- 注册
- 2010-07-16
- 消息
- 6,980
- 荣誉分数
- 646
- 声望点数
- 123
加拿大医疗是慢些，不过能返回香港看病的，不应该到急症科。
如果你不知道投哪个党，我提供给你一个投票的思路:关注医疗改革，投票给反对党
- 主题发起人 老闹子
- 开始时间
加拿大医疗是慢些，不过能返回香港看病的，不应该到急症科。
- 注册
- 2010-07-16
- 消息
- 6,980
- 荣誉分数
- 646
- 声望点数
- 123
今天晚上的彩票中奖金额很高。买彩票呢，中奖机率很低，这就好比找信誓旦旦的政党政客来解决问题；如果你不买彩票呢，中奖机率为零，这就好比找根本对这个问题不关心的政党政客来解决问题。很多人知道中奖期望不高，但是不妨试试。
老闹同学，解决问题不是去赌运气，得有一个切实可行计划。这个问题其实大家都很关注，只是没人有好办法。而且解决这个问题必定要牺牲一部分人的利益，所以大家在这个时候都不敢提到它。至于在野党的不负责任的空头支票，我想大家也都明白，那根本是死路一条。
现在与其一叶障目地炒作，不如跟关注这个问题的个人和组织一起来研究解决问题的方法更现实。古人说：与其临渊羡鱼，不如退而结网。你说捏
老闹同学，解决问题不是去赌运气，得有一个切实可行计划。这个问题其实大家都很关注，只是没人有好办法。而且解决这个问题必定要牺牲一部分人的利益，所以大家在这个时候都不敢提到它。至于在野党的不负责任的空头支票，我想大家也都明白，那根本是死路一条。
现在与其一叶障目地炒作，不如跟关注这个问题的个人和组织一起来研究解决问题的方法更现实。古人说：与其临渊羡鱼，不如退而结网。你说捏
老师啊，你好像总是混淆了在政党竞选的过程中选民和政客的角色。我一再说了，选民的角色就是提出问题，根据政党对问题回复的解决方案进行评判，并最后决定投票支持哪个政党；而政党的角色，才是研究和提供社会问题解决方案的。
另外，我不理解老师怎么会把我定性为“炒作”？老师所说的“炒作”是什么意思呢？
老闹同学，你才是没有亲身体验瞎猜测呢。
我今年1月17号滑雪小腿骨裂，当天被救护车拉到Gatineau医院急诊部，等了6小时，上了个简易石膏打发回家。给了张referral单子＋X光光盘。
第二天去Queensway看急诊，立刻被排到FastTrack队，诊断，再次照X光，确诊一共用了两小时。确诊结果需要手术，但必须空腹。于是在医院等到晚上9点开刀。手术＋苏醒总共用了一小时，没住院，当天晚上就拄着拐回家了。
wiki学姐，我对于加拿大医疗效率低，的确自己没有亲身体验，主要是通过看到朋友的经历，统计局的报告，以及新闻的披露，才认识到这个问题严重。但是，我这也不算瞎猜吧。学姐看过那个CBC2007年的报道吗？加拿大人平均等待治疗时间是18周，不是18天。
腿伤好了吗？希望没有大碍了。我本来就不敢滑雪，听了你的事故，我更加坚定我的信念了。
自由党在医疗健康问题上挑战保守党。
Michael Ignatieff makes strong commitment to the future of health care in open letter to Canadians
Posted on April 8, 2011
HAMILTON – In an announcement at the Juravinski Hospital in Hamilton, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff addressed his open letter to Canadians on the future of health care by calling on Stephen Harper to break his silence about his plans for the replacement of the 2014 Health Accord.
“Stephen Harper’s out-of-control spending commitments for 2014 and beyond will leave no money for health care,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “Instead of wasteful spending on jets, jails and corporate tax cuts, the Liberal Party is making another choice: investing in health care so that it’s there when every Canadian family needs it.
“A Liberal government will be at the table for health care, to work with the provinces and territories by tackling head-on two challenges: rising health costs and variations in the quality and availability of care across Canada,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “We will invest in health care beyond 2014, so that provinces can get on with the job of reforming our health care system.”
