Controversial Michael Moore Flick 'Sicko' Will Compare U.S. Health Care with Cuba's - page 55

... Read More

  1. by   pickledpepperRN
    David Felix: 'Sicko' economics

    ...Goodman rejects single payer universal coverage health systems, which
    Moore favors, because they require bureaucratic rationing of medical
    care, and impose longer waiting periods than do private market health
    systems. The rationing complaint as such is irrelevant; markets also
    ration, mostly by the purse. What they have been unable to do is
    provide universal coverage.

    The incentive for private health insurance companies is to maximize
    profits by insuring low-risk clients and rejecting high risk ones.
    That incentive promotes private bureaucratic rationing of services
    and intensified screening of applicants. The U.S. public sector and
    private charities have thus been pressured to finance treatment of
    some sort for the rapidly rising millions of U.S. uninsured and
    underinsured. "Sicko" illustrates various aspects of the problem.
    Goodman gives it no mention whatsoever....

    http://bangordailynews.com/news/t/vi...2647&zoneid=35
  2. by   fronkey bean
    Quote from fronkey bean
    battpos, just google Micheal Moore and you will come up with a few dozen sites that talk about MM and his work - both positive and negative sites. Spend a few min. looking through a few of each and I think you will see why I believe him to be dishonest in how he presents facts. One that is concise and organized is:

    http://www.eppc.org/publications/pub...pub_detail.asp

    By the way, I realize that at times their dislike for MM shows but that does not mean that they have no valid points. When talking about someone you think is lying it is hard to keep a neutral tone as is evidenced by MM's often scathing remarks about GWB.
    Quote from Miss_Chybil
    Just out of curiosity, what do you feel Michael Moore misrepresented in F-911?

    A little bit of everything Chybil. See above link.
  3. by   ZASHAGALKA
    A free-market cure for US healthcare system
    By Rudolph W. Giuliani


    http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...thcare_system/

    "I believe we can reduce costs and improve the quality of care by increasing competition. We can do it through tax cuts, not tax hikes. We can do it by empowering patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats. Instead of being more like Europe, we need to be more like America.

    America has the best medical care in the world. People come here from around the world to take advantage of our path-breaking medicine and state-of-the-art treatments.

    But the healthcare system is being dragged down by decades of government-imposed mandates, wasteful bureaucracy, and massive distortions in the US tax code that punish self-employed and low-income workers."


    "The future of America's healthcare system lies in free-market solutions, not socialist models. We can increase individual choice and decrease costs by increasing competition, encouraging innovation while always compassionately caring for people in need. That's the American way to reform healthcare."

    Not that I'm supporting Rudy, but at least he makes sense here. The article goes into detail. Simply put, the problem with healthcare is the level of gov't interference NOW. More gov't will create a bigger problem; it's not the solution. The solution is to get the gov't out of way from being in between you and your doctor.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on Aug 3, '07
  4. by   lamazeteacher
    Quote from Baptized_By_Fire
    Very good point. http://www.pnhp.org/

    There is a movement among physicians here, too. Some of our most vocal advocates for a single payer health care system in my state are physicians.


    How fabulous! I went to their website that you gave, but other than seeing that their position supports single payor healthcare, I didn't see that they've accomplished anything.

    I was a little alienated by the list of supporters they asked for, with check boxes for "physicians, medical students, researchers, and others".
    It seems that ne'er the twain shall meet when it comes to doctors and nurses performing as peers, on the same team..... (an old gripe).
    Their position statement was in 2003. Has anything happened since then?
  5. by   BBFRN
    Quote from ZASHAGALKA
    A free-market cure for US healthcare system
    By Rudolph W. Giuliani


    http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...thcare_system/

    "I believe we can reduce costs and improve the quality of care by increasing competition. We can do it through tax cuts, not tax hikes. We can do it by empowering patients and their doctors, not government bureaucrats. Instead of being more like Europe, we need to be more like America.

    America has the best medical care in the world. People come here from around the world to take advantage of our path-breaking medicine and state-of-the-art treatments.

    But the healthcare system is being dragged down by decades of government-imposed mandates, wasteful bureaucracy, and massive distortions in the US tax code that punish self-employed and low-income workers."


    "The future of America's healthcare system lies in free-market solutions, not socialist models. We can increase individual choice and decrease costs by increasing competition, encouraging innovation while always compassionately caring for people in need. That's the American way to reform healthcare."

    Not that I'm supporting Rudy, but at least he makes sense here. The article goes into detail. Simply put, the problem with healthcare is the level of gov't interference NOW. More gov't will create a bigger problem; it's not the solution. The solution is to get the gov't out of way from being in between you and your doctor.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    You know, I have a hard time taking Rudy seriously on this, when he and mayor Bloomberg have failed the 911 workers so miserably.
  6. by   BBFRN
    Quote from lamazeteacher


    How fabulous! I went to their website that you gave, but other than seeing that their position supports single payor healthcare, I didn't see that they've accomplished anything.

