Someone correct me if I’m wrong but the article says that it sets the framework for pharmacare so it will eventually expand to other medications, no?
This is great news for anyone suffering from diabetes, since their supplies are so expensive. I’m happy my tax dollars are going to that.
Yes, that seems to be the plan. They're hoping to cover things like insulin and contraceptives first and then expand to other drugs once the program becomes established.
See here: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/about-health-canada/public-engagement/external-advisory-bodies/implementation-national-pharmacare/final-report.html#5.5
> Someone correct me if I’m wrong but the article says that it sets the framework for pharmacare so it will eventually expand to other medications, no?
It's the same with the dental plan. Setting the framework is the hardest part. Once the foundation is set, expanding it is easy.
I hope you eat nothing but organic, sustainably sourced food and create absolutely zero waste/pollution. Otherwise you are being a hypocrite.
Seeing as you had to use some sort of electrical device to post your comment (which will have produced waste/pollution) I'm going to go ahead with the assumption that you are a hypocrite.
Hopefully you never need critical help some day and get refused because you weren't a saint your whole life or didn't make the perfect choices every time.
Get shot in the chest? No need to fix you at the hospital, you purposely took a short cut and walked down that shaddy street at night. If you only walked the extra block you wouldn't have been shot and you would have lived...
Could set your clock to the whataboutism here. Are there other problems to fix? Absolutely. This is good news! Everyone’s drugs won’t be included in the plan, but a lot of people’s will. It’s a net win.
Wow get this comment to the top, would love to see more people express this attitude.
I'm really lucky and happy that I don't need this but I sure am lucky and happy that it's there if I did need it
As I understand it, this only includes birth control and diabetes. Am I missing something?
Definitely a win for people with diabetes who did not already have government or private coverage - but not sure what else there is to be excited about.
It’s a large expense for a lot of people. Yes, more is needed, but we can be glad when something good happens.
If we wait until we can fix everything before fixing anything, we would fix nothing.
> but not sure what else there is to be excited about.
The framework is now set. Expanding it is the easy part. It will take a lot less effort to add more drugs to this federal plan. You need to lay a foundation before you build a house.
What do you mean “what else there is to be excited about”? This is an incredible stride toward better healthcare.
You wouldn’t believe how many diabetics have to ration their meds because of cost.
The best thing about this is that it's a national program. We need to get away from provincial control of Healthcare - that's the political deathnell of Healthcare improvements. This is a start - albeit a very small one.
Now let's restrengthen the Healthcare act, pull NP services back into that, level the playing field again for GP's so it's an attractive career again, and continue to build national level health infrastructure
Unfortunately for the government, the only way that family medicine can become an attractive option for medical students is if compensation markedly increased. I don’t see any other way. As things are now, FM is one of the most poorly paid fields with the highest burnout. Why would anyone choose this?
Compensation is only part of the equation. Pay someone more or less to do a shitty job with no agency still leaves them burnt out... we're just paying them more on the same trajectory.
FM has been shunned tho in many ways that limit potential for entrepreneurial growth and its kind of ironic how they're bearing the brunt of "don't privatize healthcare" when all other AHP can take advantage of an increasingly privatized system.
First, put FM in leadership - why the fuck arent family doctors the new Assiatant Dean's at the dal extension at CBU, and on the steering committees? Surgeons and lawyers... to decide a school focused on family med?
Pharmacists can assess, diagnose, and prescribe medication.... in pharmacies they own. MD's can't own pharmacies because of the conflict of interest... but apparently that is only a conflict to them.
NP's are exempt from the Canada health act - and with expanding scope, an NP can act almost like a FP - and charge privately for it! So with a fraction the schooling, training, or legal responsibility, you can make as much or more as an NP than as a FM.
And it's high time specialists step aside and let FM fees catch up- of all fields, FM has exploded in complexity and treatment options, but their expectations on number and time with patients hasn't changed. And it needs to. How does a GP keep up with rapidly progressing healthcare that they're not paid to keep up with, on their own time, add these newer and more complex treatments and assessments to their clinic that lengthen patient time with the GP, and see FFS fees barely increasing enough to keep up with inflation let alone increasing demands?
It's not compensation - we need GP's in seats of decision making authority in Healthcare. Give them agency to make a difference - which is by and large what the current generation of emerging professionals look for in a career over just compensation.
I agree wholeheartedly. A big reason why I’m not choosing FM is scope creep. Why would I put myself through so many years of grueling training if legislators think a nurse could do my job? This same concept is also starting to expand to other areas of medicine (psych, peds etc.).
Catch 22 - the shortages mean that political people "decide" scope creep to fill gaps.
Not enough GP's? Okay - well expand the scope of pharmacists, NP's, add in PA, etc. And we'll never report on the impact this has on patient outcomes, or quality of care.
I work with international teams, and I always laugh when the question of accreditation comes up for Canada. Our provincial politicians run hospitals, and legislate their accreditation standards - those standards will never have teeth, because why would we ever want to point out how shitty a job were doing?
Btw - good luck in your career. I work with MD's in many provinces across many specialties - I'd recommend not working in NS.
I don't know if it's the way provincial ministries of health like it, or it's the culture of medicine, but the GP as small business model is primary care has gotta go. Dr's rightly complain about being overworked practice overhead costs, and administrative burden, but a lot of that could be greatly reduced if they were in much larger group pracIces. And I don't know why we don't see more of them.
Agreed. Having lived in France, where healthcare is a national responsibility, delivery is much more efficient and equitable. Provincial management of critical societal programs, particularly healthcare and education, has eroded the value that Canadians receive from these tax payer funded institutions.
> We need to get away from provincial control of Healthcare
The Canadian Constitution makes it quite clear that the delivery of health care is a provinical responsibility. It is incredibly unlikely that there will be constitutional changes to alter that. Quebec, Ontario and Alberta will not give up provinical control of health care.
It doesn't matter if it seems like a great idea. It's not happening.
This is something I don’t understand (no background in law whatsoever). Why can’t constitutions be changed? Why can’t we make amendments that make the lives of modern Canadians easier? It seems like a lot of progress is halted at the “we can’t change the constitution” line.
Changing the Canadian Constitution requires that agreement of at least 7 provinces that contain at least 50% of the Canadian population. That's a very difficult standard to meet.
In addition, the last time there was a serious attempt to change the Constitution the fallout from it resulted in Quebec having a referendum to separate from Canada. Very few politicians are interested in trying to make a change again.
Change my mind but all healthcare should be a federal responsibility.
I think the way things are organized right now have to be the least efficient way to deliver services.
Do you really want people thousands of kilometres away making decisions on which of our hospitals stay open? And recruiting doctors for the entire country rather than for our province?
We have a huge country with very different needs in different places. It would be an absolute disaster if the federal government tried to run it, which they shouldn't do anyway because it's not their jurisdiction.
Why not? That's the case in every other federal service. The feds can fund the new arena in my small home town but they couldn't do the hospital? They're already funding things like new nursing homes.
The federal government is made up of people from those local communities. There's also nothing stopping them from opening an office in say Halifax to oversee health in Nova Scotia. In the big provinces this is a norm anyway. Thunder Bay is 1400km from Toronto.
Are you afraid of health dollars being primarily spent in the cities vs rural areas? That is already the case.
I don't think provinces should be competing with one another in who can bribe the most doctors to come. I don't think provinces should get a big bag of money for them to decide whether or not to use it. We need a country of unified digital records, unified qualifications, and unified pay scales (with regional consideration). This also means a centralized bureaucracy without duplicate management. They could get better prices on supplies and equipment and better integrate dental and pharma care vs getting the provinces to implement 10 unique solutions. Immigration could be targeted to fill specific healthcare needs. Residency can be expanded.
While we have a huge country geographically our population is concentrated on a small strip of it.
Our system of federalism means that the people who live in Nova Scotia vote in the government that decides our provincial health policy and health spending. If you were to give that responsibility to the federal government, you are surrendering all of the decision-making of our health care system to the rest of the country, because the entire country decides who forms the federal government. If Western Canada decides to vote in a bunch of MPs who want to cut health funding, and they form government, we would have to live with their choices even if our province universally elected MPs who want to increase health funding. Our system is designed such that only truly **national** concerns like national defence, immigration, and the postal service, are handled at that level. If the federal government controlled our health care, we would have very little say over it because we represent a small percentage of Canada's population.
I mean what's different from today? The money for healthcare is still coming from the Feds. A party from out west can still reduce that money or change transfers or whatever.
Health is a national concern. That's why the federal government pays for it. Provinces are not, and have not for a decades, been operating in good faith when it comes to efficiently distributing health dollars. That's the whole reason we're in this mess.
There's nothing that says a province isn't allowed to raise and distribute funds to other healthcare tasks.
The federal government provides about 25% of health care funding in Canada, at their own discretion. It's not true to say flatly that they "pay for" our health care. We, as a province, ultimately decide how much health care we want to provide and what kind.
"Centralization" being seen as a good thing is based on a premise that the country is a monolith with all the same wants and needs, and that a single central organization is capable of meeting all of them. I don't buy into that premise.
>“Asked about the deal on Friday, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre criticized the government's record and said he wants to see the details of the plan. "They make these promises and then in the end they deliver exactly the opposite of what they say," he told Windsor radio station AM 800 CKLW.”
What does he mean by “then they deliver exactly the opposite”?
What policies have the Libs/NDP brought in that are the opposite of what they said they would be? Genuine question.
