"Sicko" What a show!!!!!!

[Psychoblues]

Go and see it!!!!! If you are not moved by it's presentation and demand for self examination then you are simply not a human with which I want to exist with. Mike Moore is not always right but he is at least correct on this one!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pale Rider]

Go and see it!!!!! If you are not moved by it's presentation and demand for self examination then you are simply not a human with which I want to exist with. Mike Moore is not always right but he is at least correct on this one!!!!!!!!!!!

You wouldn't catch me dead in a theater showing a flick made by that fat ass, piece of shit, moore.

He's your hero Pb, not mine. I couldn't care less what that fucker has to say, and he sure as HELL isn't getting any of my MONEY!

[Spyder Jerusalem]

Then watch it for free right here.


http://openflv.com/watch?v=MzM0NzQ2MQ==&p=0

Or are you such a shit sucking fascist that you don't give equal consideration to both sides of an argument?

[nevadamedic]

Go and see it!!!!! If you are not moved by it's presentation and demand for self examination then you are simply not a human with which I want to exist with. Mike Moore is not always right but he is at least correct on this one!!!!!!!!!!!

I would be moved if Michael Moore didn't lie his ass off in it. He was proven that he lied about 4 or 5 things so far and it's still in theaters.

[avatar4321]

Go and see it!!!!! If you are not moved by it's presentation and demand for self examination then you are simply not a human with which I want to exist with. Mike Moore is not always right but he is at least correct on this one!!!!!!!!!!!

If his position is correct, why does he have to lie to support it?

[avatar4321]

Then watch it for free right here.


http://openflv.com/watch?v=MzM0NzQ2MQ==&p=0

Or are you such a shit sucking fascist that you don't give equal consideration to both sides of an argument?

When one side of the argument is presented in nothing but complete fabrications its a complete waste of time to listen to it. People who have strong arguments, dont have to resort to lies.

Should we really listen to Hitler's arguments for genocide before we determine genocide is wrong?

[Spyder Jerusalem]

So what?

Everybody lies.
Everybody.

Yer guys, their guys, what the fuck ever.

But, say, as youve already pointed out, you know what the lies are.

Now how about addressing the idea?
The ideas addressed in the film.

Or don't you think it matters that such a huge number of Americans have shitty healthcare thanks to greedy HMOs?
Do you agree or disagree that there should never ever fuckin' EVER be a profit motive in public health?
Why can't America's healthcare system be run like the ones in just about every industrialized country in the world, whose citizens almost never worry about the cost of, or the quality of their healthcare?
Should preventative medicine be the primary goal of American medicine, as it is every fuckin where else, rather than emergency, triage, or "Hobson'r Choice" style as it is now?

If you actually cared about the problem, you'd drop this sycophantic party dogma bullshit and address it, rather than yer frantic, and juvenile, attempts to shoot the messenger.

[Psychoblues]

Thanks for the link where this can be watched for free, SJ!!!!!


Then watch it for free right here.


http://openflv.com/watch?v=MzM0NzQ2MQ==&p=0

Or are you such a shit sucking fascist that you don't give equal consideration to both sides of an argument?

BTW, welcome to the Debate Policy Board!!!!

[Psychoblues]

Lies? What lies? I've already watched a dozen or more interviews with MM on this piece and they, the journalists, all did their damnedest to catch him in a lie in this piece and not one has been proven to be a lie. MM certainly has a POV, as do you and I, but I don't know of any lie he has told.



So what?

Everybody lies.
Everybody.

Yer guys, their guys, what the fuck ever.

But, say, as youve already pointed out, you know what the lies are.

Now how about addressing the idea?
The ideas addressed in the film.

Or don't you think it matters that such a huge number of Americans have shitty healthcare thanks to greedy HMOs?
Do you agree or disagree that there should never ever fuckin' EVER be a profit motive in public health?
Why can't America's healthcare system be run like the ones in just about every industrialized country in the world, whose citizens almost never worry about the cost of, or the quality of their healthcare?
Should preventative medicine be the primary goal of American medicine, as it is every fuckin where else, rather than emergency, triage, or "Hobson'r Choice" style as it is now?

If you actually cared about the problem, you'd drop this sycophantic party dogma bullshit and address it, rather than yer frantic, and juvenile, attempts to shoot the messenger.

I'm interested in seeing what lies these jerks interpret into the conversation. So far all I've seen from the ones that admit to never having seen the piece and also admit no intention to do so say there are "lies" in it. Wonder who is ringing their bells?

[nevadamedic]

Lies? What lies? I've already watched a dozen or more interviews with MM on this piece and they, the journalists, all did their damnedest to catch him in a lie in this piece and not one has been proven to be a lie. MM certainly has a POV, as do you and I, but I don't know of any lie he has told.




I'm interested in seeing what lies these jerks interpret into the conversation.

Do you know how to tell when Michael Moore is lying?

He open's his mouth.

[Spyder Jerusalem]

Awww, crap!

Just checked the link, and it doesn't work anymore.
Maybe because it is streaming it from the now defunct Google Video link.
I'll try to find another one that works.

Oh well.
Go ahead and explore that site, though.
Its a blast.
It has several hundred movies and several thousand TV shows in easily viewable, streaming DIVX format, as well as downloadable.

http://openflv.com/tag?t=Movie

[Psychoblues]

I've learned a lot about your open mouth, nm, and none of it is pretty.



Do you know how to tell when Michael Moore is lying?

He open's his mouth.

Please relate to a single lie in the piece, OK?

