"Sicko" and the US' Horrible Health Care...

[VOP2288]

I've just come back from seeing the famed Michael Moore's newest documentary Sicko. I never truly realized (if America's health care is really as bad as it's made in the film) how horrible American HMO's are before. I mean, I knew we weren't top dog in that department and that it gives the shaft to ALOT of people but if all Moore says is fact than our situation is a scary one!

It almost seems immoral to actually turn away someone who needs serious medical attention just b/c they can't pay for it up front or they're not covered. It's amazing how cold that is - denying someone in need of desperate help just b/c they can't bring out the cash right then and there.

So please, come one and all and discuss this issue of health care. I'm really interested to hear from people outside of the US. Moore makes it seem as though places like Great Britain, France, and even Cuba are far more advanced in this field and that since everything is controlled by the gov'nt and taken care of by the gov'nt, there's almost no trade off (besides higher taxes). He makes it seem as though anyone at any time can just walk into a hospital and get help immediately without paying for it EVER.

[danzig]

Kurt Loder wrote a good article on the movie, as with all Moore movies they must be taken with a grain of salt. It's standard Moore operating procedure, completely focus on the negative aspects of his subject vs something he thinks is better. The problem is Moore ignores every negative aspect of that, I think the part about Cuba and the British guy sitting in a hospital with his toe in a cup of ice for over 12 hours was amusing. The Canadian woman who had to wait 16 months for joint operation and was prescribed Oxycontin and got addicted to it finally got her operation then had to go on a waiting list for drug addiction....classic government absurdity. It's all about distortion with Moore.

Now, I dont mean it should be taken that American health care system is perfect . It's top notch, best in the world provided you can pay for it, its that paying that is the problem for a sizable number of Americans. There is no perfect health care system despite what Moore tries to sell us which of course is no excuse for us not to demand better of ours but adopting a foreign system that has its own problems isn't a solution either.

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/artic...58/story.jhtml

[Gelgoog]

very good post danzig. michael moore is essentially a sensationalist, just the media, he will hype something up to get you to see his film. if it was just a compare contrast peice on the pros and cons of the american health care, then who would want to see that? instead he focuses entirely on the bad so your shocked and awed.

[Earl of Rochester]

Honestly the problem is with Americans, not the system.

People talk about how our system is not 'preventive' enough. **** people we DO have vitamins that are freely available. Just go to the local health food store and get a few supplements. Then eat healthy and exercise.

We would become the healthiest nation in a heartbeat.

[NaptownKnight]

Honestly the problem is with Americans, not the system.

People talk about how our system is not 'preventive' enough. **** people we DO have vitamins that are freely available. Just go to the local health food store and get a few supplements. Then eat healthy and exercise.

We would become the healthiest nation in a heartbeat.

That was an educated response

[Earl of Rochester]

That was an educated response

Thank you for that, can you actually refute my points?

One of the most cited problems is our system is not preventive enough, the other main issue being cost. Cost however is dependent on prevention therefore I think it is safe to say that it is the main problem. To put it simply, its cheaper to take vitamins to prevent a heart attack, than it is to treat a patient after a heart attack. Not to mention more pleasant.

If people lived healthy life styles then our system would not be broken. Price for health care would be reduced to Cuban rates and even the poorest of Americans could easily afford what they need. Eating healthy, exercising, and taking a regular source of supplements can greatly reduce your chance of having health risks, so much so that it is simply irresponsible not to do so.

But whatever, blame the government for our health problems, that is the educated response. Taking personal responsibility and reducing ones need for medical care, what nonsense!

[NaptownKnight]

Thank you for that, can you actually refute my points?

One of the most cited problems is our system is not preventive enough, the other main issue being cost. Cost however is dependent on prevention therefore I think it is safe to say that it is the main problem. To put it simply, its cheaper to take vitamins to prevent a heart attack, than it is to treat a patient after a heart attack. Not to mention more pleasant.

If people lived healthy life styles then our system would not be broken. Price for health care would be reduced to Cuban rates and even the poorest of Americans could easily afford what they need. Eating healthy, exercising, and taking a regular source of supplements can greatly reduce your chance of having health risks, so much so that it is simply irresponsible not to do so.