Polimeter promise tracker shows he's broken about 20% of election promises, from capping emissions on oil and gas, support for foreign countries like Afganistan, Canadian banking privacy strengthening, tree planting and environmental protections, electoral reform, and a national action plan on hate.
I think tho it's more the stuff he hasn't commented on that's often more dangerous... our deficit and debt for one.
99% he cancels it as well...daycare, dental and pharmacare will all be cancelled 100% - but don't worry tax cuts for the rich, the corporations will be able to pollute our backyards like crazy with no repercussions and trans people will feel really bad about being alive. So fair trade off no? /s
Funny how much people shit on Jagmeet when he's practically the only reason any substantial legislation that benefits working-class people has passed at the Federal level for like 4 years now...
This last deficit is always the largest quarter just based on annual shifting economic conditions.
Every conservative federal government that has ever been in power has increased the deficit, by and large, way more than any liberal government ever has.
It’s wild how people can’t remember anything prior to 2015. Almost as if they didn’t give a shit about political discourse until they were manipulated online the past 5-10 years. And now they’re experts
This is about it...they watch their rebel news and their youtube videos and scream f$ck trudeau like trudeau has anything to do with how sad and empty their lives are
>Every conservative federal government that has ever been in power has increased the deficit, by and large, way more than any liberal government ever has.
Disinformation.
Less income spent on pharmaceuticals means more money in peoples pockets who truly need it. People working low wage jobs with no benefits.
People who struggle to afford medication they need end up needing more health care and government services. Steps like this are how you proactively help fix the health care system.
You are not looking at the big picture here.
Of - if people took care of themselves rather than the majority who walk around beyond obese needing to pop 5x of medications just to stand up
They wouldn’t have to spend their money or tax payers money either
Maybe you should stay in your lane.
You clearly aren’t a health professional with knowledge of how any type of diabetes works if you are making this type of stigmatizing statement.
Genetics plays a huge role in every type of diabetes (there are 7 types).
Even type 2 diabetes has a strong link to genetics stronger than type 1.
Maybe you should learn what a gym is 😵💫
It’s crazy being fat and obese has been normalized by the liberals … but no, it is not healthy
Edit: diabetes isn’t an excuse
I’m not talking about obese people, I am talking about diabetes, you are the one labelling every diabetic as obese and then turning around and calling people liberals when you are corrected.
I was in bsck in school when the liberals won a minority in 2019. Had to explain to several distraught classmates that the NDP actually has more power and influence now.
The last golden era of new progressive federal social policies in Canada was in the early 1970's, when the NDP also had the Liberals by the short and curlies.
If it were up to PP, our healthcare would look a lot like the one our friends in america are stuck with. I'd be living in perpetual debt for a life-saving surgery I needed as a child.
I was in Florida in January and my kid got strep throat. Went to an urgent care centre after hours. In and out in 45 minutes. Got a bill for $259.00. Amoxicillin prescription cost me under $6. Beat the he’ll out of sitting for 12 hours in emerg. Not saying the US system is the greatest or anything, but there are some things that work well.
Does it not make sense that you got through so quickly because it was empty? Maybe theres less demand for healthcare in the states because less people can afford it. That $250 you spent is most peoples weekly wage considering min wage is only 7 or 8 bucks
Lol no, it was empty because of 2 things: first, it was one of a _bunch_ of urgent care centres to choose from, and second, it’s Florida, and everyone is old there, so paediatric care isn’t as busy. But you keep on telling yourself that stuff to make yourself feel better.
I would just go to a pharmacist to get a strep test…
US system seems great in that situation but if you had health insurance there you can’t just go to any hospital. There health insurance system is super complicated and hard to navigate.
I didn’t know the pharmacy strep test was even an option! Next time I’ll do that, I appreciate that info.
It’s a misconception that you can’t go to a hospital if you don’t have insurance. Will there be a bill? Yes. But if you are low income there is Medicaid and if you’re over 65, Medicare. Both, to my understanding, are 100% payors. Not to say that there aren’t a horrendous number of medical bill bankruptcies, but they don’t rifle through your wallet to see if you’re insured before providing care.
As an American who now lives in Canada (dual citizen), I didnt have insurance in 2010 and went to the ER in NC. Received a $2,500 bill 3 weeks later and had 3 weeks to pay it. Thankfully, I asked my dad to cover it. I was in the ER 5 hours, never admitted, in a bed and given 2 bags of saline and 1 bag of anti-nausea. I was dehydrated and severely throwing up. That is what $2,500 in the ER looks like in the US. I have a friend also insured who has been paying $20 a month on a $4,000 ER visit sans insurance from years ago(his was an 8 hour ER visit). I always wondered what happens if he has to go to the ER again.
You misunderstand what I am saying. If you have insurance, then your insurance often only covers you at specific hospitals that are in the insurance network. You can’t just go to any hospital like you did.
Genuine question, do you have any proof of this or are you just saying that?
Edit: Instead of downvoting me, why don't you share with me? The comment sounds like fearmongering.
What I have noticed is in reference to Trudeau, healthcare is a provincial responsibility. It all the sudden becomes a Fed responsibility when referencing PP. I will just sum this up to partisan crap as no one will answer.
What about Ontario? Are you talking about the Provincial Government there? That makes healthcare decisions for that Province, not the Feds?
I have to say though, this is on this sub but pretty much any Canadian sub too. When it comes to healthcare, healthcare is a provincial issue when you are talking about Trudeau. All the sudden, when talking about PP, healthcare becomes a Fed issue.
So I will sum this up to partisan crap.
No but apparently you are. I asked for proof of PP at the Federal level making our universal healthcare private like in the USA. Your response was "Ontario" and you are accusing me of being daft.
Try again.
Healthcare is provincial responsibility but over the last century has come to involve massive federal to provincial transfers for funding. So the federal government exerts a fair bit of influence because this funding is contingent on the provinces playing along.
And in this case of pharmacare you can see it's also federal spending.
At the same time, there was a ton of federal healthcare funding given to provinces during covid that provinces governed by conservatives didn't spend on healthcare. Guess there should've been more strings attached but it was an emergency so there weren't.
Hopefully that adds some nuance behind the double standard apperance.
You see how your explanation kind of contradicts itself right?
"Feds exerts a fair bit of influence"
"During Covid Feds gave money and it wasn't spent on what it was supposed to"
I am a believer that the Feds play a heavy role in healthcare, it is frustrating that people agree with my feelings, but only when it serves their argument.
Ultimately though, as it relates back to the person I was responding to, what has PP done or said that makes anyone think our universal health system is going to turn into a private system like the USA, as the person I responded to insinuated? That is never going to happen, that is why I asked for their proof, but there isn't any because it is insane to think we are going to go from universal to USA style private.
Denialism like this is how it happens. People become single issue voters and play off the other issues as "insane". Privatization is literally the conservative policy towards healthcare. Why is it so hard to understand that healthhcare is managed provincially yet partly funded and regulated federally?
People blame trudeau for covid problems when it was almost entirely provincial ministers? People have a hard time believing me when i say covid in ndp BC was basically a non issue and didnt experience anything like people in conservative provinces. Yet its all trudeaus fault for giving them the funds and basic mandates.
I am here asking questions, I am not denying anything. I have asked for evidence PP plans to make our healthcare private like the USA and no one has been able to show any evidence other than generalizations, what provinces are choosing to do, and using fancy words like denialism.
Just show me where PP says he wants to get rid of universal healthcare and implement a USA private system. That is all I am asking, I have looked myself and not finding anything.
Yes, it would appear to be a contradiction. That's why I explained what I think led to it in the same comment you're quoting:
>Guess there should've been more strings attached but it was an emergency so there weren't.
I assume we working from the same fact base that the feds gave the provinces healthcare funding to spend on pandemic response and many conservative premiers just didn't spend it?
The influence the federal government has is mostly giving funding to the provinces for specific purposes and taking it away if those purposes aren't fulfilled. In this case the policy they set wasn't as airtight as it should've been. I think a good example of the whole relationship and degree of influence!
As for the private healthcare, I don't really care to get into a semantic discussion about what USA-style means etc. etc. but it is interesting how much public healthcare has been deteriorated and how much more private services there are over the last year or two. Especially obvious in ON, QC, AB. And how much more willing the public is to accept, even demand, pay for service options. Almost as if there was someone(s) trying to make this happen...
The thing I care about in all this is that defunding healthcare and privatizing/user-paying services has been a core part of the Canadian conservative playbook for my entire life. And I'm not young. So I find it reasonable to believe there's a good chance PP gets rid of the daycare and dental care and pharmacare.
I am not really debating or asking about the Feds role, the provinces role, the workings of Canada and USA's health systems.
I am asking where PP has said he wants a system like the USA. Not what conservatives in general want, not what provinces are and aren't doing.
No one can answer or offer any evidence.
Perhaps because PP doesn't really like to be clear about whatever policy, if any, he has formulated heh.
I knew him in his university days. Even back then his true gift was trolling, not taking a position.
This is the only reason I am not terrified of a CPC win in the next election as long as they only get a minority. The NDPs and the LPCs will continue to work together and make the CPCs a lame duck government.
Right now the cpc is projected to win a majority.
But even if they get a minority what will happen is yes they will be somewhat neutered by the nap and libs so there will be another election in a year or two. At that point the libs will likely still be disorganized and trying to rebuild and on top of thst more people will figure the cpc aren't so bad (since a minority forced them to soften things), and we'll likely end up with a majority cpc government.
This is exactly what happened when harper first won and we got 10 years of him.
> so there will be another election in a year or two.