[nevadamedic]

POINT NO. 1:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN: "(Moore says) the United States slipped to number 37 in the world's health care systems. It's true. ... Moore brings a group of patients, including 9/11 workers, to Cuba and marvels at their free treatment and quality of care. But hold on -- that (World Health Organization) list puts Cuba's health care system even lower than the United States, coming in at No. 39."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

"But hold on? 'Sicko' clearly shows the WHO list with the United States at number No. 37 and Cuba at No. 39. Right up on the screen in big 5-foot letters. It's even in the trailer! CNN should have its reporter see his eye doctor. The movie isn't hiding from this fact. Just the opposite.

CNN RESPONSE:

Moore appears unhappy with Gupta's use of the phrase, "But hold on."

Moore appears to be creating an issue where none exists.

Gupta and Moore agree that the U.S. ranks 37th and Cuba ranks 39th on a WHO report. Gupta in his fact check says this is true.

And Gupta never said Moore didn't convey that Cuba was 39th, even though the verbal emphasis at that point in the movie is a comparison between the United States and Slovenia.

POINT NO. 2:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

CNN: "Moore asserts that the American health care system spends $7,000 per person on health. Cuba spends $25 dollars per person. Not true. But not too far off. The United States spends $6,096 per person, versus $229 per person in Cuba."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

According to our own government -- the Department of Health and Human Services' National Health Expenditures Projections -- the United States will spend $7,092 per capita on health in 2006 and $7,498 in 2007 (Department of Health and Human Services Center for Medicare and Medicaid Expenditures, National Health Expenditures Projections 2006-2016).

As for Cuba -- Dr. Gupta and CNN need to watch "Sicko" first before commenting on it. "Sicko" says Cuba spends $251 per person on health care, not $25, as Gupta reports. And the BBC reports that Cuba's per capita health expenditure is... $251! (Keeping Cuba Healthy, BBC, August 1 2006). This is confirmed by the United Nations Human Development Report, 2006. Yup, Cuba spends $251 per person on health care. As Gupta points out, the World Health Organization does calculate Cuba's per capita health expenditure at $229 per person. We chose to use the U.N. numbers, a minor difference - and $229 is a lot closer to $251 than $25.

CNN RESPONSE:

CNN has corrected and apologized for an error in transcription in our report. We did so on television and online.

CNN had said that in the film Moore reported Cuba spends $25 per person for health care when the film actually reported that number to be $251. We regret that mistake.

However, we originally fact checked Moore's reporting because he uses numbers for each country from different reports and he compares a number that describes actual spending to a projection from another source.

He sources his number from Cuba to a BBC report. In that same BBC report, the number cited for U.S. spending is $5,711. Moore doesn't use that number, but instead a higher number found in another report (as cited by Moore above) from the Department of Health and Human Services' National Health Expenditures Projections. That projection is that the United States will spend $7,092 per capita on health in 2006 and $7,498 in 2007 (Department of Health and Human Services Center for Medicare and Medicaid Expenditures, National Health Expenditures Projections 2006-2016). Actual numbers for the years 2006 and 2007 are not yet available, which is why CNN could not use them.

We believe the most accurate comparison of statistics comes from analysis of numbers from the same report and the same year.

CNN used the WHO's World Health Statistics 2007 report for both the Cuban and U.S. data. That report uses the latest information on actual dollars spent, in this case from the year 2005. These summaries of actual expenditures -- not projections -- reported by CNN are: Cuba-$229, U.S.-$6,096.

Both of these numbers come from the same report and provide consistency under statistical analysis.

The only controversy here is within Moore's numbers. Moore uses $251 to describe Cuban health care spending in his movie, but when CNN e-mailed Moore's production company to verify numbers, his own staffer e-mailed back that $229 was the correct number.

As Gupta said, CNN's numbers and Moore's numbers aren't far off, but we believe ours are a fairer comparison.

POINT NO. 3:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

CNN: In fact, Americans live just a little bit longer than Cubans on average.

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

Just the opposite. The 2006 United Nations Human Development Report's human development index states the life expectancy in the United States is 77.5 years. It is 77.6 years in Cuba (Human Development Report 2006, United Nations Development Programme, 2006 at 283).

CNN RESPONSE:

Moore cites the 2006 United Nations Human Development Index, which uses life expectancy data from 2004. CNN relied on the 2007 World Health Organization report, which uses life expectancy data from 2005. That data shows Americans with a life expectancy of 77.9 years and Cubans with a life expectancy of 77.2 years.

The 2005 data is available online at:

http://www.who.int/whosis/database/life_tables/life_tables.cfm

POINT NO. 4:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

CNN: The United States ranks highest in patient satisfaction.

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

True, but even when the WHO took patient satisfaction into account in its comprehensive review of the world's health systems, we still came in at No. 37 ("World Health Organization Assesses The World's Health Systems," Press Release, WHO/44, June 21, 2000).

Patients may be satisfied in America, but not everyone gets to be a patient. Forty-seven million are uninsured and are rarely patients -- until it's too late. In the rest of the Western world, everyone and anyone can be a patient because everyone is covered (And don't face exclusions for pre-existing conditions, co-pays, deductibles and costly monthly premiums).

It's not that other countries are unhappy with their health care -- for example, "70 to 80 percent of Canadians find their waiting times acceptable." ("Access to health care services in Canada, waiting times for specialized services [January to December 2005]).

CNN RESPONSE:

Moore does not seem to have an issue with CNN's report on this point. Here's what Gupta actually said on the air:

"Sicko" Film clip: "The United States slipped to No. 37 in the world's healthcare systems..."

Gupta: "It's true. Thirty-seven is the ranking according to the World Health Organization's latest data on 191 countries. It's based on general health level, patient satisfaction, access and how it's paid for. France tops the list. Italy and Spain make it into the top 10. The United Kingdom is 18."

Again, Moore seems to be creating controversy where none exists.

POINT NO. 5:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

CNN: Americans have shorter wait times than everyone but Germans when seeking non-emergency elective procedures, like hip replacement, cataract surgery, or knee repair.

