Forum Thread

Canada versus the US

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 42 1 2 3 Next
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Copied because it refused ( blocked by someone?) to "paste"

    Article:

    How did Canada just surpass the US to have the world richest middle class?

    USA CANADA

    $ 7.25 Minimum wage $10.45

    10% Unionization Rate 30%

    $4316.- Health cost per person Free

    Weak Bank regulations Strong

    As I said many times before, these and other elements like stringent control on doctors and the "pill" pushers as well fraud, who rip of Medicare for $60 billion a year and our failure to control such. Bandaids as proposed by Hillary wont work.

    Only strict oversight and getting rid of "lobbyists' will work.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: $4316.- Health cost per person Free

    Nothing in life is free. A typical Canadian pays upwards of 50% of their income towards federal and provincial taxes. And all provinces have an additional sales tax that they themselves determine.

    I'd much rather have a system where I would pay far more taxes and have more generous government benefits, but that's a nonstarter for 99.9% of Republicans and many Democrats.

  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I have many, many Canadians friends and not one of them lusts to become "Exceprional Americans" they do all love the warmth in FL however as Dutch can attest.

    In spite of the 25% lower value of the C$ they don't seem to worry about anything other than spending more than 180 days per year in the USA and therefor losing their Canadian bennies!

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The other majority and quite possibly the significant majority are exactly represented and defined by views and interpretations similar to jaredsxtn's. They take common sense observable conditions and accept and repeat the neoconism teachings. An outstanding and exceptional example of spinning the truth into neoconism is a recent pronouncement by Allan Greenspan. He said " we are in trouble". He cites low productivity and no capital investing and lowering standard of living. He blamed and blames and blames entitlements. But what about Greenspan's push of money into the Clinton deregulated otc in derivatives. What about removing the middleman in stock investing by a zero interest rate. Driving savings out of banks directly into stocks. Capital investing and low productivity can be addressed by the flood of money into the derivative market. The consensus goes along with Greenspan. Is jaredsxtn's comment about the old lady's social security check typical of a majority educated by neocons? Is it typical of a mid group to see everything thru neocon glasses? Is that what supported Hillary against Bernie from the beginning of the campaign? Is that what caused the historically liberal MSN to downplay Bernie from the beginning? The outsider was the real Democrat that lost.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote: $4316.- Health cost per person Free

    Nothing in life is free. A typical Canadian pays upwards of 50% of their income towards federal and provincial taxes. And all provinces have an additional sales tax that they themselves determine.

    I'd much rather have a system where I would pay far more taxes and have more generous government benefits, but that's a nonstarter for 99.9% of Republicans and many Democrats.

    Yes, I agree that nothing in life is free; however if you would have ( like in Europe) a sliding tax scale so the billionaires pay up to 75% and an government like Canada or Denmark does not spent it all on super war toys or war itself as here and tries to have an efficient non bloated government, then a tax scale for the lower classes does not have to be that high. That may be called "socialism" thus a dirty word here, so likely we just muddle onwards etc. Related to healthcare we will never be able to provide "free" healthcare because of our refusal to "fix" the cost and stop "lobbyists" and "corruption/fraud" of the whole industry. Healthcare "cost" should be strictly controlled as well hospital and doctors fees. In Europe they use a "coding" system with fixed pricing as negotiated with the industry as well hospitals and doctors. Also the "billing" system by these care suppliers, should be made such way that "corruption" and "fraud" is virtually impossible. In Europe they do that by "coding" the services and computerized "billing". Also the administration and data is fully digital in other developed countries (not cabinets full with patients files/binders as I experienced here) Here it happened that one doctor was able to bill for $375 million as an "head" of an "team of doctors" who milked the whole system, because the set up here is asking for it. "Oversight" in this country is an "dirty" word.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I like to add related to our healthcare cost versus other countries that the US has an 40% obesity rate, which is the highest in the world; then on top of that the highest "drug" use and abuse, as well the most gun, car, work related accidents, which drives up healthcare cost. The enormous push for junk food here also creates all kind of illnesses as well cancer. So the environment here including the "stress" factor for a lot of people makes this an bad environment to "create" "free" health care for everyone.

    Of course a lot of VA healthcare "costs" are paid as part of our "taxes" as another burden on our country, which will continue forever.

    So I'm of the opinion, that whatever Hillary may do that it will not solve/improve our "healthcare cost" unless this country and its people/government change drastically and start using common sense by improving oversight as well the health of the people here improves.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    pr Wrote:

    I have many, many Canadians friends and not one of them lusts to become "Exceprional Americans" they do all love the warmth in FL however as Dutch can attest.

    In spite of the 25% lower value of the C$ they don't seem to worry about anything other than spending more than 180 days per year in the USA and therefor losing their Canadian bennies!

    So they enjoy spending 180 days in America, but don't like America? That's a hell of a lot of time to spend in a country they think is filled with flag waiving idiots.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: The other majority and quite possibly the significant majority are exactly represented and defined by views and interpretations similar to jaredsxtn's. They take common sense observable conditions and accept and repeat the neoconism teachings. An outstanding and exceptional example of spinning the truth into neoconism is a recent pronouncement by Allan Greenspan. He said " we are in trouble". He cites low productivity and no capital investing and lowering standard of living. He blamed and blames and blames entitlements. But what about Greenspan's push of money into the Clinton deregulated otc in derivatives. What about removing the middleman in stock investing by a zero interest rate. Driving savings out of banks directly into stocks. Capital investing and low productivity can be addressed by the flood of money into the derivative market. The consensus goes along with Greenspan.

    Are you honestly accusing me of being a neoconservative? Have I ever once indicated I had interventionist foreign policy leanings and cared only about free market capitalism? I've been compared to various things, but I have to admit being compared to Allan Greenspan is a first. What world are you living in?

    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Is jaredsxtn's comment about the old lady's social security check typical of a majority educated by neocons? Is it typical of a mid group to see everything thru neocon glasses? Is that what supported Hillary against Bernie from the beginning of the campaign? Is that what caused the historically liberal MSN to downplay Bernie from the beginning? The outsider was the real Democrat that lost.

    Here is my full quote:

    I've already told you what categories fall into mandatory spending. We're not ripping off old ladies; we are sending them a Social Security check each month. The VA is not under war costs because that is discretionary spending and I would hope you agree that we should continue to pay for soldiers injuries even after they are done serving their country.

    This was in response to a statement by Dutch that said we're ripping off old ladies and I tried to explain how the Social Security program works. I'd love nothing more than to give more money to those old ladies, but that is the job of Congress; not the President.

    Calling me a neocon just because I have different opinions than you is unfortunate. I am about as liberal as they come on a host of issues (as my thousands of posts can attest), but just because I don't agree with you on certain issues doesn't mean I'm some flag waiving neoconservative.


    Bernie was promising things he could never deliver on. Anyone who understands how our government actually functions knew that from the start of his campaign. The President is not a king and must work with the Congress to get things done in this country.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    jaredsxtn, people too lazy to look for jobs, when I described a health insurance case where a person lost insurance and couldn't get insurance you responded that you didn't feel sorry for him because he missed process opportunities where he could have gotten insurance. In both cases and typically you side with systems that are limited, underfunded, exhibition targeted and short sighted. You could at least be conciliatory and recognize the short comings of the system instead of placing responsibility with people that can't help themselves. I see that as a right conservative position. You fault critics of the system for not offering solutions and then defend the system saying short comings are the fault of recipients for expecting too much or being ignorant of process. That is not liberal. In the least it is elitist. It is not wishing more could be done.

  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Tucson, AZ
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Jared (and pr):

    Both of my wife's sisters (who live in Minnesota) have been spending winters in Arizona the last couple of years. In both of the resorts where they stay, there are more Canadians than there are any other group. In all, 1,000,000 Canadians winter in Arizona each year, and they spend $1 billion a year in tourism dollars. In all, 23 million Canadians came to America in 2014, and they spent 26.3 billion when they were here, so it's pretty clear that they like America.

    In the unlikely event that "the orange one" gets elected President, I know at least a few people who would seriously consider moving to Canada on a permanent basis.

    Canada has loonies (the Canadian dollar) and we have Republicans, so we're actually similar in a few ways. On the positive side, Wreck Beach (in Vancouver, British Columbia) is considered to be one of the best "clothing optional" beaches in the world. In most places in Canada, you can also buy Carrington's Rye Whiskey, which is absolutely amazing stuff.

  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I said they enjoy up to 180 days in the Florida sunshine NOT FLORIDA or the USA, big difference and I have yet to meet one who would ever consider moving here full time other than Justin Beaver ;( !
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    pr Wrote: I said they enjoy up to 180 days in the Florida sunshine NOT FLORIDA or the USA, big difference and I have yet to meet one who would ever consider moving here full time other than Justin Beaver ;( !
    Well said P.R. indeed our "tourists" will leave in a hurry once they see what our fantastic GOP governor Scott is doing to our beaches, by letting the polluters , pollute all they like because he got elected by means of their money. Also the guy ripped off his hospital "chain" for millions and claimed the "fifth" while his buddy's all went to jail. Furthermore the "traffic" is horrendous, since hardly any "public transportation" is available for tourists. Infrastructure is lacking; except where the rich live. That is why this Scott guy is an excellent choice for V.P. for Trump.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Personal actions of people are really no reflection of conditions where they live. The grass is greener on the other side of the fence. The type of people that travel are most likely affluent and most likely could be comfortable almost any place they travel. I spent a year in Iceland and appreciated all the positive features but would not want to live there permanently. The geo thermal heated water stinks from sulfur.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "I'd much rather have a system where I would pay far more taxes and have more generous government benefits, but that's a nonstarter for 99.9% of Republicans and many Democrats."

    All so true and 99% would benefit. Unfortunately the 1% have convinced the 99% it would be wrong.

  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    So true Chet!