this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
57 points (96.7% liked)

Canada

9607 readers
1378 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Enkers 17 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (2 children)

Did we collectively forget that the NDP brought dental care to those who couldn't otherwise afford it? Kinda a big difference, no? The Liberals certainly wouldn't have done it themselves.

It seems more just that the optics of confidence and supply is confusing to some.

[–] DoPeopleLookHere 9 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

It's such a liberal thing to do it based on income instead of it being universal. I still haven't heard a good reason.

[–] Enkers 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

While I agree universal would've been better, the cutoff is 90k. That's something like 80% of the population who qualify, and the top 20% can probably afford it.

In practice, is it really that different than universal with a raise in taxes on the wealthiest 20%?

[–] DoPeopleLookHere 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

90k isn't the wealthiest 20%.....

EDIT I stand corrected https://www.statista.com/statistics/484838/income-distribution-in-canada-by-income-level/

But still waiting for an actual good reason.

And not to mention the drug plan only covers 2 types of drugs.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Dental care that only a fraction of the population even qualify for? Meanwhile the rest of us are still dependent on our employers to provide us with private insurance that covers less and less every year.

I'm old enough to remember when the NDP was Canada's workers party. They barely even pay that legacy lip-service now.

[–] Enkers 2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 children)

While yes it's technically a fraction, and universal would've been better, the 4 in 5 people that make under 90k is a pretty darn big fraction.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Lol! You also can't have access to any other form of dental care. And since most employers offer a bare minimum of coverage, that eliminates nearly everyone who is currently employed.

[–] Enkers 1 points 14 hours ago

OK, and now that a system is in place, they have a financial incentive to drop that coverage because it A) costs them money, and B) costs their workers money, so it makes no sense to keep it there.