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

This isn't the whole truth. CNN pulled out a statistic about elective procedures. Of the six countries surveyed in that study -- United States, Canada, New Zealand, UK, Germany, Australia -- only Canada had longer waiting times than America for sick adults waiting to schedule a doctor's appointment for a medical problem. Eighty-one percent of patients in New Zealand got a same or next-day appointment for a non-routine visit, 71 percent in Britain, 69 percent in Germany, 66 percent in Australia, 47 percent in the U.S. and 36 percent in Canada ("The Doc's In, but It'll Be a While," Catherine Arnst, Business Week, June 22, 2007).

"Gerard Anderson, a Johns Hopkins health policy professor who has spent his career examining the world's health care, said there are delays, but not as many as conservatives state. In Canada, the United Kingdom and France, '3 percent of hospital discharges had delays in treatment,' Anderson told The Miami Herald. 'That's a relatively small number, and they're all elective surgeries, such as hip and knee replacement.' " (John Dorschner, 'Sicko' film is set to spark debate; Reformers are gearing up for 'Sicko,' the first major movie to examine America's often-maligned health care system," The Miami Herald, June 29, 2007).

One way America is able to achieve decent waiting times is that it leaves 47 million people out of the health care system entirely, unlike any other Western country. When you remove 47 million people from the line, your wait should be shorter. So why is the U.S. second to last in wait times?

And there are even more Americans who keep themselves out of the system because of cost - in the United States, 24 percent of the population did not get medical care due to cost. That number is 5 percent in Canada and 3 percent in the UK (Inequities in Health Care: A Five-Country Survey. Robert Blendon et al, Health Affairs. Exhibit 5).

CNN RESPONSE:

We believe our example of so-called "elective" procedures such as hip replacement and cataract surgery is accurate and is helpful information. More than 400,000 Americans have hip or knee replacements each year in the U.S. (http://www.niams.nih.gov/hi/topics/arthritis/jointrep.htm). By age 80, half of all Americans either suffer from a cataract or have had cataract surgery (http://www.nei.nih.gov/health/cataract/cataract_facts.asp).

POINT NO. 6:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

CNN: (PAUL KECKLEY-Deloitte Health Care Analyst): "The concept that care is free in France, in Canada, in Cuba -- and it's not. Those citizens pay for health services out of taxes. As a proportion of their household income, it's a significant number ... (GUPTA): It's true that the French pay higher taxes, and so does nearly every country ahead of the United States on that list."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

"Sicko" never claims that health care is provided absolutely for free in other countries without tax contributions from citizens. Former (member of the British Parliament) Tony Benn reads from the NHS founding pamphlet, which explicitly states that "this is not a charity. You are paying for it mainly as taxpayers." "Sicko" also acknowledges that the French are "drowning in taxes." Comparatively, many Americans are drowning in insurance premiums, deductibles, co-pays and medical debt and the resulting threat of bankruptcy -- half of all bankruptcies in the United States are triggered by medical bills (Medical Bills Make up Half of Bankruptcies, February 2005, MSNBC).

CNN RESPONSE:

On Moore's Web site "Prescription for Change" (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/health-care-proposal), item one is a call that "Every resident of the United States must have free, universal health care for life."

One of Gupta's overall critiques of the film is that Moore leaves viewers with an impression, as he does on his Web site, that universal health care comes without cost. In fact, substantial taxes are required to pay for such programs around the world.

POINT NO. 7:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

CNN: "But even higher taxes don't guarantee the coverage everyone wants ... (KECKLEY): 15 to 20 percent of the population will purchase services outside the system of care run by the government."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

It's not clear what country Keckley is referring to. In the United Kingdom, only 11.5 percent of the population has supplementary insurance, but it doesn't take the place of NHS insurance. Nobody in France buys insurance that replaces government insurance either, although a substantial amount buys some form of complementary insurance (Private health insurance and access to health care in the European Union. Spring 2004).

CNN RESPONSE:

The very same newsletter cited by Moore points out that complementary insurance "provides cover for services excluded or not fully covered by the state." The rates cited for complementary insurance in that newsletter show 85 percent of the French buys such policies, 9 percent of the Germans, 45 percent of the Irish, and 15.6 percent of the Italians. In Britain, 11.6 percent buy supplementary health insurance, which the newsletter says provides "cover for faster access and increased consumer choice."

POINT NO. 8:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

CNN: "But no matter how much Moore fudged the facts, and he did fudge some facts..."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):


This is libel. There is not a single fact that is "fudged" in the film. No one has proven a single fact in the film wrong. We expect CNN to correct their mistakes on the air and to apologize to their viewers.

CNN RESPONSE:

Gupta believes picking and comparing numbers from different places and times to suit an argument is not the best approach to a complicated issue like this one. Again, as pointed out earlier, by mixing types of data and time periods in some of Moore's comparisons, Gupta felt that the film effectively fudged points that could have been made just as compellingly by comparing data from the same source and time period.

POINT NO. 9:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

GUPTA: "Well, I mean, he pulls $251 from this BBC unsourced report ... Where you pulled the $251 number was a BBC report, which, by the way, stated that the per capita spending in the United States was $5,700. You chose not to use the $5,700 from one report and chose to go to a totally different report and you're sort of cherry picking data from different reports ... Well, why didn't you use the $5,700 number from the BBC report?"

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

Actually, the number "Sicko" cited for per-capita Cuban spending on health care -- $251, a number widely cited by the BBC and other outlets -- comes from the United Nations Human Development Report, helpfully linked on our Web site. Here it is again: http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/52.html.

That U.N. report does list American health care spending as only $5,700, but it's a few years old. Since then, the U.S. government has updated its projections for health care spending, to $7,498 in 2007. So we used that number. It's the most recent, and comes right from the Department of Health and Human Services. If the Cuban government gave a figure on 2007 projected health spending, we'd have used it.

