Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 06:43 pm Post subject: Palin used to get health care in Canada
Isn't that ironic? No sh*t.
Quote:
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin -- who has gone to great lengths to hype the supposed dangers of a big government takeover of American health care -- admitted over the weekend that she used to get her treatment in Canada's single-payer system.
"We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada," Palin said in her first Canadian appearance since stepping down as governor of Alaska. "And I think now, isn't that ironic?"
Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 1910 Location: Michigan
Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 03:45 am Post subject:
"Sarah Palin was a child - the article says "up to age six" - that she was making these trips to Canada.
Sarah Palin was born in 1964, so this means "up to 1970".
It wasn't until 1972 that the provinces and territories had come into compliance with the 1966 Medical Care Act, 1977 before a nationalized system had been legislated, and 1984 before the Canada Health Act gave Canada the system it has today.
SO:
1. Sarah Palin never experienced "socialized medicine" as a child, in Canada or anywhere, because it didn't exist in Canada at the time.
2. She would have been ineligible to get it for free anyway - and she is still ineligible. Americans have to cough up the dough when they visit a hospital in Canada, even today.
What else can I do to stop people from asking over and over "why did Sarah Palin use Canada's socialized medicine?" or other iterations thereof?"
Let's keep in mind that Palin was a little girl at the time. It's no blame to her that she got the health care in Canada, and no blame to her father either. Hats off to them for smart shopping. The issue is that this woman has been campaining against my family and your family getting the kind of health care that she and her brother enjoyed as a child. Maybe she did not know the facts, maybe she was confused. But if she is confused, or ignorant, why is she trying to keep my kids from getting cheaper health care?
That said, Olan, if your argument were true it would be pretty good argument, but it is not true. Socialized medicine in the Yukon started on July 1, 1960.
Palin said she used to "hustle over the border." Some hustle. Look at a map. No doctors in Anchorage, which is 46 miles from Wasilla? Hop on a train and go 676 miles to Whitehorse, YT? That does not make any sense at all unless Canada's health care was cheaper (or better) than the care in Alaska. It was cheaper or better even if you had to pay cash for it, otherwise Palin's father was crazy. It was so much cheaper or better that it was worth a day or two on a train with a sick burnt child with an infection, plus the cost of the round trip tickets,
I'm no Wasilla expert, but it appears the train they were on had to go through Anchorage before heading off to Whitehorse.
Quote:
Located on the Alaska Railroad main line that runs between Anchorage and Fairbanks, Wasilla is about 45 miles north of Anchorage.
AP talks to Chuck Heath about his daughter Sarah Palin's memory of traveling to Canada for health care:
"There was no road out of there at that time," said retired teacher Chuck Heath, reached by phone in Wasilla. "The ferry schedule was very erratic. We had no doctor in Skagway. The plane schedule was very erratic. The winds dictated whether the planes could come in or not."
...Palin's father said his family probably boarded the train for the Whitehorse hospital only twice - once when a daughter had rheumatic fever, and once when his son, also named Chuck, severely burned his leg and an infection set in.
"We much preferred to use our facilities because my insurance didn't cover anything in Whitehorse. And even though they have socialized medicine, I still had to pay the bill, being an American citizen," Heath said.
It was not until 1946 that the first Canadian province introduced near universal health coverage. Saskatchewan had long suffered a shortage of doctors, leading to the creation of municipal doctor programs in the early twentieth century in which a town would subsidize a doctor to practice there. Soon after, groups of communities joined to open union hospitals under a similar model. There had thus been a long history of government involvement in Saskatchewan health care, and a significant section of it was already controlled and paid for by the government. In 1946, Tommy Douglas' Co-operative Commonwealth Federation government in Saskatchewan passed the Saskatchewan Hospitalization Act, which guaranteed free hospital care for much of the population. Douglas had hoped to provide universal health care, but the province did not have the money.
In 1950, Alberta created a program similar to Saskatchewan's. Alberta, however, created Medical Services (Alberta) Incorporated (MS(A)I) in 1948 to provide prepaid health services. This scheme eventually provided medical coverage to over 90% of the population.[30]
In 1957, the federal government passed the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act to fund 50% of the cost of such programs for any provincial government that adopted them. The HIDS Act outlined five conditions: public administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability, and accessibility. These remain the pillars of the Canada Health Act.
By 1961, all ten provinces had agreed to start HIDS Act programs. In Saskatchewan, the act meant that half of their current program would now be paid for by the federal government. Premier Woodrow Lloyd decided to use this freed money to extend the health coverage to also include physicians. Despite the sharp disagreement of the Saskatchewan College of Physicians and Surgeons, Lloyd introduced the law in 1962 after defeating the Saskatchewan Doctors' Strike in July.
