Positive conservative views on "single payer" health care

[Falvlun]

Yes. That is the license used by private facilities.

See above.

Right— It’s the license for non-hospital private facilities. It doesn’t say anything about hospitals, or indicate that they are solely state-owned. The existence of a licensing agency for private non-hospital facilities does not prove that private hospitals don’t exist.

No you didn't. You googled and pasted a link which didn't even name a single private hospital. Name one, put some effort in.



No it would refute my point.



Nope you just google something and pasted it which couldn't name a single privately owned hospital.



The license I cited



Yet didn't name a single example. So all you have an assertion from google.

I have provided quotes, sources, and links from Wikipedia, Canadian journalists, Canadian health organizations, and multiple health system researchers. I have provided multiple forms of evidence that all support my position. Where are your quotes, sources, and links?

You can downplay and ignore my efforts but the record is there for anyone to read.

As for an example of a private hospital (not a public state-owned or state-run hosptial), here you go: St. Paul's Hospital (Vancouver) - WikipediaSt. Paul’s Hospital (Vancouver). It is run by Providence Health Care Providence Health Care (Vancouver) - Wikipedia which is a denominational (religious) non-profit.

I am not sure why a single specific instance would convince you, when you don’t believe every single other source that states that hospitals in Canada are generally not state owned.

 

[Shad]

Right— It’s the license for non-hospital private facilities. It doesn’t say anything about hospitals, or indicate that they are solely state-owned. The existence of a licensing agency for private non-hospital facilities does not prove that private hospitals don’t exist.

That is the license for private facilities.

I have provided quotes, sources, and links from Wikipedia, Canadian journalists, Canadian health organizations, and multiple health system researchers. I have provided multiple forms of evidence that all support my position. Where are your quotes, sources, and links?

Yet not a single thing from the Healthcare Act... You know law...

You can downplay and ignore my efforts but the record is there for anyone to read.

Your efforts are not covering law. You missed the mark.

As for an example of a private hospital (not a public state-owned or state-run hosptial), here you go: St. Paul's Hospital (Vancouver) - WikipediaSt. Paul’s Hospital (Vancouver). It is run by Providence Health Care Providence Health Care (Vancouver) - Wikipedia which is a denominational (religious) non-profit.

I am not sure why a single specific instance would convince you, when you don’t believe every single other source that states that hospitals in Canada are generally not state owned.

Which are considered public as per Section 8 of the Healthcare Act. I told you before you were ignoring Canada's system by inject external source in absence of arguing law.

"
8. (1) In order to satisfy the criterion respecting public administration,

(a) the health care insurance plan of a province must be administered and operated on a non-profit basis by a public authority appointed or designated by the government of the province;

(b) the public authority must be responsible to the provincial government for that administration and operation; and

(c) the public authority must be subject to audit of its accounts and financial transactions by such authority as is charged by law with the audit of the accounts of the province."

 

[Falvlun]

That is the license for private facilities.



Yet not a single thing from the Healthcare Act... You know law...



Your efforts are not covering law. You missed the mark.



Which are considered public as per Section 8 of the Healthcare Act. I told you before you were ignoring Canada's system by inject external source in absence of arguing law.

"
8. (1) In order to satisfy the criterion respecting public administration,

(a) the health care insurance plan of a province must be administered and operated on a non-profit basis by a public authority appointed or designated by the government of the province;

(b) the public authority must be responsible to the provincial government for that administration and operation; and

(c) the public authority must be subject to audit of its accounts and financial transactions by such authority as is charged by law with the audit of the accounts of the province."

Edit:
Ugh. One last try. Read the law you posted. Look at (a). What is the subject of (a)? Hint: it’s not “hospitals”. It is “the health insurance plan”. Everything you posted is about the plan.

 

[Shad]

Edit:
Ugh. One last try. Read the law you posted. Look at (a). What is the subject of (a)? Hint: it’s not “hospitals”. It is “the health insurance plan”. Everything you posted is about the plan.

No that what qualifies for getting funding. Non-profit organizations are neither public nor private ergo St Paul isn't private. St Paul',s the current building, was built by government. The future building is being built by government. The United Church of Canada is not privately owned. You keep ignoring Canadian law.

 

[Falvlun]

No that what qualifies for getting funding. Non-profit organizations are neither public nor private ergo St Paul isn't private. St Paul',s the current building, was built by government. The future building is being built by government. The United Church of Canada is not privately owned. You keep ignoring Canadian law.