As part of a new arrangement with the provinces and territories, a Liberal government will continue the current 6% health care funding escalator beyond 2014, and have two priorities for health care reform:
* Homecare services: Ensuring high-quality care in the home, including for priority areas like mental health and palliative care, everywhere in Canada; and
* Drug coverage: Reducing the cost of prescription drugs for the health care system and ensuring that every Canadian – from coast to coast to coast – has adequate drug coverage.
In the Liberal Platform, the Liberal Party has also committed to providing direct support to Canadian families facing health challenges:
* Family Care Plan: A $1,350 Family Care Tax Benefit, and the Family Care EI benefit to let you take time off to care for a loved one at home;
* Canadian Brain Health Strategy: $100 million over the first two years of a Liberal government for research into treatments and cures for Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia;
* Health promotion and Canada’s first National Food Policy: Promoting exercise, healthy eating, nutrition, better food labeling, local farmers’ markets, Canadian food on Canadian plates, regulating salt and transfats, and improving the food inspection system; and
* Improved rural health services: An additional $40 million over two years to improve rural health services in cooperation with provinces, territories, municipalities and medical professionals.
“Before May 2, Canadians need to know if Mr. Harper stands by his past comments in favour of scrapping the Canada Health Act,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “If these are no longer his views, I am calling on Mr. Harper to tell Canadians how he plans to defend and improve Canada’s health care system when replacing the Health Aaccord with the provinces and territories.”
Instead of a clear commitment to health care funding, Stephen Harper has made major spending commitments for 2014 and beyond that will leave inadequate funding behind for health care:
* $30 billion for fighter jets;
* $6 billion for annual, unnecessary tax cuts for large corporations;
* $13 billion – and climbing – for U.S.-style mega-prisons;
* $2.5 billion per year to pay for income splitting for better-off Canadians; and
* Expanding tax-free savings accounts at a cost that will rise to billions annually.
“In this election, Canadians need to choose who they trust to defend health care,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “The Liberal Party’s commitment to universal, free, quality, timely health care remains unshakeable – but Stephen Harper has taken health care off the national agenda and done nothing to guarantee its future.”
Michael Ignatieff makes strong commitment to the future of health care in open letter to Canadians
Posted on April 8, 2011
HAMILTON – In an announcement at the Juravinski Hospital in Hamilton, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff addressed his open letter to Canadians on the future of health care by calling on Stephen Harper to break his silence about his plans for the replacement of the 2014 Health Accord.
“Stephen Harper’s out-of-control spending commitments for 2014 and beyond will leave no money for health care,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “Instead of wasteful spending on jets, jails and corporate tax cuts, the Liberal Party is making another choice: investing in health care so that it’s there when every Canadian family needs it.
“A Liberal government will be at the table for health care, to work with the provinces and territories by tackling head-on two challenges: rising health costs and variations in the quality and availability of care across Canada,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “We will invest in health care beyond 2014, so that provinces can get on with the job of reforming our health care system.”
As part of a new arrangement with the provinces and territories, a Liberal government will continue the current 6% health care funding escalator beyond 2014, and have two priorities for health care reform:
* Homecare services: Ensuring high-quality care in the home, including for priority areas like mental health and palliative care, everywhere in Canada; and
* Drug coverage: Reducing the cost of prescription drugs for the health care system and ensuring that every Canadian – from coast to coast to coast – has adequate drug coverage.
In the Liberal Platform, the Liberal Party has also committed to providing direct support to Canadian families facing health challenges:
* Family Care Plan: A $1,350 Family Care Tax Benefit, and the Family Care EI benefit to let you take time off to care for a loved one at home;
* Canadian Brain Health Strategy: $100 million over the first two years of a Liberal government for research into treatments and cures for Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia;
* Health promotion and Canada’s first National Food Policy: Promoting exercise, healthy eating, nutrition, better food labeling, local farmers’ markets, Canadian food on Canadian plates, regulating salt and transfats, and improving the food inspection system; and
* Improved rural health services: An additional $40 million over two years to improve rural health services in cooperation with provinces, territories, municipalities and medical professionals.
“Before May 2, Canadians need to know if Mr. Harper stands by his past comments in favour of scrapping the Canada Health Act,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “If these are no longer his views, I am calling on Mr. Harper to tell Canadians how he plans to defend and improve Canada’s health care system when replacing the Health Aaccord with the provinces and territories.”