CNN RESPONSE:

To reiterate, we believe numbers should be compared apples to apples, oranges to oranges. Moore himself says the data he's citing from the U.N. Development Programme is dated. Consistency is important in statistical analysis and is not present in Moore's comparison.

POINT NO. 10:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

GUPTA: "Medicare is going to go bankrupt by 2019, and is going to be $28 trillion in debt by 2075 ... Look, I believe the very measure of a great society is in how we take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. But would you say that this is going to be still a working system 20 years from now?"

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

Medicare indeed has enough money to cover all seniors until 2019. At that time, it will simply need more funding. That shouldn't be hard to find in a nation spending trillions of dollars to invade other countries.

Medicare is not in trouble because it is socialized medicine. Medicare faces the same economic problem private health plans do -- health care inflation is out of control, far outpacing inflation for other goods and services. And in fact, Medicare is much more efficient at dealing with this inflation than is private insurance. According to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (Table 13), per beneficiary costs have risen in nominal dollars by 519.5 percent since 1980. By contrast, the cost per enrollee of private insurance has risen by 676.6 percent over this same period. So Gupta should instead be pointing his finger at the inefficiency of private insurance (Social Security and Medicare Myths, Lies, and Realities. Institute for America's Future and "Gupta Says Medicare is Going Bankrupt," Dean Baker, Beat the Press) blog).

There is a clear way to make our health economy more efficient. We waste $400 billion dollars per year administering our mess of a private, profit-driven system. The answer is switching to a single-payer, Medicare-style system and taking absurd profits and administrative costs out of the equation (Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H., Terry Campbell, M.H.A., and David U. Himmelstein, M.D., Costs of Health Care Administration, N Engl J Med 2003;349:768-75 ).

CNN RESPONSE:

Again, Moore seems to be creating controversy where there is none. Moore agrees with Dr. Gupta's reporting that Medicare solvency is only assured until 2019.

POINT NO. 11:

FROM MOORE'S WEB SITE:

GUPTA: (On the lone expert shown in the original piece, Paul Keckley). "His only affiliation is with Vanderbilt University. We checked it, Michael. We checked his conflict of interest. We do ask those questions."

"The Truth" (from Michael Moore's Web site):

Keckley left Vanderbilt in October 2006 to become the executive director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions. The chyron on CNN even notes his new position ("Vandy administrator to head Deloitte research center," Nashville Business Journal. November 1, 2006).

The independent chairman of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions is Tommy Thompson, who was George W. Bush's Health and Human Services Secretary from 2001 to 2005 and is currently running for president as a Republican ("Meet Tommy G. Thompson," Deloitte Center for Health Solutions).

Keckley has made large contributions to Republican candidates and organizations. He gave $1,000 to GOP Senator Bob Corker in 2006, $1,000 to the Tennessee GOP in 2002, along with $1,500 to two GOP congressional candidates and $1,000 to the Tennessee GOP in 2000 (www.fecinfo.com).

Keckley was also the CEO and Founder of EBM Solutions Inc., of Nashville, Tennessee, which counted among its customers Blue Cross of Tennessee, the drug company Aventis and others. Considering Keckley makes his living in the for-profit health care world -- a world "Sicko" argues should be abolished -- viewers should have been told exactly where Keckley was coming from.

CNN RESPONSE:

Moore is correct. Paul Keckley left Vanderbilt in late 2006. That is the affiliation Gupta referenced on "Larry King Live." In addition, CNN obtained the following details about Paul Keckley from his current employer, Deloitte Center for Health Solutions:

"The original CNN report accurately described Paul Keckley's role as a Deloitte health care expert. Keckley is executive director of the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions. He left Vanderbilt University in October 2006 to take this new position.

"The comments by Keckley in the CNN interview were factual, neutral and descriptive. The accuracy of his balanced comments in the broadcast has not been challenged.

"Neither the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions nor Paul Keckley has a political or ideological agenda. The center's mission is to develop innovative, practical and workable solutions to systemic issues of the U.S. health system. As such, it embraces a diversity of viewpoints that transcend easy labels.

"Keckley as an individual and Deloitte as an organization operate under rigorous rules, government regulations and professional standards designed to ensure his and our independence.

"The center has been an active participant in the national dialogue about the critical challenge America faces to preserve the best that our health care system delivers -- while at the same time seeking ways to provide coverage for the uninsured, promote wellness and prevention, deploy more effective information technology to improve patient outcomes, and reduce soaring health care costs.

"One example of how the Deloitte Center's approach is a report issued in late 2006 titled, 'The Catalyst for Health Care Reform: Providing More Choices and Innovation to Heal the U.S. Health Care Financing System.' In addition to providing a thoughtful and comprehensive overview of the key issues, it presented one possible, innovative approach to solving health care coverage for America's [46] million uninsured citizens. It reflects the serious, thoughtful and independent nature of the Deloitte Center.

'Keckley does not maintain any professional or financial ties to Aventis or Blue Cross. From 1998-2002, Keckley did serve as CEO of EBM Solutions, a private company formed by researchers from Vanderbilt, Duke, Emory, Washington University and Oregon Health Sciences University. EBM developed and licensed evidence-based guidelines to 32 hospitals, medical groups, insurance companies and drug companies during this period. Among those licensing these guidelines were Aventis and Blue Cross of Tennessee.

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/15/moore.gupta/index.html

[nevadamedic]

I've learned a lot about your open mouth, nm, and none of it is pretty.




Please relate to a single lie in the piece, OK?

Read the last post...................

[Spyder Jerusalem]

Not a single point in your last post evr says anything that Moore said was a "lie"
Many of these "points" were CNN admitting their own errors, or showing soem negligible, which they admit many times, conflicts in research regarding sources and puny statistic percentage points.