But whatever, blame the government for our health problems, that is the educated response. Taking personal responsibility and reducing ones need for medical care, what nonsense!

Doesn't matter how healthy a lifestyle you live, people still get sick, contract diseases, and have accidents, and charging people for potentially life threatening conditions is the problem, not our lifestyle itself. Doesn't matter how many vitamins you take, although granted that would be beneficiary, but it's just a very small part of the problem.

[NaptownKnight]

There is a lot wrong with America's health system, everything needs to be completely free. Hopefully more people will see what's wrong.

[Gelgoog]

There is a lot wrong with America's health system, everything needs to be completely free. Hopefully more people will see what's wrong.

the money has to come from somewhere. making healthcare free means raising taxes alot. most people in the US would prefer the freedom of choice in the current system. when the system is free, it takes away competition and without competition you tend to lose alot of talent as well.

[NaptownKnight]

the money has to come from somewhere. making healthcare free means raising taxes alot. most people in the US would prefer the freedom of choice in the current system. when the system is free, it takes away competition and without competition you tend to lose alot of talent as well.

Not if you were to do away with money all together...

[Gelgoog]

Not if you were to do away with money all together...

communism? cause thats the only way to do away with money. one way or another the citizen is footing the bill, not the govt.

[Princeps]

the money has to come from somewhere. making healthcare free means raising taxes alot. most people in the US would prefer the freedom of choice in the current system. when the system is free, it takes away competition and without competition you tend to lose alot of talent as well.

Making it a national healthcare system which would provide free care for all would actually make it CHEAPER. The US system today is twice as expensive as those in elsewhere in the industrial world, and yet has the worst outcome. That's because of the huge bureaucracy created by the corporate system.

[VOP2288]

Kurt Loder wrote a good article on the movie, as with all Moore movies they must be taken with a grain of salt. It's standard Moore operating procedure, completely focus on the negative aspects of his subject vs something he thinks is better. The problem is Moore ignores every negative aspect of that, I think the part about Cuba and the British guy sitting in a hospital with his toe in a cup of ice for over 12 hours was amusing. The Canadian woman who had to wait 16 months for joint operation and was prescribed Oxycontin and got addicted to it finally got her operation then had to go on a waiting list for drug addiction....classic government absurdity. It's all about distortion with Moore.

Now, I dont mean it should be taken that American health care system is perfect . It's top notch, best in the world provided you can pay for it, its that paying that is the problem for a sizable number of Americans. There is no perfect health care system despite what Moore tries to sell us which of course is no excuse for us not to demand better of ours but adopting a foreign system that has its own problems isn't a solution either.

I see your point and I was considering this during and after the film. I like Moore and his films but I can step back and see how sometimes he's a bit...biased. I must say though...Sicko was one of his more...balanced documentaries (9/11 was just an attack-film).

Healthcare might be free in most western countries but like you've stated in a few examples...there are catches. Moore chose to center more on the emergency cases though...where people needed help NOW and were treated right away.

I must say though...those systems still don't look too horrible. I mean come on...no paying for a stay in the hospital? Actually being given money by the hospital to cover your transportation costs to and from? The same kind of treatment for foreigners? Any amount of medicine from the pharmacy for a base cost of 10 bucks? Medicine for free if you're under 18 or over 60? That doesn't sound too bad....

I think the main problem with American Healthcare is just the cost...it's too much for more than half of the country's population to keep pace with. That and the portion of the film where they tell you how much they actually deny people coverage? That made me sick! A woman was billed a huge amount of money after an operation by her insurance company just b/c she failed to state on her application that she had a non-serious yeast infection a year ago. People have died slowly with no hope of help b/c they've been turned away by the health insurance companies...and these aren't the poor - these are middle class for God's sake.

I'd have to say the worst part of the whole film was the portion where they actually showed what a southern California hospital does if a patient either doesn't have coverage or can't pay the bill while in the hospital....they drop them off at the downtown clinic, dressed in their patient robes and told nothing else but to get out of the cab...sometimes even being kicked or forced out.

it takes away competition and without competition you tend to lose alot of talent as well.

