I don't like responding in the "comments" pop-up box, so I thought I would replicate comments that appear there here. Got it? A friend of Mr. Michaels (see the last post) named Matt responds:
"I'd just like to add that its pretty rude to post someones personal email address in a response to a blog post. I'm from Florida too (A friend of Marks) and while I think Canada is a pretty neat place (My sister has made Quebec her home for over a decade now), I think the healthcare issue is two-sided. Canadians pay dramatically higher taxes than Americans for everything from gasoline to a loaf of Bread. Yes, that pays for healthcare, but a large percentage of Canadians come to the united states for its excellent specialized medical services. What does that say about the state of socialized medicine? Being a native Floridian, I can personally attest that many Canadians think its so great living in Canada, they live here in MY home state 6 months out of the year, or at least they did until Canada threatened to nullify their health benefits if they didnt stay in their own country a few more months out of the year. And last but not least, love or hate America, the prosperity that most of Europe and to some extent, Canada, enjoy is largely in part due to the strength of the U.S. economy. If we go down, you can be sure everyone else is going down with us. Something to keep in mind. Im not a fan of Bush though, and will be voting for anyone who can make a good run at unseating him. He's squandered the good will that the Clinton administration spent 8 years building from the ashes of Reagan/Bush Sr. in record time. But seriously, take Marks email address off your post. Thats not cool."
First, let The General address the health care issue. The terms of my rebuttal are available in an online article called "What's Right About Canada's Health Care System?" No, I didn't write it. But it sums up my feelings on the matter well.
OK, Matt, it goes like this: Yes, some Canadians go to the States for specialized health care services. But this only supports what I said in the last post (that the United States is a great place to live if you earn $300K per year and stay healthy): the Canadians who go to the States for medical services are a small minority who need very specialized services and are willing to pay for it. We're not poring over the border for flu shots.
I think when one compares US and Canadian health care, one should consider the general case, not the particular (and limited) case. Consider this passage from the article cited above: "In particular, on the standard measures of life expectancy and infant mortality, we [Canada] outperform the US. The US has 8 infant deaths per 1000 live births - in the same league with the Czech Republic and Greece - while Canada has 6 per 1,000. Canadians also live longer and our advantage is growing. From 1990-95, the gap in life expectancy between Canadian and American males grew from 2 to 2.8 years; for women, it went from 1.6 to 1.9 years."
Here's the kicker:
"Different health care systems are not the whole, or even the principal explanation for Canadians' better health. The whole American social environment is more brutal for the less successful. In simple economic terms, for example, everyone knows that Americans enjoy higher incomes, on average, than do Canadians. Little known, and rarely reported in either country, is the fact that in the United States a much larger (and growing) proportion of total income is received by those at the very top of the income distribution. This means that most Canadians are actually better off than most Americans; only among the top ten percent of income earners are American incomes substantially higher. The difference is largely attributable to Canada's structure of tax-financed social programs. Why is this important? There is strong evidence of a link between income distribution and overall health status - inegalitarian societies, those like the American, who concentrate wealth in the hands of a few, tend to be unhealthy."
The point is: all of the good things about America are tied to being wealthy. That's not the case for Canada.
Second point: Me posting Mark's email address. I have removed it, as per your wishes. But he's not exactly hiding his identity when he leaves his real name and IP address in a comment box. I found his blog just by searching for his name and city in Google. In other words, I wasn't offering any information that wasn't already available to everyone. But, fine, I've removed it. All apologies.
Third point: If the US economy goes down, Canada goes with it. Well, not quite. Yes, if the entire US economy collapses, then Canada is pretty screwed. But as we have seen recently, Canada's economy has performed brilliantly in the past few years while Bush ass-raped the US economy into a record budget deficit. What gets ignored by most Americans is how globally interdependent national economies are. You can't simply tell the world to piss off, and still enjoy the land of milk and honey. (Well, you can, but not for very long.)
The General does feel sorta bad about labelling all "Americans" as bad people. Really, it's Bush and everyone who supports him who are the real problem. I guess The General hasn't forgotten the 2002 poll that showed 32% of Americans felt Canada should be "annexed." I'm stilled pissed about that. If it weren't so cold in my igloo, I'd be hot under the collar.
Make some new episodes of Family Guy, America, and The General will forget the whole thing. Damn that shit is funny.
12:14:23 AM 
|
|
