SiCKO by Michael Moore

[Kolar]

I don't think you can have it both ways on health care. The goal of privatization is not to make a system more efficient, even in practice is almost always creates more levels of bureaucracy it set out to destroy with the added bonus of unchecked corruption. The movie makes its point very clear; the system doctors, nurses and other officials have to work under is based on money. Not on helping people and definitely not on stats concerning patients, wait times ect...

[Mantra-Slider]

whats the big issue here, you are better than slovenia, think abut burzum!!!!!!!! :x

[Fluffz]

The goal of privatization is not to make a system more efficient

it does increase efficience, in terms of money usage. but privatisation of infrastructure can be a bad idea, is a bad idea. a transport system that only covers cost efficient parts of the country is in the long run damaging the country or at least changing the country into someting worse (one live is not less important than a million lives). a health care system that doesnt heal people is useless. however, postal services, drug industry and other goverment owned companies should get privatized i think.

[Nickname]

Quick Americans, V is attacking your way of life, KILL HIM, KILL HIM NOW!



EDIT: couldn't let this go.

I am glad all of you non Americans care and "know" so much about our country. It makes me feel special that people like vihta are so obsessed with us. :turned:

Better than being a part of a country that only knows about itself. How retarded does it sound to not care about the dealings of one of the most important countries on the planet? Even more for me since my country shares a rather large border with your country. Attempting to get educated on not just yourself, but your own backyard and other countries isn't something to be discouraged, no matter how many people think it is.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

It's not that he's attacking our way of life, really.

Hi, I'm ConcreteSchlyrd, and I'm going to try and voice a little reality.

Vihta, you know you and I are cool--never been any bad blood between us. But at least part of the reason some of the Americans on this board get a little upset over threads like these is because a lot of non-Americans on this board like to rip headlines directly from Hollywood or E! and apply them as Holy Fact.

While he might be a very effective filmmaker, Michael Moore also presents "facts" as a means to bolster his own argument. Sensationalism doesn't necessarily denote urgency, though.

Sure, the US's domestic medical policy is flawed. I don't think you'll find anyone saying that we have it all figured out. But then again, no one does. Do I find my rising health care costs unsettling? Hell yes. But then again, I also appreciate the high standard of the services I'm getting. There has to be a happy medium somewhere, and we're still looking for it.

So instead of this becoming a "RAH RAH AMERICANS vs. AMERICANS SUK" thread, how about we both realize that we've got some good on both sides, but we both need to pay a little less attention to US Weekly.

[Liquid Blue]

Thank you. It's perfectly fine to discuss something as long as you don't treat what you learned from a movie about another country as fact, and then try to sound condescending to said country.

[Epinephrine]

Sure, the US's domestic medical policy is flawed. I don't think you'll find anyone saying that we have it all figured out. But then again, no one does. Do I find my rising health care costs unsettling? Hell yes. But then again, I also appreciate the high standard of the services I'm getting. There has to be a happy medium somewhere, and we're still looking for it.

So instead of this becoming a "RAH RAH AMERICANS vs. AMERICANS SUK" thread, how about we both realize that we've got some good on both sides, but we both need to pay a little less attention to US Weekly.

Well on average Americans pay about twice as much as Canadians do on health care (our taxes vs your insurance costs from your own pocket and from your company's, which basically means you make less in wages).** As far as the systems are, they are basically exactly the same. Sure in the very few centers like the Mayo clinic Americans may get the 'best of the best' treatment, but how many people can actually afford to go to places like that? Almost 99% of people's insurance will not pay for stuff like that anyway, so it's a moot point (as other people from other countries can also just pay and go to your hospitals as well).

So as far as the quality of medical care in both countries, I'll go out on a limb and say that they are about the same. Although I have not personally worked in the US, I know a LOT of doctors who did their training in the US or worked for a long time in the US and are now in Canada, and from everyone I've asked, they said that the quality of care is basically the same. Hell doctors from both countries attend the same conferences anyway and use the same technologies. The biggest differences that are cited when I ask this question is the fact that in the US they always had to turn away people who didn't have insurance, and in the US they had to spend much more time on billing because there were so many different systems.

I think the US is on the cusp of having a public system or at least a mixed public/private system (which is doomed to failure anyway because the public system will never be as well funded as the private system). All of the democratic presidential hopefuls support such a deal, and even if the Republicans somehow manage to win, individual states are already moving in that direction. I think people in the US are finally waking up to the fact that their healthcare system isn't necessarily the best in the world for what they pay for, and maybe this movie much like An Inconvenient Truth will be the final thing that energizes those in power to really force change on this subject.

