Visit the Tommy Douglas YouTube page HERE.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Friday, January 6, 2012
Medical bills cause 62 percent of American bankruptcies
By Joan McCarter
Daily Kos
Thu Jan 05, 2012
A study released Thursday [pdf] by the American Journal of Medicine finds a huge increase—nearly 20 percent—in medical bankruptcies between 2001 and 2007. Sixty-two percent of all bankruptcies filed in 2007 were tied to medical expenses. Three-quarters of those who filed for bankruptcies in 2007 had health insurance.
Using a conservative definition, 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92% of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5000, or 10% of pretax family income. The rest met criteria for medical bankruptcy because they had lost significant income due to illness or mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations. Three quarters had health insurance. Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 49.6%. In logistic regression analysis controlling for demographic factors, the odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause was 2.38-fold higher in 2007 than in 2001. […]
Daily Kos
Thu Jan 05, 2012
Using a conservative definition, 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92% of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5000, or 10% of pretax family income. The rest met criteria for medical bankruptcy because they had lost significant income due to illness or mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations. Three quarters had health insurance. Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 49.6%. In logistic regression analysis controlling for demographic factors, the odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause was 2.38-fold higher in 2007 than in 2001. […]
The assault on universalism: how to destroy the welfare state
Martin McKee and David Stuckler
BMJ
December 20, 2011
Martin McKee and David Stuckler watch aghast as American examples are followed to destroy the European model of the welfare state
Christmas is a time to count our blessings, reflecting how they came to be. For people living in England this reflection is more relevant than ever, as the coalition government paves the way for the demise of the welfare state. This statement will be seen by many as reckless scaremongering.
The welfare state, not only in Britain but also throughout western Europe, has proved extremely resilient. How could any government bring about such a fundamental change?
To answer this question it is necessary to go back to the 1940s, when Sir William Beveridge called for a national fight against the five “giant evils” of want, disease, ignorance, squalor, and idleness.His call secured support from across the political spectrum. Although he sat in the House of Commons as a Liberal, his plans were implemented by a Labour government, and continued under successive Conservative ones. The reasons for such wide ranging support varied but, for many ordinary people, the fundamental role of the welfare state was to give them security should their world collapse around them.
Read more HERE.
BMJ
December 20, 2011
Martin McKee and David Stuckler watch aghast as American examples are followed to destroy the European model of the welfare stateChristmas is a time to count our blessings, reflecting how they came to be. For people living in England this reflection is more relevant than ever, as the coalition government paves the way for the demise of the welfare state. This statement will be seen by many as reckless scaremongering.
The welfare state, not only in Britain but also throughout western Europe, has proved extremely resilient. How could any government bring about such a fundamental change?
To answer this question it is necessary to go back to the 1940s, when Sir William Beveridge called for a national fight against the five “giant evils” of want, disease, ignorance, squalor, and idleness.His call secured support from across the political spectrum. Although he sat in the House of Commons as a Liberal, his plans were implemented by a Labour government, and continued under successive Conservative ones. The reasons for such wide ranging support varied but, for many ordinary people, the fundamental role of the welfare state was to give them security should their world collapse around them.
Read more HERE.
Medicare in Saskatchewan: A nation building event
Coast Reporter
January 6, 2012
Editor:
While I agree with Keith Maxwell (Coast Reporter letters, Dec. 30) in the general sense that commemorating historical events is important, I differ with him on the choice of raising the profile of the War of 1812 to the exclusion of other events. The War was between the U.S. and Britain and occurred when the Americans perceived a British weakness given a war in Europe. It was the first, but far from last, American imperialist adventure. No one “won”, but there was a clear loser. The Native people lost the opportunity for an autonomous indigenous region in the British colonies, and the conflict opened the way for the genocides carried out in the American West.
It may also be asked why other milestones are not given equal status. The year 2012 marks the 175th anniversary of the rebellions in both Upper and Lower Canada. The 1837 rebellions were the Occupy movements of the day and paved the way for responsible government and the formation of Canada. It will also be the 50th anniversary of both Medicare in Saskatchewan and the opening of the TransCanada Highway — clearly nation building events.
The only explanation for glorifying 1812 is the Harperite desire to “remake” the Canadian culture into the type of jingoistic, militarist cesspool we see in other countries. C’mon MP Weston: explain how a colonial war is more important than responsible government, health care and a major breakthrough in linking the country’s transport system.
