Originally Posted by OceanChild

Outline to me what is taxed then. Everything I'm reading on the internet is negating everything people are saying in this thread.

Who is paying for health care and how? Money doesn't just magically appear out of thin air. Many, many Web sites unequivocally state that Canadian health care is paid by income and sales tax.

The people are taxed, just not at the 45% plus 15% you claim. We also have business taxes. If you provide your sources, maybe I can help break it down better for you.

[frgsonmysox]

Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79

Does what insurance company you have determine how long you wait to see a specialist? Because last year when I needed an MRI I got it a week after the doctor ordered it. They didn't ask what insurance I had so I didn't assume I got preferencial treatment because of it.


Strange how these wait times vary. My ER sounds lightening fast compared to what I've read in this thread. My daughter got stepped on on her stomach by one of the ponies and she was out of the ER in 3 hours. When I got kicked in the leg by one of my friends horses and they thought it was broken, they had everything done and had me out of there in less than an hour.
Even when I've had to go to the ER for non emergencies because it was after business hours and couldn't wait, I've never been in there for longer than 4 hours. That's not how long it took to see the doctor, that's how long I was there total.

It's only longer wait times for me because I have to go through my primary care doctor to get a referral which is then approved by the insurance company prior to me making an appt. I scheduled my MRI on Thursday for the 8th, so it's not super long wait there but it's also at the military clinic and doesn't need a referral. It took me a month from seeing my doctor to get in to see my last specialist because I had to wait on a referral. Doesn't bother me as I'm still not paying anything. And we see the bills - they are horrendous.

Originally Posted by KrazE

Maybe I'm wrong and need to go back a few posts, but so far I'm getting the following items from this thread:

• Those FOR UHC know what it's like to do without proper healthcare
• Those AGAINST UHC do not know what it's like to do without healthcare, can certainly afford insurance and believe that the majority of those without insurance could afford it if they weren't such terrible spenders...
• That all the Canadians responding trying to explain what the tax system is like (to a point) falls on deaf ears to those who would rather believe false information
• That a bunch of us have vehicles with a zillion miles on them

I simply fail to understand how ANYONE could justify saying that healthcare isn't a right, hell it's a must!
How can anyone say that a child should do without seeing a doctor for an ailment that truly hurts because they automatically assume the parents must be over-spending on material possessions.
I also fail to understand how some people can't seem to get a few simple facts straight...

A family CAN be living just a squeaky hair about the line that allow them to qualify for ANY medical or financial help, but low-income enough to just barely get by. There IS a financial limbo for millions of people, and unless you have been there, you cannot possibly make assumptions that people need to 'cut back' when there is nothing to cut back.

As a Canadian with access to proper healthcare when I need it, I will always hope that something is done to allow Americans to have that kind of access too; every human being has the right to proper care, to good health, to being able to take their sick child to a doctor and get care without having to wonder how they are going to afford food to pay the fee.

My train of though keeps taking a different set of tracks (obviously), but that can be blamed on my absolute shock at some of the responses.

I've never been without proper health care. I went from a military brat to a military wife. I know how dang lucky I am to never have to worry about getting the care I need and I know that it's a RIGHT that should be granted to everyone.

[glasscandie]

Originally Posted by (.Y.)mom2dd(.Y.)

The people are taxed, just not at the 45% plus 15% you claim. We also have business taxes. If you provide your sources, maybe I can help break it down better for you.

I've looked at like, 30,0000 sites for this debate, but Wiki sums it up: Tax rates around the world - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is what I was saying - 15%. 5% GST and depending on the providence, 0-10% but essentially you end up paying about 15% in taxable sales. At the highest income bracket, a person would be paying something like 55% on federal and provincial taxes.

Alberta doesn't happen to pay sales tax, but the rest of Canada does, correct?

[**Badfish**]

Originally Posted by OceanChild

No one additionally has addressed my point that I made in a PP, so feel free: "It would be nice if everyone could have health insurance without doubt, but that inevitably leads to a downward slide on relying on the government, and that goes exactly against what America was founded on."

Benjamin Franklin founded the country's first hospital. The colonies footed the bill to provide medical care to settlers who needed it, and the colonies paid for the funerals of those who died. This country was founded on everyone being able to see a doctor when they needed it, regardless of their income.

The more I read this thread, the more I think it's in my best interest to just move to Canada.

[MissTorrieIfYou'reNasty]

Originally Posted by OceanChild

No one additionally has addressed my point that I made in a PP, so feel free: "It would be nice if everyone could have health insurance without doubt, but that inevitably leads to a downward slide on relying on the government, and that goes exactly against what America was founded on."

