Fair questions (and answers)
Smith's healthcare "fix", moving government jobs, and the self-verifying of falsehoods.
This week in AB
In Canada, health is a public service (but that could change)
It’s tough, living in a place where not nearly enough people are profiting off the suffering of their fellow Canadians.
“Competition makes everyone better!” Unless we’re talking about biological strengths and weaknesses, obviously.
“Fear of losing your income and livelihood is good motivation!” For stress leave, sure.
The idea, though, that hospitals in Alberta are competing for a “market share” of people in need of health services is so entirely twisted that it can only come from people looking south of the border and seeing those sweet, sweet, dollar signs.
And I’m not entirely referring to useful idiots like Danielle Smith and David Staples.
At a recent townhall for UCP supporters in Drayton Valley, Smith talked about removing the public health operator, AHS, in certain hospitals in favour of the separate religious alternative, Covenant Health.
This would effectively remove access to certain public health services guaranteed through the Public Health Act, but legally denied to patients in need on the basis of the healthcare provider’s personal religious sentiments and/or beliefs.
It’s certainly one way to get progressives on board with getting elected officials as far away as possible from our healthcare system.
Yet, it also sparked another thought about an area I’ve become interested in over the last couple of wildfire seasons: insurance.
Since Danielle Smith has long been a booster for private health insurance, I don’t think this next part is much of a leap, but it is conjecture.
It doesn’t matter to her that insurance companies exist to make money and reduce payouts (aka “insurable services”) in order to keep making money.
Yes, it’s a racket, and one that I already pay into in many other areas, just in case. It’s also one that comes with a false sense of security, as I may be about to find out with the cost of a new roof after our latest hail storm activity. The siding will be replaced, easily enough, but the roof might have a “depreciation clause”, like with a car; it may not cover the cost to me to replace it, but the cost they feel is reasonable based on the depreciated value.
You’d think that there would be some sort of discount as your asset ages since the coverage you think you have no longer matches the coverage your premiums once provided. L-O-L.
But I digress.
As it is becoming less profitable for insurance companies to provide house and car insurance, there is, I’m sure, a concerted effort from insurance providers to get governments to fill the gap — that is, after all, why government exists.
Also, as a business person, I’m not going to wash my hands of the potential to earn billions of dollars. Instead, I’m probably going to attempt to negotiate an exchange; say, housing and car insurance for health insurance.
You know, to “balance” the government’s expenditures.
Think of it like a swap — like that Christmas episode of The Office where Michael changed Secret Santa to “Yankee Swap”, and everyone hated it except Michael and the person who ended up with the iPod.
Two people got what they wanted, and the majority ended up with something they didn’t need because it was tailored for someone else.
In fact, “Yankee Swap” fits the bill perfectly.
Passing the bucks: moving government jobs out of urban centres
I applaud the snark, as always.
Being a small town dweller who once worked for government, I can’t complain about Smith’s decision to allow access to government work without relocating to an urban centre. However, being that Smith has decided to take off her personal freedom beanie and don her big government hat since becoming Premier, I fully expect this new plan to come with mandatory office time, regardless of need or cost.
There are some benefits to go around, however.
The pandemic showed us that if people are given an opportunity to work from anywhere, some would choose to move out of the higher-priced cities and back into smaller communities.
Small towns and rural communities are struggling everywhere.
Having decent paying jobs available in rural areas would encourage some people to return to their communities after post-secondary, which, let’s be honest, isn’t really an option, especially for the laptop classes, now.
There’s also a case to be made for the fact that the employer is the Government of Alberta, not the Government of Edmonton.
With that all being said, there’s another side to the decision; personal gain.
A lot of rural conservative supporters are upset that they can’t have decent paying government jobs in their communities — as if it’s a personal slight from “Redmonton”, keeping all the best jobs out of their reach.
Of course, the pandemic is what made this expansion possible (ignoring the invention of the internet), demonstrating that jobs could be ably completed outside of office buildings. Though, I’m sure there’s UCP-donating building owners in rural looking to Smith to provide them with multi-year leases, too.
There would also be the issue of reliable internet access in certain areas. Even though the issue saw a commitment to spend $150 million each, from both the province and federal coffers in 2022, the only announcement on its actual spending came just last week — for Strathcona County.
So, it might not be something to get too excited about anytime soon, but it’s not a horrible idea to spread those well-paying union jobs around; even to places that purport to hate unions but really want the benefits they’ve worked for.
Now, for some inside ball
The pandemic changed a lot of things; for me, the most difficult thing about it was discovering that professional designations and credentials no longer meant that a person was interested in staying in their actual knowledge lane.
To be fair, we learned that they were, in some cases, just like lots of other people who think their opinion matters when it really doesn’t; using those credentials as access to comment on topics they are as unqualified to talk about as those without them.
It was also when I found out that crap science journals exist.
Apparently, because it was too difficult to get published in an established journal with standards, some people created websites with science-y, or legitimate sounding names that included the word “journal”. It didn’t matter if they had garbage science — it wasn’t about the science — it was about being able to publish something and reference it as if it was legitimate.
This tactic works well in the online world, just like it opened up the floodgates for actual “fake news”, and legitimate-sounding websites who don’t have to worry about publishing “leaked drafts” because few people with credibility can spend time holding them to account.
Which, of course, happened recently when an online religious publication played fast and loose with a “leaked draft” of the Alberta Bill of Rights that wasn’t a draft at all but the wish list of a third party who knew of a publication that wouldn’t be too fussed about its legitimacy because they want it to be true more than they care if it is.
However, even in addressing the lack of truth, more attention is offered to the purveyor and the story it wants to tell, forcing more people into the spiral of misinformation.
The two collide with the above article wherein a right wing “influencer” details how the alternative news and opinion world has been able to build on its own shaky foundation by creating spaces where false information is fed, reflected, and fed back again with the assistance of willing co-conspirators who benefit.
It’s like how the Rebel just links back and forth to other contributor’s opinion pieces.
This loop is also known as “confirmation bias”. Thankfully, it’s not a permanent affliction and there is a cure; deliberately seek evidence that disagrees with your position.
The worst thing that can happen is that a charitable analysis of the conflicting evidence will change your mind. The best thing that can happen is that after evaluating the arguments against your position, you can still support your original stance as the right one.
It may not be as glad handing as an echo chamber, but I’ve found it’s more than worth the effort.
Final thoughts
Women of ABpoli is a reader-powered publication. My thanks to everyone who reads, shares, and becomes a paid or free subscriber. Your support is appreciated!
Calling David Staples a “useful idiot” is insulting to the everyday idiots who add more value to society than he does by sitting around smelling their own farts.