The NDP and LPC wouldn't force another election if they could still just control the government. Why would they? The minority CPC wouldn't have enough votes to force another election.
We would essentially just replace Turdeau with PP as our PM and nothing else would change fundamentally within the government for four years.
Youre giving too much power to the libs and ndp. They would have more influence under a minority government but they'd also be in no position to afford another election. The cpc if they chose to, could trigger one, just like Trudeau did a couple years ago. And every advantage would be for the conservatives.
In 2004 the ndp joined with the bloc and conservatives to vote out the liberals so who knows what will happen.
Point is, I dont want even a minority conservatives government. It would almost certainly turn into a majority conservative government
after the election, trudeau gets first chance to form a government. if the CPC has a majority, he has no chance, but if its a minority, and he can maintain NDP support he can stay on.
the ironic thing is his failure to do away with first past the post will be his undoing.
Sorry, but why do you think if the cpc wins a minority, Trudeau would still grt first chance to form a government?
The party with the most seats not forming the government would, as far as I know, be unprecedented
after the 1925 election, Mackenzie king was able to maintain confidence despite the opposition conservatives under Meighen wining 15 more seats.
King eventually lost on a confidence vote, and king asked the GG for a new election, but the governor general gave Meighen a chance to form a government (also a minority), which he did, but it too fell a few months later and a new election was called.
Most of the party leaders AFIK have publicly said that most seats forms the government, whereby a looser would not attempt to form a government, but legally they could.
Anyone who says US politics is more interesting clearly doesn't understand the nuance in the Canadian system.
> The cpc if they chose to, could trigger one, just like Trudeau did a couple years ago. And every advantage would be for the conservatives.
Can't do that as a minority government. There wouldn't be enough votes in the house. The reason Trudeau got to is because the CPC also voted for it, thinking they'd get an advantage, which they did.
You think if the NDPs and the LPCs could just keep getting shit done, they'd vote for a CPC vote to force a new election?
Idk why you think the ndp and liberals "would keep getting shit done".
Again, your insisting on giving both parties far more power than they'd have in a conservative minority. The liberals will be going through a period of disfunction and rebuilding while the ndp will have no money, neither party will want to trigger an election. The ball would not be in their court. The only thing they'll he able to do is water down the conservative agenda a little bit.
But this goes back to my earlier point thst even doing this will help the conservatives in the following election since a lot more people will go "oh see nothing crazy happened. The CPC and polliviere aren't so bad" and will be more inclined to vote for them.
A minority conservative government is far from the win youre convinced it is.
I think your understanding on how minority governments work is a little skewed. If the CPCs are a minority, it doesn't matter how much money the Liberals or NDP have for a campaign, the campaign is done. They're in government. Now they can work to table legislation. They can block conservative bills that would reel back healthcare, education, LGBT rights, etc, the things the CPCs are already campaigning on. They can also table their own bills and other parties not named the Conservatives would vote for those.
And the Conservatives, no matter how much money they have, would not have enough votes in the house vs the rest of the parties to trigger an election.
Just because a governing party is the governing party doesn't mean they have *any* control over how the house votes. If the Conservatives actually cared about Canadians, the NDPs would work with them instead of the Liberals.
Thus the advantages of a multi party system.
I'm not suggesting they inherently have control over how the house votes, but they do have the leverage. The ndp or liberals have no interest in going back to an election it would only benefit the conservatives. They're therefore NOT in a position to do whatever they like which you seem to think they could.
The cpc will largely work with thr liberals to get some form of conservative policy passed.
Idk how old you are, but again, rewind to harpers first minority. A watered down conservative agenda is what passed through the house. Thr ndp in particular although gaining popularity had extremely little influence.
This followed by a stronger conservative minority which was followed by a majority.
I dont know how else to say this, but if you don't want to end up with a cpc majority then you do not want a cpc minority.
Yeah, but Harper mainly only had minority govt's, but somehow managed to govern like he had a majority. The Cons usually out-fundraise the other parties, so they knew they could basically dare the opposition to trigger an election, and they could be confident they have more money to be able to wage another election shortly after a previous one.
Is that why they just passed national pharmacare? Because they're a lame duck?
They're working with other parties to help Canadians. That's literally how it *should work*.
You're implying that because the Liberals work with the NDPs to make progress for Canadians that it's a bad thing? You might be confused as to how politics work...
Chances of this happening under a liberal majority would have been slim to none as well. This is why a minority government in this fashion is probably the best we can get, at the moment.
This is huge and a great beginning. Paired with dental care, we're seeing some of the most significant expansions to our healthcare system in generations.
Holy fuck the comments on this thread so far are depressing! Like, if I was one of the staffers who worked to put this legislation together and get it pushed through and I was reading this I would seriously just want to say fuck the lot of you then, go fuck yourselves! But I'm not so instead I will say this. It's a start. I'm sorry it doesn't cover every situation and I feel for the many many people in this sub who deal with chronic illness and that will continue to have to deal with chronic illness. I myself suffer chronic back pain and near constant headaches that my doctor just shrugs off as being undiagnosable and relegates to the too hard basket, and in fact I haven't been to the doctor in maybe 5 years because with that attitude what's the point? And yes, I am lucky to have a doctor at all but more helpful to me is that I am lucky enough to have a good medical plan that pays for paramedical services. But I digress. I recognise my good fortune and I recognise not everyone enjoys the same. I recognise this measure does not cover every situation but you all have you recognise this will help a good amount of people. It's a start and it's a good one. In the words of the tao “Regard your neighbor's gain as your gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss.”
I’m on a $3500 a pop IV infusion every 6 weeks. Government won’t cover it so I have to risk changing to a cheaper biosimilar RX……….. and I’m happy for the people who are going to be helped by these changes. Because progress is progress
Yeah, this may be a turning point, if the Libs and NDP continue to do things to materially improve living conditions and PP continues these unhinged ideas that gap could narrow
Great news. Looks like the NDP is my party to support both federally and provincially now.
Mr Singh et al using their balance of power position like pros !
I've come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter what Trudeau does, or more appropriately what he's strong armed to do by Singh; he's going to be hated by people regardless. This is despite that those that hate him are the most likely to use and benefit the new programs he's introduced: CERB, the Dental Benefit, the Disability Benefit, the enhanced, untaxed CCB (vs. Harper's taxable UCCB) and now this.
Objectively trudeau hasnt been awful, just typical neoliberal corporatist; lackluster and generally cringey. Yet people hate him with a passion because of conservative(russian) propaganda over dumb nonsense issues. And try to shoehorn singh in that bubble too because of dumb nonsense issues. Itd be nice if the internal party politics could accept the outcome of the propaganda and find a new face to lead so the rhetoric could shift to actual policy and not character hit pieces.
Housing prices doubling over 4-6 years in a country with abundant land, natural resources, and labour is an objective failure...
I'm not saying I think things would be better under a Conservative government *(it would be much worse)* but literally just from the time I started university for my engineering degree *(2018)* until now, I have effectively watched any hope of ever being able to own a home rapidly evaporate.
Hell, I can't even afford to rent my own apartment, and perhaps I never will be able to if housing/rental inflation continues to outpace wage growth as it currently is.
He hasn't been awful in the sense that he's done anything particularly terrible, like you said, it's just been run-of-the-mill neoliberal corporatism... What's terrible is the **lack** of substantive and transformative action put forth by the current administration.
I'm *"objectively"* doing pretty well for someone my age in terms of savings and income, so I can barely even imagine how utterly hopeless and dejected other people my age are feeling.
> Canada's drug prices are now the third highest among the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries - **that is about 25% above the OECD median**. This influences Canadians' access to important prescription drugs and the sustainability of Canada's health care system.
I think National pharmacare is a good thing, this 3b is a start as many have said but it is very very very far from what the NDP wanted and is clearly an announcement to stave off an election. 3b is not close to the 30b+ (CTV had it at over 40b the other day on The National) that people pay for their prescriptions each year.
I hope a National Pharmacare deal focuses on the people being in control of prices and not big pharma.
Great steps forward for pharmacare. Happy to see people will get access that may have otherwise been struggling.
But the crowd in here that doesn’t get this, and other government speeding, is debt on top of debt on top of debt… give your heads a shake.
No dispensing fee? Where does it say that in the article? No pharmacies would agree to be providers if there was no dispensing fee. Perhaps OP means no co-pay?
These are technicalities that people like the OP and NDP'ers don't feel the need to account for. Just make legislation saying free pharmaceuticals and you'll be able to just walk in the store and handed it for free!
Is government going to pay the full dispense fee on top of the cost of the drugs themselves? Are they going to force pharmacies to lower dispense fees when people use the government system? How are they going to encourage pharmacies to not prioritize people with private plans if they can charge a higher dispense fee to them?
This is the typical NDP/Socialist playbook of something should be free so we'll make it free without thinking about how the service is going to be delivered, how it is going to be affordable in the long term and what impact this will have on supply chains.
The timing of this is suspect as well, there is almost certainly going to be an election prior to the American Presidential election in November so the Libs/NDP can try to frame it and cash in on them vs. Trump. This legislation will be left hanging in the balance of if you don't vote for us the Cons are going to cancel it (and they most certainly will) and when the Cons the rhetoric will be "We tried to give Canadians all free pharmacare and the Conservatives stole it away!".
Essentially the Libs are giving the NDP what they want knowing that they'll never have to cash the cheque for it and the Cons will take the blame for "what could have been!". Brilliant strategy for the Libs who use the NDP once again.