[edit] Medical Care Act
The Saskatchewan program proved a success and the federal government of Lester B. Pearson, pressured by the New Democratic Party (NDP) who held the balance of power, introduced the Medical Care Act in 1966 that extended the HIDS Act cost-sharing to allow each province to establish a universal health care plan. It also set up the Medicare system. In 1984, the Canada Health Act was passed, which prohibited user fees and extra billing by doctors. In 1999, the prime minister and most premiers reaffirmed in the Social Union Framework Agreement that they are committed to health care that has "comprehensiveness, universality, portability, public administration and accessibility."
BTW I believe I have had a tad bit more experience dealing with insurance companies than you (about half a million of them saying yes) - at least on a personal level - again a bit of an inside comment. About health care - unlucky to have been a IP 3X last year so I have more first hand experience than I would like.
Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 1215 Location: Federal Hill, Baltimore, MD
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 02:03 pm Post subject:
Never has been any doubt about the quality of US health care for those with excellent insurance and/or abundant bank accounts. The issues have to do with horrendous inefficiency and outrageous expense.
Never has been any doubt about the quality of US health care for those with excellent insurance and/or abundant bank accounts. The issues have to do with horrendous inefficiency and outrageous expense.
I disagree. Even the rich and insured are at risk in the United States. The AMA lets anybody out of medical school with a degree that gets in. The only substantial limits on malpractice come from lawyers and courts (not the medical establishment). So, the brakes go on after the car hits the barn.
As a result, American doctors drill holes in the wrong side of people's heads, cut off the wrong parts, kill people with the wrong medications, give people the wrong gas, tell them they have six months to live when with proper treatment they can live at least six years, and give lethal infections in hospitals that are not clean, and so on. That's why we do not want malpractice reform. Attorneys and courts are the only people currently keeping the medical profession from pushing you off a cliff.
BTW I believe I have had a tad bit more experience dealing with insurance companies than you (about half a million of them saying yes) - at least on a personal level - again a bit of an inside comment. About health care - unlucky to have been a IP 3X last year so I have more first hand experience than I would like.
I suspect that if you had not had health insurance that you took with you when you left your last job you would not be with us today. Would you agree?
If that is true, then isn't your continued (and very welcomed) well being a simple twist of fate? Others have passed while you remain, simply because of a negotiated union contract?
Should we leave the lives of our neighbors and friends up to such twists of fate, or should we take care to ensure that all of us have the same life sustaining services that you enjoy? _________________ David Traver
Attorney
Traver & Traver, S.C.
P.O. Box 459
Eagle, WI 53119
262-594-2096 (work)
david[at]traverlaw.com
Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 1910 Location: Michigan
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:30 pm Post subject:
"Economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman says the only way the U.S. will get its debt crisis under control is by the use of "death panels" and a national sales tax."
8) The United States is such a terrible place, I really don't know why anyone would want to live here. There are so many other wonderful places to set up shop and live a wonderful life. Should I name them? Well y'all come up with some. While you are looking, see if you can find somebody other than Sarah Palin to demonize. How about Pelosi, who just about did in the democrats, and ain't giving up.
So, how are your boys going to balance the budget?
Quote:
A coalition of progressive lawmakers, labor unions, and soon-to-be-former members of Congress are demanding that the Democratic Party hold an up or down vote on a tax cut package that extends rates for the middle class while letting those for the wealthy expire.
In an interview with the Huffington Post on Monday, Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D-Ohio), a freshmen member of Congress who was defeated in her re-election bid, said the time had come to "draw a line in the sand" with respect to the Bush tax cuts.
One vote was needed, said the Ohio Democrat, who would, ostensibly, get to cast that vote before she leaves office. The House should use its current majority to pass permanent relief to the middle class while letting the rates for income over $250,000-a-year go back to pre-Bush levels. That would pass the burden to the Senate, at which point Republicans will have to "put up or shut up."
"You were talking about fiscal responsibility," said Kilroy. "The fiscally responsible thing to do is to allow these tax cuts for the top earners to expire... I think we have to, as Democrats fight for policies that affect and improve the lives of the vast majority of people in this country. That is to give the working class people these tax breaks. But also, the Democratic Party has to establish itself as being fiscally responsible and to challenge the republicans. They campaigned on that. They need to work with the Democrats in Congress and with the White House to be fiscally responsible and let those tax breaks expire."
Better picture? Now it's kind of fuzzy. Well. such is life. _________________ David Traver
Attorney
Traver & Traver, S.C.