You have not provided Canadian law that supports your position. You have provided the Canadian law that states that the government administers and operates the health insurance plan. That is literally exactly what I’ve said: the government runs the health insurance plan.

You have argued that the hospitals are primarily state owned and run. I have argued, and demonstrated, that this is untrue.

As for the private vs non-profit distinction, this does not matter to my argument. I have on multiple posts stated that the majority of hospitals are run by non-profits. A non-profit is not state-owned. That has been my entire argument: the majority of hospitals in Canada are not publically owned, in contrast to the hospitals under a Beveridge Model, like in the UK.

 

[Shad]

You have not provided Canadian law that supports your position. You have provided the Canadian law that states that the government administers and operates the health insurance plan. That is literally exactly what I’ve said: the government runs the health insurance plan.

Look up laws regarding corporations and what qualifies as one.

You have argued that the hospitals are primarily state owned and run. I have argued, and demonstrated, that this is untrue.

No you didn't. Your one example, St Pauls, was built and funded by government. The United Church of Canada didn't build it.

As for the private vs non-profit distinction, this does not matter to my argument. I have on multiple posts stated that the majority of hospitals are run by non-profits. A non-profit is not state-owned. That has been my entire argument: the majority of hospitals in Canada are not publically owned, in contrast to the hospitals under a Beveridge Model, like in the UK.

Wrong again. Private corporation ownership requires an individual(s) not an non-person NGO.

 

[Falvlun]

Look up laws regarding corporations and what qualifies as one.



No you didn't. Your one example, St Pauls, was built and funded by government. The United Church of Canada didn't build it.



Wrong again. Private corporation ownership requires an individual(s) not an non-person NGO.

My position wasn’t that the hospitals must be a private corporation. My position was that hospitals weren’t generally owned or operated by the state. Non-profits are not government entities, therefore they satisfy my position. They certainly do not support your position.


But this really is all besides the point. You have not provided any evidence to support your position. Your position requires that the academic categorization of Canada’s healthcare system is wrong— literally, you are saying that the people who study this don’t know what they are talking about but somehow you are the only one who knows the truth.

You really need to consider the possibility that your position is incorrect.

 

[james dixon]

Health care, American style---

Wright now; there are thousands of secretaries, clerks, administrators..,etc.,, working for and being paid by our tax dollars just to manage the viable functioning of the Medicare and Medicaid agencies.

I believe we (citizens) should not do away with the Medicare and Medicaid agencies but instead reduce their responsibilities to oversight while farming out the day to day paper work to insurance companies. They after all know how the system works on a one to one level with the recipients of this insurance.

I think it is a win for the private sector and 8us, (US Citizens), I.e.; the ones paying for this service.

Agree, disagree and why?

-

 

[Valjean]

Give the responsibility for access, treatment, payment and other care decisions to a for-profit business that delivers none of the product it administers, whose primary interest is profit and growth, and you're not likely to get much reduction in complexity and paperwork. It's the very byzantine complexity of the system that hides the rapacious avarice that keeps stock prices high.

 

[james dixon]

The idea is to shift the day to day cost of dealing with the public to the insurance companies who's new job is to explain to the public the services medicare and medicaid can provide to the consumers.
Having said that and reading it back I am not sure what the benefits are.

The intent is to reduce the government costs in running these agencies by shifting the customer/government dialogue to an outside service that I believe would reduce the government cost in managing these services.

 

[Valjean]

So why not just eliminate the insurance agencies entirely and assign a hospital employee to answer questions?

 

[Shad]

My position wasn’t that the hospitals must be a private corporation. My position was that hospitals weren’t generally owned or operated by the state. Non-profits are not government entities, therefore they satisfy my position. They certainly do not support your position.

Doesn't work out as well as you think. The best hospital in BC was built by.... the government.

But this really is all besides the point. You have not provided any evidence to support your position. Your position requires that the academic categorization of Canada’s healthcare system is wrong

You refuted nothing thus this is dismissed as an assertion. More so I know my own healthcare system as I use it. Try again, son. More so look up what I was responding to...

— literally, you are saying that the people who study this don’t know what they are talking about but somehow you are the only one who knows the truth.

They don't.

You really need to consider the possibility that your position is incorrect.

Demonstrate it is incorrect.

Sorry Necro'ed the thread.