Sicko

Laserwolf · July 2007

I'll be the first to admit that Michael Moore's Documentarys are not the kind you find on Nova or even the History Channel. However I also strongly believe that they are more fact than fiction, and that almost every documentary ever made has had motive behind it.

I saw Sicko in theaters this previous weekend. I also saw Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11 in theaters when they came out. I liked all 3 and very much respect Michael Moore as a filmaker. Out of the recent 3, Sicko had the most impact on me. This is probably because it was about an issue I wasn't quite sure on. I always liked the sound of Nationalized Health Insurance, but I also made sure to hear the other side who brought up points about longer waits for transplants and limited operations per year. After seeing Sicko I've decided I would much prefer a Nationalized Health Insurance or at least anything better than Private Health Insurance Companies and HMOs.

However I also recognize a Nationalized Health Insurance is probably not in the cards for us anytime soon.

For those who enjoyed his other movies Sicko is not the funniest, though it has its funny parts of course, but it edged out Fahrenheit 9/11 on saddest and Columbine on most informative.

truenorthbg · July 2007

I am not a Michael Moore fan. In fact, Michael Moore and I probably, in a general way, disagree on most issues philosophically.

Nevertheless, SICKO is a must-see documentary. It is accurate. It is fair. Conservatives and liberals alike and agree with the film.

I think his documentary on columbine and gun control was complete and total crap. His farenheit (sp, wow, that is a hard word to spell!) 9/11 movie was crap as well. Sicko is not crap. Actually, it is so good I seriously recommend all Americans view it.

Edit: fahrenheit.

noname12345 · July 2007

*sigh*

Private health insurance is really not that private at all because there is sooooo much government interference in it, and THAT makes it cost more for people! Moore said it himself when he talked about the laws and shareholders.

It is not my responsibility to pay for anyone's medical bills except for my family. I take issue with anybody saying I ought to pay for their bills. Most people have a hard enough time paying for their own bills. Most Americans live paycheck to paycheck and would hate to have more money stolen by the loving government. If government just got out of health care then private companies could provide a service just like every other business. America is where many innovations are made, especially in health care....because we aren't completely socialized yet! Socialized countries are infamous for providing subpar services, and free countries are known to expand and become advanced.

How about universal groceries? Tons of people are starving in America.

How about universal auto repair? We all could use that.

How about universal phone service?

How about universal fuel?

Of course all of these universal deals would be "free" for everyone.

edit: ugh sorry for the grammar...

Draenor · July 2007

The government needs more control over your lives, they need to control everything you do, and every bit of medicine that you take...more government control in our daily lives!! Monolithic government for the freaking win!!

/sigh is damn freaking right.

Unknown · July 2007

I have not yet seen the movie, and while I agree the medical system is in serious trouble, I do not believe in nationalizing health care. I think it would be disaster.

If nothing else, look at the one medical system the government does run, the VA. If that's the way they'll run all health care, I'll take my chances with private insurance.

dendea · July 2007

Right, lets get universal health care in America. We did so well with Medicare/Medicaid and don't forget about social security, why not sink another 15% of are paychecks into another wonderful program like these.

Good idea, but it should stay as just an idea.

MadAce · July 2007

Originally posted by AlexAmore

*sigh*

Private health insurance is really not that private at all because there is sooooo much government interference in it, and THAT makes it cost more for people! Moore said it himself when he talked about the laws and shareholders.

It is not my responsibility to pay for anyone's medical bills except for my family. I take issue with anybody saying I ought to pay for their bills. Most people have a hard enough time paying for their own bills. Most Americans live paycheck to paycheck and would hate to have more money stolen by the loving government. If government just got out of health care then private companies could provide a service just like every other business. America is where many innovations are made, especially in health care....because we aren't completely socialized yet! Socialized countries are infamous for providing subpar services, and free countries are known to expand and become advanced.

How about universal groceries? Tons of people are starving in America.

How about universal auto repair? We all could use that.

How about universal phone service?

How about universal fuel?

