MMoore movie SiCKO

User Forum Topic
Submitted by lostkitty on June 29, 2007 - 4:22am

It is not showing anywhere near me. If anyone sees it today, please post your thoughts!

Submitted by Coronita on June 29, 2007 - 6:58am.

I'd be interested in what people think about the movie too. Personally, I won't giving that fat fvck slob $7-$9 of my hard earned dollars.

I'll wait for it to come out on DVD, rent it for $0.99 at Vons, with a $0.99 promotion code I can use.

Submitted by JJGittes on June 29, 2007 - 8:08am.

Leni Riefenstahl reincarnated, for the left this time.

And by the way, while he was in Cuba, did he take the opportunity to ask Fidel why there hasn't been an election on the island in 50 years, and how come mothers will risk their and their children's lives to float on tubes 90 miles across shark infested waters to get out of that worker's paradise? Funny how Chevy Chase, and a bunch of the other hollywood left forgot to ask that too.

I guess the excellent "free" health care just doesn't quite tip the scales in favor of not risking being ripped to shreds by a 10 footer.

Submitted by lostkitty on June 29, 2007 - 9:44am.

I love "that fat fvck slob".
He's out there trying to bring up topics considered off-limits.

Submitted by cr on June 29, 2007 - 10:27am.

fat_lazy_union,

I have to agree with the assesment, but I might wait for it to show up on the documentary channel.

IMO Michael Moore is one reason the rest of world generally despises the ugly American. He's a fat, wealthy, spoiled American, claiming how terrible America is.

He ought to spend a year as a native does in Sudan, China, or India, then see what he thinks about America.

Submitted by uncomfortably numb on June 29, 2007 - 10:27am.

Although I have not seen the movie, I am a physician who has been in practice for nearly 30 years. The health care system in this country makes the real estate industry look like a bunch of benevolent angels. You just can't believe what's been going on. It's as ugly as it gets.

Submitted by SDowner on June 29, 2007 - 10:36am.

Michael Moore manipulates facts to his favor, but healthcare in US needs to be restructured.

America at its worst is far better than some countries at their best.

Submitted by NotCranky on June 29, 2007 - 10:45am.

I will probably watch "Ratatouille" 100 times before I get back to Michael Moore. I don't mind him too much but I always end up thinking he is a more subtle, liberal version of Rush Limbaugh. Politics are a hopeless quagmire.

Clearly, what we really need it for Jesus to come back and set things right for the world, not for us, one grand Ekklessia.

Submitted by jg on June 29, 2007 - 10:53am.

JJG-, yep, for Castro's bowel surgery, he had surgeons flown in from Spain.

Free healthcare for all. Some of it imported, for 'those more equal than others,' though.

Submitted by PerryChase on June 29, 2007 - 11:14am.

I happen to love Michael Moore. I'll go see his movie just to support him.

Sure, he's like the liberal version of Rush Limbaugh and Rush is also rich and fat. Rush is a hypocrite drug abusing, philandering bastard. In that way he's like most of his listeners. I know because our company used to sponsor Rush. He does bring in a lot of fanatical customers. Good for the pocket-book :)

Personally, I think that progressives have been too polite and meek for too long. The right likes in-your-face politics. Let's give them what they dish out everyday. And let's make money at it too. Why not? That's the American way.

Submitted by NotCranky on June 29, 2007 - 12:02pm.

Perry, I would side with you, but who has the politcal will to be very progressive? It seems like posturing up to the attitudes of the constituents ruls the day at election time and status quo rules at all others.Name one person who is universally progressive and in in politics or could get appointed by them.Yeah I am too demanding. I couldn't listen to Rush limbaugh speak for more than thirty seconds no matter what my leanings were. I instantly get the feeling I need to start ducking globs of spit shooting out of my radio anytime he speaks.Yuck!

Submitted by drunkle on June 29, 2007 - 12:50pm.

saw it. irate-pay ay-bay dot om-cay.

entertaining, a little tear jerking, if only half the movie is factually correct, eg., the part about hmo's denying treatment, then it is worth watching and paying attention to.

it's only mm movie i've ever seen. now i feel like i've missed out.

speaking of which, apparently there's a youtube video that shows lawyers describing methods of h1b rule bending to company execs.

Submitted by no_such_reality on June 29, 2007 - 1:56pm.

the part about hmo's denying treatment,

Isn't that the crux of any managed care system? It doesn't matter if it is run by the government or not, someone, somewhere has to make the decision that patient X with disease Y doesn't have an expected success rate to justify treatment.

