I just returned from watching "Sicko" and I think it was an awesome film. I couldn't believe the stuff presented in the film and that September 11th heroes were denied medical care for what happened to them during their work. Michael Moore took them to Cuba to have some of their free medical care and it was the best care they have ever received. The film posed some very valid points about current socialized medicine that is implemented in Canada, the UK, France, and Cuba and some interesting facts about the stuff going on between US politicians, insurance programs, and their pocketbooks. What is your opinion on Sicko or socialized medicine?
too bad he didn't tell you the truth. http://www.canf.org/Issues/medicalapartheid.htm Read this. When MTV thinks you are showing disinformation, it must -really- be bad http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1563758/story.jhtml Look up wait times for basic procedures in canada if you are more curious: http://www.health.gov.on.ca/transformation/wait_times/wait_mn.html Many european systems are moving back to private care. Slowly, but even they realize it has to happen. Socialized medicine doesn't work. It's shown all over the planet.
I don't think healthcare should be fully socialized to the point where hospitals are state run affairs but at the same time it would be nice to have basic, affordable healthcare for everyone and subsidized or better regulated drug prices, of course I would be willing to pay the taxes to back it up but a lot of people would want it for nothing so it will probably never happen. Total socialization of the medical industry is a terrible idea though. Without doing any real research I can confidently say that it would all but end cutting edge medical research since government grants for such things would go straight to the status quo medical care and private donations would have to go towards advancing it to new frontiers. As far as Mr. Moore goes, he is really a terrible documenter. He is selling sensationalism and his movies are some weird mix of documentary and political propaganda. I can see how it is working out well for him but I think it adds to the already polluted pool of disinformation out there in the US today that makes us all seem like idiots.
Everything should be owned or produced by a private company. I do not have a problem with some kind of government subsidized health insurance, but I do have a problem with the government being wholly responsible for my health.
I have been wanting to see that movie too But I don't think government controlled medical care sounds too inviting. A large organization should not be in charge of determining what kind of medical care you can recieve. I hate HMO's too. I have one right now and most of the doctors they approve are all these discount doctors that are not very good. I have to have a minor procedure done on the 2nd of aug and my insurance company did not want to approve a quality surgeon because they charge more! So I decided I am still going to the surgeon with the good rep. the insurance said ok but they will only cover 50%. LOL Oh, did I mention, I hate HMO's!
I seriously laughed through the hour that I watched. He seriously spends 2 hours ripping on Americas health care without offering any ACTUAL solution. He also fails to mention the part where the United States health care system in number one for two major things: http://www.photius.com/rankings/world_health_systems.html We're basically paying for rest of the worlds health care. Oh yea! When I watched the part in the movie, where he visits the doctor in Europe that makes about 100,000 USD a year. I just about fell out of my seat laughing. That's NOTHING compared to doctors in the U.S.
Actually the salary for that doctor was quoted in pounds. 100,000 pounds = 203,451 US dollars. Watch it again and listen for "pounds"
Bingo! Of course he doesn't. If he had any idea on how to improve anything in the U.S., he himself would be in politics. But I guess he prefers making 100s of Millions inciting the ignorant whose voice he's become. I personally believe that he himself doesn't believe in 90 percent of the stuff he puts out there. But hey, it helps him afford more jumbo size Big Mac combos at Mickey Ds.
Price controls, what you are advocating, never work. They inevitably lead to shortages and higher prices overall. The problem with the medical industry is too much government involvement already. Your medical bill is high because it's easy to get out of paying a bill. So the people who do pay are punished for the people who don't pay. Also, the system exists outside of the free enterprise system. Do you know the cost of a procedure before you need to do it? Can you price shop? Not really. When you walk into a pharmacy, do you care how much a prescription costs? Not really. You just hand it over and get it. If we all walked into a shoe store and said I want that shoe - without any sort of price shopping - I'd guarantee that shoe prices would rise as well.