**I'm getting my facts from Paul Krugman of the New York Times, who is also one of the most respected economists in the US and professor of economics at Princeton University.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

I think the US is on the cusp of having a public system or at least a mixed public/private system (which is doomed to failure anyway because the public system will never be as well funded as the private system). All of the democratic presidential hopefuls support such a deal, and even if the Republicans somehow manage to win, individual states are already moving in that direction. I think people in the US are finally waking up to the fact that their healthcare system isn't necessarily the best in the world for what they pay for, and maybe this movie much like An Inconvenient Truth will be the final thing that energizes those in power to really force change on this subject.

The problem with thinking that films are going to change the world is that the people who should take something away from these movies, don't. And even then, a lot of those people who actually do see such movies, don't give them much credence. The problem is that usually, these films are framed in such a way that there's always some sort of sensationalism to them, which gives a doubtful viewer a sort of "loophole." If they were presented in more of a documentary format, with less personal grandstanding, then I believe they'd be more solid as a "format for change."

The problem with this, is that using a pure documentary format (which, from what I hear from some filmmakers that I know, isn't as easy as it sounds) doesn't make for "good film." Hollywood has figured out that people love a good ol'-fashioned witch hunt--the Mob vs. whomever. In other words, sensationalism makes for better sales. Go figure: in the end, it's just about making money.

Don't get me wrong, I think that raising awareness about a subject is a great thing. People (as a whole, across all ethnographic boundaries) are generally not willing to accept their own failures, but instead turn blame outwards. But if you're telling me that these films are going to cause a major paradigm shift, I respectfully disagree.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

(Holy shit, guys! I read that TomKat are having marital issues! What is wrong with the state of matrimony in the US these days?!)

[Scoop]

I didn't claim to know anything beyond watching the film by Moore. Since you insinuate I somehow "got it wrong" feel free to educate me which parts of Sicko are false/wrong.



Yep, you are a special kid.

I guess I don't like the fact that some random guy from Finland watches a movie that is completely biased (Michael Moore made it come on) and then starts acting like he knows everything about a country. Michael Moore is movies that are extremely biased and filled with propaganda.

[GuruMeditation]

(Holy shit, guys! I read that TomKat are having marital issues! What is wrong with the state of matrimony in the US these days?!)

The trick is not to sleep with a woman who fantasized about you when she was 7.

[Nickname]

Moore got sued over a couple of his past movies for mis representing facts.

[Money]

Moore got sued over a couple of his past movies for mis representing facts.

!@#$%&&*&(*

[Money]

oh. my. god -Aquatiq

[Eric is God]

Well on average Americans pay about twice as much as Canadians do on health care (our taxes vs your insurance costs from your own pocket and from your company's, which basically means you make less in wages).** As far as the systems are, they are basically exactly the same. Sure in the very few centers like the Mayo clinic Americans may get the 'best of the best' treatment, but how many people can actually afford to go to places like that? Almost 99% of people's insurance will not pay for stuff like that anyway, so it's a moot point (as other people from other countries can also just pay and go to your hospitals as well).

So as far as the quality of medical care in both countries, I'll go out on a limb and say that they are about the same. Although I have not personally worked in the US, I know a LOT of doctors who did their training in the US or worked for a long time in the US and are now in Canada, and from everyone I've asked, they said that the quality of care is basically the same. Hell doctors from both countries attend the same conferences anyway and use the same technologies. The biggest differences that are cited when I ask this question is the fact that in the US they always had to turn away people who didn't have insurance, and in the US they had to spend much more time on billing because there were so many different systems.

I think the US is on the cusp of having a public system or at least a mixed public/private system (which is doomed to failure anyway because the public system will never be as well funded as the private system). All of the democratic presidential hopefuls support such a deal, and even if the Republicans somehow manage to win, individual states are already moving in that direction. I think people in the US are finally waking up to the fact that their healthcare system isn't necessarily the best in the world for what they pay for, and maybe this movie much like An Inconvenient Truth will be the final thing that energizes those in power to really force change on this subject.

**I'm getting my facts from Paul Krugman of the New York Times, who is also one of the most respected economists in the US and professor of economics at Princeton University.

I personally don't care for either systems. I hate the idea of people with serious health issue being refused treatment but I also hate the idea of my taxes paying for every single planters wart removal. A semi private system is the best path in theory but as you said it would never work because the public system wouldn't receive the proper funding or the same quality of doctors.