This website requires Javascript to function properly. Please go to the setting of your web browser and enable Javascript for this website.

Ad by

最优利率和cashback可以申请特批，好信用好收入offer更好。请点链接扫码加微信咨询，Scotiabank -- Nick Zhang 6478812600。

Ad by

最优利率和cashback可以申请特批，好信用好收入offer更好。请点链接扫码加微信咨询，Scotiabank -- Nick Zhang 6478812600。

That is true. That is why I always object to new government sponsored social programs.

morovia(King of Movia)

Once some social programs are in place, it is very difficult to cancel it off. Something like universal healther, and bilingal. They have became staples of this country, nobody can dare to challenge them. Health care system will be not working some day, but before that day tax payers have to continuely inject money. It can not be resolved overnight by electing a conservative government. Even Mike Harris, a bold conservative, did not private the health care - and under his governance, Ontario Health spendign increase 25% every year - too many people abuses and too many new immigrants. People in Canada more like the ideology than facts. Another thing is the bilinguism, which Canadian are always proud of , virtually kills the opportunity to become a distinguished politician if he was not born in Quebec, and waster a lot of money in this country even people, except these in Quebec, can communicate freely without any involvement of French.

(#1757129@0)
Last Updated: 2004-6-9
This post has been archived. It cannot be replied.

Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

枫下茶话 / 政治经济 / 请教，关于加拿大私营医疗 -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-8 {1718} (#1755976@0)
本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛联邦选举即将进行。看了大中报上三大党的政纲和一些评论文章，对加拿大私营医疗问题感到很不理解，请各位大虾指点指点。
在允许私人经营医疗事业的问题上，NDP是坚决反对，要取缔。保守党是支持。自由党是不限制。好像这个问题还很敏感，在加拿大有不少人坚决反对私人经营医疗事业。（当初麦肯地在安省的省选中就提出要取消前保守党的公私合营医院，得到了很多人的支持。）在本人看来，支持私人经营医疗事业有百利而无一害。
首先，可以减轻公共医疗的部分压力，从而使公共医疗可以以现有的资源为每一位病患提供相对较好的医疗服务。因为私营医疗分流了一部分病人，使用公共医疗的人数减少，人均资源占有增加，从而有能力和可能提供更好的服务。在有能力负担私营医疗服务的人得到更好的医疗服务的同时，不能负担私营医疗服务的人也能得到较好的医疗服务，岂不是皆大欢喜？如果考虑到社会平等的问题，那么我宁愿不平等地得到医治，也不愿意不平等的坐以待毙。
其次，可以对公共医疗形成一定的竞争压力，从而使公共医疗可以提高一定的效率。因为现在只有公共医疗一家，所以一旦罢工，就会对许多病人带来生命的威胁，政府妥协起来也就不得不快。如果有了私营医疗，病人实在不行还可以从他们那里得到救治，大不了罢工期间由政府买单。也许可以在一定限度下制约医疗工会的为所欲为。
再次，肥水不流外人田，可以减少富人们到美国求医。由于现在公共医疗的等候时间太长，而很多病又是等不得的，所以不少人一掷千金到美国去看病。如果有了私人医疗，至少有一部分这样的人不必到美国去，自然减少了这种被动的医疗进口，对加美贸易顺差做一点小小的贡献。
最后，吸引资金，增加国民就业和生产。资本家的钱总要找到一个投资的地方，既然有人认为私营医疗有利可图，他们愿意大把的投资兴建新的医院，诊所，如果国家允许并且鼓励的话，岂不是可以刺激国民的就业和生产？反之，他们的钱不知会投到哪里，说不定就投到国外去了，这样对加拿大又有什么好处呢？
所以，想来想去，我实在想不明白为什么有那么多人要反对私营医疗，不知道大家对这个问题怎么看？更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net

不少加拿大人把公费医疗作为块牌坊，根本不管公费医疗的弊病，听见私营就拿美国做例子，好像除了美国世上再没别的了。明明负责不了公众的医疗，却连个自由选择的机会都不给，我觉得有点违反人权。政客们不敢说实话，那是怕惹火上身。 -dundas888(登达寺); 2004-6-8 (#1756119@0)