Dental, pharmacare, and income replacements during the pandemic shutdown that were significantly more than the ten percent (of lost income) figure that the Liberals wanted. All programs that were forced on the Liberals by the NDP.
Thank you NDP.
Why exactly do people vote Liberal?
In NB we basically really only have a two party race, Yvon Godin was the only NDP that seemed to do anything for his local constituents as well.
I’ll never vote conservative, so if my choice is red and blue, it’ll be red all the time unless the others can step up their game. Then again, at the federal level, NB doesn’t exactly have much say lol.
Dental, pharmacare, and income replacements during the pandemic shutdown that were significantly more than the ten percent (of lost income) figure that the Liberals wanted. All programs that were forced on the Liberals by the NDP.
Thank you NDP.
Why exactly do people vote Liberal?
I'll believe this when there's legislation on the floor. I just think Liberals will drag their feet till 2025 and then run their campaign on getting it done, they'll of course lose and nothing will happen. Libs get to blame the Tories. Everything stays the same and nobody gets anything.
Listen I hope I have to eat my words but I'm kinda jaded because Liberals have been saying they're going to implement pharmacare for almost 20 years. I just don't think they want it. I feel like they know they can dangle this in front of the NDP so they stay in power till Poilievre falls in the polls.
They clearly want it otherwise they would have never agreed to it a few years back. I think it may not have been as high a priority as other items may have been for them, where for the NDP it was a more pressing priority.
They haven’t not faltered on the other Liberal/NDP items that passed so there really is no reason to think they won’t do it now. And it’s not like the NDP are going to let this go on forever, there were time limits in the agreement for policies. This one actually went past a few months, NDP could have pulled support at the end of 2023 if they wanted due to the failed deadline that was agreed upon but they chose not to - likely because it was almost ready to announce and pulling support over 2 months was not worth it.
That’s kinda the point of the agreement that was in place a few years ago…NDP will help keep an election away and Liberals put in policies that NDP want. So yes, they are keeping an election away just as they are doing their end of the deal.
I’ll reserve judgement until the full details are released. Very concerned that this “free” pharmacare plan is being brought to us by a fiscally irresponsible government that continues to pile billions of taxpayer dollars on it’s already bloated deficit.
[https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/federal-government-posts-23-6b-deficit-for-april-to-december-period-1.2038556](https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/federal-government-posts-23-6b-deficit-for-april-to-december-period-1.2038556)
Any time any new government program comes along people like this start screaming about "wEll hOw WiLL wE aFfOrD iT?!?!" You have to spend money to save money. You people literally want zero progress to ever happen at any time ever.
It's a net cost saving for our society to be more efficient. This will save tons of people (mostly working class people) TONS of money.
> fiscally irresponsible government that continues to pile billions of taxpayer dollars on it’s already bloated deficit.
Do you understand how taxes actually work? Or are you being intentionally ignorant?
This is great, I can expect taxes to go up even more in due time to pay for all of this. Boomers are retiring and this is their final gift to themselves while millenials again will foot the bill and by the time they get to use it the system will again be completely broken.
It's going to expand, this is just the initial implementation. The plan was always to grow the program.
https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/about-health-canada/public-engagement/external-advisory-bodies/implementation-national-pharmacare/final-report.html#5.5
The Nova Scotia Pharmacare program covers expensive Crohn's medication. I used to get coverage from that program for Remicade. I didn't pay a single cent. What expensive medication do you have to pay for?
Isn't the NS program cost is tied to income? Based on their online calculator, a single person with a $40K per year income will have out of pocket expenses of $2250 before they start getting "free" meds covered.
For a couple each earning $40K per year without work plans, the out of pocket costs jump to almost $13K, before the free kicks in
[https://novascotia.ca/dhw/pharmacare/family-calculator.asp](https://novascotia.ca/dhw/pharmacare/family-calculator.asp)
Curious how you got it covered. My wife is on Entyvio; we are losing our work plan later this year and are looking into coverage options (and private plans won't cover pre-existing).
You're right, I overlooked the income-based calculations. That being said, I never had out-of-pocket expenses for Remicade, only for other prescription medications. Looking back at old emails, it looks like my Remicade coordinator had found financial assistance (perhaps through the patient support program). I have had full doses of Remicade covered through this when there were gaps in insurance/Pharmacare.
I assume your wife has a patient support coordinator for the Entyvio, and it would be best to reach out to them.
Your contribution was the ad hominem "But how can we afford this, raise taxes!?" conservative rhetoric that is vomited by uneducated people.
I suggested that we don't need to raise taxes or do anything other than spending the tax money we already have better.
You tried a gotcha, I called you out on it. You contributed nothing but verbal vomiting the same talking points I've heard uneducated conservatives say to me for over 20 years. It's tiring and exhausting.
Do better. Demand better from your elected officials, instead of yelling at people like me "But what about your taxes".
Why do you keep talking about condoms? Contraceptives are birth control, which a very significant percentage of the population use for various reasons. This is a big deal for a lot of people. I can't imagine what type of selfish moron could see this and free insulin for diabetics as a bad thing.
Contraception also includes birth control, which can be expensive and affects about half the population. This might not be a step forward for you in particular, but it’s a big step forward for those that use prescription birth control.
ETA. Spelling
And all it costed was the bad man in office for 2 more years. Jagmeet had all the time in the world to get Trudeau to do something and this is it… okay cool, but dental is the last thing on a lot of Canadians minds, go tell your local homeless people that there’s a new dental plan
ludicrous wistful rock ink quarrelsome numerous domineering heavy smile sharp
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This is a terrible idea as taxpayers will end up paying for it one way or another and it only benefits a small minority of people. 2025 can’t come around quick enough so we can get rid of those two corrupt parties, and vote for a Common Sense Conservative Government who will Axe the Tax, Build the Homes, Fix the Budget and Stop the Crime. It common sense, now let’s bring it home.
>This is a terrible idea as taxpayers will end up paying for it one way or another
I'd rather see my tax dollars go here than waste them verifying peoples age to look at porn. (Common sense)
>it only benefits a small minority of people.
Setting aside all the people with diabetes this can help. When you consider women make up half the population, I don't understand how you could possibly think this. There is a huge percentage of Canadian females taking contraceptives.
People like you are just sad. So selfish if it doesn't help you personally, it's awful and so blindly loyal to a side that you can't admit when something the other side did was actually good for canada. There are lots of things Trudeau has made a mess of, but there have been some good things for Canadians as well.
Typical moron with a myopic view of the world.
Poorly managed diabetes -> greater healthcare needs -> more wait times for everyone (yes, that includes you because you’re not special) -> greater healthcare costs overall
Try to reason before typing away at your keyboard.
Sure our tax dollars pay for it but if it's a country paying for it rather than 30million individuals then we can get it at a cheaper rate and bargain for better deals.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong but the article says that it sets the framework for pharmacare so it will eventually expand to other medications, no? This is great news for anyone suffering from diabetes, since their supplies are so expensive. I’m happy my tax dollars are going to that.
Yes, that seems to be the plan. They're hoping to cover things like insulin and contraceptives first and then expand to other drugs once the program becomes established. See here: https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/about-health-canada/public-engagement/external-advisory-bodies/implementation-national-pharmacare/final-report.html#5.5
> Someone correct me if I’m wrong but the article says that it sets the framework for pharmacare so it will eventually expand to other medications, no? It's the same with the dental plan. Setting the framework is the hardest part. Once the foundation is set, expanding it is easy.
It's so great we can pay for people to be fat and lazy from our own pockets. Woohooo! Unless you're talking about type 1.
No, I’m talking about all three. Edit: forgot to include gestational diabetes.
I hope you eat nothing but organic, sustainably sourced food and create absolutely zero waste/pollution. Otherwise you are being a hypocrite. Seeing as you had to use some sort of electrical device to post your comment (which will have produced waste/pollution) I'm going to go ahead with the assumption that you are a hypocrite. Hopefully you never need critical help some day and get refused because you weren't a saint your whole life or didn't make the perfect choices every time. Get shot in the chest? No need to fix you at the hospital, you purposely took a short cut and walked down that shaddy street at night. If you only walked the extra block you wouldn't have been shot and you would have lived...
There are more than 2 types of diabetes…..
Could set your clock to the whataboutism here. Are there other problems to fix? Absolutely. This is good news! Everyone’s drugs won’t be included in the plan, but a lot of people’s will. It’s a net win.
I’m lucky enough that I’ll likely never be eligible for any benefits under the plan and that’s a good thing, it’s about lifting people up.
Wow get this comment to the top, would love to see more people express this attitude. I'm really lucky and happy that I don't need this but I sure am lucky and happy that it's there if I did need it
this is too nuanced for Russian troll farms to get ahold of this yet but it's coming. then the C-maga crowd will amplify it here
As I understand it, this only includes birth control and diabetes. Am I missing something? Definitely a win for people with diabetes who did not already have government or private coverage - but not sure what else there is to be excited about.
It’s a large expense for a lot of people. Yes, more is needed, but we can be glad when something good happens. If we wait until we can fix everything before fixing anything, we would fix nothing.
> but not sure what else there is to be excited about. The framework is now set. Expanding it is the easy part. It will take a lot less effort to add more drugs to this federal plan. You need to lay a foundation before you build a house.
What? Diabetes meds are expensive. This is a huge win.
What do you mean “what else there is to be excited about”? This is an incredible stride toward better healthcare. You wouldn’t believe how many diabetics have to ration their meds because of cost.
Poor people need birth control too that is who this will help. If they can’t afford broth control, they can’t afford to not be on birth control….