Nothing here shows anything about any "lies" in Sicko.

Did you even read the article before cut and pasting it, or did you just cull it off some idiot's republifascist blog without even skimming it to see if it would support your flimsy argument or not.

There's that reading comprehension thing again, rammin ya in the ass....

[nevadamedic]

Not a single point in your last post evr says anything that Moore said was a "lie"
Many of these "points" were CNN admitting their own errors, or showing soem negligible, which they admit many times, conflicts in research regarding sources and puny statistic percentage points.

Nothing here shows anything about any "lies" in Sicko.

Did you even read the article before cut and pasting it, or did you just cull it off some idiot's republifascist blog without even skimming it to see if it would support your flimsy argument or not.

There's that reading comprehension thing again, rammin ya in the ass....

What's with you and ramming things in the ass, must be the gay tendences you have.:fu:

[Spyder Jerusalem]

Did you have anything meaningful to offer in rebuttal, or are you just fantasizing?

[Angel Heart]

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3u9dNjPc2aQ"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3u9dNjPc2aQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Moore is not objective in his views at all.

[Angel Heart]

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dIIRa464z_w"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dIIRa464z_w" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Nothing but small data error...

[nevadamedic]

Did you have anything meaningful to offer in rebuttal, or are you just fantasizing?

You first little lady.:fu::pee::finger3:

[Angel Heart]

Both systems have issues. Ours isn't as bad as Moore made it out to be. The government controlled one has many issued too. How about waiting lists for things we don't have to wait for here? How about the cost of it all? It's not free. The taxes to cover that type of care is astronomical. On top of that, doesn't create an environment for creating better treatments. You take the profit out of the medical field, you kill innovations.

[Spyder Jerusalem]

I don't give a SHIT about Michael Moore, or his "position" or wheteher he got a few numbers wrong.

The broad picture is whats really at issue and is what bears discussing.

This nitpicky bullshit is what shows that you really don't have any concept of whats really at stake or how much it means to America and its people.

MILLIONS OF PEOPLE cannot get, or afford, adequate healthcare, even thought they are insured.
HMOs profit by DENYING necessary medical services and benefits, and do so at the expense of those for whom healthcare should be non-negotiable.

Nobody should ever be refused healthcare, and certainly not on the basis of cost and profit.

[avatar4321]

So what?

Everybody lies.
Everybody.

Yer guys, their guys, what the fuck ever.

But, say, as youve already pointed out, you know what the lies are.

Now how about addressing the idea?
The ideas addressed in the film.

Or don't you think it matters that such a huge number of Americans have shitty healthcare thanks to greedy HMOs?
Do you agree or disagree that there should never ever fuckin' EVER be a profit motive in public health?
Why can't America's healthcare system be run like the ones in just about every industrialized country in the world, whose citizens almost never worry about the cost of, or the quality of their healthcare?
Should preventative medicine be the primary goal of American medicine, as it is every fuckin where else, rather than emergency, triage, or "Hobson'r Choice" style as it is now?

If you actually cared about the problem, you'd drop this sycophantic party dogma bullshit and address it, rather than yer frantic, and juvenile, attempts to shoot the messenger.

No. We don't. You've just lost all your credibility. You say you lie. So why should we listen to a damn thing you say?

[nevadamedic]

No. We don't. You've just lost all your credibility. You say you lie. So why should we listen to a damn thing you say?

He lost all the credibility after the first post he made.

[Psychoblues]

I'm stll waiting on all those lies that MM supposedly told in his documentary piece "Sicko". Although he has been accused by the unquailified as telling lies, NOT ONE thing he said has been proven untrue.

[nevadamedic]

I'm stll waiting on all those lies that MM supposedly told in his documentary piece "Sicko". Although he has been accused by the unquailified as telling lies, NOT ONE thing he said has been proven untrue.

Look at those video's Angel posted. :slap::poke::slap:

[Psychoblues]

Killer, aren't they?




Look at those video's Angel posted. :slap::poke::slap:

Dr. Sanjay Gupta has been proven repeatedly that he is the LIAR, not Micheal Moore.

Got anything else? I mean anything credible?

[nevadamedic]

Killer, aren't they?





Dr. Sanjay Gupta has been proven repeatedly that he is the LIAR, not Micheal Moore.

Got anything else? I mean anything credible?

Upi got that wrong, Michael Moore has been the one proven repeatedly that he is a liar.

[diuretic]

Both systems have issues. Ours isn't as bad as Moore made it out to be. The government controlled one has many issued too. How about waiting lists for things we don't have to wait for here? How about the cost of it all? It's not free. The taxes to cover that type of care is astronomical. On top of that, doesn't create an environment for creating better treatments. You take the profit out of the medical field, you kill innovations.

While I disagree with your very generalised and unreferenced claims at least you've got an open mind on the issue. Now, to your points.

The taxes aren't astronomical - well they're not for me. And America being the wealthiest nation on Earth should be able to find money for a national healthcare scheme. Look at the military budget. If it were trimmed a bit it would have no effect on your ability to defend and it would make many citizens a lot better off. In Australia we pay the Medicare Levy - 1.5% of taxable income. http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.asp?doc=/content/17482.htm


Medical research doesn't have to suffer under a national system - http://www.innovationaustralia.net/article/article.php?article=0,xss -


Opponents of a national scheme or a single-payer scheme, here at least, are relying on blind ideology and the mantra of "pofit is good, private is best" without opening their minds to the possibility that another way is better. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=364436

I'm not arguing for any ideological approach to health care. I favour a hybrid system, a mix of public and private care and schemes but at the very least a scheme that affords everyone decent health care regardless of ability or inability to pay, that's all I ever suggested.

