I think "annoying" is a better description. It's not shocking at all, it was a fairly predictable outcome given the situation. It is really annoying that we haven't managed to walk it back to something more reasonable since then.
I think "annoying" is a better description. It's not shocking at all, it was a fairly predictable outcome given the situation. It is really annoying that we haven't managed to walk it back to something more reasonable since then.
But man, when you do have a medical emergency, it's great not having to think about whether you're going to have to remortgage your house, sell your kidneys, put your kids up for adoption or reconsider all of your life plans.
Personally I think Canada is a little bit over-dogmatic about rejecting a parallel private system entirely: I know there are problems with running two systems (mainly around inequity and brain-drain incentives for healthcare workers to move out of the public system), but IMO, nothing that can't be fixed by sufficiently high prices/taxes.
Keep in mind that medical bankruptcy isn't unknown in Canada either - not being able to work is a bigger cause of medical bankruptcy than medical bills themselves.
Tying your personal health and that of your loved ones to your employer gives your boss unduly leverage over yourself, particularly when there are life and death decisions to be made.
historically Protestant work ethic + unrestrained pursuit of profit + weak labor protections and domination of corporate interests in the halls of legislation = predictable outcome.
Recall the intense pressures on FDR from both sides. Eventually the unions won some important concessions, but the corporations still had sufficient representation to ensure the system calcified into one that continues to funnel capital upward.