Should Healthcare in Canada be a Public or Private Issue?
Many view the public healthcare system in place in Canada as a failing system in which long wait times limit access to necessary medical treatment. Those who support the individual approach in that private healthcare is more effective as it is then in the clinics or hospitals best interest to treat people because they are paying out of pocket. Those supporting public view it as an issue of equality, if the system was private those in poor financial situations would be unable to afford required medical attention and as such would create an elitist group who had access to decent healthcare.
I believe that healthcare should remain public as it is a human right to be able to survive especially if a treatment is not affordable by family and they must accept a family member must accept their own demise because of this. However I can appreciate the possibility of some private organizations as those people willing to pay for their own medical care should be allowed to as an effort to increase funding for medical centers and as an effect create smaller waiting lists for patients trying to access the public healthcare system.
Is the Ruling of the James Keegstra Case a Violation of his Rights and Freedoms?
The Supreme Court of Canada's ruling on the James Keegstra Case was that it was not a violation of his rights as he was spreading and pushing his beliefs on his students. This adherence to collective norms as people come to accept that these ideas cannot be spread in an effort to limit the destructive mentalities of extremist groups favor Keegstra's side. Many people saw this as a violation of his individual rights as they consider his actions free speech because it is his opinion and he wasn't using truly aggressive tactics to teach it. Those same people see more value in the person as an individual then as a collective mass with differing values and beliefs.
Martha Stewart
Martha Stewarts arrest due to her insider trading deal was seen by two opposing views. The first view saw no issue with her actions as it was in her self interest and economic freedom to pursue an means to increase her financial status. Some see her involvement with a backdoor purchase as a negative aspect because it was information not available to everyone else to make the same decision and as such was not economically fair to those not privy to the information. In the end it was a more collective view that decided to imprison her for those backdoor deals as it was not economically fair.
I agree with the decisions made as it is incredibly unfair to the collective for an individual to have such unfair information that allowed them to gain such an immense amount of wealth. I can appreciate that it is in a persons best interest to use information to their advantage but it is simply to unfair to the majority to be a true example of competition on a fair level that is healthy for a growing economy.