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

HM2VikingRN, RN · Jun 26, 2007

Posting the progressive graphic is not meant to be an insult to conservatives. (I don't totally agree with the structure of the graphic) Rather it is meant to emphasize that we need to work together to solve America's very real problems in a pragmatic and fair way. What I find interesting is the total lack of response from the right to my question which was to the effect of how are we going to build a society where we have affordable universal access to health care and a broadly shared prosperity. See:

we have a non-system where we will pay for care for those people regardless of their insurance status through cost shifting to the insured.
There are enough correlations out there between poor health status and lack of educational achievement, use of public welfare systems, underemployment, and entrance into the correctional system to say that doing nothing is too expensive for our society. Its not that progressives are trying to achieve absolute equality of results for everyone rather the more accurate goal of progressivism is to reduce barriers to achievement (whether it is educational, health etc.) so that all people in society have the opportunity to achieve to the extent of their individual ability and drive.

CRNI-ICU20 · Jun 26, 2007

Good Morning America this morning had a news clip regarding the mis-managment of medicare funding. It involves several health care managment companies,who are supposed to take those government issued dollars and make sure that people who need the health care actually get it. Instead, they have made a PROFIT in the BILLIONS OF DOLLARS off of medicare patients, by denying the patient their needed treatments and medications, then turning around and giving their CEO's giant paychecks, private jets, sculptures in a Montana airport, a minor league baseball stadium, and funding a symphony......I am sure all those patients who are doing without their needed treatments and medications are just thrilled that the CEO gets to fly around in his private jet at their expense.....

Now, is this story also a LIE??? The stadium wasn't built with DONATIONS.....the filings with the SEC show these CEO's making multi-million dollar salaries.....it also shows the piles of denial forms that otherwise should have been approved.....

Think what you want about Michael Moore....but the truth is the truth about a very corrupt and broken health care system.....

again....many of my patients have had to choose between eating or buying their medication that would/was not covered under these new "health management" rules.....the ones THEY imposed on the needy, so they could go buy another JET!!

It would seem with some people here, that in the name of conservatism, they will defend even the most ruthless and corrupt among us, because they seem to be too fearful to face reality. I think it is possible to be conservative, yet honest about defectiveness in the health care system.

Those who castigate the messenger only further polarize the two opposites, while many of our society continue to fall through the cracks.

Until it actually happens to you personally, it would seem, seeing will then be believing. Which is more shameful: people who go about life believing that all is well when it isn't, or people who point out that life isn't all rosey and complete?

I often wonder if some of you here, (and now I am going to ignite a few tempers) would have shot Paul Revere on sight, simply because you could not imagine the British truly were coming!!

Take a step back from your prejudice, and look around you....

do a little more research before you quote yet another slanted view to support your stance.....ARE YOU REALLY SURE THAT HEALTH CARE IN THIS COUNTRY IS FINE???

If that is the case, why has this issue been on every politico's lips since before NIXON???

allnurses Guide · Jun 26, 2007

Paul Revere didn't have a history of lying and making things up and skewing things on video to make it look bad. "Oh, that is just old PR . . . he lies all the time and cries wolf constantly . . . . forget about the lights in the tower" . . . :rolleyes:

You can't even compare the two.

And I don't, as a conservative, "defend even the most ruthless and corrupt among us, because they seem to be too fearful to face reality".

I'm not fearful. I just don't believe in socialism and that is what a government-run universal healthcare system would be, imo. MM is looking at Cuba for goodness sake. Run by a dictator. Where folks are trying to escape.

As to the "Progressive" graphic . . . . two things . . .you keep using it in different threads and I don't agree with it. Yes, it actually does say that people who aren't "progressive" (read liberal) are "short-sighted, afraid of new ideas, naive, close-minded, selfish, arrogant and xenophobic". Now, how is that NOT an insult?????

I'm not any of the above.