Of course all of these universal deals would be "free" for everyone.
edit: ugh sorry for the grammar...

You compare HEALTH and FOOD to fuel and phone? Go without each of those for a year and then get back to me which you missed the most.

And stop making this a "american system" versus "evil commie, and you call it socialism, system" bullshit.

Switzerland has universal health care and that country produces most medical innovations compared to its size.

France provides the BEST health care. Not the cheapest. The BEST. The very best mankind has to offer. For LESS money than the US manages.

The money isn't stolen. It makes sure everyone can reach their potential. Saving the government trillions because otherwise people would fall victim to petty accident and would be unable to work.

Do you honestly think such a large part of the world is wrong? It's not the dumbest part of the world either. Nor is it the poorest part.

Country	Life expectancy	Infant mortality rate	Physicians per 1000 people	Nurses per 1000 people	Per capita expenditure on health (USD)	Healthcare costs as a percent of GDP	% of government revenue spent on health	% of health costs paid by government
Australia	80.5	5.0	2.47	9.71	2,519	9.5	17.7	67.5
Canada	80.5	5.0	2.14	9.95	2,669	9.9	16.7	69.9
France	79.5	4.0	3.37	7.24	2,981	10.1	14.2	76.3
Germany	80.0	4.0	3.37	9.72	3,204	11.1	17.6	78.2
Japan	82.5	3.0	1.98	7.79	2,662	7.9	16.8	81.0
Sweden	80.5	3.0	3.28	10.24	3,149	9.4	13.6	85.2
UK	79.5	5.0	2.30	12.12	2,428	8.0	15.8	85.7
USA	77.5 (lowest)	6.0 (highest)	2.56	9.37	5,711 (very highest)	15.2 (massive)	18.5 (massive)	44.6 (lowest)

Rank Country

1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America

I've underlined the countries with universal health care that are on the map.

The wealthiest nation on earth, and yet ranked 37th...

If you value your countries researc habilities, then please read this product of it. Note that all countries in the test that performed better than the US had universal health care.

Now, go on. Deny all of that. Deny that you pay much, much, much more than the rest of the world for OTHER people their health care, while they receive inferior quality.

abbaba · July 2007

Originally posted by truenorthbg

Conservatives and liberals alike and agree with the film.

Hahaha, that's just absurd. Conservatives and Micheal Moore are about as opposite as you can get.

Michael Moore is a master of spin. I'm sure you've all heard the stories of people waiting months for "free" medical care that cost them their lives. I'm sure you've all heard of wealthy citizens in Britian who choose to go to private clinics even though they have access to free care.

In fact, the administrator of the British national health administration recently admitted that one in eight patients had to wait more than a year for treatment. That is absolutely unheard of in the United States. And if you think that it would work in the United States, which is 100x bigger and has a 4x bigger population you're nuts.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,2098276,00.html

You can find link to articles about the problems in Britian's healthcare system here.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#britain

MadAce · July 2007

Originally posted by abbaba

Originally posted by truenorthbg

Conservatives and liberals alike and agree with the film.

Hahaha, that's just absurd. Conservatives and Micheal Moore are about as opposite as you can get.

Michael Moore is a master of spin. I'm sure you've all heard the stories of people waiting months for "free" medical care that cost them their lives. I'm sure you've all heard of wealthy citizens in Britian who choose to go to private clinics even though they have access to free care.

In fact, the administrator of the British national health administration recently admitted that one in eight patients had to wait more than a year for treatment. That is absolutely unheard of in the United States. And if you think that it would work in the United States, which is 100x bigger and has a 4x bigger population you're nuts.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,2098276,00.html

You can find link to articles about the problems in Britian's healthcare system here.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#britain

Translation:

"WTF do you mean, water helps to put our fires? There's this guy who used water when HE was on fire... And guess what. He still had burns. What's the deal with that? There's even people who prefer CO2 extinguishers. That just proves water does shit versus fire. So I know why I choose to pray nest time I'm on fire in stead of trusting what didn't help this one guy, thank you very much."

ixontes · July 2007

I wish bad things on Michael Moore.