Paul Johnston, Roberts Creek
January 6, 2012
Editor:
It may also be asked why other milestones are not given equal status. The year 2012 marks the 175th anniversary of the rebellions in both Upper and Lower Canada. The 1837 rebellions were the Occupy movements of the day and paved the way for responsible government and the formation of Canada. It will also be the 50th anniversary of both Medicare in Saskatchewan and the opening of the TransCanada Highway — clearly nation building events.
The only explanation for glorifying 1812 is the Harperite desire to “remake” the Canadian culture into the type of jingoistic, militarist cesspool we see in other countries. C’mon MP Weston: explain how a colonial war is more important than responsible government, health care and a major breakthrough in linking the country’s transport system.
Paul Johnston, Roberts Creek
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Health care belongs to all Canadians
Williams Lake Tribune
January 05, 2012
Editor:
Residential care and Medical Service Plan fees, hikes, and the introduction of convalescent care fees have added to the financial burden of seniors.
In many respects we are back at the beginning when Tommy Douglas began the campaign against privatization and had the vision to make health care a public service for all, regardless of their income. It is time to revisit the original principles of the Canada Health Act.
In September 2004 the federal Liberal government announced a 10-year action plan on health. This accord expires in two years, and one has to ask what has been accomplished. The action plan was based on principles of universality, accessibility, portability, comprehensiveness, and public administration. It promised access to medically necessary health services when they are needed, based on need, not ability to pay.
From my vantage point as a retired person, I would have to say not much, if anything, has improved. We have federal and provincial governments that have been silent on the encroachment of privatization in health care.
Assisted living and residential care has been delivered to the private, for-profit sector in a disproportionate ratio to publicly funded models of care, which has left many seniors and disabled unable to afford care.
Provincial health ministers and Leonna Aglukkaq, minister of health for Canada, meet in Victoria Jan. 16-17, 2012 to continue their discussion of the 2014 Health Care Accord. Health-care advocates will also gather to make their point that the health-care system under discussion belongs to the citizens of Canada.
It is important that all citizens begin now to inform themselves of the issues and join their voices with other advocates about what the future of health care in Canada should and can be. We need to do this for ourselves, but more importantly for future generations.
Let us not disappoint.
Audrey MacLise
Chair of the Seniors Advisory Council of Williams Lake and Area
January 05, 2012
Editor:
Residential care and Medical Service Plan fees, hikes, and the introduction of convalescent care fees have added to the financial burden of seniors.In many respects we are back at the beginning when Tommy Douglas began the campaign against privatization and had the vision to make health care a public service for all, regardless of their income. It is time to revisit the original principles of the Canada Health Act.
In September 2004 the federal Liberal government announced a 10-year action plan on health. This accord expires in two years, and one has to ask what has been accomplished. The action plan was based on principles of universality, accessibility, portability, comprehensiveness, and public administration. It promised access to medically necessary health services when they are needed, based on need, not ability to pay.
From my vantage point as a retired person, I would have to say not much, if anything, has improved. We have federal and provincial governments that have been silent on the encroachment of privatization in health care.
Assisted living and residential care has been delivered to the private, for-profit sector in a disproportionate ratio to publicly funded models of care, which has left many seniors and disabled unable to afford care.
Provincial health ministers and Leonna Aglukkaq, minister of health for Canada, meet in Victoria Jan. 16-17, 2012 to continue their discussion of the 2014 Health Care Accord. Health-care advocates will also gather to make their point that the health-care system under discussion belongs to the citizens of Canada.
It is important that all citizens begin now to inform themselves of the issues and join their voices with other advocates about what the future of health care in Canada should and can be. We need to do this for ourselves, but more importantly for future generations.
Let us not disappoint.
Audrey MacLise
Chair of the Seniors Advisory Council of Williams Lake and Area
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Preserve Medicare
By Anne Morris
Salmon Arm Observer
January 04, 2012
MP Colin Mayes tells us that the federal government is reviewing the Canada Health Accord and that the current health-care system “is not sustainable.” He says that “solutions, whether they are tied to private delivery or public delivery,” need to be found (Dec. 21). This should raise a red flag for Canadians who value our public Medicare system.
Canada’s current Health Accord expires in 2014, and the federal government is preparing for negotiations with the provinces and territories on a health-care accord for the future. Private interests are lobbying to expand for-profit health services for the wealthy. The Harper government wants to oblige by convincing Canadians that our current system is unaffordable and that increased privatization is the answer.
But two-tier health care has been proven to increase costs and also wait times for those of us who can’t afford private health care. Furthermore, if private for-profit hospitals are permitted in Canada, American HMOs will rightly claim that under the North American Free Trade Agreement, they too have a right to establish themselves in Canada. Do Canadians want American-style health care? I think not.
The federal government can afford a well-funded, enhanced public health-care system if it chooses to do so. Cancelling the planned purchase of 65 F-35 stealth fighter-bombers, would free up $30 billion to invest in health care over the coming years, and cancelling the planned tax cut to corporations would yield another $6 billion.
A recent report from the international Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, (cited in the same issue of the Observer), states that income inequality in Canada is rising, and that it is not market forces but federal and provincial government policies that are increasing this inequality.
Medicare is an equalizing force in Canadian society in that it is designed to provide quality care to everyone, regardless of income status. Let’s keep it that way by saying ‘no’ to the Harper government’s smoke and mirrors campaign to persuade us that Medicare is unaffordable.
Salmon Arm Observer
January 04, 2012
Canada’s current Health Accord expires in 2014, and the federal government is preparing for negotiations with the provinces and territories on a health-care accord for the future. Private interests are lobbying to expand for-profit health services for the wealthy. The Harper government wants to oblige by convincing Canadians that our current system is unaffordable and that increased privatization is the answer.
But two-tier health care has been proven to increase costs and also wait times for those of us who can’t afford private health care. Furthermore, if private for-profit hospitals are permitted in Canada, American HMOs will rightly claim that under the North American Free Trade Agreement, they too have a right to establish themselves in Canada. Do Canadians want American-style health care? I think not.
The federal government can afford a well-funded, enhanced public health-care system if it chooses to do so. Cancelling the planned purchase of 65 F-35 stealth fighter-bombers, would free up $30 billion to invest in health care over the coming years, and cancelling the planned tax cut to corporations would yield another $6 billion.
A recent report from the international Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, (cited in the same issue of the Observer), states that income inequality in Canada is rising, and that it is not market forces but federal and provincial government policies that are increasing this inequality.
Medicare is an equalizing force in Canadian society in that it is designed to provide quality care to everyone, regardless of income status. Let’s keep it that way by saying ‘no’ to the Harper government’s smoke and mirrors campaign to persuade us that Medicare is unaffordable.
Doctor: Health care can survive baby boomer 'tsunami'
CTV News
Video HERE.
January 4, 2011
The growth of Canada's labour force will slow to a crawl over the next two decades as an increasing number of baby boomers leave their working days behind, according to a projection by Statistics Canada.The growth of Canada's labour force will slow to a crawl over the next two decades as an increasing number of baby boomers leave their working days behind, according to a projection by Statistics Canada.
Canada's aging population has been called a "tsunami" that could eventually swamp our public health care system, but a health care expert says the true threat is an inability to adapt.
Dr. Michael Rachlis, a medical doctor and analyst, believes that aging and ailing baby boomers won't break the public purse in the coming years.
Video HERE.
January 4, 2011
Canada's aging population has been called a "tsunami" that could eventually swamp our public health care system, but a health care expert says the true threat is an inability to adapt.
Dr. Michael Rachlis, a medical doctor and analyst, believes that aging and ailing baby boomers won't break the public purse in the coming years.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Unsung Heroes of Health Care Show: CBC Radio
By Dr. Brian Goodman
White Coat, Black Art
CBC Radio, Nov. 11, 2011
When you think of hospitals, you probably picture places staffed by nurses and people like me. The image is far from complete. There are countless others who toil in healthcare's shadows. They have job titles like service assistant, lab technician and respiratory therapist. Explaining what they do can be hard to do at cocktail parties.
But make no mistake: these are people who look after you with skill and compassion. And sometimes, they mean the difference between life and death.
This week, we walk in the shoes of the unsung heroes of health care. We tell their stories - doctors and nurses need not apply. I visit a hospital where I meet a professional who keeps your breathing when seconds count. I talk with a clinic receptionist who cheers you up as you wait nervously for test results from your doctor. I chat with a case manager who - more often than not - finds a way to keep seniors and others with chronic illness and disability living at home. We also meet a hospital employee who stayed at her post at the hospital when others were fleeing for their lives.
To listen now, download the podcast.
White Coat, Black Art
CBC Radio, Nov. 11, 2011
But make no mistake: these are people who look after you with skill and compassion. And sometimes, they mean the difference between life and death.