you know if we have socialized medical care, what will be next public police and fire services? People don't pay because they can't pay http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html a lot of people just don't have an extra 20k laying around to fix a broken arm or whatever
Simplistic Ferret. Typical, though. The government bids up costs of medical procedures because they do not negotiate prices - either for procedures or medicines, like private carriers do. So the prices are higher for the goverment paid benefits (medicare, medicaid), but the reimbursement rate is very low, so the cost shifts to the people who do pay (private insured people, uninsured) raising the costs on people who actually pay the money, which results in higher insurance premiums for the bulk of people; making insurance harder to afford. I'm sure you'd not be surprised to realize that the medical industry is the most regulated industry in the country and its also the most expensive. Anyone here think that's a coincidence? Medical regulation raises the cost of healthcare about $170 billion dollars each year. What we need is more government involvement - that'd fix the problem! hard to believe you seriously compare the legitimate functions of a city/state government (who handle those services) to a far reaching federal system. I don't really have a problem with a state (like Oregon tried a few years ago) voting itself a "socialized system" - that's great, if that's what they want to do, 10th amendment (state's rights). I do have a problem with a force-fed national system that is outside the scope of the federal government's mandate. Nationalizing 1/7th (or so) of the economy isn't very swift; especially when the government barely performs its current responsibilities very well. Broken arms don't cost 20k to fix. It's not about that, anyways. But if you are gonna consider the issue, at least be honest about it.
I am in the UK and we have the NHS (National Health Service) which means free hospital, opticians, most medicines and dentists (if you're lucky). In some areas it is way better than others. Hospital care is generally good but there are some none NHS things which you have to pay for. Most medicines/drugs are free unless they are 'not a necessity'. There is some outsourcing to private hospitals e.g. BUPA but the government pays for that so it generally works pretty well. The government also pay for eye care up to the age of 16 and past the age of 65 which is pretty good. They also subsidise glasses/contacts if you are on a low wage. Dentistry is another matter. There is a huge shortage of NHS dentists which means a lot of people have to pay for private dentist care. This all happened because the NHS was arguing about pay with the dentists and the dentists had enough - hopefully they will fix it soon. Before lots of dentists went private dental checkups were free but other services such as whitening and fillings were charged unless you were younger than 16 or older than 65. Does the NHS work - Yes, in many ways it does and it has been running for about 50 years and still going. Disadvantages: 1. It is not really free as you pay for it via tax but it is a lot cheaper than if you paid seperately 2. If you dont use the hospitals a lot then you are paying for something you dont use but I guess you would still pay for health insaurance if it was private. 3. Foreigners (especially from EU) often come to the UK just to get free healthcare - hopefully government will tighten up on that. 4. If your operation/treatment is not urgent then you have to wait. So, in many ways it is good but there are some problems, especially in dentistry but what system doesn't have problems?
Socialized medicine, like socilaized anything, is a disaster. Like somebody said, "if you think health care is expensive, wait until it becomes free". Socialism is great for corpporations and the government, but it destroys the economy
And the UK won't operate on you if you are overweight, smoke, etc. Freedom and socialism don't mix. As usual. Getting rid of the hamstrings on the industry and letting the free market take over is the only way to fix the problem.
Where did you get that idea from? 9% of NHS budget is spent on obesity £1.5 billion ($3 billion) was spent on treating smokers in 2002 (couldnt find any later stats)
You are missing the point - they have been refused surgery because they continue to smoke. The doctors are saying there is no point having the surgery because you are continuing to smoke. Regarding the obese patients - these are being denied surgery at the NHS expense because the doctors are saying it is not worthwhile. Obviously they can still pay for it if they want it. You are trying to suggest that if you are obese or a smoker then you are denied treatment in the UK period. That is totally incorrect and a lot of the health budget is spent on treating obese people and especially smokers.
Here's the problem...When we think of Socialism, we think of Joseph Stalin and the Cold War and the Arms Race and the Cuba Missile Crisis and all of that. Socialism is Communism, or so we are meant to believe. Here is my only question...If we are socialistic or capitalistic in our health care, I won't express my opinion because people will always argue. But, my question... Why should anybody ever be denied health care? Why should a doctor have to find out if it is OKAY to treat someone? According to the Hippocratic Oath, "In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or with men, be they free or slaves," which means that a doctor will treat a patient no matter what. He will treat the patient and stay away from the seductions. A seduction could be wealth. Now...Let's ponder for a moment. If I needed a new heart, would I be given it? That all depends. Probably not. Want to know why? Because I weigh a little more than I should. Because I used to have epilepsy. Because I had a cardiac arrest when I was two (courtesy the anesthesiologist) and because I wear glasses. So now I die because of that. Now...The question that we ask is if we should have socialized medicine. Nah, I don't think so. But I think that EVERYONE should be guaranteed health care. And if that requires socialism in our health care system, then I think it should be the case.