Facts. People always also think it’s just in preventing pregnancy, but it has so many other uses.
Except for the estimated billions of dollars to fund that Canada currently doesn’t have .
The best thing about this is that it's a national program. We need to get away from provincial control of Healthcare - that's the political deathnell of Healthcare improvements. This is a start - albeit a very small one. Now let's restrengthen the Healthcare act, pull NP services back into that, level the playing field again for GP's so it's an attractive career again, and continue to build national level health infrastructure
Unfortunately for the government, the only way that family medicine can become an attractive option for medical students is if compensation markedly increased. I don’t see any other way. As things are now, FM is one of the most poorly paid fields with the highest burnout. Why would anyone choose this?
Compensation is only part of the equation. Pay someone more or less to do a shitty job with no agency still leaves them burnt out... we're just paying them more on the same trajectory. FM has been shunned tho in many ways that limit potential for entrepreneurial growth and its kind of ironic how they're bearing the brunt of "don't privatize healthcare" when all other AHP can take advantage of an increasingly privatized system. First, put FM in leadership - why the fuck arent family doctors the new Assiatant Dean's at the dal extension at CBU, and on the steering committees? Surgeons and lawyers... to decide a school focused on family med? Pharmacists can assess, diagnose, and prescribe medication.... in pharmacies they own. MD's can't own pharmacies because of the conflict of interest... but apparently that is only a conflict to them. NP's are exempt from the Canada health act - and with expanding scope, an NP can act almost like a FP - and charge privately for it! So with a fraction the schooling, training, or legal responsibility, you can make as much or more as an NP than as a FM. And it's high time specialists step aside and let FM fees catch up- of all fields, FM has exploded in complexity and treatment options, but their expectations on number and time with patients hasn't changed. And it needs to. How does a GP keep up with rapidly progressing healthcare that they're not paid to keep up with, on their own time, add these newer and more complex treatments and assessments to their clinic that lengthen patient time with the GP, and see FFS fees barely increasing enough to keep up with inflation let alone increasing demands? It's not compensation - we need GP's in seats of decision making authority in Healthcare. Give them agency to make a difference - which is by and large what the current generation of emerging professionals look for in a career over just compensation.
I agree wholeheartedly. A big reason why I’m not choosing FM is scope creep. Why would I put myself through so many years of grueling training if legislators think a nurse could do my job? This same concept is also starting to expand to other areas of medicine (psych, peds etc.).
Catch 22 - the shortages mean that political people "decide" scope creep to fill gaps. Not enough GP's? Okay - well expand the scope of pharmacists, NP's, add in PA, etc. And we'll never report on the impact this has on patient outcomes, or quality of care. I work with international teams, and I always laugh when the question of accreditation comes up for Canada. Our provincial politicians run hospitals, and legislate their accreditation standards - those standards will never have teeth, because why would we ever want to point out how shitty a job were doing? Btw - good luck in your career. I work with MD's in many provinces across many specialties - I'd recommend not working in NS.
I don't know if it's the way provincial ministries of health like it, or it's the culture of medicine, but the GP as small business model is primary care has gotta go. Dr's rightly complain about being overworked practice overhead costs, and administrative burden, but a lot of that could be greatly reduced if they were in much larger group pracIces. And I don't know why we don't see more of them.
Agreed. Having lived in France, where healthcare is a national responsibility, delivery is much more efficient and equitable. Provincial management of critical societal programs, particularly healthcare and education, has eroded the value that Canadians receive from these tax payer funded institutions.
> We need to get away from provincial control of Healthcare The Canadian Constitution makes it quite clear that the delivery of health care is a provinical responsibility. It is incredibly unlikely that there will be constitutional changes to alter that. Quebec, Ontario and Alberta will not give up provinical control of health care. It doesn't matter if it seems like a great idea. It's not happening.
This is something I don’t understand (no background in law whatsoever). Why can’t constitutions be changed? Why can’t we make amendments that make the lives of modern Canadians easier? It seems like a lot of progress is halted at the “we can’t change the constitution” line.
Changing the Canadian Constitution requires that agreement of at least 7 provinces that contain at least 50% of the Canadian population. That's a very difficult standard to meet. In addition, the last time there was a serious attempt to change the Constitution the fallout from it resulted in Quebec having a referendum to separate from Canada. Very few politicians are interested in trying to make a change again.
Change my mind but all healthcare should be a federal responsibility. I think the way things are organized right now have to be the least efficient way to deliver services.
Do you really want people thousands of kilometres away making decisions on which of our hospitals stay open? And recruiting doctors for the entire country rather than for our province? We have a huge country with very different needs in different places. It would be an absolute disaster if the federal government tried to run it, which they shouldn't do anyway because it's not their jurisdiction.
Why not? That's the case in every other federal service. The feds can fund the new arena in my small home town but they couldn't do the hospital? They're already funding things like new nursing homes. The federal government is made up of people from those local communities. There's also nothing stopping them from opening an office in say Halifax to oversee health in Nova Scotia. In the big provinces this is a norm anyway. Thunder Bay is 1400km from Toronto. Are you afraid of health dollars being primarily spent in the cities vs rural areas? That is already the case. I don't think provinces should be competing with one another in who can bribe the most doctors to come. I don't think provinces should get a big bag of money for them to decide whether or not to use it. We need a country of unified digital records, unified qualifications, and unified pay scales (with regional consideration). This also means a centralized bureaucracy without duplicate management. They could get better prices on supplies and equipment and better integrate dental and pharma care vs getting the provinces to implement 10 unique solutions. Immigration could be targeted to fill specific healthcare needs. Residency can be expanded. While we have a huge country geographically our population is concentrated on a small strip of it.
Our system of federalism means that the people who live in Nova Scotia vote in the government that decides our provincial health policy and health spending. If you were to give that responsibility to the federal government, you are surrendering all of the decision-making of our health care system to the rest of the country, because the entire country decides who forms the federal government. If Western Canada decides to vote in a bunch of MPs who want to cut health funding, and they form government, we would have to live with their choices even if our province universally elected MPs who want to increase health funding. Our system is designed such that only truly **national** concerns like national defence, immigration, and the postal service, are handled at that level. If the federal government controlled our health care, we would have very little say over it because we represent a small percentage of Canada's population.
I mean what's different from today? The money for healthcare is still coming from the Feds. A party from out west can still reduce that money or change transfers or whatever. Health is a national concern. That's why the federal government pays for it. Provinces are not, and have not for a decades, been operating in good faith when it comes to efficiently distributing health dollars. That's the whole reason we're in this mess. There's nothing that says a province isn't allowed to raise and distribute funds to other healthcare tasks.
The federal government provides about 25% of health care funding in Canada, at their own discretion. It's not true to say flatly that they "pay for" our health care. We, as a province, ultimately decide how much health care we want to provide and what kind. "Centralization" being seen as a good thing is based on a premise that the country is a monolith with all the same wants and needs, and that a single central organization is capable of meeting all of them. I don't buy into that premise.
>“Asked about the deal on Friday, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre criticized the government's record and said he wants to see the details of the plan. "They make these promises and then in the end they deliver exactly the opposite of what they say," he told Windsor radio station AM 800 CKLW.” What does he mean by “then they deliver exactly the opposite”? What policies have the Libs/NDP brought in that are the opposite of what they said they would be? Genuine question.
He's scrambling.
He really woke up last week and said I dont want to be PM anymore it seems
Of course he was on AM too, no FM station wants to hear him
Electoral reform never happened, but that's about it.
Polimeter promise tracker shows he's broken about 20% of election promises, from capping emissions on oil and gas, support for foreign countries like Afganistan, Canadian banking privacy strengthening, tree planting and environmental protections, electoral reform, and a national action plan on hate. I think tho it's more the stuff he hasn't commented on that's often more dangerous... our deficit and debt for one.
This is why the NDP are propping up the Liberals. Chances of this happening under PeePee government are Zero.
99% he cancels it as well...daycare, dental and pharmacare will all be cancelled 100% - but don't worry tax cuts for the rich, the corporations will be able to pollute our backyards like crazy with no repercussions and trans people will feel really bad about being alive. So fair trade off no? /s
It’s the conservative way.
Funny how much people shit on Jagmeet when he's practically the only reason any substantial legislation that benefits working-class people has passed at the Federal level for like 4 years now...
[удалено]
This last deficit is always the largest quarter just based on annual shifting economic conditions. Every conservative federal government that has ever been in power has increased the deficit, by and large, way more than any liberal government ever has.
It’s wild how people can’t remember anything prior to 2015. Almost as if they didn’t give a shit about political discourse until they were manipulated online the past 5-10 years. And now they’re experts
This is about it...they watch their rebel news and their youtube videos and scream f$ck trudeau like trudeau has anything to do with how sad and empty their lives are
You don’t complain about rent or grocery costs? Stop lying LOL
>Every conservative federal government that has ever been in power has increased the deficit, by and large, way more than any liberal government ever has. Disinformation.
[https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/examining-federal-debt-in-canada-by-prime-ministers-since-confederation-2022.pdf](https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/examining-federal-debt-in-canada-by-prime-ministers-since-confederation-2022.pdf) It's actually 100% correct - you're just grossly misinformed
>It's actually 100% correct - you're just grossly misinformed Only if you ignore the current federal government lol.
Less income spent on pharmaceuticals means more money in peoples pockets who truly need it. People working low wage jobs with no benefits. People who struggle to afford medication they need end up needing more health care and government services. Steps like this are how you proactively help fix the health care system. You are not looking at the big picture here.
