Talk:Pat Schulz

indictment of capitalist medical care

Schulz's op-ed in the Toronto Star is mentioned as an indictment of "an indictment of capitalist medical care". I'm afraid that without further contextualizing that, and since Schulz herself doesn't refer to it as such, readers may find that confusing since they may not think of the Ontario Health Insurance Plan as capitalist medical care. Misogynistic perhaps? Vexations (talk) 22:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Vexations, Solidarity123 has done the bulk of the major editing on the article. Since they are new(ish) to Wikipedia, I thought I'd ping them here. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 02:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the ping and for finding the original article! Super helpful. The citation is not linking to the article so I am trying to fix that. She didn't use the the words indictment of capitalist medical care in the article because that's too didatic for a newspaper. But when she talks about the lack of a weekend emergency service at Princess Margaret, the overcrowding in the hospital, the push to discharge her, the failure to protect patients from unnecessary pain, the fact she has to beg for proper care, she's talk about the inhumanity of capitalist medical care. I actually think inhumanity would be better than indictment. Her analysis would be that having OHIP is very important in terms of not having to pay for medical care, but Canada's medical system still exits within the context of a capitalist economy, and that is why our medical system is persistently starved of resources. Capitalists are always trying to roll back the gains like public health care, that Canadian activists have achieved.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Solidarity123 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I understand that's probably Schulz's POV and perhaps yours, but I'm not sure we can say that in Wikipedia's voice unless we have a direct quote. Do you know if there were responses to the article in the start that we could cite? Vexations (talk) 12:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

The article is about her point of view and not your point of view. I don't need a direct quote. Unfortunately I think you are getting caught up in mocromanaging the page. I am leaving it as is. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solidarity123 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Solidarity123 I agree with @Vexations above. We really do need a direct quote from Shulz to verify this. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 19:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)