This week, we walk in the shoes of the unsung heroes of health care. We tell their stories - doctors and nurses need not apply. I visit a hospital where I meet a professional who keeps your breathing when seconds count. I talk with a clinic receptionist who cheers you up as you wait nervously for test results from your doctor. I chat with a case manager who - more often than not - finds a way to keep seniors and others with chronic illness and disability living at home. We also meet a hospital employee who stayed at her post at the hospital when others were fleeing for their lives.
To listen now, download the podcast.
Meet the new 1%: healthcare CEOs replace bankers as America's best paid
No bankers in top 10 of America's best-paid executives, but those in charge of healthcare and drugs firms are in the money
By Dominic Rushe
guardian.co.uk
14 December 2011
Pity Wall Street's bankers. Once the highest-paid bosses in the land, they are now also-rans. The real money is in healthcare and drugs, according to the latest survey of executive pay.
There are no bankers in the top 10 of this year's GMI survey of CEO pay. In fact, they have been out since 2007, when Goldman Sachs boss Lloyd Blankfein competed for the top slot with Richard Fuld, boss of soon-to-be-bust Lehman Brothers, and Angelo Morzillo, head of Countrywide, once the largest sub-prime home loan firm.
With the bankers still recovering from their tussle with hubris, old age and infirmity were 2010's boom businesses – at least in terms of pay. Leading the pack was John Hammergren, chief executive of McKesson Corporation. The firm's 52-year-old chairman, chief executive and president took home $145,266,971 in 2010.
McKeeson is probably the biggest company you've never heard of. Headquartered in San Francisco, the company is the largest pharmaceutical distributor in North America, distributing a third of the medicines used in the US. McKeeson's sales topped $112bn last year.
Hammergren's next closest rival was Joel Gemunder, outgoing boss of Omnicare, where he had been president since 1981. Omnicare is a pharmacy company that dispenses drugs in nursing homes – among other services – and had sales of $6.15bn last year. When Gemunder started at the firm it had sales of $150m. His 2010 total pay package was worth $98,283,242.
CVS Caremark, which operates 7,000 pharmacies across the US, awarded chief executive Thomas Ryan $68,079,823 in 2010. Caremark's share price was $71.70 on 1 May 1998, when Ryan joined the firm, and ended 2010 at $34.29.
Ronald Williams, boss of health insurance giant Aetna, made $57,787,786 in 2010. Another recipient of a golden goodbye, Williams made $50.4m on his stock options last year. Williams is one of the US's most prominent African American business leaders, and has campaigned against healthcare reforms that would have introduced a government-backed public insurance option to compete with private insurers. Since he became CEO, Aetna's stock price declined by 70%.
By Dominic Rushe
guardian.co.uk
14 December 2011
 |
| Joel Gemunder, CEO Omnicare "earned" $98 m. |
There are no bankers in the top 10 of this year's GMI survey of CEO pay. In fact, they have been out since 2007, when Goldman Sachs boss Lloyd Blankfein competed for the top slot with Richard Fuld, boss of soon-to-be-bust Lehman Brothers, and Angelo Morzillo, head of Countrywide, once the largest sub-prime home loan firm.
With the bankers still recovering from their tussle with hubris, old age and infirmity were 2010's boom businesses – at least in terms of pay. Leading the pack was John Hammergren, chief executive of McKesson Corporation. The firm's 52-year-old chairman, chief executive and president took home $145,266,971 in 2010.
McKeeson is probably the biggest company you've never heard of. Headquartered in San Francisco, the company is the largest pharmaceutical distributor in North America, distributing a third of the medicines used in the US. McKeeson's sales topped $112bn last year.
Hammergren's next closest rival was Joel Gemunder, outgoing boss of Omnicare, where he had been president since 1981. Omnicare is a pharmacy company that dispenses drugs in nursing homes – among other services – and had sales of $6.15bn last year. When Gemunder started at the firm it had sales of $150m. His 2010 total pay package was worth $98,283,242.
CVS Caremark, which operates 7,000 pharmacies across the US, awarded chief executive Thomas Ryan $68,079,823 in 2010. Caremark's share price was $71.70 on 1 May 1998, when Ryan joined the firm, and ended 2010 at $34.29.
Ronald Williams, boss of health insurance giant Aetna, made $57,787,786 in 2010. Another recipient of a golden goodbye, Williams made $50.4m on his stock options last year. Williams is one of the US's most prominent African American business leaders, and has campaigned against healthcare reforms that would have introduced a government-backed public insurance option to compete with private insurers. Since he became CEO, Aetna's stock price declined by 70%.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)