His common sense vision for public safety involves a big increase in addiction treatment programs, most of them private and some of them involuntary, meaning during incarceration. He wants indefinite apprehension of permanently brain-damaged habitual offenders now wandering the streets, on mental health grounds. That could involve invoking the notwithstanding clause in the charter of rights to bypass constitutional concerns if need be, he said.
The hypocrisy is palpable.
The whole thing is worth a read, but this stuck out:
Hospitals now cut services to meet their budget because they look at patients as a cost, he said. “We actually need to reverse that, we need to look at patients as revenue generators.”
Yeah, that’s how the US got to where they are. Profit incentives have no place in healthcare, as it incentivizes the exact opposite of what you want.
If a patient is a revenue generator you’ll want to make sure to keep them sick for as long as possible to make more money (or, alternatively, drain them as quickly as possible with exorbitant cost of care then boot them out the door when they can’t pay anymore). If a patient is a cost you’ll want to make sure they are healed as quickly as possible to avoid a further drain through expenses. And you’ve also got an incentive to provide high-quality care, because that patient returning means they will increase cost again. So you better do it right the first time around.
look at patients as revenue generators
Yep. Treat sick people like piggy banks to shake out until all their coins drop out, ruin their life then kick them on the street or let them die. That’s the best™ way to do healthcare.
This clown driver needs to lose all political clout
“I hope I don’t offend people, but [Premier David Eby] is a socialist. He believes very strongly in big government. … He’s also an authoritarian who does not respect democracy and local governance.”
I see a lot Conservatives on social media call people Communist when describing Socialist leaning politics. it’s kinda funny if you know any CCP living people here they have a clear bias towards supporting Conservatives.
“That is not the approach that we want to take… and so it’s not a fit for what we are thinking.”
In regards to Rustad firing the current PHO. Do people think it’s a good thing to hire Provincial Health Officer based on how they fit their ideology.
Do people think it’s a good thing to hire Provincial Health Officer based on how they fit their ideology
Way too many people do. Look slightly east for an example.
Nothing will be better for the BC NDP Party that a few years of remindet that they don’t like conservative governments and their virtue signaling lawmaking…
Sometimes takes multiple cycles of conservative power for the people to swing back, and sometimes the damage done in the meantime is irreparable. Lives will be ruined, lives will be lost.
Most definitely. The biggest danger is that Trump gets elected in the US and Candian christofascists double down on copying the US christofascist playbook to try to establish a christofascist dictatorship in Canada.
If people don’t approve of government allowing people to keep more of their own money by way of tax cuts, anyone can contact Revenue Canada and offer to seem them more of a person’s own money that was not taken in taxes. If you are against tax cuts, send more of your own cash to Revenue Canada.
Counterpoint: I proudly pay taxes and am happy to pay more if it means the betterment of all people living in the province. Taxes are the wave that lifts all boats (*when applied correctly - corruption and misspending are serious issues that should be addressed to keep taxation equitable). Anyone who has an issue with making sure we’re all better off is welcome to go and build a society based off the “each man for himself” principle and report back how that turned out.
Face it - Humans are group animals by nature. We are stronger as a species when we band together.
Also, you can’t actually donate to revenue Canada. So I have no clue what you’re on about.
If you are happy to pay taxes for the betterment of others, you could can also give your money to individuals, you can enroll in donating to charities, and you can buy things and give tem away. It is no different than you pay taxes, so politicians vote themselves a pay raise and more benefits paid for by your taxes. Ifyou buy things and give them away, it’s no different than your tax money being used to pay for something and give to whoever needs it.
If you want to pay more to help people then start giving away your cash to anyone it can help, donate your money to organization. If you believe taxes are too low, you can give away your money to anyone you want to make up for it.
Okay let’s play this game since you obviously don’t get it: Please tell me who should pay for the roads you use to drive on. And who should pay for the wildfire services that protect your house from burning down. And who should pay for police services to keep you safe. And who should pay for all other public good and services that exist to better our lives collectively.
Once you go down the rabbit hole of “everyone pays for only the things they need” you either end up re-inventing taxation with private entities instead of public ones, or you end up in utter chaos. For society to function, taxation is a necessity.
P.S. I do agree with you that misspending and corruption are serious problems that need to be addressed to maintain public trust in government spending, as I already stated. P.P.S. I do actually donate to charities that operate on small margins and put the majority of their donations towards their cause.
Will you outlaw unions, ban unions in society to protect jobs? Will you support a single page flat tax?
No, I strongly support unions. People have a right to gather and demand their labor be compensated fairly. Don’t see how that’s related to taxation though.
As for flat taxes - they are a scam that hurt low and middle wage earners much more than rich people. A progressive taxation system is the most fair implementation of taxation - where people that have little means pay less and people with lots of means pay more. This equalizes the relative impact taxation has on the individual’s income to be much fairer than any flat tax every could be. A 20% tax on a 30k/y income is much harder to bear for the individual than a 50% taxation on a 3m/y income. Someone with 24k to spend after taxes will have a much harder time to make ends meet than someone with a 1.5m take-home income.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
