The real cost of Canada’s universal health care system

I think that a lot of people do not really see the truth about the universal health care system. I was reading an article about Natasha Richardson's death and stopped to look at the comments section on Digg. People were comparing the cost of Canada's health care system to the US' basically saying it was $0 versus a lot of money. While I personally think universal health care is a good thing, I do think that people should realize that they are in fact paying for it. This is why its card is called an "insurance card" and not a "hospital pass".

In 2007-2008, the annual cost per Quebecer was $2 518. Basically, our taxes, income or otherwise, go to pay the system we have come to take for granted. This is the same idea as any other "safety net" system in our province. They are not free.

With this being said, the universal health care system makes sure that people are paying for it based on their ability to do so since it is linked to the tax system. It might not be perfect and I think that there is a lot of money lost in inefficient management of the system but even then, it is a better starting point for something great than an all private system like the US' can be. Also, no matter what people say about wait times at the emergency room, if you come in with a bullet wound, or your head bashed in, you will get world class treatment.

Consumer confidence and stimulus plans

Niels Veldhuis, Charles Lammam and Milagros Palacios wrote a text in the Fraser Forum slamming Flaherty's latest budget. Their problem is the stimulus spending that will drop the Canadian government into the red. They are saying that stimulus spending doesn't work. Their argument, I find, is a sound one. Since the government will have to borrow money for its stimulus spending it means that it will essentially be taking money from its citizens to give it back to them with a shiny new name. The alternative would have this money either spent (which "stimulates" the economy) or saved at the bank who will then lend it (and "stimulate" the economy). By their account, it simply means that the only thing the stimulus spending does is put the country further into debt.

They are forgetting that a government is a political body first and foremost. They have to be seen in action and these actions, no matter how small an effect they actually have on the environment, resonate strongly in the population's psyche. Basically, the fact that the government is spending all this money has people feeling a bit more confident about the economy and spending more. The banks see that the governments bail out troubled companies and might take a bit more risk in lending, opening up the stranglehold they have on credit right now. Basically, a stimulus plan is like a marketing campaign. No, it's not only like one, it IS a marketing campaign telling people and corporations "Don't be afraid, spend, invest and let's get this economic train going again!"

Re-Blogging: Leapfrogging to the new basics

OK, so there's been a lot of talk lately about the education reforms in Quebec and there seem to be quite a few people saying that they are not very efficient. I think that a lot of it has to do with the human's fear of change. Basically, we don't see the benefits of a new system so why get out of our comfort zone. The problem is that the world is evolving and sooner or later we are going to find out that the way we teach children is irrelevant to how they will live their lives after school.

So here is a post from the Education Futures blog about several possible points that a future curriculum might look at.

Leapfrogging to the new basics

Re-Blogging: Homeless, not phone-less

I might seem obsessed, but here is a good post from Change.org

Homeless, not phone-less

I am black

Friday I went to a conference-spectacle at Cegep Ahuntsic. The show was helmed by the KEPKAA group and was basically a play interspersed with PowerPoint presentations giving background information on what they were talking about. The story of the play was that of a professors teaching members of his family about the story of a slave girl named Americana. It begins in the 19^th century where she managed to escape slavery in the US and come to Canada and ends in the early 20^th century at her death. The most interesting "character" in my opinion was the PowerPoint presenting computer named Historika. It was truly a wealth of information and opened your eyes on how the world had changed in the last 200 years. We had presentations about the life of escaped slaves, about the first black people in Canada, those who managed to carve their places in society and about the daily lives of others. We also had one about black inventors which leads me to think that, as it has been the case with students, a lot of discoveries and inventions were awarded to the one that had the money or authority to publish it rather than the actual discoverer.

There was also a presentation about how the white occidental world demeaned black people in order to keep their economic system viable. Before the industrial revolution, the only way to get the "massive" amounts of food and materials needed for cities, wars and the like was to use slaves. Only with the advances of technology were people actually able to look at what they were doing with objective eyes and say "What the hell is wrong with us?" (or maybe "Those slaves could drive the economy if they were paid and could buy the stuff our machines produce").