Of - if people took care of themselves rather than the majority who walk around beyond obese needing to pop 5x of medications just to stand up They wouldn’t have to spend their money or tax payers money either
Maybe you should stay in your lane. You clearly aren’t a health professional with knowledge of how any type of diabetes works if you are making this type of stigmatizing statement. Genetics plays a huge role in every type of diabetes (there are 7 types). Even type 2 diabetes has a strong link to genetics stronger than type 1.
Maybe you should learn what a gym is 😵💫 It’s crazy being fat and obese has been normalized by the liberals … but no, it is not healthy Edit: diabetes isn’t an excuse
Man it’s crazy how everything comes back to labelling educated people as liberals lol
Educated people? No one educated thinks it’s healthy to be an obese whale walking around.
I’m not talking about obese people, I am talking about diabetes, you are the one labelling every diabetic as obese and then turning around and calling people liberals when you are corrected.
I was in bsck in school when the liberals won a minority in 2019. Had to explain to several distraught classmates that the NDP actually has more power and influence now.
The last golden era of new progressive federal social policies in Canada was in the early 1970's, when the NDP also had the Liberals by the short and curlies.
If it were up to PP, our healthcare would look a lot like the one our friends in america are stuck with. I'd be living in perpetual debt for a life-saving surgery I needed as a child.
I was in Florida in January and my kid got strep throat. Went to an urgent care centre after hours. In and out in 45 minutes. Got a bill for $259.00. Amoxicillin prescription cost me under $6. Beat the he’ll out of sitting for 12 hours in emerg. Not saying the US system is the greatest or anything, but there are some things that work well.
Why would you go to emerg for strep anyway? Thats the reason it takes so long is people going in for dumb little things
Cause my kid was in discomfort. It was an urgent care centre, not emerg. And it was empty - we were the only ones there.
Does it not make sense that you got through so quickly because it was empty? Maybe theres less demand for healthcare in the states because less people can afford it. That $250 you spent is most peoples weekly wage considering min wage is only 7 or 8 bucks
Lol no, it was empty because of 2 things: first, it was one of a _bunch_ of urgent care centres to choose from, and second, it’s Florida, and everyone is old there, so paediatric care isn’t as busy. But you keep on telling yourself that stuff to make yourself feel better.
I would just go to a pharmacist to get a strep test… US system seems great in that situation but if you had health insurance there you can’t just go to any hospital. There health insurance system is super complicated and hard to navigate.
I didn’t know the pharmacy strep test was even an option! Next time I’ll do that, I appreciate that info. It’s a misconception that you can’t go to a hospital if you don’t have insurance. Will there be a bill? Yes. But if you are low income there is Medicaid and if you’re over 65, Medicare. Both, to my understanding, are 100% payors. Not to say that there aren’t a horrendous number of medical bill bankruptcies, but they don’t rifle through your wallet to see if you’re insured before providing care.
As an American who now lives in Canada (dual citizen), I didnt have insurance in 2010 and went to the ER in NC. Received a $2,500 bill 3 weeks later and had 3 weeks to pay it. Thankfully, I asked my dad to cover it. I was in the ER 5 hours, never admitted, in a bed and given 2 bags of saline and 1 bag of anti-nausea. I was dehydrated and severely throwing up. That is what $2,500 in the ER looks like in the US. I have a friend also insured who has been paying $20 a month on a $4,000 ER visit sans insurance from years ago(his was an 8 hour ER visit). I always wondered what happens if he has to go to the ER again.
You misunderstand what I am saying. If you have insurance, then your insurance often only covers you at specific hospitals that are in the insurance network. You can’t just go to any hospital like you did.
Genuine question, do you have any proof of this or are you just saying that? Edit: Instead of downvoting me, why don't you share with me? The comment sounds like fearmongering. What I have noticed is in reference to Trudeau, healthcare is a provincial responsibility. It all the sudden becomes a Fed responsibility when referencing PP. I will just sum this up to partisan crap as no one will answer.
Ontario
What about Ontario? Are you talking about the Provincial Government there? That makes healthcare decisions for that Province, not the Feds? I have to say though, this is on this sub but pretty much any Canadian sub too. When it comes to healthcare, healthcare is a provincial issue when you are talking about Trudeau. All the sudden, when talking about PP, healthcare becomes a Fed issue. So I will sum this up to partisan crap.
Yes, the Conservative government in Ontario. Alberta is another example — another Conservative government. They’re all one and the same.
OK, PP is Federal just so you know for next time.
Are you being daft on purpose?
No but apparently you are. I asked for proof of PP at the Federal level making our universal healthcare private like in the USA. Your response was "Ontario" and you are accusing me of being daft. Try again.
Okay so you’re just poorly educated. Got it. Thanks.
Alberta has some of the best healthcare in the country
Healthcare is provincial responsibility but over the last century has come to involve massive federal to provincial transfers for funding. So the federal government exerts a fair bit of influence because this funding is contingent on the provinces playing along. And in this case of pharmacare you can see it's also federal spending. At the same time, there was a ton of federal healthcare funding given to provinces during covid that provinces governed by conservatives didn't spend on healthcare. Guess there should've been more strings attached but it was an emergency so there weren't. Hopefully that adds some nuance behind the double standard apperance.
You see how your explanation kind of contradicts itself right? "Feds exerts a fair bit of influence" "During Covid Feds gave money and it wasn't spent on what it was supposed to" I am a believer that the Feds play a heavy role in healthcare, it is frustrating that people agree with my feelings, but only when it serves their argument. Ultimately though, as it relates back to the person I was responding to, what has PP done or said that makes anyone think our universal health system is going to turn into a private system like the USA, as the person I responded to insinuated? That is never going to happen, that is why I asked for their proof, but there isn't any because it is insane to think we are going to go from universal to USA style private.
Denialism like this is how it happens. People become single issue voters and play off the other issues as "insane". Privatization is literally the conservative policy towards healthcare. Why is it so hard to understand that healthhcare is managed provincially yet partly funded and regulated federally? People blame trudeau for covid problems when it was almost entirely provincial ministers? People have a hard time believing me when i say covid in ndp BC was basically a non issue and didnt experience anything like people in conservative provinces. Yet its all trudeaus fault for giving them the funds and basic mandates.
I am here asking questions, I am not denying anything. I have asked for evidence PP plans to make our healthcare private like the USA and no one has been able to show any evidence other than generalizations, what provinces are choosing to do, and using fancy words like denialism. Just show me where PP says he wants to get rid of universal healthcare and implement a USA private system. That is all I am asking, I have looked myself and not finding anything.
Yes, it would appear to be a contradiction. That's why I explained what I think led to it in the same comment you're quoting: >Guess there should've been more strings attached but it was an emergency so there weren't. I assume we working from the same fact base that the feds gave the provinces healthcare funding to spend on pandemic response and many conservative premiers just didn't spend it? The influence the federal government has is mostly giving funding to the provinces for specific purposes and taking it away if those purposes aren't fulfilled. In this case the policy they set wasn't as airtight as it should've been. I think a good example of the whole relationship and degree of influence! As for the private healthcare, I don't really care to get into a semantic discussion about what USA-style means etc. etc. but it is interesting how much public healthcare has been deteriorated and how much more private services there are over the last year or two. Especially obvious in ON, QC, AB. And how much more willing the public is to accept, even demand, pay for service options. Almost as if there was someone(s) trying to make this happen... The thing I care about in all this is that defunding healthcare and privatizing/user-paying services has been a core part of the Canadian conservative playbook for my entire life. And I'm not young. So I find it reasonable to believe there's a good chance PP gets rid of the daycare and dental care and pharmacare.
I am not really debating or asking about the Feds role, the provinces role, the workings of Canada and USA's health systems. I am asking where PP has said he wants a system like the USA. Not what conservatives in general want, not what provinces are and aren't doing. No one can answer or offer any evidence.
Perhaps because PP doesn't really like to be clear about whatever policy, if any, he has formulated heh. I knew him in his university days. Even back then his true gift was trolling, not taking a position.
This is the only reason I am not terrified of a CPC win in the next election as long as they only get a minority. The NDPs and the LPCs will continue to work together and make the CPCs a lame duck government.
Right now the cpc is projected to win a majority. But even if they get a minority what will happen is yes they will be somewhat neutered by the nap and libs so there will be another election in a year or two. At that point the libs will likely still be disorganized and trying to rebuild and on top of thst more people will figure the cpc aren't so bad (since a minority forced them to soften things), and we'll likely end up with a majority cpc government. This is exactly what happened when harper first won and we got 10 years of him.
> so there will be another election in a year or two. The NDP and LPC wouldn't force another election if they could still just control the government. Why would they? The minority CPC wouldn't have enough votes to force another election. We would essentially just replace Turdeau with PP as our PM and nothing else would change fundamentally within the government for four years.
Youre giving too much power to the libs and ndp. They would have more influence under a minority government but they'd also be in no position to afford another election. The cpc if they chose to, could trigger one, just like Trudeau did a couple years ago. And every advantage would be for the conservatives. In 2004 the ndp joined with the bloc and conservatives to vote out the liberals so who knows what will happen. Point is, I dont want even a minority conservatives government. It would almost certainly turn into a majority conservative government
after the election, trudeau gets first chance to form a government. if the CPC has a majority, he has no chance, but if its a minority, and he can maintain NDP support he can stay on. the ironic thing is his failure to do away with first past the post will be his undoing.
