn't say Canadians resent Americans.

I would say its quite common to express disbelief at the election of Trump; the lack of a proper system of health insurance in the U.S. or proper gun control.

People respect its another country, and you can all make your own choices; but that doesn't mean we can rationally understand those choices.

I would add, that American exceptionalism does provoke a negative response in Canadians.

This often seems to surprise my American friends.

Let me offer, if you went to another country and were constantly told how awesome it was, how much better it was than the U.S. even in ways you knew weren't true............how would you feel about that?

That's exactly how Canadians feel when they hear [[some) Americans put down Canada or any other country.

With great respect, The U.S. is in many ways a very awesome country with some very bright and wonderful people, and many great achievements and beautiful spots.

But it certainly isn't the best at everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

That simply is not happening, will not happen, there is no evidence to support that, period full-stop.

The TD report, which is from 2010, assumed increases in costs that have never materialized.

Appropriate actions were taken to restrain cost growth, which has generally been held to under 3% per year.

---

So are you saying that the media printed false information,or TD is considered a sketchy institution when it comes to financial reports?

They are after all a numbers crunching institution and not assumptions..

I knew it was from 2010,I left the door open for you to post the 2019 numbers that show the difference in the 9 years.

How exactly do you restrain cost growth?

If you have X amount of people putting into a system and have a drop off of those who cannot afford through job loss or bad economy and the ratio of those putting into the system is greater then those unable to.

The cities here that tried to implement their form of “socialized”
health care with hospitals ended up collapsing.

Charity hospital in New Orleans,closed and never re-opened,the hospital in Queens that recently became an epicenter because of restrained cost growth.

The UKs system operates on a fine line and is over 40 full hospitals short of being able to serve the needs,it does not take much to overwhelm the system.

I agree that the cost per person is cheaper in Canada but it is catching up pretty fast.

When that hospital receives the notice that it is nearing the line of funding and needs to reduce services,while retaining the same level of care for the same level of those needing that care.

Keystone pipe line is shelved
The oil sands fields are devastated by the drop in prices and higher cost to transport the product.
Auto factory’s are closing

That equals billions in revenue loss along with 10s of thousands more entering into the non paid sector that are still going to need the same amount of care.

How do they cut costs?

I know the answer and you sugar coated it by posting

Appropriate actions are being taken to restrain cost growth.

You cannot change the fixed infrastructure costs you can only alter the number of non fixed costs by limiting services.

Which brings us back to the theory of the age group of 15 to 50 are considered worth investing more health care into verses the age group 51 to 100 because they are no longer considered that productive to society as an investment.

But yes you can call it,appropriate actions being taken to restrain cost growth.

Richard... certainly you have heard of Americans in border states going to Canada to get prescriptions refilled [[at least before the pandemic). They seem to have better controls on cost increases than Americans can get [[our pharma lobbyists see to that). :[[

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

So are you saying that the media printed false information,or TD is considered a sketchy institution when it comes to financial reports?

---

No, TD is fine.

They had an agenda; to scare politicians in to addressing healthcare costs that were rising faster than inflation, around 6% per year back then.

They took those numbers, assumed they would never come down, that with an aging population they would in fact rise, and they assumed no productivity gains, no innovations, no wage restraint and relatively low government revenue growth, which was easy to do having just come out of the 2008-09 financial crisis.

They got what they wanted, government acted. The story changed.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Quote:

---

How exactly do you restrain cost growth?

---

The first thing you do is restrain wage growth, and discretionary hospital spending [[non-medical).

Hospital executive compensation was capped, a tighter lid was kept on capital projects, and a harder line taken in billing fee negotiations with doctors.

The second thing you do is review structural costs...........so you change the way you calculate a fair price when granting a patent for a prescription drug.

Previously, Canada had a formula that considered the average price of several other countries for prescriptions.

That group included the U.S. which is a high-price outlier. The decision was made to eliminate the U.S. from the reference price group, lowering the cost for a new drug.

Also decided was that the provinces would negotiate with drug companies together, instead of one by by one.

So all ten provinces started using their combined buying power to drive down the cost of commonly used drugs.

Third, you evaluate whether there are cheaper ways to do things.

There was innovation in several areas, notably, flu shots and some vaccinations can now be delivered by pharmacists instead of doctors.

Midwives can now deliver [[if a woman wishes it) a low-risk birth instead of a doctor.

We also merged several hospitals together to slim administrative costs.

There was a move to evaluate whether some patients could recover from certain surgeries at home sooner, if given the right support.

Money was spent to send a nurse to someone's house 1-2x daily, to loan out equipment that could monitor vitals to patients and to have virtual check-ins with doctors.

That allowed some patients to go home 1-3 days sooner after a procedure; and the system spends $200 a day keeping them home, instead of a $1,100 a day in an acute care hospital.

I'll now ignore the rest of your incoherent rant.

When that hospital receives the notice that it is nearing the line of funding and needs to reduce services,while retaining the same level of care for the same level of those needing that care.

Are you serious? They just slip into discount mode with no reduction in service. We need to apply that to all services!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheels

When that hospital receives the notice that it is nearing the line of funding and needs to reduce services,while retaining the same level of care for the same level of those needing that care.

Are you serious? They just slip into discount mode with no reduction in service. We need to apply that to all services!

---

How it actually works.........

Hospitals in Ontario are independently run.

Their budgets are composed in several different ways.

Revenues come from - Base Allocation

This is the number the government notifies hospitals they have ahead of the fiscal year to cover, core, fixed-costs.

So routine building maintenance, janitorial, the lab, the c-suite/admin. etc.

As well as performance spend, this may apply to certain elective procedures, so, for instance a hospital in a small rural area, may have dedicated funds to staff their MRI 40 hours per week.

There is always someone in the hospital [[X-ray tech) who can run it for the E.R.; but the appointments would be limited to the agreed hours.

The next layer of funding is the funding that covers all other medical services.

Here the government is simply the insurer, and directly pays fee-for-service for all medically necessary care, period.

Third, the hospital will have non-government revenues, including retail [[many hospitals have stores and a food court in them), as well as parking revenues, and ancillary services, such as TV and Phone. They are also free to and do sell services into the international market, several countries pay our top hospitals to act as consultants designing their new hospitals, that is done for profit.

Fourth, they fundraise, every hospital is a registered charity and takes donations, runs lotteries and the like.

Finally, while hospitals are strongly discouraged from running deficits, they are in fact able to do so.

So hospitals which do run into an unexpected hiccup near fiscal year end do not stop providing care, they file a request for more funds from government, and if necessary, bridge that with debt.

Medical care decisions for priority 1, 2 or 3 patients [[anyone deemed urgent) is not deferred for money, ever. Some minor waits may occur for structural reasons from time to time.

Priority 4 patients still are never 'delayed' to save money, rather general fiscal restraint may mean that if there's no compelling reason you need that knee-surgery right this moment, then you may wait a bit longer.

But no doctor is laid off, and no one specifically delays a particular patient, rather what may happen is that additional O/R time isn't approved [[beyond base levels), or the overtime budget for elective procedures gets capped, and that may mean fewer slots for that surgery. Since all patients are triaged, lower-priority patients may find the wait a bit longer.

It occurs to me you might actually want to see what a real hospital system budget looks like.

So I'll post the simplified one for UHN. That's the University Health Network, affliated with the University of Toronto, and includes Toronto General Hospital among many others.

Attachment 40106


You'll notice that revenue from government is only slightly over 1/2 of the overall budget.

Also, the hospital ran a surplus of 16M for the year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don K

...snip...
Forget Canada for a minute - life expectancy in the U.S. is the lowest in the entire developed world. Now I'll grant some of this is because of our wide-open spaces, where the nearest hospital might be two hours away, but still, we [[either directly or through lower salaries and wages) pay huge amounts for health care that's not all that great. The best U.S. hospitals are among the best in the world, but on the whole the U.S. healthcare system is at best mediocre.

---

I'm not expert here, but I understand three things:

1) Our life expectancy stats are significantly lowered by our inclusion of most to all infant deaths -- where much of the rest of the world does not count most infant deaths.

2) Our stats for life expectancy once you are adult are comparable to the developed world.

3) The 'life expectancy' stat is a war horse trotted out to argue that our healthcare is substandard. Yes, the financial part of our healthcare is a 'hot mess'. But the actual healthcare is excellent by international developed-world standards.