P.O. Box 459
Eagle, WI 53119
262-594-2096 (work)
david[at]traverlaw.com
I hope Sara Palin becomes the Republican candidate for President in 2012. She will simmer along in the next year-and-one-half, get a few more TV shows for her family, make a few more million dollars, have a book or two written, and drag the gullible Republican party to a resounding Barry-Goldwater-type-disaster in 2010.
Quote:
Fewer than a fifth of Americans saw this month’s election as giving a mandate to the Republican Party, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research poll.
Asked whether the election provided a mandate for Republicans or was a rejection of Democrats, 70 percent said the midterms were a negative reaction to the governing party. Only 17 percent said the election provided the GOP with a mandate.
That said, the big fear is that Republicans will wise up in time to derail Palin. Will this become the predominant Republican view? Obviously, not all Republicans are dupes. On the other hand, Palin is an excellent grifter and she will be hard for rational Republicans to stop.
Quote:
Republican U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski says she doesn't think Sarah Palin has the leadership qualities to be president, nor the "intellectual curiosity" needed to make good policy.
Murkowski shared her take on the matter during an appearance on Monday's edition of "CBS Evening News" with Katie Couric.
"I just do not think that she has those leadership qualities, that intellectual curiosity that allows for building good and great policies," explained the incumbent lawmaker when asked about a previous suggestion she's made that she wouldn't support Palin for president. "You know, she was my governor for two years. And I don't think that she enjoyed governing."
Elaborating on her view, Murkowski continued, "I want somebody that goes to bed at night and wakes up in the morning thinking about how we're going to deal with our national security issues, how we're going to deal with our economy, how we're going to deal with providing better education or peace in the Middle East."
I just do not think that she has those leadership qualities, that intellectual curiosity that allows for building good and great policies,” Ms. Murkowski told Katie Couric during an interview on CBS. “You know, she was my governor for two years, for just about two years there, and I don’t think that she enjoyed governing.”
The two Republican women have been rivals of a sort for years, though Ms. Palin’s decision to leave the governor’s office appeared to take them out of direct competition for a time.
In the CBS interview, Ms. Murkowski said “we really don’t have much of a relationship.” She added that Ms. Palin “is not really that keyed into the state anymore. She is looking, obviously at a bigger pond.”
Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 1910 Location: Michigan
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 02:36 pm Post subject:
I agree with the poll that the thumping performed by dthe GOP on the House was a total rejection of the Democratic rule of the house and the Speaker:
"Americans overwhelmingly say that the midterm election results that gave Republicans control of the House represented a rejection of the Democrats and not a mandate for the GOP, according to a CNN/Opinion Research poll conducted Nov. 11-14. (Story; Poll data)."
About Palin she is making one million dollars an episode for her show with 8 episodes and her second book is coming out with a book tour included. Who said anything about president - she is building a empire that will transcend a mere presidency - just kidding but she is turning into a media machine indeed that may last many years as she is still in her 40s.
Grifters always self-destruct. "The bigger they are, the harder they fall." etc.. It's not a matter of if, simply, when.
See e.g. John Edwards, Gary Hart, Jimmy Swaggart, Ted Haggard, James Hargis, Tony Alamo, Charles Rangel, Wall Street investment bankers (all of them), etc.
The problem is catching them before they destroy lives, kill thousands of Marines, lay waste to cities, and destroy entire economies.
I'm right again! Such a fall is inevitable. But at a cost. _________________ David Traver
Attorney
Traver & Traver, S.C.
P.O. Box 459
Eagle, WI 53119
262-594-2096 (work)
david[at]traverlaw.com
Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 1910 Location: Michigan
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 08:16 pm Post subject:
I will not even bring up your support of Edwards in many past posts dating to 2007. LOL
Humans are well human.
Reminds me of a time when a claimant of mine who was a mental case told me how defiant her baby was and would not follow instructions.
I told her if she realized that her baby was a --- baby.
Human born of the flesh are indeed - human.
People no matter their station are born to fail - get old and fail / fall again. - so to speak.
That is a problem with many people who think that folks with a lofty IQ and are elitist will never FALL / fail - I worry about those people the most who think themselves to be invincible - arrogance is indeed abhorrent and evil :)
All humans are human but not all humans are grifters. I figured out Edwards fast enough. Will your guys wise up to Palin? I think not.
. _________________ David Traver
Attorney
Traver & Traver, S.C.