People speak of "polarizing"? Well, it goes both ways.

steph

HM2VikingRN, RN · Jun 26, 2007

Paul Revere didn't have a history of lying and making things up and skewing things on video to make it look bad. "Oh, that is just old PR . . . he lies all the time and cries wolf constantly . . . . forget about the lights in the tower" . . .
You can't even compare the two.
And I don't, as a conservative, "defend even the most ruthless and corrupt among us, because they seem to be too fearful to face reality".
I'm not fearful. I just don't believe in socialism and that is what a government-run universal healthcare system would be, imo. MM is looking at Cuba for goodness sake. Run by a dictator. Where folks are trying to escape.
As to the "Progressive" graphic . . . . two things . . .you keep using it in different threads and I don't agree with it. Yes, it actually does say that people who aren't "progressive" (read liberal) are "short-sighted, afraid of new ideas, naive, close-minded, selfish, arrogant and xenophobic". Now, how is that NOT an insult?????
I'm not any of the above.
People speak of "polarizing"? Well, it goes both ways.
steph

This is my last comment as I have continually attempted to keep my end of the discussion focused on a very real problem for America and the people who live here. The real concerns are emphasized:

Rather it is meant to emphasize that we need to work together to solve America's very real problems in a pragmatic and fair way. What I find interesting is the total lack of response from the right to my question which was to the effect of how are we going to build a society where we have affordable universal access to health care and a broadly shared prosperity. See:
Quote:
we have a non-system where we will pay for care for those people regardless of their insurance status through cost shifting to the insured.
There are enough correlations out there between poor health status and lack of educational achievement, use of public welfare systems, underemployment, and entrance into the correctional system to say that doing nothing is too expensive for our society. Its not that progressives are trying to achieve absolute equality of results for everyone rather the more accurate goal of progressivism is to reduce barriers to achievement (whether it is educational, health etc.) so that all people in society have the opportunity to achieve to the extent of their individual ability and drive.

Michael Moore-nor the CAP graphic- are not the issues here. The real issue is that we have a failing health care system that could be more efficient and deliver better health care outcomes for all Americans.

teeituptom, BSN, RN · Jun 26, 2007

This is my last comment as I have continually attempted to keep my end of the discussion focused on a very real problem for America and the people who live here. The real concerns are emphasized:
Michael Moore-nor the CAP graphic- are not the issues here. The real issue is that we have a failing health care system that could be more efficient and deliver better health care outcomes for all Americans.

Thus you indicate a true need for a major change to the Universal Healthcare System. Im glad you support it.

allnurses Guide · Jun 26, 2007

Thus you indicate a true need for a major change to the Universal Healthcare System. Im glad you support it.

Tom . . .you are an interesting fellow. Union buster and anti-union. Pro Universal Healthcare.

:balloons::balloons:

steph

teeituptom, BSN, RN · Jun 26, 2007

Tom . . .you are an interesting fellow. Union buster and anti-union. Pro Universal Healthcare.
:balloons::balloons:
steph

and you forgot------Im a good golfer also

cardiacRN2006, ADN, RN · Jun 26, 2007

well thats the ridiculous part .instead of seeing the movie and even thinking or debating the topic .you would rather trash the man who made it .thats the ridiculous part .get over who the director of the piece is and keep an open mind .

Sure, ridiculous. :uhoh3: Ok...

allnurses Guide · Jun 26, 2007

and you forgot------Im a good golfer also

Yep, sorry about that. Tom is a very good golfer . . . .:bow:

