I beleive a no govt system is more friendly.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

Hmm stunning, you confirm with your personal experience that Canadians are very happy with what they get.

Then you counter with another opinion piece saying its not so good, from a non-Canadian. What are we to make of this?

Anyway, re paying through the ass for things, doesnt everyone in both Canada and America? Moreover should we not consider instead what one gets for this?

__________________
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.

Guess who?

What a complete turd of a link.

Just check the comments underneath it;

__________________
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.

Guess who?

I'm at a loss with respect to your quoteThese kinds of patriotic pejoratives along with words like Liberty only tell of (your) [speaking generally] desire for the status quo. The status quo is what led us to where we are right now.

I don't understand this need to prove some sort of patriotism vs. alternative ideas and dialogue.

How much freedom can you lose with at least one in every State. You could, potentially, gain better health care products and services at lower cost to the individual consumer of statism.

How friendly would it need to be with at least one research hospital in every State?

It could create jobs and lead to advances in the art and science of health care.

Fart from it. Im arguing exactly the opposite of the status quo. I want govt out of healthcare alltogether. That would be total freedom.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

I would be forced to pay for it. If that is the cost, I dont want it. You can pay for it.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

Here's a Canadians perspective on our "sick-care" system:

Debunking Canadian health care myths

__________________

Your arguments don't seem to be consistent enough. You are already paying for a drug war that denies and disparages individual liberty, "steals" private property, and destroys forms of wealth.

Yet, you claim to have more of a problem with a potentially more efficient health care system that would be able to find cures sooner rather than later (as a mechanism for individual liberty from debilitating diseases).

I understand economics. When externalities are considered, nothing is truly "free". You are already "paying" for it by having less than full employment of resources in any given market.

Social ills are a result of less developed markets rather than more developed markets.

A research hospital in every state would ensure jobs, and advances in the art and science of medicine that could eventually enable cures for most of our human conditions.

COuld you post of a quote of mine where Ive supported the drug war?

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

I would disagree with your assessment of the status quo: the government is not in healthcare perse'. We've been fine with medicare and medicaid as supplimental programs for those on a fixed income: what do you propose that those people do?

And freedom from what? The question was about these patriotic buzz words and phrases that actually reflect nothing. It seems as though by using these buzz words, folks are trying to say that they are more patriotic than those who disagree.

Freedom and liberty are not threatened at all: that stuff smacks of McCarthyism... so I don't get it.

Where's your solution? With all the hyperbole from the right, we hear nothing about what they would do about this.

Freedom to take care of your health in the way you think is best. Freedom to see any health care provider you want, regardless of whether the government, or the AMA, or the insurance companies, approve of their methodology. Freedom to arrange payment with your doctor without interference from the state on behalf of the insurance companies. Freedom to purchase, grow or make the drugs you need to maintain your health without asking permission. Freedom to finance your health care outside mandated, and destructive, insurance schemes. Etc...

I think you're projecting. "Freedom" may ring hollow for you, but not for all of us. McCarthy? Give me break. We just don't want to be meddled with.

More hyperbole.

Can you please explain exactly how the governemnt plans to disrupt a person's ability to take charge of their own health care?

Doctors have been screaming about insurnacce company obstructions for years and many are joining a Doctor's Union to help solve this problem: these guys are small business people just like anybody else.

Kaiser Permanente on the other hand is an HMO who is famous for shoddy care because Kaiser is an insurance company with their own facilities.

You're not answering the questions, your coloring the subject with patriotism to bury your inablilities to come up with answers and solutions of your own - even your pundits can't do it.
What the hell kind of statement is that?

Puleeease