It's a finite pool of money. Coronary Artery Disease is a leading killer. 650,000 die a year. 5% die on the operating table. 20% within the year. 35% within 5 years. How much do we spend to treat CAD? How long will the wait be? The wait increases the death rate. What's the cut-off for a patient if a panel doctors estimates they won't make it through the operation? 50/50? 80% chance of death on table?

Or may favorite disease, Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, aka human mad cow. roughly 200 cases a year in the US. 90% die within the year. How much do you allocate for spending? on treatment? on research? We don't have a cure, will you doom 200 people year for lack of enough research or choose not to treat the heart disease patient above?

Given San Diego's pension issues, has corrupt and inept as the insurance company's may be, do you really think the Government is going to do it cheaper and better once the bureaucracy is established?

I don't want to hear about the money could come from the war and be better spent, that's non-issue, I'd consider that a given. However, that money barely scratches the surface. My question is, will you step up to the hard decisions or just pretend government healthcare is an endless mana from heaven.

Submitted by Bugs on June 29, 2007 - 2:01pm.

If we want to address health care we also need to address the civil tort system that turns a serious problem into a catasrophic problem. Doing one without the other is not only ineffective it's hypocritical.

The primary reason health care is so expensive that we can't just give it away to everyone is because there are waaaay too many attornies and professional victims who equate a doctor's visit to a lottery ticket.

Universal health care isn't about providing the best coverage to everyone - it's about providing a servicable level of care, even though mistakes and deficiencies will sometimes occur as a result. Holding everyone to the gold standard is the reason these doctors have to order all those expensive tests even though 95% of the time they aren't necessary. The doctors spend too much time, effort and money for CYA.

For those people who have both the desire and the means for the gold standard they can always pay the extra. Everyone else gets the Walter Reed version; not perfect but about equal to what you'd get in any other country with universal health care.

That, and we need to put some teeth into the disciplinary boards and agencies that are charged with regulating the professional practice of these care providers. We wouldn't view litigation lotto as being the primary mode of control over substandard health care providers if the government would enforce the existing laws and regulations that already apply.

But I don't wanna hear any noise about addressing only half the problem to the exclusion and benefit of the other half.

Submitted by what_a_disasta on June 29, 2007 - 2:41pm.

I saw it and found it to be really moving. It makes a compelling case that the HMO's havent got our best interests at heart. I think you should definately watch it, no matter what side of the fence you sit on. I have lived under social and private medicine systems (US and UK) and I know which one I prefer. The funny thing is I pay at least as much tax in the US as I did in the UK. The difference is that in the US at least 50% of that money is used for fighting wars, instead of keeping us all healthy.
There is going to be a lot of negative noise from industry shills and the 'got mine, screw you' crowd, but do yourself a favor and see it for yourself and make up your own mind.

Submitted by uncomfortably numb on June 29, 2007 - 2:53pm.

This health care system is dysfunctional for many, many reasons but none more fundamental than the calculated manipulation and exploitation of people's fear of suffering and death.

This control allows the capital interests to effectively ply there wares on a public literally scared to death. How else do you think you have have half the senior population in this country drugged beyond recognition. When you see patients hand you their drug lists that contain fifteen or twenty different meds, then you begin to understand why the Pharma industry is what it is.

1984 us here my friends.

Submitted by no_such_reality on June 29, 2007 - 3:01pm.

To be frank, less McDonalds and more excersize would do a lot for controlling costs.

The VHA spends about $6000/vet. For 300 million people, that VA spending level equates to $1.8 Trillion dollars. That's roughly our entire 2001 National budget.

Submitted by what_a_disasta on June 29, 2007 - 3:18pm.

Could it be possible that vets are more likely to have serious chronic conditions that need long term care than the general population? I would have thought so, all those guys coming back with serious psychological issues, missing limbs and shrapnel or bullets wounds, not to mention being around all that toxic depleted uranium. I would have thought they would be a lot less healthy than the majority of Americans.

Submitted by DrChaos on June 29, 2007 - 3:20pm.

Sicko isn't about Cuba.

It's about the US.

Why can a poor Communist piece of crap do this better?

Is the US so great because of it's health care? Or despite?

Submitted by DrChaos on June 29, 2007 - 3:33pm.

Given San Diego's pension issues, has corrupt and inept as the insurance company's may be, do you really think the Government is going to do it cheaper and better once the bureaucracy is established?

I don't want to hear about the money could come from the war and be better spent, that's non-issue, I'd consider that a given. However, that money barely scratches the surface. My question is, will you step up to the hard decisions or just pretend government healthcare is an endless mana from heaven.

