The new federal dental insurance plan will be phased in gradually over 2024, with the first claims likely to be processed in May, government officials said ahead of a formal announcement scheduled for Monday morning.

  • Godort@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wow, I never thought this would actually pass. I was 100% expecting some bureaucratic fuckery to prevent it.

    Good job, NDP

    • MisterD
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe some of us will vote for them in the next election

      • mayo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’ll get more votes but people are still going to vote strategically because what choice do they have.

        • vivadanang@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          which strategy overcomes giving people healthcare that actually covers their health?

          honest query, not sure how to read this response, and actually jealous because I’m an american (merikafuckyeah no healthcare and bang bang vroom vroom war war) who pays out the nose for dental and my kids’ braces are gonna cost bank even with ‘good coverage’. :(

          • Franklin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Unfortunately much like America we have a system that punishes split votes with this is mind the question becomes less who do you want and more who do you really not want?

            Regardless this is great news and good on the NDP

            • shinratdr
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m done voting strategically, once Trudeau broke his promise to end FPTP I gave it up and I’m never going back.

          • TotallyHuman
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The strategy that avoids the entire system being dismantled. Imagine if there were five congressional representatives from a new Social Democracy Party. Because those five representatives are the deciding vote if it goes along party lines, they can apply pressure on the Democrats to pass healthcare reform. Hooray, everyone loves the Social Democracy Party.

            They might take a few more seats from the Democrats’ safe districts in the next election. But in a contentious district where the Republican candidate has a good chance of winning, if half the people who voted Democrat vote Social instead, the vote gets split and the Republican gets in. So many of those people, who want to vote Social, will realize that if they do, then healthcare gets completely gutted. So they hold their nose and vote for the Democrat.

            • vivadanang@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The strategy that avoids the entire system being dismantled.

              struggling with this here too. hope people can overcome their slight discomforts in the face of actual fascism.

        • ILikeBoobies
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Strategic voters vote NDP, strategically voting Lib hasn’t worked

  • IninewCrow
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    That is amazing … and that is what happens when you have the NDP in politics

    • Oderus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      The NDP are the reason we have National Healthcare. It’s no surprise they’re behind National Dental Care as well.

  • 123@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Very happy it passed but 90k limit on household income seems rather low. I guess this is a much broader discussion but shouldnt it be based on average household income rather than cumulative since that scales with number of people where as a hard 90k number doesnt.

    • Lauchs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It might feel a little low (especially if you live in Vancouver/Toronto) but it covers some 9 million of us.

      I imagine they’ll keep revisiting the number or index it to inflation. But really, these programs are designed to help the most needy and at 90k it is already one of our largest social programs.

      • undercrust
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, it’s truly fantastic that they’re aggressively rolling this out to whom it’s most needed, first.

    • Numpty
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      A not insignificant number of people earning more than $90k have at least some dental benefits through their employers. Covering the most needy first is the best way to implement this program.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      The 90k limit also helps keep the conservatives off their back vs 150k or everyone.

      It’ll give the program some time to show it actually saves money long term and then they can slowly expand it further with better data to back it up

  • Showroom7561
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    starting with qualifying seniors over the age of 87

    Eligibility will gradually expand over the course of the year to include all qualifying seniors over the age of 65 by May 2024, then children under the age of 18 and people with disabilities by June.

    Wow, talk about a big “fuck you” to the taxpayers funding this insurance.

    What about working folks who can’t afford dental care?

    • shinratdr
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Gotta start somewhere. Once the program exists, expanding it is much easier. Look at Obamacare. They fought tooth and nail against it, but once it’s in the Republicans tried as hard as they could to repeal it and it just never worked.

      It’s hard to take away entitlements once they exist, so the only future is really expanding it. Vision, dental and drug coverage are all on that path, it’s just a matter of time.

      • whoisearth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s hard to take away entitlements once they exist, so the only future is really expanding it.

        As an Ontarian lol. We used to have provincial eye care coverage. That’s been gone for decades now. Government can and will strip services as they see fit just need assholes in charge.

        • shinratdr
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I didn’t say impossible, just difficult. I still say expanding it is better than not, even if it’s not perfect.

    • Victor Villas
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why is starting out with seniors a “fuck you” to taxpayers? Would you rather seniors wait longer just so we can all get covered at once?

      • Showroom7561
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, don’t get me wrong. Absolutely start with seniors, young kids, and the disabled.

        But don’t forget the rest of us! We’re the backbone of society funding these programs and helping the economy to hum along. Not including taxpayers between 18 and 65 is a massive slap in the face. Discrimination by definition.

        • Victor Villas
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Absolutely start with seniors, young kids, and the disabled.

          And is this not what’s happening? Are they saying that “taxpayers between 18 and 65” will never be included?

          • Showroom7561
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Are they saying that “taxpayers between 18 and 65” will never be included?

            Correct. That demographic is not part of the plans.

            • Victor Villas
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Maybe you have access to some privileged information, or by “the plans” you mean this one piece of legislation specifically.

              But I’m pretty sure the forces behind this movement have “the plan” of expanding this to universal access. I wouldn’t expect a single piece of legislation to necessarily include the whole ten-year rollout of the program, but start with just one segment.

              • Showroom7561
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I guess we can hope. But if it isn’t even mentioned as part of a long-term vision, how optimistic should we be?

                • Victor Villas
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  About as optimistic that this part is not going to be cancelled halfway through or eventually rolled back 🤷‍♂️

  • Swordgeek
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s…a start.

    Dental care needs to be free and universal. Need a filling? No charge. Make $370M a year and need a filling? Still no charge.

    Dental care, pharmacare, and eye care (at least!) are health care, period - and have to be available to all citizens who need them. Full stop.

    Any and every system that charges the consumer for basic health care is predatory and discriminatory; and needs to be destroyed. Not just dismantled, but destroyed.

    Health care is a basic human right.