    I was a little alienated by the list of supporters they asked for, with check boxes for "physicians, medical students, researchers, and others".
    It seems that ne'er the twain shall meet when it comes to doctors and nurses performing as peers, on the same team..... (an old gripe).
    Their position statement was in 2003. Has anything happened since then?
    http://sickocure.org/

    Here is one of their companion websites re: attempt to get passage of HR 676, which is what they're lobbying for right now. This is a bipartisan campaign that involves anyone who wants to be involved.

    PNHP has state affiliates that don't only include physicians, (although I admit by looking at their national page, I can see why you're turned off). My state has one, and there are as many nurses and other citizens that are just as active as the physicians. Check out your state's affiliate to see how active they are in your area.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.00676:
    Here is the Thomas page for HR 676.
  7. by   HM2VikingRN
    its hard to negotiate from a gurney.......
  8. by   Roy Fokker
    Increasingly, it seems that the biggest difference between conservatives and "liberals" is that the conservatives know government is force. But that doesn't stop them from using it.

    Michael Moore may not have thought about it, but there are only two ways to get people to do things: force or persuasion. Government is all about force. Government has nothing it hasn't first expropriated from some productive person.

    In contrast, the private sector-whether nonprofit or a greedy business-must work through persuasion and consent. No matter how rich Bill Gates gets, he cannot force us to buy his software. Outside government, actions are voluntary, and voluntary is better because it reflects the free judgment of creative, productive people. As I wrote in Give Me a Break, "If government would just back off, the private sector will provide many of the same services faster, better and cheaper." There are plenty of examples that should astound the socialists, like better private water works, ambulance services, roads, even air-traffic control.

    Of course, I'm talking about a private sector that gets no privileges from the state. That doesn't describe our private sector now. For years, government has bestowed all kinds of favors on special interests, from trade restrictions on foreign competitors to cash subsidies and cheap loans to corporate tax deductions for health insurance. People in and out of government have conspired to pollute the voluntary private sector with force and regimentation. That's why we have a mixed rather than a free economy.

    Thomas Jefferson said, "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." Was he ever right! Liberty yields as well-intentioned busybodies try to "fix" the world by stopping you from using gasoline or forcing you to finance antipoverty programs.

    No behavior is too small or private to escape the schemers. When a New Zealand couple recently named their child "4real," the Washington Times said it was "unfortunate" that the government doesn't forbid that. The "conservative" newspaper named the couple "Knaves of the Week."

    That prompted Donald Boudreaux, chairman of the economics department at George Mason University, to write the editor: "I choose you as my 'Knave of the Week' for asserting that the decision on naming a child should belong to politicians and bureaucrats rather than exclusively to that child's parents. True knaves are those who arrogantly impose their tastes and preferences upon others."

    Exactly. "Live and let live" used to be a noble approach to life. Now you're considered compassionate if you demand that government impose your preferences on others.

    I prefer "live and let live."
    Read Full article

    cheers,
  9. by   Roy Fokker
    Interviewing Moore for an upcoming health care special on "20/20," I said, "In America we kill each other more often. We shoot each other. We have more car accidents. Forgive me, more of us look like ... you."

    He smiled at that, but still argued that that people live longer in Canada "because they never have to worry about paying to go see the doctor. That means at the first sign of being sick they go right away to the doctor cause they're not worrying about whether or not they can afford it."

    Please.

    Freedom brings anxiety, but its other rewards are so superior to passive care from a smothering government. America's medical system has problems, but profit is the least of it. Government mandates, overregulation and a tax code that pushes employer-paid health insurance prevent the free market from performing its efficient miracles. Six out of seven health-care dollars are spent by third parties. That kills the market. Patients rarely shop around, and doctors rarely compete on price or service.

    Moore told me, "Government can do things right. ... My dad gets his Social Security check every month. Comes not only every month, it comes on the same day through the so-called 'dilapidated' U.S. mail. ... [A]sk your grandparents what they think of Medicare. Although it has its flaws, although it may be underfunded, it's a much better program than the HMO that somebody has."

    Underfunded? Medicare has a 75-year $34 trillion unfunded liability! Its costs are growing faster than inflation. Social Security has a 75-year $5 trillion unfunded liability. These are Ponzi schemes that will be bankrupt before Moore reaches retirement age. The U.S. mail manages to deliver his dad's checks, but compare its performance to FedEx or UPS. The Post Office said it wasn't possible to deliver packages overnight.

    I want FedEx health care: innovation, new cancer treatments, hip replacements and pain relief. We get that from private-sector competition, not government lethargy.

    Moore said, "You don't introduce profit into your city water department."