P.O. Box 459
Eagle, WI 53119
262-594-2096 (work)
david[at]traverlaw.com
Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 1910 Location: Michigan
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 05:36 pm Post subject:
Maybe but after her second book I figure she would have made at least 20 million dollars (counting her first book which sold 2 million copies and her TV show) and counting her 15 minutes of fame is no where near up. Not made pay for a grafter! Many people should apply for the job as it appears to be legal employment. I rather applaud her for her ingenuity and she remains topical as long as she polls well and the Dems talk about her regards if she ever runs for office again and remains an influence and a money making machine. IMHO
8) I really don't get it about Sarah Palin. Feminists should hold her up as an icon of feminism. A highly popular female, elected governor of the largest state in the nation, and proven politician. What has she done that is so bad? I think Nancy Pelosi has done more to harm this nation than Sarah. I think I have come up with the answer. She is conservative.
8) I really don't get it about Sarah Palin. Feminists should hold her up as an icon of feminism. A highly popular female, elected governor of the largest state in the nation, and proven politician. What has she done that is so bad? I think Nancy Pelosi has done more to harm this nation than Sarah. I think I have come up with the answer. She is conservative.
Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 1215 Location: Federal Hill, Baltimore, MD
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 02:13 am Post subject:
You know, I was going to reply...but for the life of me, I could not find anything worth replying to. Palin's made a lot of money...but then, so has Gates, Buffet, et. al. Somehow I don't see how making lots of money equates to political gravitas. Maybe Olan can explain that. And good Ole DJ, I know you are kidding when you describe her brief tenure as governor of the "largest state" as something of significance. If only moose could vote....
Joined: 17 May 2004 Posts: 1910 Location: Michigan
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 02:22 am Post subject:
Look I am only (mostly) saying the more she is bashed by the left the more money she makes and the more she is a a underdog and the more votes she will get. She is dancing in this political contest as best she can and is getting votes in the polls.
Therefor many would say in the media bash away at your peril as the game of ridicule does not seem to be working this time.
8) Hey Larry, wonder how many square blocks Obama represented as a community organizer in Chi-town. Barely got his desk straightened out and his seat warm as a senator before he decided he was God's answer to america's problems, and now realizes he's the problem, along with his clueless democrats. Now it's the republicans turn to screw it up. Will it ever end? Sarah Palin is the least of our problems, because she holds no office. Jump on somebody else, I've got some suggestions.
Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 1215 Location: Federal Hill, Baltimore, MD
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2010 09:55 pm Post subject:
No doubt that she's making lots of bucks with her "books" and speeches. But your assumption, Olan, that money and adulation from the Tea Partiers translates to more 'votes' is a bit questionable. I really doubt that she will bother running in 2012; I don't think she likes to work that hard (see her abbreviated governorship). Plus, as Rush Limbaugh repeatedly says, it would be a massive pay cut.
Tom, I agree, S. Palin's no problem at all. And I wasn't "jumping" on her, I didn't think, just trying to put a little balance into your amusing description of Alaska and her 18 month meander through the governor's office.
Ooops, that's why Joe Biden is laughing in the linked video above. I hadn't watched it before. But I guess that confirms my view that the WH house is 'smiling.' GO SARAH, run until your running shoes disintegrate!
8) Larry, believe me, Sarah Palin is just another hot chick as far as I'm concerned and I'm too old to appreciate that. You mention her sojourn as governor of Alaska, and one of the reasons for her leaving that was the constant barrage from her critics. I just don't understand it. The more she is criticized, the more popular she becomes. I think if the progressives {liberals} ignore her, to their surprise, she just might fade away. Ahh, but no, she is too much of a whipping girl. "W" is just a memory, along with his partners in crime, Rove, etc., so she is just about all the progressives have. Never fear though, they'll come up with somebody except their own. Rangel and Waters, rest easy.
Joined: 13 May 2004 Posts: 1215 Location: Federal Hill, Baltimore, MD
Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 02:40 pm Post subject:
Guess I'm not watching or reading the correct media outlets these days, Tom. I don't see or hear her being turned into a "whipping girl." She begs for publicity--and gets far more than she "should," IMHO, but who exactly is whipping her? And over what?
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Traverlaw, Traver Law, Traver Law Offices, S.C., Traver & Traver, S.C.,
Traverlaw.com, SSAConnect,
Attorneys for the disabled and disadvantaged in all areas of Social Security
disability law, http://traverlaw.com,
http://ssaconnect.com, Connect, SSA Connect, Think Bigger,
Social Security Advice Connect, Social Security Disability Advice Connect,
"Social Security Disability Advocacy, Debate, and Professional News,"
the yellow and orange swoosh image, and the square favicon.ico image,
are trademarks and service marks of Attorney David F. Traver.
For information the about use of our copyrighted and trademarked material please call
262-594-2096.
CONNECT
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
