Finland’s government collapses over failed health care reform

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jkcerda, Mar 18, 2019.

  1. jkcerda macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #1
  2. s2mikey macrumors 68020

    s2mikey

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #2
    Send this link to Cortez and Bernie...... free medicare for all forever. Right. LOL. :rolleyes:
     
  3. Rhonindk macrumors 68040

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    sitting on a beach watching a DC simulation ...
    #3
    Ouch.
    I wonder what their next step is now going to be ...
     
  4. RichardMZhlubb Contributor

    RichardMZhlubb

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #4
  5. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #5
    that is an assumption. you could argue the same was true about people not being happy with democrats since the republicans won, and compared to obama the republicans lost least senate and house seats....
     
  6. macsmurf macrumors 65816

    macsmurf

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    #6
    It's really not a big deal. All it means is that the Finnish government were unable to find a majority for their policies which results in the government resigning. Elections will then be held which were already scheduled anyway. This has happened many times before in sane democracies and campaigns+elections normally take a few weeks.

    No need to shut down the government or have decades long stalemates. Government employees will get their pay on time. Parks will stay open. Lights will stay on.
     
  7. chagla macrumors 6502a

    chagla

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    #7
    Regardless of any shortcomings that exist in Canadian, Finnish or British healthcare system, ask them if they will opt for current American system.

    Think about that before mocking.
     
  8. Rhonindk macrumors 68040

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    sitting on a beach watching a DC simulation ...
    #8
    However I have a few peers/friends who would love to have some aspects of the US care availability in their system.
    Not an all or nothing.

    Now, back to Finland ... ;)
     
  9. LordVic macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    #9
    One of the reasons I never moved to, nor would EVER move to the USA is their 3rd world nation health care system. Sorry, while there are small bits and pieces here in Canada we may think are done well in the US, the overall system is a disaster and wouldn't trade it for even 1/100th of what you have.

    In usual poling up here, it's typical that < 15% of the population supports a two tier health system with a pay option. and even less (< 5%) support a free market health system.

    IT's a typical failing of those screaming abou "socialism evil!!!" on this site. It's a definite showcase that they don't know a lick about what they're screaming about, other than it's a boogeyman evil they need to scream about.

    MOST countries who have implemented a national health system have all done so fairly successfully and most of their countries residents would never trade it for anything even remotely close to the run away freight train of US capitalism abusing the health of the nation.
     
  10. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #10
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/canadian-medical-tourism_n_5949b405e4b0db570d3778ff
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/sallyp...e-waiting-for-medical-treatment/#2870225f3e7d
     
  11. Rhonindk macrumors 68040

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    sitting on a beach watching a DC simulation ...
    #11
    Opinions vary. I have cohorts in Canada that luv their system, hate their system, wish their system would change a bit. None of it is perfect.

    Thanks @jkcerda for the quick reply. Nice ;)
     
  12. LordVic macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    #12
    Those were also thouroughly debunked. Forbes got it wrong. First, they used data from the "Fraser institution" which is a conservative funded (like literally the conservative party)/

    Lengthy waits is also not the norm, except for far rural communities. Canada is a highly concentrated nation where 90% of the population lives within about 10 cities (actually, 60% lives between niagara falls and Montreal). So the bulk of all medical is in that area. If you live northern ontario for example, you'll be stuck waiting a while due to the remote nature of the location and getting doctors to those regions. These same regions would not be better served by a private health system as there's not enough money in those communities to support even a private system.

    Our healthcare system is also a triage based. Emergency care will always bump non-emergency care. The biggest complaint you get from people opting to go to the US for care is primarily for optional stuff in which they don't want to wait for those who need mergency care first. This is not an indictment of a universal health care, but the evidence of greed that there are enough people who blieve they should be able to pay their way to the front of the line. If that is what they want, they have options. But that is not what our system is designed to do. our health care system is intended first and foremost to provide primary care equaly to all. Regardless of monetary position. A cancer patient who has no money doesn't get bumped by someone who is wealthy and wants a nose job.

    Even if you read the article you linked

    "All told, nearly 3% of Canada's population was waiting for some kind of medical care at the end of last year." So just shy of 1 million Canadians felt like their wait was too long. compraed that to 20million Americans (or 10%) who are estimated to have ZERO health care.

