Controversial Michael Moore Flick 'Sicko' Will Compare U.S. Health Care with Cuba's - page 8

... Read More

  1. by   icuwant2rn
    Quote from cardiacRN2006
    Nope. Sorry. I can't believe a word that Micheal Moore says, and I certainly won't drop a dollar into his wallet.
    :yeahthat: Completely agree with you. He is as extreme left as you get and would have us living in a communist state if he could. Can't believe a word of what he says. Of course there are instances where the health care system fails. Every system, including Canada, Europe, etc. have problems. I prefer working on what is in place and keeping our free market as opposed to socialist controlled HC.
  2. by   pickledpepperRN
    Quote from icuwant2rn
    :yeahthat: Completely agree with you. He is as extreme left as you get and would have us living in a communist state if he could. Can't believe a word of what he says. Of course there are instances where the health care system fails. Every system, including Canada, Europe, etc. have problems. I prefer working on what is in place and keeping our free market as opposed to socialist controlled HC.
    Most advanced western countries are not communist.
    People voted for their health system.

    What we have now is not acceptable.
    We can and someday will do better.
    I will do my part to help that someday be sooner rather than later.
  3. by   Ludlow
    In faith, Tim, the experiences that people tell about in SICKO are the facts on the ground about our health care system.

    We can't have babies dying for want of hydration and antibiotics as they sit in an ER simply because it's an "out of system" hospital. That was baby Mychelle's story. Right diagnosis, right professionals who knew what to do, right place to be where all the right equipment was but wrong insurance. So an IV was not started and antibiotics were not given because the insurer would not pay for it. The baby sat in that ER and seized. Finally she was transported by ambulance to a "provider" hospital in time to be coded and pronounced. That is the experience told by the baby's mother. That's what in truth happened because our system is messed up.

    Doesn't matter who tells the story. That story and the others in SICKO constitute true moral problems and embarrassments for all of us that we must work to correct.

    One of the great values of SICKO is that everyone will have a chance to peek behind the curtain hiding the greedy profiteers that control our health care system. They will be able to see that they are not alone in likewise being screwed over by insurers and HMOs. And they, too, will want to figure out how to make the system better.

    And just seeing the facts makes the answer pretty clear: for-profit has no place in Health Care.
  4. by   HM2VikingRN
    I have yet to see a credible argument from opponents to single payer that shows the current "system" in America actually works.

    The arguments for COBRA as a suitable medigap system for families and children are ludicrous to be kind. How will a family pay for 750 dollars per month for 18 months if the main breadwinner is disabled or unemployed. (13500 dollars is a lot of money to come up with on short notice.) I agree with spacenurse!
  5. by   Ludlow
    Yeah, hm2viking, once you can't work because of your illness, the system completely breaks down. My daughter, a teacher, couldn't work because of illness and wasn't eligible for disability because she hadn't been in the system long enough. How in the world can anyone pay for COBRA (her's was $400 a month) when they have no income? She still needed medical care and medicines.

    Our system expects you to become destitute. I'm sure some people in similar situations without family support never recover.
  6. by   mdfog10
    Don't let the fear mongers and uninformed sidetrack you. SB840(California) and HR676---simply put all the money we are already spending in one pot and pay the providers. There is no government control over the hospitals or staff. We Nurses see the horror every day. I have seen patients who delay treatment because they can't afford the medications, patients who can't come to us for specialized care because they don't have insurance. Patients that have had surgery but can't go to rehab or a SNF because they have medicade and we know it will be a long wait before anyone accepts them. My cousin got laid off, started her own business and was uninsurable because she had had surgery for fibroids. How many tragic stories do you have to hear or experience yourself before you get it??? Our system only beneifts the insurance companies. The Revolution has just begun. You think you are safe and insured? check this out ---
  7. by   Ludlow
    Quoting Darren:"You can't make an argument for socialized/single-payer based on whether or not a Canadian won't make a total exchange of the Canadian system for an Aetna card...
    And there is no evidence that the American system will be improved at all, let alone "vastly improved" by changing to a single-payer system."

    And Darren, I'm not making an argument based on that.

    18,000 Americans will die this year because they don't have access to care (no insurance)

    Untold more who thought they were properly insured, will be denied the care they need and progress to problems that will lead to unnecessary suffering, disability and death.

    This happens because insurance companies and other for-profit health care providers need to make profits. In actual fact, it is their fiduciary duty and responsibility to their shareholders to make as much profit as possible. They make profits by overcharging, delaying care, denying care, and renigging on already approved care. The more of our premiums they keep, the more profit they make. The less care they give, the higher their profit margins.

    Did you know that a single-payer system can be administered for less than 5%; in some countries less than 2%? Know how much profit insurance companies take? On average 31%. That's billions of dollars that should be going to your MRI or a baby's well-baby check-up or a diabetic's supplies and education and medicines. You get the idea.