保守党或自由党都不敢轻举妄动，怕一动则牵全身。不过相信慢慢地大家会明白，如果不想再让无能的政府往这个无底洞里闭着眼睛瞎扔钱，私营（或公私合营）是大势所趋。 -dundas888(登达寺); 2004-6-8 (#1756127@0)
"政客们不敢说实话，那是怕惹火上身" -- 这就是我觉得奇怪的地方。你说得对，老百姓应该有“自由选择的机会“。 -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-8 (#1756129@0)

The court has ruled that government has the collectively right to disallow private clinc. -morovia(King of Movia); 2004-6-8 (#1756196@0)

i don't know, i just know that i am poor. :-) -babyface(●★猫猫睡觉觉★●); 2004-6-8 (#1756126@0)

看不懂这帮人云衫雾罩地讨论,还是你这句话实在,我是穷人,我反对医疗私有化,因为我担心负不起高昂的医疗费或者保险费.对比一下汽车保险私有化的安省和其他没有私有化的省份(比如BC)的保险费,结果已经很清楚了. -wzap(信天翁); 2004-6-9 (#1757205@0)

不是要取消现在的公费医疗系统，而是允许私人医疗的存在。对穷人来说，除了可能会眼红之外，应该好处多。那些富人交了税，又不使用公费医疗的福利，赚的岂不是我们穷人？ -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-9 (#1757290@0)

请问你所谓的私营医疗服务是政府买单还是个人买单? -wzap(信天翁); 2004-6-8 (#1756146@0)

当然应该是个人买单。 -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-8 (#1756208@0)

Private medicare will enourage doctors to move from public hospitals to private clincs. At the last it costs government more money to maintain the health system. -morovia(King of Movia); 2004-6-8 {559} (#1756194@0)
The current system is that government acts as the moloply insurance company which force doctors to accept lower pay. The problem is not that Canada lacks doctor (although indeed it needs more doctors), it lies that under the system, people are not encourage to become doctors/nurses (pay is much lower than US), not encourage to see more patients, not encouraged to provide better service. Simply put, the health system will eventually not work. Ontario puts more than 40% tax money on healthcare; the highways system, road maintenance are much worse than US.

make sense. 那么有没有办法既允许公私医疗并存，又能留住公有医院的医务人员呢。 -seyou(干掉liberal); 2004-6-8 (#1756215@0)

Increase their salary to a competitive level. -sailor(野苹果); 2004-6-8 (#1756378@0)

then need more tax :D -diao_david(不要Conservative); 2004-6-8 (#1756535@0)

仔细想了想，不是太同意这个观点。允许私人医疗确实会引起部分好医生的流失，但未必会导致更多的医疗投入以及由此引起的税务增加。 -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-9 {1593} (#1757013@0)
本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛第一，在保有目前公共医疗的大前提下，私有医疗的市场十分有限，只有那些富有阶层的人才有能力自己支付其费用。如果富有阶层是百分之十的话，私有医疗市场最多也只有百分之十。所以，医生的流失也相应的只有这个规模。超过这个规模就赚不到钱，必然会导致回流。

第二，假定确实有百分之十的医生流失了，这是一件坏事呢还是好事呢？是否一定要大幅提高投入来留住他们呢？间接的，是否一定要提高税收来提高他们的收入呢？这些问题都是彼此关联，又和其他的一些问题息息相关的。
首先，这确实是一件坏事，但又不绝对是一件坏事。百分之十的医生流失了，而且是好医生，这对留在公共医疗体系中的人确实是件坏事。但是，比之目前这种把好医生也变成庸医的单一公费医疗制度也许要好一些。好医生坏医生，医术固然重要，但肯认真治病也同样重要。本人就受了不少好医生漫不经心治疗的痛苦（肚子留了丑陋的疤做见证），同时也接受了实习医生认真医疗的好处（十几年的胃病被彻底治愈）。如果私营医疗的出现能够鼓励医生们更认真地对待病人的话（为他们自己开私营诊所做技术和病人的准备），好医生的流失反而会提高公共医疗体系的医疗水平，这难道不是一件好事？
其次，由于少了百分之十的医生，在不减少医疗投入的前提下，原来用于支付这百分之十医生的工资现在可以用来提高剩下百分之十的医生的工资。也就是说，由于部分医生的流失可以提高公共医疗体系内医生的工资而不必增加医疗投入。
最后，增加医疗投入也未必要增加税收比例。税收总额的增加有两大主要因素，一是税率，二十征税对象的总额，也就是国民经济总额的大小。降低税率，从长远看会增加国民经济总额，从而也达到税收总额增加的目的。而提高税率，从长远看会降低国民经济总额，从而无法达到增加税收总额的目的，甚至进入恶性循环，对经济造成极大的危害。