Instead of a clear commitment to health care funding, Stephen Harper has made major spending commitments for 2014 and beyond that will leave inadequate funding behind for health care:
* $30 billion for fighter jets;
* $6 billion for annual, unnecessary tax cuts for large corporations;
* $13 billion – and climbing – for U.S.-style mega-prisons;
* $2.5 billion per year to pay for income splitting for better-off Canadians; and
* Expanding tax-free savings accounts at a cost that will rise to billions annually.
“In this election, Canadians need to choose who they trust to defend health care,” said Mr. Ignatieff. “The Liberal Party’s commitment to universal, free, quality, timely health care remains unshakeable – but Stephen Harper has taken health care off the national agenda and done nothing to guarantee its future.”
- 注册
- 2007-12-02
- 消息
- 550
- 荣誉分数
- 532
- 声望点数
- 203
这里看病的制度是预约制，与中国不一样。 所以，经常需要等位置，因为别人已经把时间给预订了，即便他没有急需要看的病。 这与政府没有太大关系。俺也抱怨这一点，但是预约制度没有办法改变，专科医生不接受 walk-in 病人。如果专科医生也能像一些家庭医生一样，接受 walk-in 病人，也就不需要推荐和预约了，也就能很快看上专科医生，跟中国一样。但在这里是不可能的，因为这里看病是预约制。
但是，就我个人的经历和几个朋友的经历来看，如果你真有医生认为很严重的病，一般还是挺快的，时间安排还是比较合理的。 至于比如说做MRI检查，排队时间是10周或更长，一般是这样。 但是如果医生认为你需要马上做， 还是会很快的。 就如同我有一位朋友需要做一种手术，医院还是尽量很快安排了。
但是，就我个人的经历和几个朋友的经历来看，如果你真有医生认为很严重的病，一般还是挺快的，时间安排还是比较合理的。 至于比如说做MRI检查，排队时间是10周或更长，一般是这样。 但是如果医生认为你需要马上做， 还是会很快的。 就如同我有一位朋友需要做一种手术，医院还是尽量很快安排了。
LIB要缩短与PC的差距，就因该强调HEALTH CARE。道理很简单，因为民调显示HEALTH CARE和JOB／ECONOMY是选民最关心的俩个问题。而PC并不想在HEALTH CARE上有所作为，它认为只要抓住JOB／ECONOMY这个问题就可以了。选民中，中，老年人投票率最高，而恰恰是他们更关心HEALTHCARE。可惜啊，LIB的ELECTION PLATFORM没有强调HEALTH CARE，只搞了个＂FAMILY CAREPLAN＂。可能HEALTH CARE这个问题太难对付吧。HEALTH CARE虽然是省政府的事，但每年联邦政府还是拨款的吧，应该是有发言权的。LIB的ELECTION PLATFORM已经公布，现在意识到HEALTH CARE的重要性，想要补救。
自由党继续在医疗健康问题上挑战保守党的政策。
下面这篇文章转自加拿大自由党的党站网页。
Reality Check: Flaherty’s plan to slash health care funding
Posted on April 8, 2011
Today the Conservatives pretended to match the Liberal funding commitment to health care post-2014.
In summer 2010, Jim Flaherty revealed his plan to cut health care funding. Is this what Jim Flaherty meant in his 2011 budget when he said health care spending post-2014 is “subject to change”?
Flaherty’s comments about health costs in New Brunswick
In a July 2010 editorial board meeting with the New Brunswick Telegraph-Journal, Flaherty called for a cut to the annual Canada Health Transfer from a 6% annual increase to “real GDP” growth – or 2.6%:
“The provinces are going to have to look at their budgets and figure out ways of providing health care services without rampant growth,” Flaherty said.
“It’s about controlling the rate of growth so that health care doesn’t run away from the level of real GDP growth,” he said. (Curb health costs: Flaherty New Brunswick Telegraph-Journal, July 16, 2010)
Reaction to Flaherty’s 2010 health care transfer comments:
[Quebec Premier Jean] Charest said Thursday if Flaherty intends to fund health care only according to GDP growth, that’s “not sufficient.” (Niagara Falls Review, August 6, 2010)
The premiers are urging Ottawa to strike a new accord under the same terms. If health spending is not tied to the actual increase in costs, said Nova Scotia Premier Darrell Dexter, “then you are essentially withdrawing from health-care funding.” (Globe and Mail, August 6, 2010)
[PEI Premier Robert] Mr. Ghiz warned that if federal funding does not keep pace with rising costs, the quality of health care would suffer. The provinces would not be able to purchase new medications or keep up with advances in technology, he said. (Globe and Mail, August 6, 2010)
He said federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty wants to limit increases in health care funding to the rate of economic growth, but the provinces need more. “Health care increases on an annual basis are on the range of five or six per cent,” Charest said. “That’s not optional, by the way. The population is growing older.” (Winnipeg Free Press, August 6, 2010)
下面这篇文章转自加拿大自由党的党站网页。
Reality Check: Flaherty’s plan to slash health care funding
Posted on April 8, 2011
Today the Conservatives pretended to match the Liberal funding commitment to health care post-2014.