    With a single-payer like HR 676 or California's SB 840, everybody's in, nobody's out. Everybody's covered. That already is a vast improvement over our current situation.

    You can choose your own doctor and hospital. Every doctor will be paid for every patient seen and every hospital will be paid for every patient treated (that doesn't happen in our current system).

    Drugs are covered, medical equipment, vision care.

    You can cover everybody with all the basics when you take the money that is already in the system and use it smarter for actual care---not profits.

    With cost eliminated as an obstacle, people can go get preventative care as well as care that will nip illnesses in the bud. This will lead to a healthier, stronger society.

    I went to help out after Hurricane Katrina. I saw people who were receiving a medical check-up for the first time in years. People with hypertension and diabetes. People with strokes and blindness because they couldn't afford the medicines necessary to keep their illnesses in check. People who could have led active, productive lives had they had the opportunity to have a constant supply of blood pressure medicine or insulin. That was a real life disgrace that we all saw on our TVs and yet we did nothing about it.

    Universal health care rights those wrongs and makes us a better, healthier people. But rest assured it does matter what kind of "universal care" we choose. If we choose to include all those who raid the system for profits like the for-profit insurers and HMOs, we will not have universal care. If we choose single-payer we will.
  8. by   PaulshoeRN
    I too refuse to pad Moore's socialist agendized wallet. A single-payer system like Canada, France, etc. is not "Guaranteed healthcare for all!" Hopefully, many of you've heard the news this week about about how broken and pathetic those country's systems are. In one country, the judicial system allowed the overturning of the 18 week waiting period to get into hospitals 18 WEEKS! and now that turns into an even longer wait with the court's ruling! As a nurse-to-be, I am not in favor of this type of socialized medicine that amounts to letting natural selection or survival of the fittest occur. I'm sure many of us have heard horror stories about waiting for care in these "model" countries. I don't call that compassion, which is what I hope to provide for the people I get to care for.

    I do think improvements are needed in our country's health system but socialized medicine is not the answer. Remember, we still live in a country where hospitals write-off millions of dollars every year because they will treat anyone who walks in the doors, regardless of their ability to pay.

    One of many examples I've read of include a baby who had to be transferred to Seattle from British Columbia for treatment and sent home with instructions to have a follow-up MRI within 6 weeks. The mother thought that would be a reasonable timeline back in Canada but was shocked to find a 6 to 9 Month waiting period.

    See full article here:

    God Bless America. Help us in our quest for better healthcare.
    Last edit by PaulshoeRN on Jun 13, '07
  9. by   Ludlow
    So, jadwinnurse2b, how long do you think the 47 million Americans who have no insurance have to wait to get health care? Sometimes they die waiting...

    And when these individuals show up in the ER to be stabilized, do you think that is optimal care? Shouldn't they have been able to get treatment at the beginning of their illness instead of when things became catastrophic? which is when most of the uninsured show up in the ER.

    We are not talking about socialized medicine. Nor neglected systems that have had to endure 6 years of cuts as the VA has.

    We are talking about single-payer where the private doc does his or her thing and gets compensated for it from a single source.

    Right now there are 700-1000 different insurers. Can you imagine the paper work (all different) and the formularies (all different) and the requirements for treatments (all different) that doctors and patients have to negotiate to try to get care? It's an endless bureaucracy.

    Can you imagine the minions of clerks who review the requests for treatment by doctors who have actually examined the patient and determined a treatment; clerks who don't have any medical training and whose only connection to the patient is the form in their hand; clerks who have been given the authority from the insurance company via lists and protocols to know better than the examining doctor what the patient needs? Can you imagine these minions of clerks whose sole job is to find any and every way to deny the doctor and the patient the medical treatment plan? Clerks with maybe only a high school degree determining medical care. That's what happens in our current medical system.

    Single payer means streamlined administration. LESS bureaucracy. Medical treatment decisions in the hands of medical professionals.

    That's far better than what we have now and far safer. Definitely something I'd rather have for myself and my loved ones.
  10. by   PaulshoeRN
    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.
  11. by   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..
  12. by   DarrenWright
    1. Can you please either stop refuting the false claim that 40-something million people are uninsured, or address the facts. BTW, if waiting is an issue that causes death, why would you want to go to a 'waiting-list' system?

    2. If claims are made that thousands will die because of lack of insurance, could you show a reference.

    "...Canada's provinces spend nearly 45 percent of their budgets on health care - The New York Times, August 22, 2006"
  13. by   pickledpepperRN
    Uninsured, national — 46.8 million (15.9% of the population), 2005, up from 45.3 million in 2004.

    Lack of health insurance causes 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year.
    Institute of Medicine:
    Last edit by pickledpepperRN on Jun 14, '07