[Psychoblues]

Thanks, doc.




While I disagree with your very generalised and unreferenced claims at least you've got an open mind on the issue. Now, to your points.

The taxes aren't astronomical - well they're not for me. And America being the wealthiest nation on Earth should be able to find money for a national healthcare scheme. Look at the military budget. If it were trimmed a bit it would have no effect on your ability to defend and it would make many citizens a lot better off. In Australia we pay the Medicare Levy - 1.5% of taxable income. http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.asp?doc=/content/17482.htm


Medical research doesn't have to suffer under a national system - http://www.innovationaustralia.net/article/article.php?article=0,xss -


Opponents of a national scheme or a single-payer scheme, here at least, are relying on blind ideology and the mantra of "pofit is good, private is best" without opening their minds to the possibility that another way is better. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=364436

I'm not arguing for any ideological approach to health care. I favour a hybrid system, a mix of public and private care and schemes but at the very least a scheme that affords everyone decent health care regardless of ability or inability to pay, that's all I ever suggested.

These jerks are shitting in their pants afraid that their personal America might choose to embrace any ideology that might improve the lives of anyone other than themselves. Not very American in my opionion!!!!!!!!!!!!

[red states rule]

The Orange Grove: What Michael Moore left out of 'Sicko'
His film bent over backwards to make socialized medicine look superior
By RICHARD RALSTON
Executive director, Americans for Free Choice in Medicine, in Newport Beach

Michael Moore's comedy-drama "Sicko" presented a great deal of misinformation – too much to summarize in a short column. Besides, if anyone in the audience really believes that all Cubans receive superb health care when Moore's cameras are not running, there is not much I can say to help them.

However, those who have seen the film should at least be aware of some of the information that was left out.

After bemoaning the amount of money that Americans spend on health care, Mr. Moore castigated the "greed" of an insurance company for not providing routine and immediate approval of a medical procedure in the 1980s that might have saved a patient's life at a cost of $500,000. He did not mention whether there should be an upper limit on any procedure, no matter how experimental or expensive, and what that would do to health care costs. $1 million? $10 million? That would surely provide incentives for a lot of medical experiments.

When Moore described health maintenance organizations as the creation of a dark and evil conspiracy by Richard Nixon, for some reason he forgot to mention that Nixon's enthusiastic partner in pushing the HMO Act of 1973 through a Democratic-controlled Congress was Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

He also forgot to mention that the Clinton administration's health care proposals in 1994 would have forced most Americans into HMOs.

Longer life spans in Canada were cited as proof that Canada has a superior health care system. Moore forgot to mention how many Canadians die in traffic accidents, are shot by criminals, are killed in combat, are addicted to illegal drugs, have diseases primarily afflicting racial minorities, or are obese, compared with Americans. He also forgot to establish whether Canadians started living longer only after they nationalized their health care system, or whether they always lived longer than Americans. He did not mention that if they do live two years longer, they need to – because that is how long they often have to wait for surgery.

When Moore filmed two of his relatives buying health insurance in fear before they traveled to America, he forgot to mention that many Canadians travel to America for the express purpose of spending their own money for more than $1 billion in American health care each year.

Moore interviewed a physician in the British National Health Service about how wonderful free health care is in Britain, and how satisfied the physicians are in the NHS. He forgot to mention that more than one third of physicians working for the NHS buy private insurance so they don't have to rely on the "free" care, and that more than 6 million British citizens also buy private insurance for the same reason. He did not mention that this year the health minister admitted that one in eight British patients still wait for more than a year for treatment. He neglected to say that Britain has had to import more than 20,000 physicians in the past three years – chiefly from Middle Eastern and Asian countries – because so few of the British, after sixty years of experience with the NHS, want to enter or stay in the profession.

While praising the superiority of French medical care and the fact that French doctors make house calls – almost as an aside while praising the superiority of every element of French society compared with America's – Moore forgot to mention that 13,000 Frenchmen died of heat prostration and dehydration during a heat wave in the summer of 2003, when most French physicians were on summer vacation and did not show up in emergency rooms, let alone make house calls.

Michael Moore forgot to mention why he jammed seriously ill patients into a small boat to take them to Cuba, in order to film a stunt attempting to prove the superiority of Cuban health care – when, for much less money, he could have written them a check for care in America. It must have been compassion.

Most importantly, when Mr. Moore mentioned that "every industrial country" except the United States has adopted medical socialism, he did not mention why that means that we should. Many of those countries still have monarchies. Should the United States? Many of those countries have established state religions. Should the United States? Many of those countries have long waiting lists and severe rationing of health care.

Should the United States?

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/health-care-mention-1786587-moore-forgot

[Hagbard Celine]

How long does it take for this website to load the movie? I'm having to wait too long and I'm becoming impatient. I need instant gratification!!!

[Spyder Jerusalem]

Like I said, the link is broken.

I'm still lookin for one that works.

Sorry.

[dan]

How long does it take for this website to load the movie? I'm having to wait too long and I'm becoming impatient. I need instant gratification!!!

I believe he said the movie's not on there anymore, jerky!

[darin]

Then watch it for free right here.


http://openflv.com/watch?v=MzM0NzQ2MQ==&p=0

Or are you such a shit sucking fascist that you don't give equal consideration to both sides of an argument?

Banned from thread.

[Angel Heart]

Waiting lists.... Another problem with socialized medicine


The woman of 108 told to wait 18 months for hearing aid
By STEVE DOUGHTY and NICK McDERMOTT - More by this author »

Last updated at 22:28pm on 29th July 2007

A woman aged 108 has been told she must wait 18 months before the Health Service will give her the hearing aid she needs.

Former piano teacher Olive Beal, one of the oldest people in Britain, has poor eyesight and uses a wheelchair.