Complete excluded middle. Either we are left on our own with a corrupt and immoral system or we become sad little unthinking sacks sucking on the public teat? There's no middle ground? What about Canada? What about France? What about Germany? They pioneered the science in literally growing limbs and organs, which advances all the time. The first face transplant (FACE. TRANSPLANT. Just a few years before it was literally science fiction.) was performed in France by a French Surgeon. I would argue that being forward thinking, progressive, and innovative isn't dependent of a profit driven system. Those qualities aren't going to go away in Americans because we change our system. Freedom doesn't have to go out the window.

In the Founding Father's days, they couldn't have foreseen the amount of advancement we have today. They couldn't have understood that one day the science of the human body may require infrastructure for people to maintain. It would have even been incomprehensible to them that one doesn't have to die of a broken leg. They were champions for the common man, against oligarchy. I do believe that if I could explain the mechanics of the current system to them, they would be revulsed.

[WineKeepsMeSane]

Originally Posted by OceanChild

I've looked at like, 30,0000 sites for this debate, but Wiki sums it up: Tax rates around the world - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is what I was saying - 15%. 5% GST and depending on the providence, 0-10% but essentially you end up paying about 15% in taxable sales. At the highest income bracket, a person would be paying something like 55% on federal and provincial taxes.

Alberta doesn't happen to pay sales tax, but the rest of Canada does, correct?

Sorry, but your math is wrong! How many freaking times do I have to lay out the structure? You are not taxed the top percentage on your entire income, only the the highest bracket portion of your income. So, no one is actually paying 40% income tax plus 15% sales tax. If you like, I can be a good math student and show my work for full marks. I could even do a little basic algebra and back calculate exactly how much one would have to make to be taxed 40%.

Sweeping generalizations that people pay 45% income tax is incorrect, and that is my entire point. Sales tax varies. Sales tax is also somewhat optional, since many essential items aren't taxed, and used items aren't taxed provincially.

[glasscandie]

Originally Posted by amegra

Furthermore, I don't have a lot of sympathy for the person in your example that has to pay the sales tax on a $100k vehicle. Gee, whatever will they do! Clearly, a person's right to buy a $100k vehicle without an extra 15% sales tax is far more important than a person's right to access health care when they need it.

Why don't we all just pool our money then. What is the point of striving for success if someone is just going to pay for you? In America, the tax system is set up to screw those who work hard. If you reach the 50% tax bracket you give more to the gov't than you do to yourself. My fundamental question is, why should people in higher income brackets have to pay for other people's health care *just because* they are in higher income brackets? I don't think the gov't should be involved in this at all, it is *not* America's government's responsibility to give out health care, it is the responsibility of the gov't to facilitate a place where people can take action to provide for themselves and their families. That is the very basis of what our founding fathers founded this country on. It does suck that there's a recession. It does suck that there is this twisted interconnection between America's politics and America's health care system. But that doesn't mean we have to jump on the UHC bandwagon to fix it. We need to get rid of HMO's, PPO's. We need to stop using ER's as doctor's offices. We need to fix the tax system, and we need to fix the medical industry, in particular the way doctors/insurance companies/politicians interact.

[glasscandie]

Originally Posted by Jess is Write

Wrong. We make too much to qualify for Medicaid. Granted, we do pay for private insurance for our son, but we can't afford it for all three of us. We do not have any luxuries. We have internet because I work from home. We do have basic cable, but it's because we don't go out to eat, we don't go to the movies, we don't even rent movies. Our TV is six years old and it was a Christmas gift from my parents. We do not have an Xbox or Playstation or anything like that. We don't believe in buying new cars. I'm not complaining. I like living this way, and it honestly would be like this even if we made an extra $20k a year, but we would have health insurance.

If we tried to pay an extra $1,000/month for an insurance premium, we would not be able to pay for our most basic needs. I have shaved our budget down as much as possible, and I cannot come up with an extra grand a month. I doubt many people could.

I can sympathize with your situation, it was very similar to mine when I was a child growing up. This is why I put out the idea of expanding Medicare/Medicaid to allow for higher income levels. I still don't think that's a reason to jump to UHC.

Originally Posted by Torrie

Complete excluded middle. Either we are left on our own with a corrupt and immoral system or we become sad little unthinking sacks sucking on the public teat? There's no middle ground? .

Torrie, I've said over and over in this debate that I think we need reform, but I don't think UHC is the way to go. The one statement I made I agree was a little misleading to that, but for clarification, the first sentence of this post is my opinion.