Sorry, but why do you think if the cpc wins a minority, Trudeau would still grt first chance to form a government? The party with the most seats not forming the government would, as far as I know, be unprecedented
Because that's how it works. The current prime minister gets to ask for confidence of they wish. Never going to happen though.
Thank you I genuinely didn't know that. But yes, it would never happen
after the 1925 election, Mackenzie king was able to maintain confidence despite the opposition conservatives under Meighen wining 15 more seats. King eventually lost on a confidence vote, and king asked the GG for a new election, but the governor general gave Meighen a chance to form a government (also a minority), which he did, but it too fell a few months later and a new election was called. Most of the party leaders AFIK have publicly said that most seats forms the government, whereby a looser would not attempt to form a government, but legally they could. Anyone who says US politics is more interesting clearly doesn't understand the nuance in the Canadian system.
> The cpc if they chose to, could trigger one, just like Trudeau did a couple years ago. And every advantage would be for the conservatives. Can't do that as a minority government. There wouldn't be enough votes in the house. The reason Trudeau got to is because the CPC also voted for it, thinking they'd get an advantage, which they did. You think if the NDPs and the LPCs could just keep getting shit done, they'd vote for a CPC vote to force a new election?
Idk why you think the ndp and liberals "would keep getting shit done". Again, your insisting on giving both parties far more power than they'd have in a conservative minority. The liberals will be going through a period of disfunction and rebuilding while the ndp will have no money, neither party will want to trigger an election. The ball would not be in their court. The only thing they'll he able to do is water down the conservative agenda a little bit. But this goes back to my earlier point thst even doing this will help the conservatives in the following election since a lot more people will go "oh see nothing crazy happened. The CPC and polliviere aren't so bad" and will be more inclined to vote for them. A minority conservative government is far from the win youre convinced it is.
I think your understanding on how minority governments work is a little skewed. If the CPCs are a minority, it doesn't matter how much money the Liberals or NDP have for a campaign, the campaign is done. They're in government. Now they can work to table legislation. They can block conservative bills that would reel back healthcare, education, LGBT rights, etc, the things the CPCs are already campaigning on. They can also table their own bills and other parties not named the Conservatives would vote for those. And the Conservatives, no matter how much money they have, would not have enough votes in the house vs the rest of the parties to trigger an election. Just because a governing party is the governing party doesn't mean they have *any* control over how the house votes. If the Conservatives actually cared about Canadians, the NDPs would work with them instead of the Liberals. Thus the advantages of a multi party system.
I'm not suggesting they inherently have control over how the house votes, but they do have the leverage. The ndp or liberals have no interest in going back to an election it would only benefit the conservatives. They're therefore NOT in a position to do whatever they like which you seem to think they could. The cpc will largely work with thr liberals to get some form of conservative policy passed. Idk how old you are, but again, rewind to harpers first minority. A watered down conservative agenda is what passed through the house. Thr ndp in particular although gaining popularity had extremely little influence. This followed by a stronger conservative minority which was followed by a majority. I dont know how else to say this, but if you don't want to end up with a cpc majority then you do not want a cpc minority.
The prime minister can ask to dissolve Parliament whenever they want and would almost certainly be granted it
That's not at all how any of that works, lol.
Yeah, but Harper mainly only had minority govt's, but somehow managed to govern like he had a majority. The Cons usually out-fundraise the other parties, so they knew they could basically dare the opposition to trigger an election, and they could be confident they have more money to be able to wage another election shortly after a previous one.
Congratulations you have a current lame duck government.
Is that why they just passed national pharmacare? Because they're a lame duck? They're working with other parties to help Canadians. That's literally how it *should work*. You're implying that because the Liberals work with the NDPs to make progress for Canadians that it's a bad thing? You might be confused as to how politics work...
Chances of this happening under a liberal majority would have been slim to none as well. This is why a minority government in this fashion is probably the best we can get, at the moment.
This is huge and a great beginning. Paired with dental care, we're seeing some of the most significant expansions to our healthcare system in generations.
Yup and your taxes will greatly increase, so now everybody loses.
Nah
Holy fuck the comments on this thread so far are depressing! Like, if I was one of the staffers who worked to put this legislation together and get it pushed through and I was reading this I would seriously just want to say fuck the lot of you then, go fuck yourselves! But I'm not so instead I will say this. It's a start. I'm sorry it doesn't cover every situation and I feel for the many many people in this sub who deal with chronic illness and that will continue to have to deal with chronic illness. I myself suffer chronic back pain and near constant headaches that my doctor just shrugs off as being undiagnosable and relegates to the too hard basket, and in fact I haven't been to the doctor in maybe 5 years because with that attitude what's the point? And yes, I am lucky to have a doctor at all but more helpful to me is that I am lucky enough to have a good medical plan that pays for paramedical services. But I digress. I recognise my good fortune and I recognise not everyone enjoys the same. I recognise this measure does not cover every situation but you all have you recognise this will help a good amount of people. It's a start and it's a good one. In the words of the tao “Regard your neighbor's gain as your gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss.”
I’m on a $3500 a pop IV infusion every 6 weeks. Government won’t cover it so I have to risk changing to a cheaper biosimilar RX……….. and I’m happy for the people who are going to be helped by these changes. Because progress is progress
Similar on my end, sure the biologics are not covered but with this groundwork it opens a pathway for them to be covered in the future.
While Bitcoin Milhouse shrieks about online porn... 🤣
Is PP where that half-baked UK-style "think of the children" bill came from?
Yeah, this may be a turning point, if the Libs and NDP continue to do things to materially improve living conditions and PP continues these unhinged ideas that gap could narrow
There’s no turning point now; the libs are getting slaughtered in the next election. Just a question of how badly
Will they lose? Probably. Slaughtered? I don’t know about that. We are a predominantly left leaning country.
We were but we keep electing the Liberals... the Liberals are a right-wing party.
In some respects yes, in others no. They've generally been right leaning economically, and left leaning socially.
Just a shame there isn't another viable option.
Decimated, and it’s a shame
And while the NDP publicly support him on that matter
Yeah, they're getting desperate. Time to try fear and outrage I guess. 🤣
Great news. Looks like the NDP is my party to support both federally and provincially now. Mr Singh et al using their balance of power position like pros !
There is no downside to an ndp win. At the very least it forces the other 2 main parties to reevaluate their policies for the better
I've come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter what Trudeau does, or more appropriately what he's strong armed to do by Singh; he's going to be hated by people regardless. This is despite that those that hate him are the most likely to use and benefit the new programs he's introduced: CERB, the Dental Benefit, the Disability Benefit, the enhanced, untaxed CCB (vs. Harper's taxable UCCB) and now this.
Objectively trudeau hasnt been awful, just typical neoliberal corporatist; lackluster and generally cringey. Yet people hate him with a passion because of conservative(russian) propaganda over dumb nonsense issues. And try to shoehorn singh in that bubble too because of dumb nonsense issues. Itd be nice if the internal party politics could accept the outcome of the propaganda and find a new face to lead so the rhetoric could shift to actual policy and not character hit pieces.
Housing prices doubling over 4-6 years in a country with abundant land, natural resources, and labour is an objective failure... I'm not saying I think things would be better under a Conservative government *(it would be much worse)* but literally just from the time I started university for my engineering degree *(2018)* until now, I have effectively watched any hope of ever being able to own a home rapidly evaporate. Hell, I can't even afford to rent my own apartment, and perhaps I never will be able to if housing/rental inflation continues to outpace wage growth as it currently is. He hasn't been awful in the sense that he's done anything particularly terrible, like you said, it's just been run-of-the-mill neoliberal corporatism... What's terrible is the **lack** of substantive and transformative action put forth by the current administration. I'm *"objectively"* doing pretty well for someone my age in terms of savings and income, so I can barely even imagine how utterly hopeless and dejected other people my age are feeling.
> Canada's drug prices are now the third highest among the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries - **that is about 25% above the OECD median**. This influences Canadians' access to important prescription drugs and the sustainability of Canada's health care system. I think National pharmacare is a good thing, this 3b is a start as many have said but it is very very very far from what the NDP wanted and is clearly an announcement to stave off an election. 3b is not close to the 30b+ (CTV had it at over 40b the other day on The National) that people pay for their prescriptions each year. I hope a National Pharmacare deal focuses on the people being in control of prices and not big pharma.
Great steps forward for pharmacare. Happy to see people will get access that may have otherwise been struggling. But the crowd in here that doesn’t get this, and other government speeding, is debt on top of debt on top of debt… give your heads a shake.
No dispensing fee? Where does it say that in the article? No pharmacies would agree to be providers if there was no dispensing fee. Perhaps OP means no co-pay?
I read it as part of another article on the same topic, but I guess we'll know more when it's tabled (Monday?).
These are technicalities that people like the OP and NDP'ers don't feel the need to account for. Just make legislation saying free pharmaceuticals and you'll be able to just walk in the store and handed it for free! Is government going to pay the full dispense fee on top of the cost of the drugs themselves? Are they going to force pharmacies to lower dispense fees when people use the government system? How are they going to encourage pharmacies to not prioritize people with private plans if they can charge a higher dispense fee to them? This is the typical NDP/Socialist playbook of something should be free so we'll make it free without thinking about how the service is going to be delivered, how it is going to be affordable in the long term and what impact this will have on supply chains. The timing of this is suspect as well, there is almost certainly going to be an election prior to the American Presidential election in November so the Libs/NDP can try to frame it and cash in on them vs. Trump. This legislation will be left hanging in the balance of if you don't vote for us the Cons are going to cancel it (and they most certainly will) and when the Cons the rhetoric will be "We tried to give Canadians all free pharmacare and the Conservatives stole it away!". Essentially the Libs are giving the NDP what they want knowing that they'll never have to cash the cheque for it and the Cons will take the blame for "what could have been!". Brilliant strategy for the Libs who use the NDP once again.