    Simply put, The system isn't perfect. I wouldn't ever claim it to be, But most of the things you and the detractors of a single payer system are STILL Better than the current system you have in place in the US. We see and cover more people as percentage of thep opulation with overall wider results affecting more people. We still need to work on making it better. Get some of those waits and lines down, attract new professionals, and get doctors to remote communities (we cannot compel them to work somewhere they don't want to). But to throw out the baby with the bathwater over overall minor failings that affect a tiny percent of our population would be asinine and NO party, even the conservative party of canada has any intention of rolling back our healthcare system.
     
  13. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #13
    guessing huffpost also got it wrong? and you ASSUME I am against single payer,,,,,,,,,,, I am not, but we need to seriously tackle the corruption HERE before something like that is implemented.
     
  14. LordVic, Mar 18, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2019

    LordVic macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    #14
    as above, we do need work. We need to cut down on some of the beurocracy that has added lots of overhead and costs to the system that doesn't need to be there.

    our last provincial government implemented regional "Networks" of beurocracy to oversea health. So now there are dozens of the same duplication of services based on region. This was a mistake as it meant numerous reproduced efforts and a waste of taxpayer money, while the actual practitioners themselves didn't get any real benefit.

    Biggest issue we had was our last Liberal Provincial government was anything but Liberal in reality and more of a "lets just give our friends in high places good paying jobs". There's a reason why last election we tossed them out with one of the biggest defeats in Ontario politics.

    The problem is, going with a private system would fundamentally move away from the belief that all Canadians' deserve equal access to the equal quality of service. Health care has been deemed a fundamental right.

    However, overall having a single payer system has levelled the playing field dramatically and has provided far more freedoms to more people than if it were a pay per use system. now when I pay into private health insurance ($30/mth copay with work), that private health insurance goes to additional care such as rehabilitation, pharmacare, dental, eyecare, chiro, massage, etc, and is completely optional. My money, and those of all Canadians goes a lot further for medical coverage and the additional "nice to haves", because we're not stuck paying out of pocket for the baseline services. This also means we have access to a lot more preventative medical care that helps prevent, and early identify potential medical issues, leading to overall healthier population as a whole, instead of for those who can afford it.
    --- Post Merged, Mar 18, 2019 ---
    yes, that's a COMPLETELY different and valid argument. if you've got politicians siphoning off money, all the dumping of money in the world does nothing.

    have to plug the whole hole in the pipe.

    but that's a completely different thread. Speaking from an outside observer, the US political system is so absolutel broken and corrupt and does not in any shape / form represent the will of the people, but the will of those with deep pockets.

    Got to put up some walls between Politicians and money and start enforcing them before any meaningful change can happen to bring about real policy.

    instead though, you got Trump.

    Also: it's not Forbes I have problem with, but use of Fraser institution. They are self described "Conservative libertarian think tank" who have a vested interest in pushing for specific policies that best represent their investors. They aren't a complete sham, But they quit honestly have a history of being the one outlier in polling and data compared to the other pollsters accross canada, and also have a history of not being terribly accurate in comparison to the others. They have a very long history of accepting millions from US companies and individuals in the means of "Charitable donations" to help fund their polls and surveys (which tend to also have a reported high margin of error).

    The problem with the Forbes article here is that it was clear the editorial had it's own defined view and found a single source to try and prove it right. Unfortunately, that source is not on it's own entirely valid, and would need multiple other reports to back it as well.
     
  15. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #15
    better than getting Hillary,,,,, agree with the rest.
     
  16. Rhonindk macrumors 68040

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    sitting on a beach watching a DC simulation ...
    #16
    Now if we could get a real functioning set of Congress Critters .... ;)
     
  17. Peace macrumors Core

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #17
    Do you people ever actually read beyond the headlines ?

    Seems their form was run by LOCAL agencies. The kind you people want.


    "Finland has a decentralized system of health and social welfare programs, where much of the administration is left to local municipalities. This arrangement has led to widespread geographic variation when it comes to quality and access to health care services."
     
