[Marcarc]

This article does seem to symbolize the whole difference I keep seeing here between Quebecers and their supporters, and those in the ROC. The previous comments make that plain. <br /> The ROC, while far from showing 'faith' in the federal government, is content with criticizing and acting in meagre ways to change federalism. There is some validity to that, however, how valid is it in a parliamentary democracy which hasn't seen any investment in social policy for at least thirty years. <br /> The Quebec side simply rejects that notion, either recognizing it for what it is, or lacking the patience to 'wait it out' or 'tough it out', depending on one's perspective.<br /> So it seems clear that both sides are right, yet both sides are operating within an entirely different ideology. If government guts budgets and refuses to address individual suffering, then the individual is quite right to challenge this under the constitution. The benefit that may come out of this is that further definition of what is 'too long' a waiting time will have to defined. Obviously even in the states one doesn't walk into a health provider and get service for most procedures. Gall bladder surgery in many states have a three month waiting list, while my wife had hers done in three weeks.<br /> The question is, do you throw the baby out with the bathwater and do you need to. As to the educational comment, obviously if the money invested in private education is invested in the public education, it has considerably more money.

[samuel]

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc]As to the educational comment, obviously if the money invested in private education is invested in the public education, it has considerably more money. [/QUOTE]<br /> You're blaming the problem on money. The money's there, it is the allocation of money by government that's the problem. More money so they can buy faulty submarines from Her Majesty perhaps? <br /> <br /> Even if what you say were to be applied at a local level (ie. the wealthy investing their money directly into a local public school), government would cut back funding to these particular schools based on their supplementary income. Well endowed people are smarter than to trust government, opting into a private system (while paying into the public one) is a safer investment.

[Marcarc]

That simply means that public education should not even exist. There is no cause and effect there, and in a region where board officials are elected the wealthy are listened to far more than others. There is no inherent reason why more money wouldn't be put into the educational system since that is what is occurring now. I do grant that that is a POSSIBILITY depending on the region, and the province and the health of the economy, but it certainly isn't obligatory. The same is true for the health system, do you discard it and find a new model because you've underfunded it, or do you fund it? We all know corporate taxes have been gutted, all that is happening is that rather than get money from these corporations we will take their investments as partners and let them profit even more off it.

[samuel]

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc] That simply means that public education should not even exist.[/QUOTE]<br /> No, that's not what I'm saying, although I'm sure some wealthy individuals would agree with it. You've basicly agreed to what I've said, government mismangement of public funds or a serious lack of moral priorities is at the root of the problem. But, you can't blame or as the court has determined in the case of health-care, deny people who can afford it, the means to assure their own higher level of services. Especially considering the fact these people are not even raising an issue as to dishing out towards the public sector.<br /> <br /> In an ideal society, people would flock to Parliament Hill by the millions and demand justice, but don't expect that from Canadians and expect more of the same from government.

[Jesse]

[QUOTE BY= Samuel] Well endowed people are smarter than to trust government, opting into a private system (while paying into the public one) is a safer investment.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> You seem to have misspoken. I believe you meant:<br /> <br /> Well endowed people are smarter than to trust government, opting into a private system protects their own wealth.

[sebastien]

[QUOTE BY= sthompson]<br /> <br /> Lastly, I also find it incredibly interesting that the more outspoken separatists here are so eager to embrace a change that REDUCES the distinctiveness and progressiveness of the Quebec system, at the behest of the CANADIAN Supreme Court no less. <br /> <br /> And yes, I believe that the Canadian health system is a part of our national identity, because it expresses an emphasis on an egalitarian, progressive understanding of human rights and collective responsibility which is one of the redeeming qualities/better aspects of Canadian public policy--ie one of the things about the country, and about Quebec (which is generally more progressive than the country as a whole and certainly constantly contributing to keeping us going in that progressive direction), that we should preserve.[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> <br /> Thanks for the compliment Sthompson about Québec being more progressive.<br /> <br /> Québec people have to know a lot about politics since the Federal and Ottawa are always trying to get in the provincial jurisdictions... even if it knows that all Québécois want to control some areas of its destiny.<br /> <br /> That's why we will separate !<br /> Oh ! And by the way... there's 1000 reasons for Québec to separate. Let's do it in peace okay ?

[Clovis]

We have no doctors. Do u think by opening the way for private health care will help our situation? When the doctors of public will go in private ... the poor people will wait during the rich one will get services. Our society is not ignorant and stupid ... We just want the same shit for everyone. We want equality between all people! U can say what u want but when u do that, u let entering in Québec and Canada USA assurance company!