The delay could mean she will be unable to communicate and listen to the music she loves.
Continue... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=471617&in_page_id=1770)

[Hagbard Celine]

Waiting lists.... Another problem with socialized medicine

We have waiting lists here too. Ever known anyone who needed a heart or a kidney? That's a tad-bit more serious. Puh-leez.

[Angel Heart]

Yeah for things like transplants where you have only so many coming in... BUT for hearing aids. Something that isn't requiring someone to die to get.

[Hagbard Celine]

I believe he said the movie's not on there anymore, jerky!

Yes, I would like some jerky. I prefer teriaki flavor.

[diuretic]

Waiting lists.... Another problem with socialized medicine

As the great Yogi Berra once said,"this feels like deja vu all over again!" :laugh2:

It's about under-funding, not "socialised medicine" :coffee:

[diuretic]

Yeah for things like transplants where you have only so many coming in... BUT for hearing aids. Something that isn't requiring someone to die to get.

If you have a fixed budget to administer a system you have to make decisions about priorities. A hearing aid doesn't trump a life-saving procedure.

[Roomy]

Is it worth watching then? I have it on disc:salute:

[red states rule]

We have waiting lists here too. Ever known anyone who needed a heart or a kidney? That's a tad-bit more serious. Puh-leez.

In the UK you wait for clean sheets as well

Hard-up hospital orders staff: Don't wash sheets - turn them over
by DANIEL MARTIN - More by this author »

Last updated at 23:22pm on 13th April 2007


Cleaners at an NHS hospital with a poor record on superbugs have been told to turn over dirty sheets instead of using fresh ones between patients to save money.

Housekeeping staff at Good Hope Hospital in Sutton Coldfield, have been asked to re-use sheets and pillowcases wherever possible to cut a £500,000 laundry bill.

Posters in the hospital's linen cupboards and on doors into the A&E department remind workers that each item costs 0.275 pence to wash.

Good Hope reported a deficit of £6million last year and was subject to a report by the Audit Commission because of its poor financial standing.

It recorded 36 cases of MRSA from April last year to January, while cases of clostridium difficile have more than doubled in less than a year to 327. A Government hit squad was drafted in to solve the infection problems last year but the trust is still failing to hit MRSA targets.

Tony Field, chairman of Birmingham-based MRSA Support, said: 'Is that all the safety of a patient's life is worth? 0.275 pence?

'It is utterly disgraceful and tantamount to murder because hygiene like changing sheets is essential to protect patients.

'It proves beyond all doubt that cost- cutting is directly contributing to hospital acquired infections.'

A Good Hope spokesman said the posters went up around two years ago and should all have been taken down by now. But a medic insisted the posters were still on display in A&E and the maternity unit as recently as the past month.

'It is clear the trust is encouraging staff to "top 'n' tail" used sheets on a bed instead of replacing them between patients,' said the health worker, who did not wish to be named.

'The very nature of A&E should be enough reason to change sheets between every patient as casualty sees patients who have come in with a variety of infections, traumatic injuries and blood spill.'

Conservative healthvehealth spokesman John Baron said: 'This sounds ludicrous and is a real cause for concern given that MRSA is such a problem in our hospitals.

'This matter needs to be investigated at a higher level. Patient safety must never be compromised.'
Liberal Democrat health spokesman Norman Lamb said: 'If we are to beat healthcareacquired infections we need the highest possible standards of cleanliness. The idea of turning over sheets like this is extraordinary and scandalous.'

The scheme is one of many ways that cash- strapped trusts are trying to save money.

In January, staff at West Hertfordshire NHS Trust were amazed to receive a memo urging them to save £2.50 a day by prescribing cheaper medicines, reducing the number of sterile packs used, cutting hospital tests and asking patients to bring drugs in from home.

Epsom and St Helier Trust in South London has removed every third light bulb from corridors.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=448395&in_page_id=1774

[diuretic]

Fixed budget. I don't know what sort of budgeting approach is being used but if there's no waste then clearly the budget is insufficient and central govt has to put more money into it.

[red states rule]

Fixed budget. I don't know what sort of budgeting approach is being used but if there's no waste then clearly the budget is insufficient and central govt has to put more money into it.

You mean by raising taxes on the already over taxed people?

[diuretic]

You mean by raising taxes on the already over taxed people?

Not necessarily. Taxation though has the advantage of spreading the cost. The wealthy can contribute to the commonality through tax and if more money is needed for government to function then they should bear the tax burden. Poorer people and the increasingly squeezed middle class, although they have to pay their share of tax, shouldn't have to take the greatest burden. The extremely wealthy can tip a few bucks in to help our their countrypeople I'm sure.

[red states rule]

Not necessarily. Taxation though has the advantage of spreading the cost. The wealthy can contribute to the commonality through tax and if more money is needed for government to function then they should bear the tax burden. Poorer people and the increasingly squeezed middle class, although they have to pay their share of tax, shouldn't have to take the greatest burden. The extremely wealthy can tip a few bucks in to help our their countrypeople I'm sure.

Why should a small minority pay the majority of the taxes?

Why should those who use government services the least, pay the most in taxes?

Why should those who use government services the most, pay the least in taxes?

[diuretic]

Why should a small minority pay the majority of the taxes?

No real reason, "because I said so" is as good as any. No, I'm not being difficult. It just depends on how society wants things to work. There are no natural rules involved, societies work out their taxation rules as it suits them.
But, having said that, the issue of "fairness" comes to mind.




Why should those who use government services the least, pay the most in taxes?

Capacity to pay their fair share. Unless you want an excruciating difficult system of "user pays" you'll go with it.



Why should those who use government services the most, pay the least in taxes?

Because it's not based on use but on need.