steph

HM2VikingRN, RN · Jun 26, 2007

Michael Moore: Well, I actually -- I had a TV show on back in the '90s called TV Nation, and one day I just -- I thought it would be interesting to have like a race. So we sent a camera crew to an emergency room in Fort Lauderdale, a camera crew to an emergency room in Toronto, and then one to Havana. And they would each wait until someone came in with a broken arm or a broken leg. And then they were going to follow that person through and see Healthcare Olympics. And so, it was a race between the US, Canada and Cuba. And to make a long story short, Cuba won. They had the fastest care, the best care, and it cost nothing.
We turn the show in to NBC that week, and we get a call from the censor. They're not called "the censor," they're called Standards & Practices. And so, this woman calls. She's the head of Standards & Practices -- Dr. Somebody. I don't know they -- she actually had a "Dr." before her name, but I forget her last name now. But she calls, and she says, "Mike, Cuba can't win." I said, "What?" "Cuba can't win." "Well, they won. What do you mean they can't win? They won." "No, we can't say that on NBC. We can't say that Cuba won." "Well, yeah, but they won! They provided the fastest care. They were the cheapest. And the patient was happy, and the bone got fixed." "No, it's against regulations here." I said, "Oh, well, I'm not changing it."
Well, they changed it. They changed it. Two days later, when it aired, they changed it so that Canada won. And Canada didn't win. Canada almost won, but they charged the guy $15 for some crutches on the way out. So it's bugged me to this day that anybody who saw that episode, you know, where it said, you know, "and Canada won the Healthcare Olympics," and in fact it was Cuba, but that couldn't be said on NBC, because God knows what would happen.
So, anyways, I first started thinking about this issue then, and then when I had my next show, The Awful Truth, we followed a guy who had health insurance, but his health insurance company would not approve this operation he needed, which would save his life. So we took the guy to the headquarters of Humana, the HMO down in Louisville, Kentucky, took him in to see the executives there. They gave us the boot. So we went out on the lawn and conducted the man's funeral, with him present. So we had a priest and a casket and pallbearers, bagpipes and, you know, "Amazing Grace" and the whole deal. And the executives are looking down from the top floor at this and horrified this is going to air on national television. Three days later, they call and tell the guy, "We'll approve the operation." And the man is alive today.
And I thought at the time, geez, you know, a ten-minute piece, we saved a guy's life; what could we do if we did a two-hour movie? And so, that was the sort of the genesis of this, though the movie didn't end up being a bunch of stories about, you know, saving individual people's lives, because as I got into this, I figured there's a much, you know, sort of bigger story to tell about the actual system itself.

http://alternet.org/healthwellness/54639/

headsup · Jun 26, 2007

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog/one_more_attempt_to_set_the_record_straight/
and
http://www.moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog/jim_kenefick_and_moorewatch_as_presented_by_michael_moore_in_sicko/

You know, I don't have much of a dog in this fight, and I certainly am ambivilent about Michael Moore. However, to quote that venemous, vitriolic website as a source of any kind shows an appalling lack of character and judgement.

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Jun 26, 2007

You know, I don't have much of a dog in this fight, and I certainly am ambivilent about Michael Moore. However, to quote that venemous, vitriolic website as a source of any kind shows an appalling lack of character and judgement.

But, I suppose that gov't restricted healthcare advocate posters, who continually posts links for progessive websites, to include the cheapshot graphic, -- I suppose THOSE quotings of venomous, vitriolic websites can be dismissed as impassioned debate, because you don't disagree with it.

It goes both ways.

There can be debate without insult. But, when you start the debate with the observation that everybody that disagrees with you is vitrolic and venomous, can you really expect the conversation to go anywhere but downhill?

Gov't restricted healthcare won't work. It can't work, because it ignores basic economic laws. Creating unlimited demand for a resource means creating unlimited supply, or rationing of supply. It's that simple. Plus, the gov't is not any kind of saint when it comes to managing your money or anything else. I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.

And, Uncle Daddy treats you like the child he thinks you are.

No thanks. I want better. Gov't is NEVER better.

Universal healthcare isn't. It's gov't restricted healthcare. And that's just not very compassionate.

I'd rather have the current system where 85% of people are covered and 15% have EMTALA access for emergency care. It's MUCH more compassionate - and better care, even for those without insurance. I agree that some changes could be made. But the CURRENT system - as is - is a much better system than gov't restricted healthcare.

That's the bottom line. I'm not being venomous to say so. Gov't restricted healthcare won't work. It's not compassionate. I understand the thought processes of those that advocate it. I think it's misguided, but I'm not going to accuse them of being evil (even as I have been accussed of that in the past, on this site.). I support resisting gov't restricted care because I believe that to be the more compassionate position.

The idea of Universal Healthcare looks great on paper. Except. The reality is gov't restricted healthcare. NO thanks. That's not compassionate.

~faith,

Timothy.