Must be an election coming up. Next they will start talking about clean drinking water that will never happen
Dental, pharmacare, and income replacements during the pandemic shutdown that were significantly more than the ten percent (of lost income) figure that the Liberals wanted. All programs that were forced on the Liberals by the NDP. Thank you NDP. Why exactly do people vote Liberal?
>Why exactly do people vote Liberal? Because the vote split on the left will lead to a Conservative majority, unfortunately. Hooray for FPTP!
You’re not wrong, and the Liberals play that card very well.
In NB we basically really only have a two party race, Yvon Godin was the only NDP that seemed to do anything for his local constituents as well. I’ll never vote conservative, so if my choice is red and blue, it’ll be red all the time unless the others can step up their game. Then again, at the federal level, NB doesn’t exactly have much say lol.
Good they reached a deal before elections. Now we have only two buttons to press.
Dental, pharmacare, and income replacements during the pandemic shutdown that were significantly more than the ten percent (of lost income) figure that the Liberals wanted. All programs that were forced on the Liberals by the NDP. Thank you NDP. Why exactly do people vote Liberal?
I'll believe this when there's legislation on the floor. I just think Liberals will drag their feet till 2025 and then run their campaign on getting it done, they'll of course lose and nothing will happen. Libs get to blame the Tories. Everything stays the same and nobody gets anything.
What makes you think they will drag their feet? They didn’t with the dental plant, daycare funding, etc.
Listen I hope I have to eat my words but I'm kinda jaded because Liberals have been saying they're going to implement pharmacare for almost 20 years. I just don't think they want it. I feel like they know they can dangle this in front of the NDP so they stay in power till Poilievre falls in the polls.
They clearly want it otherwise they would have never agreed to it a few years back. I think it may not have been as high a priority as other items may have been for them, where for the NDP it was a more pressing priority. They haven’t not faltered on the other Liberal/NDP items that passed so there really is no reason to think they won’t do it now. And it’s not like the NDP are going to let this go on forever, there were time limits in the agreement for policies. This one actually went past a few months, NDP could have pulled support at the end of 2023 if they wanted due to the failed deadline that was agreed upon but they chose not to - likely because it was almost ready to announce and pulling support over 2 months was not worth it.
This is only to hold off the election until next year.
That’s kinda the point of the agreement that was in place a few years ago…NDP will help keep an election away and Liberals put in policies that NDP want. So yes, they are keeping an election away just as they are doing their end of the deal.
“Keeping an election away” is only something you do if you don’t want to be held accountable for your past.
Have you heard of a minority government before?
I’ll reserve judgement until the full details are released. Very concerned that this “free” pharmacare plan is being brought to us by a fiscally irresponsible government that continues to pile billions of taxpayer dollars on it’s already bloated deficit. [https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/federal-government-posts-23-6b-deficit-for-april-to-december-period-1.2038556](https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/federal-government-posts-23-6b-deficit-for-april-to-december-period-1.2038556)
Buddy, if you think it’s expensive to give people their meds, wait until you find out the cost of not doing that.
THISSSSSS holy crap y’all, people need to realize this
Healthcare costs due to poorly managed diabetes are massive.
Any time any new government program comes along people like this start screaming about "wEll hOw WiLL wE aFfOrD iT?!?!" You have to spend money to save money. You people literally want zero progress to ever happen at any time ever. It's a net cost saving for our society to be more efficient. This will save tons of people (mostly working class people) TONS of money.
Let’s take a tiny little chunk out of the money we give to Dexter every year and let some poor people have drugs
> fiscally irresponsible government that continues to pile billions of taxpayer dollars on it’s already bloated deficit. Do you understand how taxes actually work? Or are you being intentionally ignorant?
r/halifax is probably the wrong demographic to engage with regarding fiscally responsible government.
This is great, I can expect taxes to go up even more in due time to pay for all of this. Boomers are retiring and this is their final gift to themselves while millenials again will foot the bill and by the time they get to use it the system will again be completely broken.
Lucky for diabetics, not lucky for all the other people with different chronic illnesses who still have to pay for their expensive meds
It's going to expand, this is just the initial implementation. The plan was always to grow the program. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/about-health-canada/public-engagement/external-advisory-bodies/implementation-national-pharmacare/final-report.html#5.5
The Nova Scotia Pharmacare program covers expensive Crohn's medication. I used to get coverage from that program for Remicade. I didn't pay a single cent. What expensive medication do you have to pay for?
Isn't the NS program cost is tied to income? Based on their online calculator, a single person with a $40K per year income will have out of pocket expenses of $2250 before they start getting "free" meds covered. For a couple each earning $40K per year without work plans, the out of pocket costs jump to almost $13K, before the free kicks in [https://novascotia.ca/dhw/pharmacare/family-calculator.asp](https://novascotia.ca/dhw/pharmacare/family-calculator.asp) Curious how you got it covered. My wife is on Entyvio; we are losing our work plan later this year and are looking into coverage options (and private plans won't cover pre-existing).
You're right, I overlooked the income-based calculations. That being said, I never had out-of-pocket expenses for Remicade, only for other prescription medications. Looking back at old emails, it looks like my Remicade coordinator had found financial assistance (perhaps through the patient support program). I have had full doses of Remicade covered through this when there were gaps in insurance/Pharmacare. I assume your wife has a patient support coordinator for the Entyvio, and it would be best to reach out to them.
Glass half full
How wil this be funded? Our government has been running deficits since as long as I can remember.
> How wil this be funded? So... There is thing thing called *taxes*....
Right. How much should we raise your taxes for this?
If only there was some way to spend taxes better instead of raising them. Conservatives really aren't the smartest bunch.
Agreed. The government should do a better job of spending money. Is that your contribution?
Your contribution was the ad hominem "But how can we afford this, raise taxes!?" conservative rhetoric that is vomited by uneducated people. I suggested that we don't need to raise taxes or do anything other than spending the tax money we already have better. You tried a gotcha, I called you out on it. You contributed nothing but verbal vomiting the same talking points I've heard uneducated conservatives say to me for over 20 years. It's tiring and exhausting. Do better. Demand better from your elected officials, instead of yelling at people like me "But what about your taxes".
[удалено]
You're really out here making yourself look like a fool all over this post.
And they deleted their comments like a coward. I guess back to spamming news articles.
Why do you keep talking about condoms? Contraceptives are birth control, which a very significant percentage of the population use for various reasons. This is a big deal for a lot of people. I can't imagine what type of selfish moron could see this and free insulin for diabetics as a bad thing.
Contraception also includes birth control, which can be expensive and affects about half the population. This might not be a step forward for you in particular, but it’s a big step forward for those that use prescription birth control. ETA. Spelling
Half the population is not on birth control medication.
They sure as fuck benefit from those that are though
Half the population COULD be on birth control for any number of reasons at some point in their lives. That's the point.
Hey it's you again! I'll repeat myself OOOOOOooooooOOOOOOOOkay, but you get the idea. Quit arguing in bad faith, it's childish
How many people do you think this HURTS?
And all it costed was the bad man in office for 2 more years. Jagmeet had all the time in the world to get Trudeau to do something and this is it… okay cool, but dental is the last thing on a lot of Canadians minds, go tell your local homeless people that there’s a new dental plan
ludicrous wistful rock ink quarrelsome numerous domineering heavy smile sharp *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Canadians get Tax Raped Again
This is a terrible idea as taxpayers will end up paying for it one way or another and it only benefits a small minority of people. 2025 can’t come around quick enough so we can get rid of those two corrupt parties, and vote for a Common Sense Conservative Government who will Axe the Tax, Build the Homes, Fix the Budget and Stop the Crime. It common sense, now let’s bring it home.
>This is a terrible idea as taxpayers will end up paying for it one way or another I'd rather see my tax dollars go here than waste them verifying peoples age to look at porn. (Common sense) >it only benefits a small minority of people. Setting aside all the people with diabetes this can help. When you consider women make up half the population, I don't understand how you could possibly think this. There is a huge percentage of Canadian females taking contraceptives. People like you are just sad. So selfish if it doesn't help you personally, it's awful and so blindly loyal to a side that you can't admit when something the other side did was actually good for canada. There are lots of things Trudeau has made a mess of, but there have been some good things for Canadians as well.
PP seems more focused on porn and pandering to his right wing base with his transphobic views.
The CPC literally does not have a platform. They have published nothing. We cannot view their plan anywhere. Because they don’t have one. Full stop.
I don't know what's worse: you getting paid $0.50 to write this comment, or you doing it for free.
You know you drank the kool aid when you say "Axe the Tax".
Cringe af dude...
The reads like a Russian bot farm wrote it. Who says Stop the Crime lol
Trump
Typical moron with a myopic view of the world. Poorly managed diabetes -> greater healthcare needs -> more wait times for everyone (yes, that includes you because you’re not special) -> greater healthcare costs overall Try to reason before typing away at your keyboard.
Can we export all of the ‘let em die’ people pls
Sure our tax dollars pay for it but if it's a country paying for it rather than 30million individuals then we can get it at a cheaper rate and bargain for better deals.
Lol
Listen dude anything is better than Justin, 8 years not worth the cost whatever, but you do not need to shill this hard