[WineKeepsMeSane]

Originally Posted by OceanChild

Why don't we all just pool our money then. What is the point of striving for success if someone is just going to pay for you? In America, the tax system is set up to screw those who work hard. If you reach the 50% tax bracket you give more to the gov't than you do to yourself. My fundamental question is, why should people in higher income brackets have to pay for other people's health care *just because* they are in higher income brackets? I don't think the gov't should be involved in this at all, it is *not* America's government's responsibility to give out health care, it is the responsibility of the gov't to facilitate a place where people can take action to provide for themselves and their families. That is the very basis of what our founding fathers founded this country on. .

You know, I agreed with your initial points - that what's being proposed likely isn't the solution, etc. But then you had to go and revert back to this argument. Ugh. This kind of attitude angers me so much I can't even type coherent sentences about it. I'll stick with my socialist commies here in Canada with UHC, thanks.

[glasscandie]

Originally Posted by Jess is Write

Benjamin Franklin founded the country's first hospital. The colonies footed the bill to provide medical care to settlers who needed it, and the colonies paid for the funerals of those who died. This country was founded on everyone being able to see a doctor when they needed it, regardless of their income.

That has not changed. You can still go to an ER and cannot get turned away. I still would not say the country was "founded" on being able to see a doctor. It's just common sense that people would offer free services to other people to get them to move somewhere else.

The rights guaranteed in America and outlined by Declaration of Independence are those of action. You have the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness. It doesn't mean the gov't is responsible for giving them to you.

[KrazE]

Originally Posted by Keskes

The more I read this thread, the more I think it's in my best interest to just move to Canada.

Bring your long undies, we live in Igloos cause all our money goes to taxes you know!

[glasscandie]

Originally Posted by KrazE

Bring your long undies, we live in Igloos cause all our money goes to taxes you know!

I knew I was right.

[Lash]

I thought the money went to train the Huskies to pull sleds. Don't you all get free dog sled teams? How the hell else do you travel?

[glasscandie]

Originally Posted by amegra

You know, I agreed with your initial points - that what's being proposed likely isn't the solution, etc. But then you had to go and revert back to this argument. Ugh. This kind of attitude angers me so much I can't even type coherent sentences about it. I'll stick with my socialist commies here in Canada with UHC, thanks.

What is just about taking away the majority of someone's income because they make more money than the average person? I still don't understand. Why would someone strive to succeed past a certain class? And you do realize that I am posting as a one-income military wife (our pay chart is posted all over the internet, we're E5, go look it up) who is not floating in money, right? So here we are, with a mediocre income, and I'm arguing for the rights of those who make substantially more money than I do. Why is that distasteful?

Originally Posted by OceanChild

I've looked at like, 30,0000 sites for this debate, but Wiki sums it up: Tax rates around the world - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is what I was saying - 15%. 5% GST and depending on the providence, 0-10% but essentially you end up paying about 15% in taxable sales. At the highest income bracket, a person would be paying something like 55% on federal and provincial taxes.

Alberta doesn't happen to pay sales tax, but the rest of Canada does, correct?

I'm looking at that source and still can't understand how you came to the conclusion we're paying 45%?
Look at this breakdown:

Canadian federal marginal tax rates of taxable income
2009:
$0 - $10,320 = 0% tax
$10,321 - $40,726 = 15%
$40,727 - $81,452 = 22%
$81,453 - $126,264 = 26%
over $126,264 = 29%

Income taxes in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, GST isn't a tax on everything. So that 5% isn't for the following:

Untaxed items
The tax is a 5% tax imposed on the supply of goods and services that are made in Canada, except certain items that are either "exempt" or "zero-rated":
For tax-free — i.e., "zero-rated" — sales, GST is charged by suppliers at a rate of 0% so effectively there is no GST collected. However when a supplier makes a zero-rated supply, it is eligible to recover any GST dibayar on purchases used in making the particular supply. This effectively removes the cascading tax from the particular goods and services.
Common zero-rated items include basic groceries, prescription drugs, inward/outbound transportation and medical devices (GST/HST Memoranda Series ME-04-02-9801-E 4.2 Medical and Assistive Devices). Certain exports of goods and services are also zero-rated.
For tax-exempt supplies, the supply is not subject to GST and suppliers do not charge tax on their exempt supplies. Furthermore, suppliers that make exempt supplies are not entitled to recover GST paid on inputs acquired for the purposes of making the exempt good or service. Tax-exempt items include long term residential rents, health and dental care, educational services, day-care services, legal aid services, and financial services.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goods_a...es_Tax_(Canada)

As far as I know Alberta is the only province that has zero sales tax. I only know because I live here. Even if I paid as high as 10%, look at the benefits we get from care if your child has autism to full health care coverage.

No this system isn't perfect but if you add up your taxes and your insurance coverage for limited coverage, who's further ahead?

[KrazE]

Originally Posted by Lash

I thought the money went to train the Huskies to pull sleds. Don't you all get free dog sled teams? How the hell else do you travel?

YouTube - I Am Canadian

[MissTorrieIfYou'reNasty]

Originally Posted by OceanChild

Why don't we all just pool our money then.

Excluded middle again. No one is advocating Communism.

What is the point of striving for success if someone is just going to pay for you?

Because no one in Canada or Britain is paying for everyone to get great housing, nice things, neighborhoods with good schools, and luxurious food, and everyone wants those things. By your logic, entire populations should be resting on their laurels, and they aren't. Not in any greater numbers then they do here.

In America, the tax system is set up to screw those who work hard. If you reach the 50% tax bracket you give more to the gov't than you do to yourself. My fundamental question is, why should people in higher income brackets have to pay for other people's health care *just because* they are in higher income brackets?

1. Being rich doesn't mean one worked hard.
2. Working hard doesn't mean one will be rich.
3. No man is an island. If he's rich, it's because someone along the way helped him. They also probably used existing infrastructure to get there and use more of it now that they are there. Rich people use more resources than poor people. Reference my earlier example about private jets.
4. No one deserves to die a horrible, painful death because their pocketbook isn't large. Much of where we end up in life is what we choose, but a good amount of it is luck. I don't want people to suffer because of luck if I think there is a way it can be avoided.

I don't think the gov't should be involved in this at all, it is *not* America's government's responsibility to give out health care, it is the responsibility of the gov't to facilitate a place where people can take action to provide for themselves and their families.

And if you're dead because an insurance company didn't want to pay for you, you can't provide for yourself or your family. And the government wouldn't be 'giving out' healthcare, it would come from taxes. Poor people *do* pay taxes, even if it's just a sales tax. That money would be collected and then distributed. How would depend on the situation of the nation at the time. Every country that has a version of UHC does it differently. The system is sort of privatized in Germany, doctors don't have to work for the government.

That is the very basis of what our founding fathers founded this country on.

They founded this country on the basis that everyone deserved a chance and a choice. The current system goes against that, actually.

It does suck that there's a recession.

Bad luck to get cancer during the recession right after your lay-off. Oh well, not my problem, have fun dying.

It does suck that there is this twisted interconnection between America's politics and America's health care system. But that doesn't mean we have to jump on the UHC bandwagon to fix it. We need to get rid of HMO's, PPO's. We need to stop using ER's as doctor's offices. We need to fix the tax system, and we need to fix the medical industry, in particular the way doctors/insurance companies/politicians interact.

Hell, if we could get this much fixed, that would be great. I might even be content with that much. It's not UHC or nothing for me. But UHC works in other countries just fine. They have good outcomes. People who think it's a total disaster of a system don't understand the systems. I recommend "Sick Around The World". All the different ways all these different nations provide care to all of their citizens, it's interesting.

One way to stop using ERs as doctor's offices is to ensure that people can get health insurance.

[WineKeepsMeSane]

Michelle, I already tried posting that. But apparently 30,000 internet sites give better information that the Canada Customs & Revenue Agency, and Canadians who do their taxes, and it keeps getting ignored somehow.....


Yes, rich people pay more. But rich people are still left with more left over!!! They're also likely more able to take advantage of tax savings via Registered Retirement Plans (contributions are tax free, and you can contribute up to a percentage of your income). Nobody is making people who work hard to get rich give so much of their money to the government that they end up back in middle class.

eta: a big ditto to Torrie's post above.

[MissTorrieIfYou'reNasty]

Originally Posted by OceanChild

What is just about taking away the majority of someone's income because they make more money than the average person? I still don't understand. Why would someone strive to succeed past a certain class?

Someone should have told these guys that they were wasting their time. All that work and they have NO advantages other people don't have. None at all. Progressive tax systems totally invalidated all of their billions and billions and billions of dollars.





If any of those guys gets cancer, they will get the absolute cream of the crop, super duper amazing treatment. Doctors will fall over themselves to splice pig dna on their anuses if they think it will help. What we are asking is for all people to be able to get normal treatment. Pardon me if I don't waste many tears for their sad lost tax dollars.