d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Should Canada Adopt A Two-tiered Healthcare System
1234Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 8,205
Joined: Dec 18 2008
Gold: 5.20
Jul 21 2014 01:13am

Let's hear what you guys think.

Adopting a two-tiered healthcare system would reduce wait times and increase efficiency of medical procedures however would create further inequality for society.

Maintaining the current healthcare system is morally ethical and just.

Member
Posts: 60,893
Joined: Jan 24 2007
Gold: 171.76
Jul 21 2014 01:19am
Quote (TempoONE @ Jul 21 2014 03:13am)
Let's hear what you guys think.

Adopting a two-tiered healthcare system would reduce wait times and increase efficiency of medical procedures however would create further inequality for society.

Maintaining the current healthcare system is morally ethical and just.


I am torn on this issue as I am currently being tested for relapse remitting multiple sclerosis and the wait times are atrocious for an MRI . ( hoping not obviously )

That said ... There are places where an MRI is easily accessible with the right coverage and money. ... And those without coverage simply won't get the MRI ...

Keeping the moral and ethical bankruptcy of the two tiered system we can see at work in the United States ... I would have to say no ....the only ones who would say yes are the ones with the ability to benefit from a system like that ... Some things should be guaranteed rights ... And in my humble opinion health care access should be one of those things. There are obviously problems that could be solved with a two tiered healthcare system .... But it comes at a price too heavy to pay .

Member
Posts: 8,205
Joined: Dec 18 2008
Gold: 5.20
Jul 21 2014 01:29am
Totally agree with the inequality, but being objective, it is obvious that a person of wealth would be for the two-tiered system whereas a person with a lack of wealth would be against.

However, a person arguing from a social theory perspective would argue that a two-tiered system is fair because we live in a world that is fair and lower ranking people have the opportunities to move up the ladder of social rankings if they work hard. I.e through schools, and support like OSAP. Or the corporate ladder if they choose that route.

A person arguing from a conflict theory perspective would acknowledge the fact that the world is unfair and that the survival of the privileged few is maintained through the manipulation of the many.

Two problems then arises,

1) How can we justify a two-tiered healthcare system when we have some groups being able to afford it while others can't and in fact Canada does view healthcare as a right
2) Is it also not a right for someone to choose private health care should he/she afford it or someone who has "made it" through hardwork and dedication. Is it not fair to deny them two-tiered health care just to cater to the people who can't afford it?

This post was edited by TempoONE on Jul 21 2014 01:39am
Member
Posts: 60,893
Joined: Jan 24 2007
Gold: 171.76
Jul 21 2014 01:40am
Quote (TempoONE @ Jul 21 2014 03:29am)
totally agree with the inequality, but being objective, it is obvious that a person of wealth would be for the two-tiered system whereas a person with a lack of wealth would be against.

However, a person arguing from a social theory perspective would argue that a two-tiered system is fair because we live in a world that is fair and lower ranking people have the opportunities to move up the ladder of social rankings if they work hard.  I.e through schools, and support like OSAP. Or the corporate ladder if they choose that route.

A person arguing from a conflict theory perspective would acknowledge the fact that the world is unfair and that the survival of the privileged few is maintained through the manipulation of the many


I am a person who has the ability through good employer benefits and a moderately wealthy family that I could afford better care in a two tiered system ... I couldn't in good conscience take that better care knowing someone else would wait longer simply because of finances .

I would argue against the idea that we live in a fair world ... Life is not even close to fair or balanced ... And in a lot of cases this is acceptable.... Access to proper medical attention in a timely fashion to give people the best chance at survival is of the utmost importance .

I would say that this fundamental right guaranteed through the good fight of tommy Douglas trumps all else Canadian ... People around the world die of curable diseases daily ... People in the USA die before they can afford treatment ...or go bankrupt from it .

To attack public health care is to attack the very foundation of Canadian social democratic values
Member
Posts: 63,030
Joined: Jul 15 2005
Gold: 152.00
Jul 21 2014 01:43am
who cares, it's Canada
Member
Posts: 60,893
Joined: Jan 24 2007
Gold: 171.76
Jul 21 2014 01:46am
Quote (TempoONE @ Jul 21 2014 03:29am)
Totally agree with the inequality, but being objective, it is obvious that a person of wealth would be for the two-tiered system whereas a person with a lack of wealth would be against.

However, a person arguing from a social theory perspective would argue that a two-tiered system is fair because we live in a world that is fair and lower ranking people have the opportunities to move up the ladder of social rankings if they work hard.  I.e through schools, and support like OSAP. Or the corporate ladder if they choose that route.

A person arguing from a conflict theory perspective would acknowledge the fact that the world is unfair and that the survival of the privileged few is maintained through the manipulation of the many.

Two problems then arises,

1) How can we justify a two-tiered healthcare system when we have some groups being able to afford it while others can't and in fact Canada does view healthcare as a right
2) Is it also not a right for someone to choose private health care should he/she afford it or someone who has "made it"  through hardwork and dedication.  Is it not fair to deny them two-tiered health care just to cater to the people who can't afford it?


1. We cannot ... The short answer at least .

2. This depends on what you define as a right ... As I said when a human being is born ... At least in my view ... In canada that person is equal under the law , and should have equal access to proper medical attention .

There are inequalities that can be tolerated and allow people to thrive upon their own steam or fail... But medical attention should not be one of those things.

We must never allow ourselves to be tempted to allow the well off in our society to marginalize the poor simply because they don't have a means of defending themselves .

Member
Posts: 33,849
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 633.87
Jul 21 2014 07:41am
Yes, Canada should. Treating everyone the same is a mistake, the people more likely to afford more expensive care are also pretty indispensable to society.
Member
Posts: 60,893
Joined: Jan 24 2007
Gold: 171.76
Jul 21 2014 10:29am
Quote (bogie160 @ Jul 21 2014 09:41am)
Yes, Canada should. Treating everyone the same is a mistake, the people more likely to afford more expensive care are also pretty indispensable to society.


Yeah because wealth determines a persons value
Member
Posts: 32,250
Joined: Mar 11 2008
Gold: 1,157.00
Jul 21 2014 10:48am
Quote (bitg_pj @ Jul 21 2014 10:29am)
Yeah because wealth determines a persons value


That's why America is Fucked up.
Member
Posts: 60,893
Joined: Jan 24 2007
Gold: 171.76
Jul 21 2014 11:04am
Quote (Subzer0isGG @ Jul 21 2014 12:48pm)
That's why America is Fucked up.


There are people outside of America with this fucked up value .... They're just one of the few societies who is built around that concept
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
1234Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll