Sicko

[Scary Guy]

I liked it, and yet I hated it because much of it is true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicko

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0386032

http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko (warning, flash with audio upon clicking)

Then again he's been flagged as working for "THEM" because he wouldn't ask about the 7th tower in Fahrenheit 9/11. But that's just some tinfoil hat stuff that no one should ask about or question UNDER PENALTY OF TORTURE.

[darkboi13]

I liked it, and yet I hated it because much of it is true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicko

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0386032

http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko (warning, flash with audio upon clicking)

Then again he's been flagged as working for "THEM" because he wouldn't ask about the 7th tower in Fahrenheit 9/11. But that's just some tinfoil hat stuff that no one should ask about or question UNDER PENALTY OF TORTURE.

I'll be seeing it Friday. Can't wait

[Homicidalheathen]

Not something I want to pay full price to see on a big screen but I will rent it when it comes out on video.

[Head Wreck]

why are we dedicating some attention towards this tabloid crap.

honestly, as a socialist i have no time for that liar.

[Scary Guy]

why are we dedicating some attention towards this tabloid crap.

honestly, as a socialist i have no time for that liar.

OK, not everything he says is true, but he does bring up some good points.

[Head Wreck]

but tarnishes himself in "look at me" BS.

he will cut and paste anything to make his opinion, sorry force his opinion.

he's no bettwer than those he claims to "crusade against", a hypocrit.

i think his best role was in team america world police. "say teeam america ate my baby!" they got him down to a T there

[Homicidalheathen]

I dont know if national coverage is good. My cousins from Germany said they have to wait a long time to get in at times even if it is an emergency.....that could kill me.

If it could work and work good yes......I just don't see how. I hear the same about Canada.

So want it though. Me, and a few people I know......are stuck........or worse because of this.

One person I know has run out of hospitals to go to.......she has no medical and is always sick.

[Homicidalheathen]

PS...I always thought he was truthful and all.....why does everyone hate him now? Can you post something please.......?

[kellygrrrrrl]

I thought it was excellent.

Michael Moore is definately one sided, but the points proven by example say enough for me.

I'm convinced Universal Health IS the way to go.

I work for an insurance company and know how this stuff works, and it ain't working.

[Homicidalheathen]

I sorta agree. If I were not married to someone with good insurance I would be dead right now.

After I had 3 operations......they cancelled me! They said I didn't disclose a pre exhisting condition...and found pot in my system (the doctor said it would help)

I didn't really know how sick I was so this was not fair.

Now we pay up the ass. And we do it ourselves.

[sass_in_the_pants]

Everyone has an opinion about Michael Moore.

His 'documentaries' are meant to make you think and to entertain you, and I think they succeed at doing both. But if you swallow his pill whole, you're setting yourself up for some disappointment.

He pokes holes in our health system, and it deserves it, but honestly, EVERY country has horror stories about their own health systems. Just ask. People will tell you. So, I don't think it's entirely fair to compare the US health system to other countries, at least not if you plan to look at other nations through rose-colored glasses.

Did anyone watch his show TV Nation? It was on years ago and it was AWESOME! SO funny!

[Homicidalheathen]

swallow his pill whole, you're setting yourself up for some disappointment

Its like that with ANYONE though who is influential.

This country is too crooked to EVER make it work. Michigan has a good lottery and casinos yet I drive on roads with holes and my kids school sucks ass?

[sass_in_the_pants]

swallow his pill whole, you're setting yourself up for some disappointment

Its like that with ANYONE though who is influential.

This country is too crooked to EVER make it work. Michigan has a good lottery and casinos yet I drive on roads with holes and my kids school sucks ass?

You're just not buying enough lottery tickets.

[Homicidalheathen]

Yah, riiight......that rich Mayors Mansion off 16 Mile? Not quite big enough.

[angusfergus]

The problem with complete universal health care is that it ends up costing more than private insurance, and the care is not as good. What needs to happen is existing health care programs that exist for the elderly and low-income needs to be scrapped and that funding rolled into a national catastrophic care system, with comprehensive care for the elderly, low-income, and children. If all of those programs were combined into a single system, it would be more efficient and therefore more would get done with the same amount of money. There would be minimal tax increases, and everyone who can't afford private insurance would be covered in a system that didn't have all the red tape and delays of a single payer system.

