Controversial Michael Moore Flick 'Sicko' Will Compare U.S. Health Care with Cuba's - page 58

... Read More

  1. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Quote from Baptized_By_Fire
    What's so wrong with insuring coverage for children? I'm not understanding the smug attitude regarding this.
    Because, it's 'for the children' is disingenuous. It's a lie. A smug lie, at that.

    The purpose of expanding this legislation into the upper middle class and well into adulthood is to use it as a vehicle for gov't restricted, socialized care. Claiming it's 'for the children' when the current proposals are targeted far away from children is a lie to sell socialized insurance to the public because the topic cannot prevail on its own merits.

    When I'm lied to, I reserve the right to cage my responses smugly:

    http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm1577.cfm

    "If Congress decides to go down the road toward SCHIP expansion, it means that more Americans will be dependent on government for their health care; taxpayers will be burdened by higher levels of government spending and increased taxation; and more Americans will lose their private health care coverage because of the "crowd-out" that accompanies government expansion."

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
  2. by   HM2VikingRN
    a california study found that a family of four with income of 200 percent of the poverty line that had individual-market coverage would have to spend 34 percent of its income on health care.[10] in 2007, this would amount to about $14,000, far more than any tax benefit a family at this income level would receive from any tax deduction or credit that has been proposed.

    http://www.cbpp.org/7-31-07health3.htm

    in contrast to these 34 percent and 30 percent “crowd-out” rates, a study by m.i.t. health economist jonathan gruber — the economist whose work on schip crowd-out the administration frequently cites — found that 77 percent of the benefits under the health tax deductions and credits the administration proposed last year would go to people who already had insurance. gruber also found that despite costing $12 billon a year, the administration’s tax subsidy proposals would produce no net reduction in the number of americans who are uninsured, because they would induce a number of employers to drop, or not to offer, coverage.
    http://www.cbpp.org/7-31-07health3.htm

    the data doesn't agree with your assertions about crowd out....
  3. by   piscesguy
    Quote from jadwinnurse2b
    Goodness, I'm glad to see there is plenty of emotion on this subject. I think that shows genuine concern for patients.

    Yes, I'm glad we are in agreement. As I said in my post, improvements are needed in our current system and it has areas that are broken but I (and I would guess many others) believe the current Canadian and European systems are not good models.

    I also don't think its healthy to kowtow to Michael Moore who many would classify as a communist promoter and sympathizer.
    Quote from cardiacRN2006
    I think we can all agree that we deserve better healthcare, but how does going to a movie and feeding Micheal Moore more money have to do with that?

    I can feel one way about healthcare reform, and still find Micheal Moore not credible all at the same time.


    But, why do we, as nurses, need to see a movie about this when we see it everyday in real life? I'm not giving MM a dollar for anything, and I certainly would cringe at the thought that he's somehow "standing up" for us. The only thing he stands up for is the mightly dollar--and he's getting none of mine..
    How can you be so emotional about a movie you refuse to see? See it and then talk about how you feel, otherwise it's not fair to others who want to talk about the issues in the movie, and maybe spare the rest of us YOUR propaganda about how "healthy" it is to associate with "communists"....PLEASE!
  4. by   piscesguy
    Quote from stevielynn
    (On purpose ).


    steph
    Why? I don't get it? I feel like you're gloating about being dismissive just because you disagree. Okay. Did you see the movie?
  5. by   piscesguy
    Quote from marvelous_truth
    I dont care if socialized medicine is discussed here. However there is another thread about that.

    I dont need to watch moores film to understand that there are problems, I allready know that. I also know that socialism is and always has been a failure to freedom of the masses and a success to those that use it in guise of helping but in actuality enslaving mankind.

    Moore may make great points but he will not change the eternal principles. My rights are from God as part of an eternal plan not from a group of men or politicians as part of a political plan at the whims of men.

    The road to hell is paved with good intentions
    You start off sentences with "I don't care.... and I don't need to watch.... and I allready [sic] know that socialism is...". You aren't coming accross as open to discussion, new knowledge or sharing ideas. Maybe you don't see it, take a look.

    Also, WAKE UP, your rights are part of politics and often ARE at the whims of others is you refuse to participate.

    God bless you.
  6. by   piscesguy
    Quote from stevielynn
    My experience in Vietnam was wonderful - the people loved us and were proud that their President had been to America recently - they boasted that he met with George Bush. They also talked about the Bush Administration putting pressure on the Vietnam government to open up more to capitalism and to stop persecuting Christians.