It isn't endless mana from heaven by any means but empirical evidence from nations which have lower GDP per capita than the US does shows marked improvement and satisfaction. France in particular has good health care, with superb doctors and isn't at all technologically backwards. And all those same issues come up there too.

In the current system the decisions get made in a worse fashion: "what's better for short term profit of insurance companies." You see, they find it more profitable to deny things which could have long term benefits---because they might be able to kick the people off the plans first, and make it Somebody Else's Problem.
Insurance system now has people who are actively vexatious in thwarting good health care (as well as actually liking overall inflation as it means more dollars flowing through the system), as opposed to a merely uncaring and plodding bureaucracy typical of government.

Taiwan, just jumped to a single payer system in the mid 90's. They're not a pathetic socialist country either. Japan has a national system too. It's not just Europe.

The empirical facts are obvious that health works differently from most other businesses. It's the reality of the world. The general supremacy of capitalism over communism is not catechism but a testable emprirical phenomenon, and we ought to judge the value of the ideology by the observed results.

Why do people get socialized medicine when they turn 65?

What's so special about them that they deserve it?

If you told them, "we're canceling medicare and everybody's going to private insurance", how many (especially Republican voters) would say "that's a great idea, I can't wait to have less expensive better medicine system, and get out of that terrible socialist POS". I'd bet about three.

How many would howl with rage?

Submitted by meadandale on June 29, 2007 - 5:15pm.

"My question is, will you step up to the hard decisions or just pretend government healthcare is an endless mana from heaven."

Hit the nail on the head.

All the people for socialized medicine fail to appreciate that any US government run healthcare system will still have a 'gatekeeper' that will have the same job as any HMO, namely to grant or deny coverage.

All those who think that we need in home diaper and laundry service like france for new mothers and are willing to pay a 40% tax rate to get it raise your hands...

Another thing that MM fails to mention is how many British and Canadian citizens end up buying private health care so they don't have to wait 6 months or more to get treatment.

Yeah, socialized medicine is great. People who don't or won't work want medical care for themselves and the children they can't afford to raise. I suppose we should buy them all houses as well?

Submitted by SDowner on June 29, 2007 - 5:45pm.

Socialization is obviously not the solution, but neither is the current system of "managed" healthcare without any other guidelines other than profit margins. Have you ever been on the phone with an insurance company/doctor's office/medical lab after they have denied some life-saving medical tests on a technicality, which was their mistake in the first place?

Submitted by Borat on June 29, 2007 - 5:48pm.

These boards are a total waste of time. No one will ever change their mind because of anything you write here. Give it up. Stop. Go outside and talk to people. Vote. See the movie and decide for yourself.

Submitted by jztz on June 29, 2007 - 6:06pm.

Haven't watched it, but will (have watched MM's other documentaries and like them). Yes, he dramatizes a topic, hence brings debate and discussion and awareness.

US healthcare system is highly in-efficient for the money it spends. It's now about 15% of GDP, and easily double the per capital spending of the next country (Japan?), and we achieve less - lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality rate, 45 to 50M of uninsured ...

Market economy works if consumers have a good sense of price/value ratio. But with healthcare, that's very difficult if not impossible. How do you know how much to pay for a cancer drug? What if you're in urgent pain? Do you know your doctors enough to know the right price to pay him/her? Also, empirical evidence show that people undervalue life when it's their money (private contractors going to Iraq), but overvalue life when insurances pay for it. In fact, in market economy (or a private payer system like the US) prices tend to be much higher. Other countries, such as Japan and European ones, have country wide price controls and periodical price drops for medicine and other medical equipment. That's why all pharma companies want to market/distribute their drugs in the US because of high prices.

HMOs are just a sad way to control the rampant cost increases when prices are set by manufacturers (pharma companies, etc, etc) and those with insurance think that they should be entitled to all medical means regardless of costs.

Fundamental reform in healthcare for sure is needed, and I hope that Hillary will get it done the second time she tries.

Submitted by what_a_disasta on June 29, 2007 - 6:20pm.

All those who think that we need in home diaper and laundry service like france for new mothers and are willing to pay a 40% tax rate to get it raise your hands...

I pay around that much tax to live in California.

healthcare system will still have a 'gatekeeper' that will have the same job as any HMO, namely to grant or deny coverage.

The whole point of universal coverage is nobody gets denied the care they need. If its critical (in the UK at least) you get seen at once, they wont make you wait. However, people might have to wait a bit to get that boob job or whatever other non critical procedure, unless they want to pay for it themselves. I actually have to wait longer for a doctors appointment in CA than I ever did in the UK.

Submitted by LookoutBelow on June 29, 2007 - 6:39pm.