    He's wrong about that, too. As I wrote in "Give Me a Break," Jersey City, New Jersey's water tasted foul and failed safety tests. City workers said there wasn't much they could do. In fact, water prices would have to be raised ... just to maintain the lousy service they had.

    So Jersey City turned its water system over to a for-profit company. Within months, it had fixed the pipes government workers said couldn't be fixed, and for the first time in years, Jersey City's water met the highest cleanliness standard. Taxpayers saved $35 million.

    The private company could do it better and cheaper because their skills were honed by constant competition.

    Private competitors innovate or die. Government workers do what they did last year. That's why I want the private sector to provide my health care. Pursuit of profit will give us our best medicines and medical devices.

    I'll pay you $1,000 if you can name one thing government does more efficiently than the private sector.

    Moore laughed at me, saying, "You are, like, so Thirteenth Century," but he conceded that America's founding Libertarian philosophy has made us a rich and innovative country. "Look at everything we've invented," he told me. "I say to my British friends, can you tell me something you invented in the last 50 years. I mean, what have you given us?"

    "Can they come up with anything?" I asked.

    "No, they have a hard time. That can-do spirit served us well in building this country."

    Served? It still does. And will-if government would just get out of the way.
    Read full article

    cheers,
  10. by   dream'n
    Will someone explain to me how Guilani's plan will work. Tax cuts? Tax cuts aren't going to supply the uninsured with healthcare. Many don't have an income high enough that a tax cut would give them enough money to improve their healthcare situation. On the surface his plan sounds like a way to let the wealthy pay less taxes (garner their votes perhaps) while doing little to nothing regarding healthcare reform. I am very disappointed.
  11. by   Roy Fokker
    Quote from Baptized_By_Fire
    You know, I have a hard time taking Rudy seriously on this, when he and mayor Bloomberg have failed the 911 workers so miserably.
    "Attack the messenger. Forget about the message..." ?

    Ok, if that's your stake - would you take Dr. Ron Paul seriously?

    [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The problems with our health care system are not the result of too little government intervention, but rather too much. Contrary to the claims of many advocates of increased government regulation of health care, rising costs and red tape do not represent market failure. Rather, they represent the failure of government policies that have destroyed the health care market.

    [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]It's time to rethink the whole system of HMOs and managed care. This entire unnecessary level of corporatism rakes off profits and worsens the quality of care. But HMOs did not arise in the free market; they are creatures of government interference in health care dating to the 1970s. These non-market institutions have gained control over medical care through collusion between organized medicine, politicians, and drug companies, in an effort to move America toward "free" universal health care.[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]One big problem arises from the 1974 ERISA law, which grants tax benefits to employers for providing health care, while not allowing similar incentives for individuals. This results in the illogical coupling between employment and health insurance. As such, government removed the market incentive for health insurance companies to cater to the actual health-care consumer. As a greater amount of government and corporate money has been used to pay medical bills, costs have risen artificially out of the range of most individuals.

    [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Only true competition assures that the consumer gets the best deal at the best price possible by putting pressure on the providers. Patients are better served by having options and choices, not new federal bureaucracies and limitations on legal remedies. Such choices and options will arrive only when we unravel the HMO web rooted in old laws, and change the tax code to allow individual Americans to fully deduct all healthcare costs from their taxes, as employers can.

    [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]As government bureaucracy continues to give preferences and protections to HMOs and trial lawyers, it will be the patients who lose, despite the glowing rhetoric from the special interests in Washington. Patients will pay ever rising prices and receive declining care while doctors continue to leave the profession in droves.
    Link

    cheers,
  12. by   BBFRN
    Actually, I like Ron Paul. I think he's a smart guy that votes his conscience. And I'm not even a Republican.
    Last edit by BBFRN on Aug 4, '07 : Reason: Can't spell today.
  13. by   marvelous_truth
    Quote from Roy Fokker
    "Attack the messenger. Forget about the message..." ?

    Ok, if that's your stake - would you take Dr. Ron Paul seriously?


    Link

    cheers,
    Yes I wouldnt take a mobster like Juliani serious at all. Ron paul on the other hand is THE ONLY ONE who is a true STATESMAN and has done his constitutional homework, his economic policy homework, and THE ONLY candidate that is a doctor as well I believe. Of course the media owned by the Banking Cartel will not give him much time to educate the people about how to represent their best interests rather than the interests of the elite in the guise of helping the citizens.

    I watched Johnny Q. Last night it was an emotional show but had a propaganda agenda of promoting failure formulas that are claimed in our interest. We are becoming Prisoners without Bars. The middle class is being elimanted, but not because of rising health care, because of lack of knowledge and education the foundiong fathers warned against. Because we have accepted "cradle to grave" mentality. Because we believe the government is the solution to all problems, when in fact the Government and its media mouthpiece are largely controlled and influenced by a BANKING CARTEL. It is even a Rockefellar that largely benifits from BIG PHARMA.

close