[red states rule]

No real reason, "because I said so" is as good as any. No, I'm not being difficult. It just depends on how society wants things to work. There are no natural rules involved, societies work out their taxation rules as it suits them.
But, having said that, the issue of "fairness" comes to mind.



Capacity to pay their fair share. Unless you want an excruciating difficult system of "user pays" you'll go with it.



Because it's not based on use but on need.

So to sum it up - you say whatever is best for the common goood

Is that correct?

[diuretic]

So to sum it up - you say whatever is best for the common goood

Is that correct?

Only where the common good is decided in a transparent manner by a democratically elected government which is going to expend those monies, yes.

[red states rule]

Only where the common good is decided in a transparent manner by a democratically elected government which is going to expend those monies, yes.

That idea has failed everywhere it is tried

Capitalism is the best system on the planet - and liberalsim destroys it

I fail to see where the $9 trillion spent on social programs in the last 40 years has made any difference

[Psychoblues]

I love you. Keep thinking that way. As liberals progress the con's become more of an endangered species. I hope I am alive to see you on the list.

[Psychoblues]

If everyone committed to common good in general while maintaining individual progression in particular there would be no Republican Party. Would there? And a show like "Sicko" would have never been necessary much less the enormous success it has had. Don't you think?

[Sitarro]

Thanks for the link where this can be watched for free, SJ!!!!!



BTW, welcome to the Debate Policy Board!!!!

Why isn't it a surprise that you would welcome of piece of fly ridden horse shit like this ignorant asshole, typical....... you leftist twats welcome felons, hopelessly stupid uneducated losers that can't even help themselves without the almighty government's handouts. Free heath care???? You get what you pay for.

Wanna guess where that pig Moore will go for the quad bypass he will surely need soon?

[Sitarro]

If everyone committed to common good in general while maintaining individual progression in particular there would be no Republican Party. Would there? And a show like "Sicko" would have never been necessary much less the enormous success it has had. Don't you think?

It is hard to believe that someone that is as mentally challenged as you can figure out how to turn on a computer. You are the reason that an IQ test should be a prerequisite to vote along with a "paid in full" receipt from the IRS and a photo id. With those restrictions there would never be another yellow bellied democrat elected again.:fu:

[Abbey Marie]

If everyone committed to common good in general while maintaining individual progression in particular there would be no Republican Party. Would there? And a show like "Sicko" would have never been necessary much less the enormous success it has had. Don't you think?

Enormous success?

Gross $24,416,389 (USA) (23 September 2007)

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

[Psychoblues]

Only 24.5 million on a .5 million dollar film by September? Any producer would cream his jeans for such a success!!!!!!!




Enormous success?

Gross $24,416,389 (USA) (23 September 2007)

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

Exactly where or what do you call success, Abe?

[stephanie]

Mikey Moore...When did he become an expert on Health care and insurance companies..????
Did he even graduate from high school???

Just like Al Bore.........when did this politician become a climatologist???

I truly believe.......P. T. Barnum...

One every minute....:laugh2:

[Psychoblues]

I'll do my best to schedule a 1 on 1 debate for you, staphy.



Mikey Moore...When did he become an expert on Health care and insurance companies..????
Did he even graduate from high school???

Just like Al Bore.........when did this politician become a climatologist???

I truly believe.......P. T. Barnum...

One every minute....:laugh2:

But I seriously doubt if Mikey (as you call him) would give one second to the inane and insane arguments from anyone as ditzy as you demonstrate repeatedly to be.

What are your arguments other than name calling?

[stephanie]

I'll do my best to schedule a 1 on 1 debate for you, staphy.




But I seriously doubt if Mikey (as you call him) would give one second to the inane and insane arguments from anyone as ditzy as you demonstrate repeatedly to be.

What are your arguments other than name calling?

:lol:Are you looking in a mirror right now....love..
My conscious is clear on who is the name caller...How bout you????:poke:

[Psychoblues]

staphy, I must admit that I can sleep soundly on this issue.



:lol:Are you looking in a mirror right now....love..
My conscious is clear on who is the name caller...How bout you????:poke:

You indicate that you have an argument with the ideologies of (Mikey, as you call him) Micheal Moore yet you can't articulate a single disagreement. Your identity on this subject is dedicated solely to flirtations with me.

Silly you, love, dear, staphy.

[stephanie]

Mikey Moore is as intelligent as a high school senior.....
I'm not even sure he went that far.........??

Just like Al the Bore is as schooled in climatology as is someone might be in collage???

If people want to take their word as ...........the ALMIGHT TRUTH...

Then as I said..................P. t...Barnum.....:coffee:

[Abbey Marie]

Only 24.5 million on a .5 million dollar film by September? Any producer would cream his jeans for such a success!!!!!!!





Exactly where or what do you call success, Abe?

Actually, the budget was 9 million. They barely covered expenses. Exactly what do you call an "enormous success" as you put it? I'd call that a gross exaggeration of the film's success.

By all standards, this measly 24 mill would be termed a tepid performance at the box office.

Here's an "enormous success", by comparison:

The Passion
Release date: February, 2004
Box office by end of February, 2004 (that's in just one month): $125 million
Box office one year later: 370 million

Source: imdb.com

[red states rule]

Actually, the budget was 9 million. They barely covered expenses. Exactly what do you call an "enormous success" as you put it? I'd call that a gross exaggeration of the film's success.

By all standards, this measly 24 mill would be termed a tepid performance at the box office.

Here's an "enormous success", by comparison:

Release date: February, 2004
Box office by end of February, 2004 (that's in just one month): $125 million
Box office one year later: 370 million

Did you see the hidden video of the real Cuban hospitals last night on Hannity and Clomes?

Patients covered with flies, broken windows, boards covering holes in the floors, and fifthy bathrooms

I wonder why Moore was not there to explain why he missed this