These are just my prejudices, based on what I've heard. If you listen only to CNN or Fox News -- you may have a different impression. I'm open to hearing from someone better informed than I am.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

But the actual healthcare is excellent by international developed-world standards.

---

But can you say the country's healthcare is excellent is part of the population is excluded from it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 401don

But can you say the country's healthcare is excellent is part of the population is excluded from it?

---

So Why is it necessary to provide both public and private paid options,it could be argued that the countries providing that option those who cannot afford the private option are also excluded?

If you are receiving the same level of care,the private option would not exist because everybody would just use the public option that they already pay for in taxes,so they are not only paying for a service that they are not using they are paying an increased cost for the private option.

Canada's system is open to those who pay into it and to those who cannot afford to pay into it.

What is the cost difference between those who pay into It verses the private sector costs compared to the US private sector healthcare?

Private Clinics

In addition to public health care providers such as primary care doctors and hospitals, many private clinics offering specialized services also operate in Canada.
Under federal law, private clinics are not legally allowed to provide services covered by the Canada Health Act. Regardless of this legal issue, many do offer such services.
The advantage of private clinics is that they typically offer services with reduced wait times compared to the public health care system. For example, obtaining an MRI scan in a hospital could require a waiting period of months, whereas it could be obtained much faster in a private clinic.
Private clinics are a subject of controversy, as some feel that their existence unbalances the health care system and favors treatments to those with higher incomes.
Costs in private clinics are usually covered by private insurance policies, which will typically pay around 80% of the costs.

http://www.canadian-healthcare.org/page6.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

So Why is it necessary to provide both public and private paid options,it could be argued that the countries providing that option those who cannot afford the private option are also excluded?

If you are receiving the same level of care,the private option would not exist because everybody would just use the public option that they already pay for in taxes,so they are not only paying for a service that they are not using they are paying an increased cost for the private option.

Canada's system is open to those who pay into it and to those who cannot afford to pay into it.

What is the cost difference between those who pay into It verses the private sector costs compared to the US private sector healthcare?

Private Clinics

In addition to public health care providers such as primary care doctors and hospitals, many private clinics offering specialized services also operate in Canada.
Under federal law, private clinics are not legally allowed to provide services covered by the Canada Health Act. Regardless of this legal issue, many do offer such services.
The advantage of private clinics is that they typically offer services with reduced wait times compared to the public health care system. For example, obtaining an MRI scan in a hospital could require a waiting period of months, whereas it could be obtained much faster in a private clinic.
Private clinics are a subject of controversy, as some feel that their existence unbalances the health care system and favors treatments to those with higher incomes.
Costs in private clinics are usually covered by private insurance policies, which will typically pay around 80% of the costs.

http://www.canadian-healthcare.org/page6.html

---

That is an obscure and dated website.

Its also misleading at best.

I have no issue showing that except I could spend all my time here disproving the nonsense you dig up.

I have better things to do.

Yes there are some private clinics doing some things, which vary by province, but they are not a material part of the system.

Here, of course I mean private in the for-profit sense or the competes w/the public system sense.

Since as explained repeatedly all medical practice in Canada is private; its just publicly insured/funded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

I'm not expert here, but I understand three things:

1) Our life expectancy stats are significantly lowered by our inclusion of most to all infant deaths -- where much of the rest of the world does not count most infant deaths.

2) Our stats for life expectancy once you are adult are comparable to the developed world.

3) The 'life expectancy' stat is a war horse trotted out to argue that our healthcare is substandard. Yes, the financial part of our healthcare is a 'hot mess'. But the actual healthcare is excellent by international developed-world standards.

These are just my prejudices, based on what I've heard. If you listen only to CNN or Fox News -- you may have a different impression. I'm open to hearing from someone better informed than I am.

---

Attachment 40111

That comes from here: https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/...ity-index-2016

Also have a look at this report:

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/sit...01-30-2020.pdf

The US fares well in Breast Cancer survival rates, but is dead last in cervical cancer survival rates.

Also deaths considered preventable through healthcare the U.S. was again worst. Not close, more than 50% higher than Canada.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

That is an obscure and dated website.

Its also misleading at best.

I have no issue showing that except I could spend all my time here disproving the nonsense you dig up.

I have better things to do.