In summer 2010, Jim Flaherty revealed his plan to cut health care funding. Is this what Jim Flaherty meant in his 2011 budget when he said health care spending post-2014 is “subject to change”?
Flaherty’s comments about health costs in New Brunswick
In a July 2010 editorial board meeting with the New Brunswick Telegraph-Journal, Flaherty called for a cut to the annual Canada Health Transfer from a 6% annual increase to “real GDP” growth – or 2.6%:
“The provinces are going to have to look at their budgets and figure out ways of providing health care services without rampant growth,” Flaherty said.
“It’s about controlling the rate of growth so that health care doesn’t run away from the level of real GDP growth,” he said. (Curb health costs: Flaherty New Brunswick Telegraph-Journal, July 16, 2010)
Reaction to Flaherty’s 2010 health care transfer comments:
[Quebec Premier Jean] Charest said Thursday if Flaherty intends to fund health care only according to GDP growth, that’s “not sufficient.” (Niagara Falls Review, August 6, 2010)
The premiers are urging Ottawa to strike a new accord under the same terms. If health spending is not tied to the actual increase in costs, said Nova Scotia Premier Darrell Dexter, “then you are essentially withdrawing from health-care funding.” (Globe and Mail, August 6, 2010)
[PEI Premier Robert] Mr. Ghiz warned that if federal funding does not keep pace with rising costs, the quality of health care would suffer. The provinces would not be able to purchase new medications or keep up with advances in technology, he said. (Globe and Mail, August 6, 2010)
He said federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty wants to limit increases in health care funding to the rate of economic growth, but the provinces need more. “Health care increases on an annual basis are on the range of five or six per cent,” Charest said. “That’s not optional, by the way. The population is growing older.” (Winnipeg Free Press, August 6, 2010)
Health Care Parties Debate on CBC
2011-04-12
Health Care Reality Check - David Dodge
We started this segment with a clip of three Canadians talking about their stuggles with illness. Going into this election, more Canadians picked health care as their top political concern over any other issue. Given that, you might think health care would be a key election issue. But as the federal leaders hunker down in preparation for tonight's English-language debate, health care seems to have been largely side-lined.
This morning, we focused on the problems and hopefully some solutions on health care. We began with the pessimistic perspective of former Bank of Canada Governor, David Dodge. In a new report for the CD Howe Institute, he argues our current health care system is unsustainable and that governments will have to make difficult choices to fix it. David Dodge was in Phoenix, Arizona this morning.
Health Care Reality Check - Michael Rachlis/Diana Gibson
Not everyone agrees with David Dodge's assessment. Michael Rachlis is a health policy analyst and an associate professor at the University of Toronto. And Diana Gibson researches health care policy and she's the Research Director at the Parkland Institute at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.
2011-04-12
Health Care Reality Check - David Dodge
We started this segment with a clip of three Canadians talking about their stuggles with illness. Going into this election, more Canadians picked health care as their top political concern over any other issue. Given that, you might think health care would be a key election issue. But as the federal leaders hunker down in preparation for tonight's English-language debate, health care seems to have been largely side-lined.
This morning, we focused on the problems and hopefully some solutions on health care. We began with the pessimistic perspective of former Bank of Canada Governor, David Dodge. In a new report for the CD Howe Institute, he argues our current health care system is unsustainable and that governments will have to make difficult choices to fix it. David Dodge was in Phoenix, Arizona this morning.
Health Care Reality Check - Michael Rachlis/Diana Gibson
Not everyone agrees with David Dodge's assessment. Michael Rachlis is a health policy analyst and an associate professor at the University of Toronto. And Diana Gibson researches health care policy and she's the Research Director at the Parkland Institute at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.