To conclude, for those who didn't click the link, KEPKAA is basically a school that teaches people to write and speak Haitian Creole. They did an awesome job in creating an informative play with Friday's event. I just wish the room wasn't 99% black and sold on their ideas. It is my firm belief that we can all learn from the struggles others have endured. At any rate, the evening ended with some pictures of Barack Obama which received a standing ovation so loud that he probably heard it in Washington.

An eye for an eye

This is a bit of a follow up on the Bus Beheader post. I had a good reason to say that, while I disagreed about the fact that he was held unaccountable for his actions, I was okay with the sentence he got. Basically, my approach to justice is that there should be a societal gain (not necessarily monetary), or at least no loss in the sentences given. The thing is that every time something horrible happens, there is an increasing number of people calling for harsher penalties. When we do so, we must ask ourselves what we would gain by sending the guy to prison for an extra 10 years or do we want to live in a society that gets rid of its troubles by executing them.

Earlier this week, I was in a discussion with Nouaman (www.khaimi.com, @NouamanK) about how some embezzlers have gotten off lightly maybe (especially in Canada). I do agree that the population who has seen their RRSP accounts go down lower than Montreal's climate might be enraged that a guy made millions ripping them off but their calls for tougher sentences are really just them wanting vengeance. They basically want the person who hurt them to suffer at least as much as they did. This is the eye for eye mentality updated for the 20^th century.

But really, why are we putting people in jail? Why do we have a justice system? The reason is to protect the innocent citizens and this is what sentences should aim at. The embezzlers go to prison to prevent them from ripping off other people (this might not be the best way but that's another discussion!). Vince Li is going to a hospital because that is where he belongs. He might not suffer as much as if he was in jail (although that's up for debate) but he will still be separated from a society in which he cannot coexist. This brings me back to what I wrote in the first paragraph… would a harsher penalty make your life safer? If you are saying no, then there is no reason for it.

Prince William serves soup too!

I like that the take home message of that article is that, in these though times we should help those who have less than us…

http://homelessness.change.org/blog/view/prince_william_serves_soup_too

My first meeting with Michael Ignatieff

This was an interesting weekend. A week ago, I received invitations to two events with the Canadian Liberal Party: a Shabbat dinner on Friday and a brunch on Sunday. Both of these had party leader Michael Ignatieff as the guest of honor.

The Sunday brunch was just a "bain de foule" where MPs would just meet the people that supported them. This was nothing new for me as I had been to many of those events with the ADQ at the provincial level. The one thing that struck me was how popular Justin Trudeau was. When he was first named, he received nearly as much applause as Ignatieff. He also seemed to be positioning himself as close to the leader as possible. He's been bred by the media as a possible future Prime Minister so he's acting like it.

Stéphane Dion also received a standing ovation at the event but he seemed a bit sad. He didn't seem to have the energy that the other MPs like Rodriguez or Coderre had. I heard someone say that his wife had predicted his win at the Liberal convention a few years ago to which Dion replied "Yes but we didn't win the one after that".

I also managed t speak to Pablo Rodriguez about free cell phones for the homeless. He told me to meet him at his office to discuss further. I personally want to know what steps would be necessary to bring this project forward within the Canadian government. Even though the Liberals are not in power, I hope he can help me do that.

Now, about Iggy! At the brunch, he gave an energetic and inspirational speech about how he was a strong leader and how the liberal party was awesome. He also gave us the creepy directive that went like "Allez frapper aux portes et dites aux gens que les Rouges sont de retour" (This is not a straight quote). All in all, I felt that this was a good speech to an audience that was already sold on his message.

So, I spoke about the brunch first. The reason is that the Shabbat was a very different experience, at least for me. So, on Friday, I went to the Opus Hotel not knowing at all how the evening was going to go. I had never been to a Shabbat dinner before and actually knew (and still knows) very little about the Jewish faith. I also knew no one at that dinner. This made the evening memorable. The Jewish community seems to be very tightly knit. Everyone knew each other and seemed to have helped one another in some way. They were also open insofar as I had no trouble striking conversations with anyone. I was also very impressed with the organizer Zach Battat. He gave a very interesting and emotional speech about the importance of Shabbat for him and his family. You could see the passion in his eyes and I felt he was, by far, the best speaker that night. And yes, that includes Ignatieff who seemed, at least to me, tired. The liberal leader's speech was thoughtful and intelligent but he didn't seem to have energy (something he displayed a lot on Sunday). He talked about his stance on the Israel-Palestine situation which is, in my opinion, fair.

