Here’s an article discussing some of her base which touches on what you’re saying. For example supporters wanting to know when the Alberta government is going to start investigating chemtrails.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
I've never been to an NDP or any other party constituency meeting but they're surely not talking about chemtrails. They can pretend all they want that brand doesn't matter but just being called NDP puts probably 10% of the population out of reach while not really bringing in another 10% to offset that.
Saying all that, kudos to Danielle for keeping the party united, not scaring off the average voter while keeping the tin hat crowd in the party will and has won them elections. Not sure you can satisfy both long term but so far she's shown she can dance.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
I want Smith to address why Trudeau is denying the earth is clearly flat!
darwink
Senior Member
Last time she managed 4 years while in opposition before the freedom for me, not freedom for thee folks came knocking.
trtcttc
Active Member
It'll get much tougher if Trudeau is gone after next October. Basically their strategy for all this nutty stuff is to first blame Trudeau, then pass some useless laws they know won't hold up against other federal laws. Not sure if that'll work when PP is in office.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Everything was in perfect Harmony when Harper was PM apparently, so they will be singing kumbaya when PP is in office.
Duck Lightning
Senior Member
That was the old provincial PC's which still had connection to the federal party. The current UCP has no relation to that party outside of them both being on the right. UCP as a whole is built to be Alberta first and very anti Ottawa. It's essentially a separatist party in all but name.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Make public delivery so bad you have no choice but to go private. Healthcare costs money. Education costs money. You underfund, blame the bureaucracy, and take no responsibility. UCP will get away with it because "I can live on a tighter budget, why can't you?" As if a governments budget should be run like a household or business.
Last edited:
MichaelS
Senior Member
Are we underfunding it though? I thought it was funded at a record high. I think we are up to just about 36% of our entire provincial budget for that one line of service. At some point you need to ask, are we getting value under the current delivery method? Or, should we look to try something else?
darwink
Senior Member
Both can be true. We can also be getting value, and need to try something else.
I'd rather it not be ad-hoc like is happening though. I'd rather if Alberta Health wanted to contract with multiple operators (like NHS England does), that it be focused on the cities where competition and scale can exist, not be geography. Alberta at this point seems not to be learning the right lessons.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
The current model is underfunded, could/should the current model change? Yes! Do I know what that is? No, but it likely is a mix of public and private, like darwink said. Get out in front of that, say how desperate things are. Bringing in a prejudiced 'public' healthcare operator in to run more hospitals is not the answer. You can also bet no private operator will be able to operate rural hospitals at lower cost, they will want more money because they'll do what it takes to properly operate them; pay people what it takes to get them to work there and then send you the bill.
We have a rapidly growing population, so every year should be a new record high for funding. Could healthcare be better run? Probably (I cannot speak to the operations of hospitals). Is money the only way to get better outcomes? No. If you're the Alberta government and you want to call people to Alberta then you better back that up with properly funding healthcare to support those extra people. This isn't Justin's problem, you're in charge of healthcare and you called people here, step up.
Danielle and her town hall threats are dangerous, it has started a "will they, won't they" amongst healthcare professionals. My doctor left Alberta and if you keep sending off trial balloons at town halls where people ask you about chem trails you will keep possible employees looking for stability away.
We have a rapidly growing population, so every year should be a new record high for funding. Could healthcare be better run? Probably (I cannot speak to the operations of hospitals). Is money the only way to get better outcomes? No. If you're the Alberta government and you want to call people to Alberta then you better back that up with properly funding healthcare to support those extra people. This isn't Justin's problem, you're in charge of healthcare and you called people here, step up.
Danielle and her town hall threats are dangerous, it has started a "will they, won't they" amongst healthcare professionals. My doctor left Alberta and if you keep sending off trial balloons at town halls where people ask you about chem trails you will keep possible employees looking for stability away.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
The question I have is, are we funding it in the appropriate way, or is the government just throwing money at it to appear to be fixing it, while not addressing the problem. An example is ambulances, the province buys ambulances to appear as if they are solving the problem, the issue is there aren't enough people to staff the ambulances we have, so how is that a solution? I think CalgaryTiger's point is bang on, they are purposely missing the point to be able to blame the system. This is all in an attempt to privatize. At least that's how it appears....
trtcttc
Active Member
While I'm not super familiar with the ambulance case, I think that's just not how it operates. It happens in corporations all the time as well, there's teams managing capital/equipment (ambulance) and HR managing the people (paramedics). The number of ambulance probably is matched to the staffing plan submitted by HR, and asset lifecycle/retirements. Province approves plan to buy ambulances, which likely have been in plan for years, then HR tries to hire the number of paramedics to staff them, which may face it's own challenges. There may be mismatches at some points in time, but I doubt the plan is to buy a bunch of spare ambulances to collect dust.
I think our entirely publicly funded model just isn't sustainable. Healthcare costs have grown partially because medicine has similar challenges as childcare, where wages increase with inflation/cost of living but productivity does not. Except healthcare workers have significantly stronger negotiating power than childcare workers. Doctors may be making 2x as 10 years ago, but they are not able to see double the amount of patients. There are advancements in Healthcare but they often add complexity (more complex diseases are now treatable = more time and wages) faster than we are increasing efficiency. The net result is we need more and more money to fund healthcare and one way to inject that capital is private insurance. There's this stigma with private systems that largely comes from the US, but there are very successful public-private systems as well. Fairness is a good goal, but if it results in everyone waiting too long, letting some people cut the line while reducing waits for everyone, isn't always the worst idea.
Everybody Covered: What the US can learn from other countries’ health systems
What the US can learn from other countries’ health systems.
www.vox.com
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
The problem is I don't believe that they actually want to makes it better. When I say.While I'm not super familiar with the ambulance case, I think that's just not how it operates. It happens in corporations all the time as well, there's teams managing capital/equipment (ambulance) and HR managing the people (paramedics). The number of ambulance probably is matched to the staffing plan submitted by HR, and asset lifecycle/retirements. Province approves plan to buy ambulances, which likely have been in plan for years, then HR tries to hire the number of paramedics to staff them, which may face it's own challenges. There may be mismatches at some points in time, but I doubt the plan is to buy a bunch of spare ambulances to collect dust.
I think our entirely publicly funded model just isn't sustainable. Healthcare costs have grown partially because medicine has similar challenges as childcare, where wages increase with inflation/cost of living but productivity does not. Except healthcare workers have significantly stronger negotiating power than childcare workers. Doctors may be making 2x as 10 years ago, but they are not able to see double the amount of patients. There are advancements in Healthcare but they often add complexity (more complex diseases are now treatable = more time and wages) faster than we are increasing efficiency. The net result is we need more and more money to fund healthcare and one way to inject that capital is private insurance. There's this stigma with private systems that largely comes from the US, but there are very successful public-private systems as well. Fairness is a good goal, but if it results in everyone waiting too long, letting some people cut the line while reducing waits for everyone, isn't always the worst idea.
Everybody Covered: What the US can learn from other countries’ health systems
What the US can learn from other countries’ health systems.
I don't think this Government have that kind of courage, Danielle's happy to spit fire at AHS in town halls but isn't actually interested in solving the problem by studying what has worked elsewhere and then selling it to the people, she just wants to put AHS on notice because she's all about finding the boogey man. The boogey man isn't real Danielle!