Already saw it, our healthcare is as bad as you all might imagine it is in your worst nightmares, but hey ....its insurance, they make money by collecting premiums...NOT by paying claims....follow the money, pretty simple really, they slop the troughs of both sides of the aisle so no politician is going to be too disagreeable with big pharma...

 

M. Moore does manipulate the facts to suit his opinions however, but no more than any other public figure in my estimation, but his points are well taken. I think his portrayal of 3rd world countries and other more socialist/communist countries having better healthcare compared to ours is a little (lot) over blown.

If I needed heart surgery, I would want the guy that is the most successful in his trade to do my operation. In a capitalist society, the way people are measured in their success of their profession is by pay.... I want the guy who drives a porsche, not the guy who takes the bus to work.

Good health is NOT a right, its a privilege....Unfortunately for the sick who are poor also, but what can you do ? At some point everybody must take responsibility for themselves, if your sick and your poor, your gonna get worse and maybe die....if your a billionaire like that old fart Amway founder (Jay Van something or other) and you've simply outlived your heart and need a transplant, then your gonna get a new heart, cuz you can "afford" it...simple as that...People in India readily sell their organs for financial gain....Its a HUGE industry over there. Life is onyl precious..if you can afford it.

 

Submitted by meadandale on June 29, 2007 - 6:44pm.

"I pay around that much tax to live in California."

Nonsense. YOu probably pay 28% federal tax with 9-11% ca tax on top of that.

How'd you like that to go up to 40-50% federal tax with an additional 10% ca tax on top?

I pay for my own healthcare. I have insurance but most of the time when I go to a doctor I pay out of pocket because I have a very high deductible (to keep my premiums low). Because of this, I only visit the doctor when I'm sick, not when I just have some random sniffle.

It's not cheap but its worth the alternative of death or bankruptcy. When given the choice, most of the people that NEED universal coverage wouldn't pay for health insurance. They'd rather get it for free. That's the problem. They want it but they refuse to pay for it.

Submitted by jg on June 29, 2007 - 7:03pm.

w_a_d, you're right, no need to fight those wars with those terrorists overseas. Let's just let them park their bomb-filled Mercedes' anywhere and everywhere that they want in our home countries.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070630/ap_o...

Pull your head out of the sand, man. We've got to kill those vermin over there so that we don't have to fight them over here.

Submitted by uncomfortably numb on June 29, 2007 - 8:50pm.

You people don't get it. The health care system is doing EXACTLY what it is designed to do...make huge amounts of money for the corporations which control it. You, as is the case for most Americans, just can't believe that the health care system was taken over by people whose mandate is to produce the highest return for shareholders.

This system is this way because it's the law. Wake up people!! You're living in a fairly tale which no longer exists.

Submitted by one_muggle on June 29, 2007 - 10:35pm.

Things that are true:

Healthcare is screwed up.
Doctors lie to cover other Doctors.
Everyday people sue Doctors without cause.
Everyday a Doctor deserves to get sued.
Everyday a rich person get better care than a poor person.
Everyday a poor person in the US gets better care than a King twenty years ago.
Everyday someone dies because of a Doctor's mistakes.
Everyday a Doctor saves a life.
Every year someone graduates last in his class in medical school and earns the title Doctor.
Everyday medical students face increasing tuition and liability and decreasing salaries.(http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/malpract...)
Everyday Paris Hilton pays her dog sitter more per month than the chief of surgery at USC. (OK, I made that up)
And IMHO:
Michael Moore has an agenda.
Michael uses artistic license to push his agenda http://www.davekopel.org/terror/59Deceit...
He isn't always wrong.
But, he doesn't try too hard to be right.
And he doesn't let facts get in the way of a story that advances his agenda.
I girl I knew in college had a friend who said he heard from a very reliable source that Michael Moore eats unborn babies... It might have been a chicken egg, but we have no concrete evidence that it wasn't a human baby. Maybe we should make a Crocumentary and let the world know.
Lastly, everday MM does less for this country and the world than do Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, or Michael Dell.

-one muggle

Submitted by Coronita on June 29, 2007 - 11:05pm.

fat_lazy_union, I have to agree with the assesment, but I might wait for it to show up on the documentary channel. IMO Michael Moore is one reason the rest of world generally despises the ugly American. He's a fat, wealthy, spoiled American, claiming how terrible America is. He ought to spend a year as a native does in Sudan, China, or India, then see what he thinks about America.

 

The irony to MM is that he probably shoved enough of the those Big Macs down his fat throat for it to be an issue moving forward. Both him and Rush are just tubs of lard, and probably contributing to the increased cost of our health system.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.