Talent? What? As in like who can screw over the most middle class people needing coverage? Or what medical examiner for the insurance company can get the salary bonus for turning down the most claims and thus saving the company millions of dollars?

[Gelgoog]

Talent? What? As in like who can screw over the most middle class people needing coverage? Or what medical examiner for the insurance company can get the salary bonus for turning down the most claims and thus saving the company millions of dollars?

talent meaning when you take away free enterprise from the equation then you no longer have a system that makes as much money. do you really believe that all your medical personel do it to save lives? hell no they want to make butt loads of cash for all that time they spent in medical school. you have to realize how expensive it is to become a doctor. not only that but alot of these guys are extremely busy. so you take out the large income factor, and you have alot less people who would spurred on to become medical personel, this deludes the pool of talent available to you. simple put wage levels dictate the size of people willing to do the job. the more people you have competing in said field, the more those of greater talent can rise to success and push the less talented out.

[Cluny the Scourge]

I must say though...those systems still don't look too horrible. I mean come on...no paying for a stay in the hospital? Actually being given money by the hospital to cover your transportation costs to and from? The same kind of treatment for foreigners? Any amount of medicine from the pharmacy for a base cost of 10 bucks? Medicine for free if you're under 18 or over 60? That doesn't sound too bad....

The reaction works the other way - being British, for me the idea of being billed because I was hospitalised is startling; horrifying even. It's like something from a Dickens 19th century social-tragedy. Jesus Christ - how would my family have survived over the years? We're as poor as church mice. My father had a brain aneurysm when he was 57 and came within a hair's breadth of death - instead he got the very finest quality of high-tech keyhole-guided brain surgery to repair the artery from the inside-out, repeated MRI scans and months of pain-killing medication...saved not just his life but his quality of life. He's as sound as a bell now. Having to PAY for all that? Having to pay increased insurance premiums for that having happened? Couldn't have happened in a thousand years.

When humans are able to create both matter and energy with our minds, maybe. Until then, no. Resources are not unlimited.

As the saying goes; "There's no such thing as a free lunch."

If someone doesn't pay any taxes, then perhaps it's free to them, but trust me, someone is always paying for it. There is no exception.

So tax the rich more heavily - those who are always gloating about the booming stock market, and how many more multi-millionaires there are in America these days. Oh, I forgot, you can't, because they have a stranglehold on the campaign-funding of both your major political parties. So the greedy and the spineless connive together to ass **** the weak.

Socialized medicine (or socialized anything else for that matter) is a terrible idea. Then again, I'm just one of those crazy conservative/libertarian capitalists

And speaking ideologically, not pragmatically.

[danzig]

Healthcare might be free in most western countries but like you've stated in a few examples...there are catches. Moore chose to center more on the emergency cases though...where people needed help NOW and were treated right away.

I must say though...those systems still don't look too horrible. I mean come on...no paying for a stay in the hospital? Actually being given money by the hospital to cover your transportation costs to and from? The same kind of treatment for foreigners? Any amount of medicine from the pharmacy for a base cost of 10 bucks? Medicine for free if you're under 18 or over 60? That doesn't sound too bad....

Dunno I consider someone having a cancer and being stuck on a waiting list for so long that they died just as tragic as someone who has cancer and cant afford treatment. The end result under both systems is the person died because they didn't get treated. There are cracks under every system the question is are there less cracks under say Canada's system to warrant a massive overhaul of that scale? My answer is no, we need a system that is suited for America not copying something (that others have pointed out) no Americans want...we want reforms but we also want choices.

It doesnt sound bad as you said but as the Loder article indicates its clearly not as happy and free as Moore attempts to lead people to believe especially the Cuban scene where he is greeted warmly by doctors and then says he asked the Cubans to treat them like they treat everyone else...yah right

I think the main problem with American Healthcare is just the cost...it's too much for more than half of the country's population to keep pace with. That and the portion of the film where they tell you how much they actually deny people coverage? That made me sick! A woman was billed a huge amount of money after an operation by her insurance company just b/c she failed to state on her application that she had a non-serious yeast infection a year ago. People have died slowly with no hope of help b/c they've been turned away by the health insurance companies...and these aren't the poor - these are middle class for God's sake.