所以，我的结论是，允许私人医疗确实回导致部分医生的流失，但未必会导致税收增加的恶果。更多精彩文章及讨论，请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net

Good point. Want to know more details. Thanks. -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-8 (#1756223@0)

因为英国这一尝试失败，别的国家都不敢动了。一旦变私人医疗，你每年的保险费就全控制在保险公司手里。哪天他想涨就涨，就和安省汽车保险一样。 -contact(Contact); 2004-6-9 (#1756974@0)

不是要全面私有化。简单说，如果有百分之十的人要求并有能力享受私有化医疗，那么就允许私人提供这百分之十的医疗服务，而百分之九十的老百姓仍然留在公共医疗体制中。 -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-9 (#1756991@0)

this is the point, no any politic party would like to take this risk to divid Canadians into 2 classes: 10% vs 90%, would you like to try? -table(桌子来了); 2004-6-9 (#1757017@0)

The two classes are already there. Nobody can divide it, we can only choose to face it or pretend to ignore it. Allow/Support private medicare and change public medicare to private are to concepts. -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-9 (#1757053@0)

there are 2 different concepts, what you said is a social exsit, a fact, I agree with you, it is true. but the social exsit does not equal to social system, public medicare is a social system. -table(桌子来了); 2004-6-9 (#1757079@0)

经济基础决定上层建筑。 -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-9 {344} (#1757158@0)
上层建筑只有反映及适应经济基础的需要才是一个合理的，有利于社会进步发展的上层建筑。如果只是为了行而上的东西违背这个规律的话，只会陷入一个恶性循环的怪圈。中国几十年的社会主义就是活生生的例子。同意你的观点，要打破这个怪圈确实需要时机，智慧和莫大的勇气。不过，从目前来看，在这个问题上，保守党拥有最大的勇气，就是不知道他们有没有足够的智慧和运气了。

not sure the medicare from private to public was a forward or a backward many years ago, @_@ -table(桌子来了); 2004-6-9 (#1757167@0)

加拿大的这种高福利实际上也是政党竞选的结果，因为如果有哪个政党提出减少福利的话我不相信他会竞选成功，随着现在移民人口的大力增加以日显出其维持高福利的勉为其难 -march2000(eagle); 2004-6-9 (#1757056@0)

not really true, since there are many other states with the similiar politic system, the vote politics, but without such so called high welfare. -table(桌子来了); 2004-6-9 (#1757090@0)

That is true. That is why I always object to new government sponsored social programs. -morovia(King of Movia); 2004-6-9 {948} (#1757129@0)
Once some social programs are in place, it is very difficult to cancel it off. Something like universal healther, and bilingal. They have became staples of this country, nobody can dare to challenge them. Health care system will be not working some day, but before that day tax payers have to continuely inject money. It can not be resolved overnight by electing a conservative government. Even Mike Harris, a bold conservative, did not private the health care - and under his governance, Ontario Health spendign increase 25% every year - too many people abuses and too many new immigrants. People in Canada more like the ideology than facts. Another thing is the bilinguism, which Canadian are always proud of , virtually kills the opportunity to become a distinguished politician if he was not born in Quebec, and waster a lot of money in this country even people, except these in Quebec, can communicate freely without any involvement of French.

对不起，弄错了。今天看了大中报才知道原来现在各政党讨论的所谓私人医疗跟我想的完全不一样。如果都是政府买单，还真不知道该不该允许私人医疗了。 -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-9 (#1757887@0)

从开始我就问你所谓的私营医疗服务是政府买单还是个人买单,如果是个人买单还有什么好讨论的,自己的钱随便折腾没人管:) -wzap(信天翁); 2004-6-9 (#1757910@0)

不管怎样都要谢谢大家。头一回参加联邦选举，虽然知道自己这一票只是汪洋中的一滴水，可还是不想轻易浪费了，毕竟这是我唯一的一滴水啊。 -daizi(littlefool); 2004-6-9 (#1758018@0)

That is true. That is why I always object to new government sponsored social programs.

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics