You're right, if he was in Brandon (pop: 43,000), going to Bismarck makes more sense geographically. Still, I would have gone to Winnipeg, which is a lot closer to Brandon and has 6-7 times the population of Bismarck. (Not that population directly relates to the availability of quality health care, but I would assume that there would be more doctors, more specialists, and more specialized equipment in larger centres.) Though it's possible that Brock just got fed up and wanted to get back into the States.
Originally posted by CerebusI just don't believe one's personal healthcare is a 'right'. If that was the case, what makes food and shelter any different. You need those to survive, right. Why not just give everyone free food and a house while you're at it.
Didnt Obama & the dems take free "Obamacare" off the table like a month ago? Why is that even up for debate anymore?
Then why was the bill still going to cost a trillion dollars?
Originally posted by dMr 1. That the multi-millionaire Brock Lesnar can afford better health care than the publicly-funded offering in Canada probably isn't going to change the mind of anyone who thinks the underprivileged need access to something better than they can reasonably afford in the US at present.
Actually, doesn't pointing out how people in rural areas can't get access to quality health care, even when it's provided 'free of charge' negate the argument that quality healthcare would be available for all if we had a Canadian type system?
Originally posted by dMr 1. That the multi-millionaire Brock Lesnar can afford better health care than the publicly-funded offering in Canada probably isn't going to change the mind of anyone who thinks the underprivileged need access to something better than they can reasonably afford in the US at present.
Actually, doesn't pointing out how people in rural areas can't get access to quality health care, even when it's provided 'free of charge' negate the argument that quality healthcare would be available for all if we had a Canadian type system?
(edited by StaggerLee on 23.1.10 1609)
But that's not what Brock was doing. He was slamming the whole system based on his experience (in a rural area). In parentheses because he didn't pin it on being in a rural area, but because it's Canadian.
You wanted the best, you got... the Out of Context Quote of the Week.
"Besides, you already had me at "Blood and semen."" (Zeruel)
Originally posted by Matt TrackerSounds like he was in the boonies.
According to Meltzer, Lesnar was hunting near Gimli, Manitoba (population: 5,800). Winnipeg (population: 600,000+) is less than an hour's drive from Gimli, so I'm guessing he went to the hospital there. If you went straight from Gimli to North Dakota, you'd have to go through or around Winnipeg. Though I'm not sure why you would go to Bismarck - Fargo is a bigger city and would be quicker to get to from Gimli or Winnipeg.
Regardless, to be fair to Brock, Winnipeg IS pretty ass-awful.
Ahem.
Winnipeg isn't the greatest city in the world (or in Canada, for that matter) but we have some great hospitals here. I would easily rank it above Toronto or Montreal is quality.
Originally posted by dMr 1. That the multi-millionaire Brock Lesnar can afford better health care than the publicly-funded offering in Canada probably isn't going to change the mind of anyone who thinks the underprivileged need access to something better than they can reasonably afford in the US at present.
Actually, doesn't pointing out how people in rural areas can't get access to quality health care, even when it's provided 'free of charge' negate the argument that quality healthcare would be available for all if we had a Canadian type system?
(edited by StaggerLee on 23.1.10 1609)
But that's not what Brock was doing. He was slamming the whole system based on his experience (in a rural area). In parentheses because he didn't pin it on being in a rural area, but because it's Canadian.
Right. However, if we're to argue that OUR nation needs government intervention in healthcare, and we point to other nations that have it, shouldn't we look at the shortfalls of those nations, be it in urban or rural areas? It was the CANADIAN system he didn't like. Perhaps he was saying that he expected more from a country who has a large amount of their population singing the praises of their system.
Originally posted by StaggerLeeRight. However, if we're to argue that OUR nation needs government intervention in healthcare, and we point to other nations that have it, shouldn't we look at the shortfalls of those nations, be it in urban or rural areas? It was the CANADIAN system he didn't like. Perhaps he was saying that he expected more from a country who has a large amount of their population singing the praises of their system.
But again, "Obamacare" is/was only intended for those Americans who either (A) cant afford "traditional" (for lack of a better word) health insurance from "traditional" sources, or (B) for those Americans who dont like whatever current plan available to them from their employer (or wherever their current plan comes from).
So if what you have is better than Obamacare for you, keep what you have! If not, now you have another option. If you have no healthcare at all, surely having Obamacare or CanadaCare or UK-care or whatever-care is better than nothing, right?
Now if you dont like Obama's plan because it's too expensive or you dont think the government is capable of running an efficient healthcare system or you think providing healthcare is not the govt's job, that's one thing. But I really dont understand this "But people in other countries hate their free healthcare!" argument and I dont think it holds water.
Originally posted by StaggerLeeRight. However, if we're to argue that OUR nation needs government intervention in healthcare, and we point to other nations that have it, shouldn't we look at the shortfalls of those nations, be it in urban or rural areas? It was the CANADIAN system he didn't like. Perhaps he was saying that he expected more from a country who has a large amount of their population singing the praises of their system.
There's a difference between rural and remote. It would never be possible to give literally *everyone* immediate access to health care because there'll always be some people who live in the back of beyond and it obviously wouldn't be possible to fund a fully equipped hospital that would only serve a handful of people.
You make a not unreasonable point though that the geography/demographics of a country might make it difficult to get medicval faciliites within easy reach of even a high percentage of the population. I'd imagine this would be less of a problem in the US than in Canada, but it's not a question I could claim to be qualified to answer.
My overarching point is simply that it's perfectly obvious that there are tons of people who (quite rightly) believe the best medical care money can buy is better and more comfortable than that which is typically available publicly. we know this because people with 'free' health care also choose to pay for private care. I don't think any right thinking person would dispute the point anyway, so having Brock Lesnar say it seems kinda inconsequential.
I'm in danger of repeating myself though and you seem to be having to debate similar points on multiple fronts which seems a little unfair, so I'll leave it at that.
The new F4W confirms that Brock was initially hospitalized in Brandon.
I don't think it matters whether your health care is funded through taxes or paid for out-of-pocket as needed; the level of available care is going to be at least somewhat relative to the population base of the area. It's unreasonable to expect Brandon to have the same level of available services as even Winnipeg, much less (say) Toronto. Americans (who can afford to do so) travel to receive the best possible care too - just like Brock did when he left Bismarck and went to the Mayo Clinic.
Originally posted by OliverWinnipeg isn't the greatest city in the world (or in Canada, for that matter) but we have some great hospitals here. I would easily rank it above Toronto or Montreal is quality.
I don't know from Winnipeg's hospitals, but I know from its blizzards, its mosquitoes, its incomprehensible traffic lights and road signs, and its general dumpiness. Some people I am very fond of live in Winnipeg, but I still don't like the city at all.
Thread ahead: Howard Zinn (1922-2010) Next thread: Man who exposed ACORN arrested Previous thread: Supreme Court sticks up for those poor, neglected corporations