Mark Steyn wrote the following article on U.S. citizenship taxation and Denise Rich in the National Review Online-
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/306587/re-re-goodbye-and-good-luck-mark-steyn
Mark Steyn wrote the following article on U.S. citizenship taxation and Denise Rich in the National Review Online-
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/306587/re-re-goodbye-and-good-luck-mark-steyn
* A much more level-headed assesment. This writer does not have his head buried in the sand.
How refreshing to read a commonse sense view of the issue for once.
I would prefer even more if the mainstream media would stop focusing on those rich fatcats who are maybe 1 or 2% of us expats and bring some real human stories about the fear and trauma of grappling with these senseless laws and getting kicked out of banks, pension funds, etc.
Mark Steyn’s article is well-done indeed. He is a representative of the right wing both in Canada and the United States. This is as I expect, to get more true sympathy from freedom loving conservatives than from tax loving progressives. This is the salient quote to show that Mark Steyn is our friend:
Mark Steyn is a frequent guest host for Rush Limbaugh and, as a result of this and his regular columns and his high profile in Canada, has a very large audience.
IMO, Mark Steyn is Canada’s Ron Paul. And just like Ron Paul he is largely ignored by his brainwashed countrymen. But I would gather from this piece that he is starting to have second thoughts about the wisdom of leaving Canada in favor of the US.
Steyn, even after his adventures with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, would certainly agree that the US under the Obama administration has become as bad as Canada under any administration since Trudeau. Yes, Steyn sees the idiocy of citizen based taxation, but he fled to the US to escape the socialist government in Canada, especially the socialized health care there that he has written so extensively about. Blindly following PC doctrine is one area where Canada definitely leads the US.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/228868/cross-river-burn-bridge/mark-steyn
I had to wait the exact same time in Canada under our healthcare system to see the exact type of specialist, for the exact same serious illness and treatment as my family member in the US. Difference? I didn’t have to scrutinize multiple invoices from the doctors, the hospital, and each individual health service provider, then reconcile them with the benefit statements from the insurer, and fight with each to resolve discrepancies and deductibles. I didn’t have to decide whether I could afford to change jobs based primarily on what healthcare plan was offered for my family – or not.
Under socialized medicine, in Canada, I didn’t have to deal with continuous daily harassing calls from a collection agency after the death of a parent – even with 100% coverage under a really generous US employer’s plan, the US health providers and the major US insurer could not agree on what exact services were provided, what was billed and what was covered and outstanding (2 years and massive paperwork to resolve). I didn’t face a surprise on the spot demand in a cancer treatment ward for immediate payment upfront, at a pre-scheduled and time critical radiotherapy session because of a dispute between the parties actually responsible, over a bill of less than 50.
And extra bonus – I don’t have to deal with the IRS in connection with my healthcare coverage
May be some of the Canadian physicians who moved to the US to practice will move back to Canada, now that 83% of US practitioners are considering quitting. That’s good. Perhaps then I’ll be able to have a family doctor.
@ConfederateH- I would not be so quick to be dismissive of Mr. Steyn’s stance amongst the U.S. right. You have to remember that William F. Buckley Jr. started this magazine as a promoter of Right Wing conservative values and it, along with its contributors, is widely read within the Repbulican party. This is not a magazine that belongs only to the Ron Pauls of the American Right.
George Will, who is a prominent conservative commentator, is one of the most widely known of its contributors.
@Petros; depending on their status held in the US, moving back to Canada means they would bring their US acquired taxable status with them too, making any Canadian accounts ‘foreign’, and subject to FBARs and FATCA for life. They’d also be filing all those incomprehensible tax and reporting forms – forever after their return. And I don’t know if they are considered ‘self-employed’, and how complex reporting would be for a practice. What a mess it could be.
Is that why the CMA wrote to Flaherty?
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/04/23/canadian-medical-association-position-on-fatca-and-fbarmust-read/
@badger- the CMA is concerned about U.S. persons who are physicians and living in Canada. What you say about the consequences for Canadian citizens who move back to Canada is true. Their practises are considered to be independently owned businesses which means that they would face a terrible tax reporting burden if they were to move back to Canada. The obviously most sensible thing for them to do would be to get rid of their U.S. citizenship or residency as soon as they are back in Canada or before they leave the States.
I believe that it would be safe to say that all of their U.S. filing obligations are current so that part losing U.S. personhood won’t be troublesome.