Yes there are some private clinics doing some things, which vary by province, but they are not a material part of the system.

Here, of course I mean private in the for-profit sense or the competes w/the public system sense.

Since as explained repeatedly all medical practice in Canada is private; its just publicly insured/funded.

---

The study, by University of British Columbia and University of Toronto researchers, shows that overall Canadians paid $6.8 billion more in premiums than they received in benefits in 2011.
Approximately 60 per cent of Canadians have private health insurance. Typically obtained as a benefit of employment or purchased by individuals, private health insurance usually covers prescription drugs, dental services and eye care costs not paid by public health care.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-...th-canada.html

Are you saying that both university of British Columbia and the university of Toronto are misleading and providing false information?

I can email them for clarification.

If 60% of Canadians have private health insurance and it is also publicly funded as you say?

Instead of saying I am spewing nonsense how about you use your superior knowledge and explain to me the concept of public funded,private healthcare??

You are trying to sell and support a system by saying shut the *uck up and trust me,I know what is best,

I guess if you tell me that the University of Toronto and the University of British Columbia are low rate institutions then I would understand the level of knowledge a bit more and accept that they are dime store learning institutions.

So is the private healthcare system funded by the public healthcare system in Canada? As you posted.

Yes or no ?

Does the word,private,in the Canadian medical field have a different meaning then in the United States?

If you have better things to do then to explain the system why are you even bothering to get involved in the discussion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

The study, by University of British Columbia and University of Toronto researchers, shows that overall Canadians paid $6.8 billion more in premiums than they received in benefits in 2011.
Approximately 60 per cent of Canadians have private health insurance. Typically obtained as a benefit of employment or purchased by individuals, private health insurance usually covers prescription drugs, dental services and eye care costs not paid by public health care.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-...th-canada.html

Are you saying that both university of British Columbia and the university of Toronto are misleading and providing false information?

I can email them for clarification.

If 60% of Canadians have private health insurance and it is also publicly funded as you say?

Instead of saying I am spewing nonsense how about you use your superior knowledge and explain to me the concept of public funded,private healthcare??

You are trying to sell and support a system by saying shut the *uck up and trust me,I know what is best,

I guess if you tell me that the University of Toronto and the University of British Columbia are low rate institutions then I would understand the level of knowledge a bit more and accept that they are dime store learning institutions.

So is the private healthcare system funded by the public healthcare system in Canada?

Yes or no ?

Does the word,private,in the Canadian medical field have a different meaning then in the United States?

If you have better things to do then to explain the system why are you even bothering to get involved in the discussion?

---

That's a different link.

You're a @#$#@

And yes dental is largely uninsured within the public system as I've said in posts time and again.

As are most, out-patient prescriptions if you're a working age adult [[seniors are covered, as are many youth)

That wasn't what you were on about; you were implying something else.

Now just be quiet! You're so full of erroneous information and you just don't care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

That's a different link.

You're a @#$#@

And yes dental is largely uninsured within the public system as I've said in posts time and again.

As are most, out-patient prescriptions if you're a working age adult [[seniors are covered, as are many youth)

That wasn't what you were on about; you were implying something else.

Now just be quiet! You're so full of erroneous information and you just don't care.

---

Thank you for answering the questions in an adult like manner.

It would have been much more informative to just say

Canadian private practices are forbidden to provide procedures that conflict with the public healthcare plan,it was done this way in order to ensure basic coverage no matter what your income is.

Why was it set up that way?

Millionaires will stand in line with paupers.

Private insurance is offered for everything else that is not covered under the basic plan provided by the public plan.

Or you can go across the border

When people support healthcare they always use a multitude of countries as an example of public healthcare,when the truth is every country that provides a national heath plan uses a different system.

Many systems do use a two tiered system,this is what we offer as a basic plan if you want a higher level or faster rate of care you can also purchase true private heath care and pay out of pocket.

That is the system the UK uses along with many others.

Canadas system is one of the only that actually forbids true private healthcare as an alternative option and views it as a competitor.

There is no public healthcare system in the world that provides prompt service and they are all based on waiting in line.

The question remains is when you have an illness that is deemed at the time not an emergency but turns into one while waiting for the two month appointment,one that once addressed has now turned into a life long illness,does it not cost the system more in long term care?

