• chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yeah, right. If California joined they’d be subsidizing health care for the rest of Canada through transfer payments since every province would be considered a “have not province” compared to California.

    This is like inviting your billionaire uncle to move in with you and also open a joint bank account.

    • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Isn’t this kinda already the case when you compare California to other states? In terms of subsidizing the rest of the country, not healthcare.

      • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Canada has a massive program of equalization transfer payments where taxes collected in rich provinces go to subsidize poor ones. The US does not have anything like this. None of the state governments have their budgets subsidized by other states.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          It’s federal taxes so it’s the federal government that’s subsidizing some provinces and not others to make their potential tax revenue per capita the same, the goal is to make sure those provinces aren’t left behind.

          If the program didn’t exist Albertans would still pay those taxes, they would be used to pay for other Canada wide programs.

          Bonus: Lil’PP signed on the the current calculation of transfer payments, it was put in place during the Harper years.

      • shawn1122@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I wonder if Canada sending its water bombers so that California doesn’t get burnt to a crisp counts as a transfer payment.

      • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Mostly ours is single payer, except for prescriptions, etc.

        Although it has been moving further towards private because of the right-wing provincial governments (who control healthcare spending).

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      So?

      Do you understand the goal of transfer payments? Because from what you just said you already don’t understand how it works.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Better balance all that by including New England. In Massachusetts, we’re already closest to universal healthcare

        • don@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yes, by all means. Considering how dismal it’s about to be in the states, the only ones that would revile you for imaging a brighter future are mostly those who voted to make it darker.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Plus, while May is a parliamentarian, she is also the leader of a party of one elected person.