@badger, I’m also familiar with the mess that the US health insurance system is, and I agree that socialized medicine would be better. However, I believe that even better would be the system the world had for thousands of years: actually paying for what you use, or asking for money from other people if you can’t pay. With insurance and socialized medicine, others are paying anyway. And for those who don’t like being charged a large amount at once and prefer to split costs over a long period, deposit the equivalent of an insurance premium on your own savings account every month, and use it when you need it later. Or if you need the money first, get a loan from someone and pay back later. Or argue with your doctor or hospital directly to reduce the costs. We don’t need insurance or socialized medicine because health care is expensive, health care is expensive precisely because of them, as people in these systems use health care services without regards to costs.
@Shadow Raider
Right! If I knew I would have to pay for a doctor I would make sure I did not have a heart attack, develop cancer, or contract ALS! I would also assure my child not develop leukemia, asthma, or get hit by a car! Sharp thinking!
@shadowraider- I’ve been in Canada for close to 27 yrs. and I have not seen any evidence for the argument that socialized medicine encourages the reckless consumption of medical care on the part of the public.
I do understand how this can happen in the U.S. system of privatized medical care. When you live in a society where MRI’s are available to the public for a price then it is very easy to see how medical care services become a consumer commodity. Yesterday I was watching, “The NewHour” on PBS and they had a segment on “concierge” medical services as the new thing in U.S. health care. The thing that makes this new kind of medical care desireable is not the fact that you get better treatments and therefore better outcomes. The sole attraction seems to rest on that the individual gets personal medical attention when he/she wants it. It sounds like the perfect system for a hypochondriac.
As for whether or not we can pay for our medical care out of pocket or through some kind of haphazard community system of contribution, you can forget it. Long gone are the days when the doctor would be willing to accept a chicken for his services. Medical training takes years of study and the infrastructure that is devoted to it is not cheap to build.
When it comes to ones health in the end there are no acceptable alternatives. Delaying medical care is often not an option and there are no cheaper off the shelf alternatives for a failing heart.
The U.S. health care system is an abysmal failure and should be a national embarassment. I am glad to be out of it.
@ConfederationH, you are such a buzz kill. Your comments are sure to raise blood pressure and a test to the strength of the Canadian healthcare system. Speaking of tests, you may want to take your argument to Harvard and their study that compared US healthcare to ours. It’s a few years old, but I’m sure the divide has only widened since then, and about to get worse with 83,000 physicians passing through the ‘iron curtain’.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2006/6/6/canada-trumps-us-in-healthcare-study/
@Confederate and ShadowRaider: I have lived in Canada for 45 years and have been a citizen for 40. I have had M.S. for 28 of those years. I see my family physician about once a year and my neurologist about twice a year. So, despite a serious long term medical condition, I am not a huge consumer of Canada’s excellent health care.
However, I know the system is there for me when I need it–unlike in US where I could be excluded due to previously existing condition. The superb health care I have received has ensured I have remained working, independent in my own home, contributing, and paying taxes (to Canada. I will never pay one penny to US or allow them any information about my bank account or savings despite their outrageous demands)
Canada’s health care system is also there for my friend who was diagnosed with cancer several months ago, my colleague who requires dialysis, my neighbour who had hip replacement last month and my colleague’s child who had leukemia, but who is now a happy healthy teenager, giving her parents all the normal challenges of adolescence.
Is our system perfect? No. Would I trade it for the US system? Not a chance.
@bubblebustin: In Switzerland we have mandatory but mostly privatized health insurance, and it is a very much a mixed bag.
IMO the “healthcare industry” around the world is so corrupted and distorted no one knows anymore what is up or what is down. Throw in big pharma and the medical profession and it is clear that the health industry is an abysmal failure just like professional sports, banking, politics, law, defense, green energy, real estate, and you name it.
So what I want is to [reshuffle] the old order in all of the above. I want to be able to buy any substance I want to put into my body in a free market without any government, doctor, or pharma control. I want to be able to choose my own doctor and my own hospital and pay for it with my own money. And if I had all the money I had wasted on government controlled insurance schemes in my own privatized health-care account I would be sitting pretty about now.
Unfortunately there are many who insist that I must subsidize their “health” because they have a “right” to it. It has become so absurd that we have Sandra Fluke arguing before the US house of representatives that unlimited socialized birth control is part of a womans reproductive rights.