    I was proud to be from America.

    steph
    I'm glad you had a wonderful experience on a trip. That is always priceless.
    People from cooperative cultures like in Asia would place a much higher emphasis on being polite and finding common ground than being direct and brutally honest about George W. I think you should factor that into your anecdotal account of how proud the Vietnamese people were.
  7. by   piscesguy
    Quote from stevielynn
    My experience in Vietnam was wonderful - the people loved us and were proud that their President had been to America recently - they boasted that he met with George Bush. They also talked about the Bush Administration putting pressure on the Vietnam government to open up more to capitalism and to stop persecuting Christians.

    I was proud to be from America.

    steph
    Quote from spacenurse
    I think citizens writing, calling, and e-mailing legislators, demonstrating, and encouraging their colleagues, friends, and family members to do so for safe staffing is NOT the same as millions of dollars spent by paid lobbiests who use the money WE pay for healthcare to lobby for laws to increase profits instead of providing the healthcare WE PAID FOR.
    Thank you for posting that so succinctly. The short posts to the point and not pretentious are so delightful to read.
  8. by   piscesguy
    Going to the doctor for sniffles should not be an issue. Time during this visit may contribute to better communication between doctor and patient, patient education, an assesment of lifestyle and maybe making some changes. It's not abusing the system to visit the doctor for sniffles if you are truly worried and want to talk. Big deal.
  9. by   BBFRN
    Quote from ZASHAGALKA
    Because, it's 'for the children' is disingenuous. It's a lie. A smug lie, at that.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Thanks for clarifying. Just so I get this correctly, are you saying that you're not necessarily against expanding health care for children then, as long as it truly covers children?
  10. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from piscesguy
    Going to the doctor for sniffles should not be an issue. Time during this visit may contribute to better communication between doctor and patient, patient education, an assesment of lifestyle and maybe making some changes. It's not abusing the system to visit the doctor for sniffles if you are truly worried and want to talk. Big deal.
    If the person with the sniffles pays for it himself, then I agree with you.

    steph
  11. by   HM2VikingRN
    Quote from baptized_by_fire
    thanks for clarifying. just so i get this correctly, are you saying that you're not necessarily against expanding health care for children then, as long as it truly covers children?
      • when their parents are insured, children gain better access to health care and improve their use of preventive health services. even among children who are covered by medicaid or schip, enrolling their parents produces gains. insured children whose parents also are insured are more likely to receive health care services they need, such as preventive health care, than insured children whose parents lack coverage.
      • expanding coverage for parents strengthens insurance coverage and health care access for the parents themselves. more than one-third of all low-income parents — 36 percent —have no health insurance. as would be expected, the research shows that expanding eligibility for health insurance programs to cover more low-income parents reduces the percentage of low-income parents who are uninsured. increased medicaid coverage for low-income parents also has been found to boost their use of preventive health care such as pap smears and breast exams, and to lower the extent to which low-income parents postpone or skip necessary health care due to cost.
    http://www.cbpp.org/10-20-06health.htm

    i think that there is a strong argument from a family systems approach for some use of schip for parental coverage of families on the fringe....

    plus it is cheaper:

    Last edit by HM2VikingRN on Aug 9, '07
  12. by   fronkey bean
    Quote from ZASHAGALKA


    3. Your model did not take into account the positive benefits of a change towards making the system truly free market: first party payors vs. third party payors. The result of such a system would bring prices down, WAY down. The price of healthcare is so high largely because those that pay for it don't care what it cost. When cost is brought into play, much more rational decisions are made. That brings down costs. Your doctor can charge 200 bucks for an office visit because insurance pays for it. But, there is a growing field of docs that take cash only for visits, and their visits are much more like 50 dollars. It's like any new tech gadget, the more people that begin to use it, the less the price becomes, because of competition and sufficient demand. As more people begin to discriminate what things costs, the costs will come down.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Tim, I don't want to sound greedy but, as the sole income for my family, it is an important detail. What happens to nurses salaries here? It seems like we are the ones that get our incomes or benefits cut whenever the profits are low so what keeps our profession from having our wages frozen or even cut?
  13. by   fronkey bean
    Quote from piscesguy
    I'm glad you had a wonderful experience on a trip. That is always priceless.
    People from cooperative cultures like in Asia would place a much higher emphasis on being polite and finding common ground than being direct and brutally honest about George W. I think you should factor that into your anecdotal account of how proud the Vietnamese people were.
    I have experienced the same kind of attitudes in Bangledesh, Honduras, and Thailand. There are some who protest (often quite vocally) not unlike our country, but for the most part people are either unconcerned about the US or fairly pos.

close