Yep its the cost, its where all reforms in this country needs to be centered on. We dont need free health care we need readily affordable health care. As I said in previous post I most certainly agree we need alot (and I mean alot) of fixing of health care in this country but it needs to be done with eyes open to avoid creating even bigger mess. Its why I dislike Sicko as it implies a magical wand approach and poof everything will be better.

I'd have to say the worst part of the whole film was the portion where they actually showed what a southern California hospital does if a patient either doesn't have coverage or can't pay the bill while in the hospital....they drop them off at the downtown clinic, dressed in their patient robes and told nothing else but to get out of the cab...sometimes even being kicked or forced out.

Yep disgusting. One approach at reforms I do like here in the US is on the state level attempts, its the route I think that is best for us given our size. It allows states to build their system to suit the specific needs of its citizens, much better solution then some huge federal system.

[Poisoner]

[quote=danzig;1913805Yep disgusting. One approach at reforms I do like here in the US is on the state level attempts, its the route I think that is best for us given our size. It allows states to build their system to suit the specific needs of its citizens, much better solution then some huge federal system.[/quote]

You know, that if a ****ing great idea. I don't like the idea of a Federal Health Care, but a state system I wouldn't mind.

[danzig]

You know, that if a ****ing great idea. I don't like the idea of a Federal Health Care, but a state system I wouldn't mind.

Massachusetts, Oregon, Tennessee, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are 5 states in various degrees of progress...at the very least it will provide information on what works in the US depending on success or failure. New York is working on its own but aimed mostly at ensuring children are covered, an expanded California system I suppose. I like solutions like this because it provides actual evidence to support whether something can work rather then bloated magic wand solutions that will cost billions with no indication of success (aka Clinton's attempt).

Scale of a system matters alot, its simply easier to provide a system that caters to the needs of say 30 million people against 300million. If Canada has waiting lists and mix ups with that small a number how can we expect to do it better or even the same with 300million? There will be more hands in the cookie jar, its why I like state based solutions, the accountability is right there if it goes wrong it falls on your mayor or your governor to fix instead of a faceless suit in Washington.

[boofhead]

Australia has for a long time had Medicare/Medicaid - everyone is covered for whatever their problem may be. Private health insurance is optional, but those who take it out get tax-rebates.

A bum on the streets has as much right to necessary medical care as Donald Trump in my opinion, unless you want to start putting a specific value on human life.

Having said that, our taxes are high; also, with the avalanche of new immigrants in the last 2 decades and the ageing population, the system is now under strain and we are experiencing some problems with waiting lists etc.

I still believe it is an issue of human rights, and rather than dealing with our problems by whittling down universal health care, the problem should rather be addressed by expanding hospitals, getting more doctors, making the system less beaurocratic etc.

The USA is a great nation, but really, something as fundamental as health care for low-income earners or even the unemployed should be an unalienable right.

[Beat Revolution]

What gets me about the "no" to universal healthcare crowd is the argument that it will cost so much in order to impliment it. Well, yes, it is true that it will cost quite a good amount of money in order to do it, however, due to our immensly inefficient private healthcare system our country actually ends up spending more per gdp on healthcare (15%) than other countries (France 11% Canada 10%). On top of that the the administration cost (the basic cost of shuffling paperwork through a system) for private health care are higher than in government run health care systems. (in private it can range from 12-20%, whereas the other is usually 9% or less). Let us not forget that even with a universal health a country can still allow private plans to exist. So if you are not satisfied with the safety net allowed by the government you can opt to pay for a private plan. Finally, it seems to me that it would be quite easy to pay for such a system without wasting such an extreme amount of money on halfhearted botched occupations. With even a small share of what we pay for on our military we could easily afford to provide health care to everybody in the USA.