This is why governments are driven to such draconian measures as 50% (Hollande wants 75%) marginal tax rates on top of 20% value added tax on top of real estate taxes, energy taxes and death taxes. Some people refuse to accept that government isn’t some magical cornucopia that exists to provide for their “rights”. Those people come largely from the left and most Canadians fall into this category.
[Note: comment has been changed by request of its author]
@Joe Smith, I know that these things are usually impossible to prevent, and that people in these unfortunate circumstances already suffer enough. I sympathize with them and I agree that they shouldn’t have to worry about money on top of the already troubling situation. That’s why I agree that socialized medicine would be better than the US system of health insurance, especially for these extreme cases.
@Blaze, It’s great that you have used the Canadian health care system with good judgment, and that it is available to help your friends. Maybe Canadians are more responsible, but at least in the US many people overuse when they don’t have to pay.
@recalcitrantexpat, I agree that socialized medicine isn’t as bad as health insurance. But I don’t accept that doctors, hospitals, manufacturers of drugs and medical equipment, and even medical schools should earn so much money. Medical training shouldn’t take so much time. There is clearly something wrong when an hour of a doctor’s time costs a week of the patient’s salary, and when you need to talk to four or five people before finally seeing (or not) a real doctor. I don’t think it’s right to assume that this is the way things are, and to create a system that accomodates it. You say that there are no cheaper alternatives for a failing heart, but the medical community is very aware that expensive stents are being used unnecessarily and even harmfully in too many cases. Sometimes the most expensive option is not best for every patient.
The same medical procedures and drugs in developing countries cost much less, even at the same or higher level of quality as in the developed world. Doctors in developing countries are not necessarily worse as many people think, and most of them have a much better connection with their patients. Licensing laws and substance control there are less strict, medical education takes less time, and doctors aren’t so rich. It’s true that certain advanced treatments are not always available there, but when they are, they are much less expensive. The days when people could afford to pay doctors themselves are not long gone, they exist in most of the world. The main reasons why most people in developed countries don’t go there for medical treatment are the language and cultural barriers, because they want the comfort of their home and their families near them, and because they don’t know any doctor (or anyone else) there.
@ConfederateH, I agree.
@ConfH, with all this talk of blowing things up, you wouldn’t be from a private securities firm contracted by the US government to make Brock look like a terrorist group?
Call me paranoid, but I never would have thought a year ago…
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/coming_to_a_gulag_near_you_20120402/
@blaze- I also have M.S. I’ve lived with it since high school, which is a time span that at this moment makes it about as long as yours. At the time when my symptoms first appeared I was only a teenager but back then it was commonly accepted medical theory that children did not get M.S. It was only in 2000 when I had an MRI done after my last attack that I was finally diagnosed.
I see my neurologist once a year because so far that is all that my condition demands. I know very well what things would be like for me if I lived in the States and did not have private medical insurance. But even with private insurance the quality of your care and coverage can vary greatly depending on the carrier you are with and the LEVEL of coverage that you have purchased. Chances are pretty good though that I would have been placed in the high risk pool of whatever state I lived in and my co-pays even for that coverage would have been budget breaking.
Recalcitrant: Interesting. Are you the one who relinquished (or renounced) in Calgary? Are you one of the ones who has an adult disabled daughter? Or, do I have all of my people mixed up? There have been so many I may be losing track.
@Blaze- I did renounce in Calgary and I have a son who has Downs Syndrome.
@Recalcitrant: I can’t even begin to imagine how you are coping with the challenges in your life. Thank you for being one of the Brockers who is trying to make a difference and standing up for what is right.
Recalcitrant has indeed made significant contributions here at Isaac Brock and his insightful comments are often seen elsewhere. He is a busy and committed father and one of the many persons at Isaac Brock trying to sway change — as are you Blaze.
That’s a really good article. It’s great to see more and more coverage of this issue. If only we could get a balanced take in the bigger, mainstream outlets too.
Two more good updates from National Review. Andrew Stuttaford quotes Wellington’s comment on Mark Steyn’s piece:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/308414/re-re-goodbye-and-good-luck-andrew-stuttaford
And Michael Walsh has favourable comments too (though he conveniently forgets the many people on his own side of the aisle, like Grassley, who support all the insane policies he tries to blame on the Left)
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/308425/first-principles-michael-walsh
@bubblebustin: you are right, that was a very poor choice of words.
@Petros: could you change that to read “reshuffle”….