Anyways,when we discuss a public healthcare for all it cannot be a generalized picture based on some other country it has to be tailored to this country with its population and distance.

We cannot say we want to be like Sweden,Canada,UK,etc because none of those are the same.

In the UK,Italy,Canada and some others it is the government that actually controls the level of healthcare for any given region,simply by the allocation of funds.They decide what is deemed to expensive to continue with.

IMO, the issue of smoke and the lungs is that much of it is latent damage not noticed, or unacknowledged until you get into a situation where your lungs have to fight! Then you have no leg to stand on - or more specifically less optimum lung 'tissue' to fight with - against an infection [[pneumonia) etc.

I'm by no means judging your family, but as a former cigarette smoker [[I do miss 'em sometimes) it took my quitting to notice how shallow my breathing had become and how even my sense of taste had become altered. That stupid 'smokers-lifestyle' cough that was waved-off was gone too!--https://bonesmart.org/forum/jofox_images/sunsmijcj.gif--

So while not directly tied to immunity, healthy lungs do a body well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 401don

I would also love to know the percentage of people over/under age 60 who end up on ventilators/die that are smokers. My sister and brother-in-law are both smokers over 60 and don't think their immune systems are much different than non-smokers.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

Attachment 40111
...
Also have a look at this report:

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/sit...01-30-2020.pdf

The US fares well in Breast Cancer survival rates, but is dead last in cervical cancer survival rates.

Also deaths considered preventable through healthcare the U.S. was again worst. Not close, more than 50% higher than Canada.

---

Sure. The Commonwealth Report must come from the Commonwealth -- like England, Australia, Canada. So I read through the charts. Sure does look like the US sucks in many ways.

Preventable deaths [[Amenable to Healthcare) was pretty interesting. In 2006, the ratio of best [[Swiss) to worst [[USA) was 149/90, or about 65% worse. In 2016, the ratio is 112/54 making it 107% worse. So in 10 years, the USA/Swiss ratio more than DOUBLED? That seemed a bit doubtful. So time to look into Commonwealth Fund a bit.

Turns out its not related to the Commonwealth Nations. And the first item in its website menu is 'PRESS ROOM'. So we know who their audience is.

Their mission statement from 'ABOUT' says;

Quote:

---

Throughout its history and in keeping with its donors’ intent, the Commonwealth Fund has sought to be a catalyst for change by identifying promising practices and contributing to solutions that could help the United States achieve a high-performance health system.

---

Not about statistics. They say so.

Quote:

---

---

Quote:

---

The foundation’s communications efforts have enabled it to share knowledge and experience and reach influential audiences able to push forward the necessary agenda for achieving a high-performance health system.

---

Advocacy news. And proud of it.

Doesn't make them wrong of course.

But once I read 'vulnerable population' in their mission, context was clear.

The UK wasn't well regarded in this piece of journalism either. So the most socialist healthcare in the OECD shares some of our pain it seems.

Everybody in health care sucks in some ways that can make ugly charts. Sure the USA sucks. And so does Canada. Just in different ways.

So what was this thread about again? Oh yea. Sure, Detroit is a problem for Windsor. And Ontario is a problem for Canada. And Quebec is a problem for Ontario. Lots of problems. Demonizing the USA doesn't help most problems. Get to work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Sure. The Commonwealth Report must come from the Commonwealth -- like England, Australia, Canada. So I read through the charts. Sure does look like the US sucks in many ways.

Preventable deaths [[Amenable to Healthcare) was pretty interesting. In 2006, the ratio of best [[Swiss) to worst [[USA) was 149/90, or about 65% worse. In 2016, the ratio is 112/54 making it 107% worse. So in 10 years, the USA/Swiss ratio more than DOUBLED? That seemed a bit doubtful. So time to look into Commonwealth Fund a bit.

Turns out its not related to the Commonwealth Nations. And the first item in its website menu is 'PRESS ROOM'. So we know who their audience is.

Their mission statement from 'ABOUT' says;


Not about statistics. They say so.

Advocacy news. And proud of it.

Doesn't make them wrong of course.

But once I read 'vulnerable population' in their mission, context was clear.

The UK wasn't well regarded in this piece of journalism either. So the most socialist healthcare in the OECD shares some of our pain it seems.