  18. LordVic macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    #18
    is there a way to replace everyone all at once, with a rule "can't run again"? seriously. there might be a few good ones. A few naieve ones, and a few who try to be good, but the bulk of the entire US political system right now looks like a nonsense hyperpartisan system run by either religious fundamentalists, Crooks, or self interested charlettans. This includes the cretin in the white house, most in the senate and Congress and many even on your supreme court.

    US politics has become so toxic that not even half the registered voters bother to show up for elections. And if you include the whole of US population, it's 1/3rd that show up. This indicates a massive apathy towards a system that has become so disconnected from the average person, that over 100m voters just don't care to show up.

    time to throw out both Democrats and Republicans and form yourself 3-4 new parties that can start covering more of the ideas and thoughts. Get rid of this bipolar, and non-Representative system (two right winged parties does not representation make)


    I'm not going to get into the Hillary vs Trump ********. but if you truly believe this, STILL, after 2 years of Trump, than i'm not sure there's any real worthwhile conversation to have since it's also COMPLETELY irrelevant as Trump is currently sitting president and Hillary is not. Bringing that up yet again should be beneath you as you keep saying you're not an actual trump supporter. You should be calling him out for his ******** just as loudly you would for hillary.
     
  19. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #19
    already said I'll probably vote Tulsi come 2020..............
    --- Post Merged, Mar 18, 2019 ---
    completely depends on the situation, some come here for treatment.
     
  20. LordVic macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    #20
    US Primaries are a little too remote / far away for me to know the full breadth of whose running yet. I get enough of US media, but have to step back this early in the game, especially since in 2019, i'll have my own federal election to consider.

    I'd ask for opinion on Why Tulsi now, but that's probably off topic and as the primaries get closer, I'll get caught up for then.

    It just gets frustrating when you try and talk politics, point out things that Trump is doing that is harmful not only to Americans, but the world, and the answer is "BUT HILLARY!"

    Hillary lost. I don't have vested interest in her. I can only speak to the actions of those who currently have power. Constantly going back to the "but hillary" argument just makes it look like that you can't defend something Trump is doing, want to, so you're going to deflect. it's a poor debaters argument and it does nothing but shut down the conversation. I've lurked here for a long long time (I had some time off ;)) and your clearly willing to discuss things, But then will randomly throw down such conversation ending nonsequator. I truly believe you can do better than that. There are others here who can't, but I know you can.
     
  21. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #21
    you can see why here.
     
  22. RichardMZhlubb Contributor

    RichardMZhlubb

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #22
    Well, part of her appeal for some people is that she’s a Trump and Assad apologist and someone with a long history of hatred of the LGBTQ community. I’ve said for two years that I will vote for any warm body if the alternative is Trump, but I genuinely don’t know what I would do if the Democrats were so foolish as to nominate Gabbard. Thankfully, I don’t think there is any chance that I’ll be forced to make that decision, since I cannot imagine any scenario under which the Democrats would nominate her.
     
  23. jkcerda thread starter macrumors 6502a

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #23
    that is because the DNC is crooked and will go for whomever buys them out like Hillary did when she controlled the funds.....
     
  24. mrex, Mar 18, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2019

    mrex macrumors 68040

    mrex

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2014
    Location:
    europe
    #24
    ”Finland has a decentralized system of health and social welfare programs, where much of the administration is left to local municipalities. This arrangement has led to widespread geographic variation when it comes to quality and access to health care services. The reform was meant to address these inequalities and reduce the growing cost of the country's health care system, which has come under increasing stress from an ageing population. It included centralization of the administration at a regional level.”

    The main part is that health care is there and it doesnt going to change but rather than the system is run under several local administrations (municipal and co-operating with other municipal togerher providing the healthcare for larger areas) the goverment wants to centralized it to reduce costs and provide good health care in the future too.

    to give ”vote of no-confidence” was also to make some political parties to look better under the election year (spring 2019). The reform is going to happen and it is going to be a hot potatoe of election themes.
     
  25. Rhonindk macrumors 68040

    Rhonindk

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2014
    Location:
    sitting on a beach watching a DC simulation ...
    #25
    Would like to see term limits.
    There are good and bad members. Collectively it is a busted system.
     

Share This Page

57 March 18, 2019