[know_buddy_kares]

People hate them because he speaks against replublicans and they've no real way to hit him back or attack him any. he exposes the bullshit and weakness, and on a large scale. That's why people hate them, is becuase they wanna defend their precious republican "saints"

even though he's not a saint himself, but he's no where near as bad as our government is.

[Msterbeau]

The problem with complete universal health care is that it ends up costing more than private insurance, and the care is not as good. What needs to happen is existing health care programs that exist for the elderly and low-income needs to be scrapped and that funding rolled into a national catastrophic care system, with comprehensive care for the elderly, low-income, and children. If all of those programs were combined into a single system, it would be more efficient and therefore more would get done with the same amount of money. There would be minimal tax increases, and everyone who can't afford private insurance would be covered in a system that didn't have all the red tape and delays of a single payer system.

I agree with that. Capitalism largely works because of natural motivational aspects in humans. Profit motive is a big one. People who can afford it, through work or there own $$ should pay for it. It's all the people slipping through the cracks that need to be helped. Simplifying the whole system, from an organizational point of view also makes sense.

I haven' seen the movie yet... I'll wait for DVD.

[Fierce Critter]

Hard to know whether talking about health care in general is taking this thread off-topic, but, what the hell.

Taking into consideration that socialized health care has major problems, I wish getting coverage didn't go hand-in-hand with employment.

I'm not real clear on why it's that way in the first place.

On the one hand, I appreciate that we have coverage through Jon's job. And I get cranky every time they change the coverage so that we end up having to pay higher deductibles & copays.

But on the other hand, why should employers be the ones - generally speaking - in charge of whether a person has health care in the first place?

I'm no fan of big business. But the health care thing doesn't really strike me as something for which they should be responsible.

I don't know what the alternative would be, however. What AngusFergus says sounds good, but what would be considered "low income?" I mean, there are MEN out there who have jobs, with paychecks that are adequate to cover general bills (rent, utilities, maybe a car payment, food, clothing). But if you start making them pay for their own health care, generally they won't be able to afford it.

I mention MEN because of experience. There is precious little out there for men of a certain age who aren't fathers or considered low-income. But they're in a certain pay scale that doesn't allow them savings or "extras" such as self-paid medical coverage.

There's a lot more out there for women, children, the elderly. It's mostly the adult men I feel for.

[angusfergus]

Hard to know whether talking about health care in general is taking this thread off-topic, but, what the hell.

Taking into consideration that socialized health care has major problems, I wish getting coverage didn't go hand-in-hand with employment.

I'm not real clear on why it's that way in the first place.

On the one hand, I appreciate that we have coverage through Jon's job. And I get cranky every time they change the coverage so that we end up having to pay higher deductibles & copays.

But on the other hand, why should employers be the ones - generally speaking - in charge of whether a person has health care in the first place?

I'm no fan of big business. But the health care thing doesn't really strike me as something for which they should be responsible.

I don't know what the alternative would be, however. What AngusFergus says sounds good, but what would be considered "low income?" I mean, there are MEN out there who have jobs, with paychecks that are adequate to cover general bills (rent, utilities, maybe a car payment, food, clothing). But if you start making them pay for their own health care, generally they won't be able to afford it.

I mention MEN because of experience. There is precious little out there for men of a certain age who aren't fathers or considered low-income. But they're in a certain pay scale that doesn't allow them savings or "extras" such as self-paid medical coverage.

There's a lot more out there for women, children, the elderly. It's mostly the adult men I feel for.

I would use something similar to the existing scales. Pretty much anybody making around the average income or below qualifies for low income programs such as Medicaid and Section 8 housing. Without having done a study into the subject, I would surmise that the savings provided from simplifying the existing systems and consolidating them into a single system would be able to provide coverage for many who might not qualify for existing programs. There is a chance that a tax increase would be required, but certainly nothing on the level of the kind of taxes you see in countries that have socialized health care.

As for the employer-based health care...this is a result of the fact that with any large company and a great many small companies, the employer pays some amount into the health care, and by having a group plan the overall rate is cheaper, and the rate the employee pays is MUCH cheaper. Private health care paid entirely out of pocket would not be controlled by employment, but would provide far fewer people with coverage.

[Vater Araignee]

why are we dedicating some attention towards this tabloid crap.

honestly, as a socialist i have no time for that liar.

Wow, I was about to call him a scum sucking socie but a decent one is calling him a liar.

I'm nearly a fascist so he can't be one. Well I am one, kill old money and redistribute the wealth.

Maybe donkey cock sucking commie pinko bastard?