That evening, I also learned that the Israelis in particular and the Jews in general were being persecuted in Venezuela through governmental actions. In answer to this, Canada decided to open its embassy doors to any Israeli who might need shelter and flew the Israeli flag. At any rate, when someone asked Ignatieff what he thought of this, he answered in a way that resonates with my values: state-sponsored hatred of an ethnic group, in this case jews, is unacceptable and Canada should work as hard as it can to prevent or stop such actions.

Oh and yea, I did get to shake Michael's hand and say that I am a fan, to which he said: "I am glad!"

Free cell phones for everyone!

Homeless people are the scapegoats of our society. We somehow think that they deserve their conditions and that they shouldn't bother us. Eerily enough, homelessness is nearly equal to prison for us. An homeless person, much like the con in prison, is someone who made a bad choice earlier in life and must pay for it. Notwithstanding the fact that this kind of logic makes no sense at all, they, as members of our society still deserve our attention.

One thing that I found out about earlier this week was an initiative in the US called Safelink Wireless. This is a government program whose purpose is to help those in need get a cell phone. The idea is born out of the sheer number of people losing their jobs in the US and not able to afford any type of communication device and plan. I just want to clarify that this is not just a free cell phones, but free useable air time as well. This might help people look for a job, give them a number so that they can be reached and, something important in the case of homeless people, a way to call for help if needed.

Oh… and that'll also help them take pictures of someone important (from change.org)!

Changing the layout

I'm just experimenting a bit with a new template until I settle for something more "me" in the future. Just tell me what you think. 

By the way, the credits for the template are at the bottom of the page

Accountability

My friend Lenka pointed me to this story of the "Bus Beheader" Vince Li. The man gruesomely removed the head of a sleeping passenger in a traveling Greyhound Bus. Earlier this week, the man was "found not criminally responsible" of the murder as he did not know that what he was doing was wrong. He is to be sent to a maximum security institution for treatment.

Anyone who felt bad (or good) after taking psychotropic substances like alcohol can attest that a person's mood doesn't always have anything to do with reality. Taking it farther there are quite a few drugs that can induce psychosis rather fast in an individual. By watching enough of those events, we start to realize that these interactions between external and internal mental modifiers are what make up our personality. This personality is what makes us ourselves and this is what affects our behavior.

All this is to say that a person's abnormal behavior can be explained by neurological defects but that this should not exempt them from any of the consequences. To give an example, saying that Li was not criminally responsible for his actions because he was schizophrenic is similar to saying a drunk is not responsible for running over a little girl because he is an alcoholic (different diseases, but alcoholism has genetic predispositions and is not always entirely the fault of the drinker).

I have no problem with Li going to a mental institution instead of prison. He is clearly sick and deserves treatment. But I think he should still be held responsible for what he did.

Alex talks about democracy

I just want to point you out to this article on Critic Al's blog about a more direct democracy.

http://criticalex.blogspot.com/2009/03/its-2009.html

Responding to Russian aggression

There was a lot of activity in the media lately about the incursion of a Russian warplane in Canadian airspace two weeks ago. I personally found it unsettling that this was not this was only the latest of a series of such violations. When the Americans do it, at least we know that they stand much to lose should they become too aggressive. The Russians, at least from my point of view, are much more obscure.

So, should we send the mighty Canadian Legions to conquer Eurasia? The first thing that comes to mind is increasing the Canadian military presence in the arctic. This is the 20^th century response. The geographical position of an army is not that relevant in our world. Indeed, the CF-18s that intercepted the bomber were stationed in Alberta. Of course, moving the army closer to an aggressor sends a message that we are monitoring them and this has real dissuasive value. I do think however that the best way to deal with this is show Russia that they would have much more to gain by working with us than by working against us.

Russia, like us, has access to a tremendous amount of natural resources that they funnel to the European Union. Working with us, they could open another trade route to the US while we would gain a more direct access to the Eastern European countries. We would also open another route for goods to travel to northern china, one that might be more effective than the sea route currently use.

Working with Russia would also lay the bases of a strong alliance of arctic countries. The apprehended "Arctic War" would be a ridiculous way to solve the different claims in the region. Working together however, we could achieve great things.