Everybody in health care sucks in some ways that can make ugly charts. Sure the USA sucks. And so does Canada. Just in different ways.

So what was this thread about again? Oh yea. Sure, Detroit is a problem for Windsor. And Ontario is a problem for Canada. And Quebec is a problem for Ontario. Lots of problems. Demonizing the USA doesn't help most problems. Get to work.

---

1) Yes this thread is off-track; but the first thing was the need to address nonsense that the headline was somehow racist.

2) Then we had more Canada-bashing, with misinformed nonsense.

Not my choice on either account; I only saw fit to eviscerate those bad posts.

3) Finally, Mr. Mouch........you have a long history of first disavowing any and all studies that show you're wrong in almost every view you hold.

You don't do this by disproving a single word in them.

Instead, when you're clearly shown that you're wrong, and that the studies are sound.....you throw up your hands and go....well it doesn't really matter does it, cause we all have our flaws.

Which is really your excuse for doing nothing for your community, your kids, you country, your species/planet.

If you have nothing useful to contribute; and you don't, please stop pretending.

Your posts are marginally more articulate and cogent that Richard's but they ultimately arrive at the same place.

"I've got mine, @#$# everyone else"

"I might be wrong, but so are you, I'm pretty sure, and I'm sticking to that".

That's why you have a region beset with problems worse than others.

Because given a chance to change for the better; you either argue there is no better; or there is but who cares.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

1) Yes this thread is off-track; but the first thing was the need to address nonsense that the headline was somehow racist.

2) Then we had more Canada-bashing, with misinformed nonsense.

Not my choice on either account; I only saw fit to eviscerate those bad posts.

3) Finally, Mr. Mouch........you have a long history of first disavowing any and all studies that show you're wrong in almost every view you hold.

You don't do this by disproving a single word in them.

Instead, when you're clearly shown that you're wrong, and that the studies are sound.....you throw up your hands and go....well it doesn't really matter does it, cause we all have our flaws.

Which is really your excuse for doing nothing for your community, your kids, you country, your species/planet.

If you have nothing useful to contribute; and you don't, please stop pretending.

Your posts are marginally more articulate and cogent that Richard's but they ultimately arrive at the same place.

"I've got mine, @#$# everyone else"

"I might be wrong, but so are you, I'm pretty sure, and I'm sticking to that".

That's why you have a region beset with problems worse than others.

Because given a chance to change for the better; you either argue there is no better; or there is but who cares.

---

Don't forget the "Because I'm the Mom, That's Why...." posts, and the personal vendetta posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

Don't forget the "Because I'm the Mom, That's Why...." posts, and the personal vendetta posts.

---

Again, you're here to offer childish insults.

I didn't mention you, I didn't say anything bad about you.

There was no need for you to debase yourself.

Show more restraint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canadian Visitor

1)
"I might be wrong, but so are you, I'm pretty sure, and I'm sticking to that".

That's why you have a region beset with problems worse than others.

Because given a chance to change for the better; you either argue there is no better; or there is but who cares.

---

Judging an entire region because of past mistakes when they are clearly showing that they are trying not to repeat them,to me anyways,clearly shows a level of character that is not acceptable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

Judging an entire region because of past mistakes when they are clearly showing that they are trying not to repeat them,to me anyways,clearly shows a level of character that is not acceptable.

---

I didn't 'judge' a region.

I stated that Detroit is beset by many challenges, moreso than many other areas.

That's a fact, and not in dispute. Its not a criticism.

I 'judged' Mr. Mouch for contributing to those challenges and not only failing to be part of the solution, but actively opposing the solutions.

That is equally factual but is clearly also critical, as it should be; of one person.

One person, who like you, opposes facts, opposes decency, opposes fairness and change.

It is what it is.

^ no I oppose people that oppose opposition.

You are not willing to accept different viewpoints on a subject so why do you berate people that offer different viewpoints other then what you think?

It is an American thing,I would not expect you to understand.

Kinda like the *face palm* thing of a gun thing you had no clue about.

It was a fact nobody drove automobiles or flew airplanes,at the time there were also many CVs running around telling people that it was not possible,but yet here we are.

like you say,it is what it is.

Facts are facts and subject to change,they only remain a fact until an alternate fact is recognized.