So you'd support an increase in taxes to balance the books instead of a user-pay scheme?
Last edited:
Ice fisherman billed for rescue
- Thread starter klr_guy
- Start date
- Status
So you'd support an increase in taxes to balance the books instead of a user-pay scheme?
OpenGambit
Banned
I would support something along the lines of the way the medical expense tax credit works under the federal scheme, which is that you get tax credits back based on your expenses if it represents more than x% of your income.
While user fees in general is something I agree with, I believe they should be eliminated, to the extent possible, for emergency services.
I certainly would. Consider it a 0 profit insurance scheme. Everybody pays a little extra, but if they EVER need to use the service, they don't get billed up the rectum. I understand the fact that the taxes aren't really financing the FD's, but user fees are leaving too much bad taste in the mouth. The increase wouldn't even be considered a blip in comparison to the $500-$1000 that the typical Canadian pays to be policed
Wait a minute, you don't want to pay for the same emergency services for visitors, that you are willing to pay for Canadians? "Welcome to Canada, hope you enjoy and leave us alone."
under funded or mismanaged?
I would support this as I never know when my stupidity will catch up with me. Is the gov. capable of 0 profit ins. scam, err scheme? E.I used to be 0 profit until there was billions extra diverted to other social programs. But yes, in theory, I like it.
If I understand you correctly, you expect Canadians to pay for social services for visitors and vacationers in Canada? They haven't paid a cent for these services. Why should they be eligible? What happens in the U.S.A. when a Canadian accesses American medical services? You better have CAA buddy!
As a healthcar5se worker, I can honestly say mismanaged. My hospital that employes me even has someone to monitor the internet regarding comments in social media made against it.
The problem with your reasoning is that because of the universal healthcare mentality prevalent in Canada, everyone is entitled to healthcare . The reality is that 1% of patients are responsible for ~33% of the healthcare budget. This 1% are for the most part,are the chronically ill that will never have a normal quality of life and the elderly on their last few weeks of life. This means that procedures that could actually improve or prevent a worsening of someones condition that effect the quality of life for the remaining 99% are de-listed. This has the effect of diluting the effectiveness of the true reasoning behind the concept of Tommy Douglas' idea of Medicare.
ItIsWhatItIs
Banned
Finally, someone who states the reality. Not every country is an immigrant whor$ like Canada. Those born to Canada are abused and victimized by the greedy public sector hiding behind their unions and the corrupt political constructs of Canada where one party is able to form parliament to create laws, pass those laws, and operate the government to hire all their friends. Look at all Harpers Senate appointments, a friggin joke.
ItIsWhatItIs
Banned
. The increase wouldn't even be considered a blip in comparison to the $500-$1000 that the typical Canadian pays to be policed
They need to pursue their funding through the same source instead of trying prey upon those who require rescue.
I don't follow. I was supporting the idea of 0 profit insurance scheme to fund rescue and emergency services if the costs of those services exceed what is already paid for thru taxation, is all. Like travel ins. without profit.
Well what would happen if someone flat out refuses to pay the unreasonably high bill? Could you plea it down to a lesser amount like a parking ticket? For example, $450 fine for parking in a handicap spot without a sticker. I call that the sucker fine because in reality, it always gets reduced to a more proper amount like $150 if you take it to court. Only suckers pay the full amount.
I totally get what your saying. But what you asked was " Is the gov. capable of 0 profit ins. scam, err scheme? " Two key words, government and scam. That's the problem, everything government, becomes bloated, corrupt, patronage appointments,therefore more corrupt, then eventually ineffective. Just as our public healthcare system. Every new government elected de-lists more services which as I said dilutes it's value to the productive people paying taxes. I could go on about the waste in healthcare....but the original subject of this thread was regarding a $5500.00 bill for an ice fishing rescue. Thats as bad as a $10,000.00 fine for going 51KpH over the posted speed limit. If the township of Scogog incurs $5500.00 in expenses for lets say at , tops 4 hour rescue? Multiply that times 6 x 365 = $12,000,000.00 Fire department budget for year round 24hr 365 day a year protection for the town. Is that what Scogog allocates for Fire & Rescue? As you said $0 profit, but it seems every government department now must make a profit to pay their overpaid management team, while the front line workers, whether Hospital, Police, Fire & Rescue, EMS, Teachers get the blame forgoing over budget.
Ah, yes of course
I see where you're coming from. When you questioned my reasoning I thought you might be pulling a Rob Maclennan on me.
ps i did mention the eg of EI insurance and how that went sideways......
Last edited:
Ah, yes of course
ps i did mention the eg of EI insurance and how that went sideways......
EI. Please, for the love of God don't get me going on another rant
It can be done if managed right. Just look at Scandinavia. In those countries the government directly controls up to 30% of the economy including employing up to 30% of the population, they got more social programs than us, less income disparity, and generally comfortable lives for all. I'd be more interested in looking into why it works for them and how we can make it work for us.
A more local example is the provincial car insurance program in SK. It turns a profit, which you get back as refunds based on your driving record - extremely well-managed. If they can do it on a pretty significant scale, it can be expanded to work on an even bigger scale as long as we adopt their management style and system of checks and balances.
I could give every Scandinavian a gun and expect the place not be riddled with bullets in a fortnight. Completely different headspace.
25% of Canadians own guns and I haven't seen the place 1/4-riddled either, plus we're allowed access to cheaper sources of ammo (like buying in bulk and reloading).. Also I'm sure SK has a higher rate of gun ownership than Canada average (kept artificially low by Ontario and especially Quebec)
- Status
