
Since our doctors are private and the "system" is just an insurance
plan, litigation would not involve the insurance fund.  Our lawyers
do not work on contingency, so that if you were to sue for malpractice
then you'd better be sure of winning to cover your fees ... likewise,
if you were a doctor and subject of a suit, it's time to sweat.


A few weeks ago, the president of the Canadian MA wrote a letter to
the NYT to decry a lobbyist's advert repeating the same old trash.
This is significant because the AMA and the CMA are interlinked
organizations and he would not have done it without the approval 
of his AMA cronies.


It serves the same purpose as the Bethesda Naval Hospital ... since
not all hospitals can provide everything, maybe they have some stuff
that others don't?  (Ottawa's population is only a quarter million,
if you include the surrounding counties.)


People of influence will get their way in any system, American or
European.  It's the "Golden Rule" - he who has the gold makes the
rules. (-;

As for annual budgets, those are actually annual grants for facilities
(e.g., mops, pans, etc.) given to hospitals of which most are private
nonprofit foundations (btw, I have no problem with having aggressive
for-profit hospitals like the French, who use our approach ... but in
the Paris region they have almost as many people as Canada does so
their market is much more diverse).  The rest has to be made up for
by billings from patients who use their services.


The GDP figures are combined public and private expenditures for total
outlay, and  are compiled use the same methods by the OECD that yield 
the 13-14% figure for the U.S.


How?  They are collecting premiums ... and I'm an advocate of having
copayments like the French do in their system in order to make it look
more like the real insurance that it is.  The private doctors and 
hospitals will still be there after the insurance (hypothically)
disappears, as they were there before it appeared.


For one thing, I think that Bob Rae is an idiot ...


Most of OHIP comes from separate premiums on your paycheck if you are
a player ...  he wants to spend our money on other things than the
health insurance.  Our high taxes are high for other spending but
health insurance, which is separate and optional, and it is being 
spent in a nonpartisan manner by every party. )-;

OHIP is just a health insurance plan; it does not provide any kind
of health care, that is up to you and your private doctors.


Some of the companies providing extra insurance are subsidiaries of
American companies, and their parents provide full insurance down
here.  Regardless, all firms up north can easily turn on cable TV
to see how well the American firms are doing by being involved in
basic coverage.  The private firms are making too much money after
having gotten rid of basic coverage.  They run around patting them-
selves on the back for their own cooperation in providing extras 
for those people who "deserve it".


I agree ... they were in a win-win situation.  But right now, it seems
that they have won bigger, when you look at how full their coffers
are.  Friends from my sisters' MBA class were still being flown out
for job interviews individually with insurance firms in London, ON,
(Canada's insurance capitol a la Hartford) along with generous expense
privileges this year despite the ongoing post-recession blues.

gld