Why should I be taxed (pay for) someone else's health care?

MadAce · July 2007

Originally posted by ixontes

I wish bad things on Michael Moore.
Why should I be taxed (pay for) someone else's health care?

At the moment you're paying more than what you would pay with universal health care. See my post with the charts and stuff.

Besides, you would pay for someone elses health because health bills are the main reason for bankruptcies in the US, costing the country billions each year. Not to mention the larger poverty have a very bad effect on the economy. A healthier popullation is a healthier country.

ixontes · July 2007

Originally posted by MadAce

Originally posted by ixontes

I wish bad things on Michael Moore.
Why should I be taxed (pay for) someone else's health care?

At the moment you're paying more than what you would pay with universal health care. See my post with the charts and stuff.

Besides, you would pay for someone elses health because health bills are the main reason for bankruptcies in the US, costing the country billions each year. Not to mention the larger poverty have a very bad effect on the economy. A healthier popullation is a healthier country.

And I so look forward to waiting 10 months for a surgery I need tomorrow.

MadAce · July 2007

Originally posted by ixontes

Originally posted by MadAce

Originally posted by ixontes

I wish bad things on Michael Moore.
Why should I be taxed (pay for) someone else's health care?

At the moment you're paying more than what you would pay with universal health care. See my post with the charts and stuff.

Besides, you would pay for someone elses health because health bills are the main reason for bankruptcies in the US, costing the country billions each year. Not to mention the larger poverty have a very bad effect on the economy. A healthier popullation is a healthier country.

And I so look forward to waiting 10 months for a surgery I need tomorrow.

The ranking of countries and their health care on the previous page takes into account waiting times. That means that far less people have to wait less time for better and cheaper medical care. Is the penny dropping in that head of yours?

So other country

better medical care

on all levels

for less money,

correction,

far less money,

and for a whole lot more people.

For example, in my country I will be hard pressed to not be operated within two days. The same day (= immediatly) if I really need the surgery. If I go to my docter now then I can see a specialist tomorrow. If I'm willing to sit on a bus for 20 minutes I'll be able to see one tonight ( 7.30 pm at my place right now). Of course I'll pay a total of about € 10 for both visits. Would be less if I had less money.

Theutus · July 2007

I was going to make this big reply with charts and graphs to counter yours... but then I decided to attack the root of this argument. I simply don't give a sh** what you or anyone else thinks is a better system for health care. I'm unwilling to share my wealth with the "less fortunate" in this country, since I did earn it with my blood and sweat, while they choose to work at McDonalds or receive the welfare checks I'm already forced to pay them. It is very easy to get ahead in the American economic system. Save more than you spend. Unfortunately the majority of the poorer classes here feel a sense of entitlement to my income.

If and when I choose to give, it will be to the charity of my choice... not the governments choice.

lomiller · July 2007

Originally posted by MadAce

Originally posted by ixontes

I wish bad things on Michael Moore.
Why should I be taxed (pay for) someone else's health care?

At the moment you're paying more than what you would pay with universal health care. See my post with the charts and stuff.

Besides, you would pay for someone elses health because health bills are the main reason for bankruptcies in the US, costing the country billions each year. Not to mention the larger poverty have a very bad effect on the economy. A healthier popullation is a healthier country.

Very true, but in some ways very much a moot point. The US already spends almost as taxpayer money per capita on healthcare as other G8 countries that have universal publicly funded health care.

The average American spends nearly twice as much on healthcare as people in other G8 countries care and the US still and still ranks low in health care. The high cost and the burden on employers makes the US system the most economically damaging heath care systems in the world. It’s pretty clear there is something wrong, but what’s baffling is why people continue to insist on ignoring the solution that is clearly working in every other rich western country.

lomiller · July 2007

Originally posted by ixontes

And I so look forward to waiting 10 months for a surgery I need tomorrow.

*If* you have such a wait list in most publicly funded health care system it’s for *elective* surgery. Waiting lists are typically caused by the physician shortage plaguing every country including the US. What do you think is a better solution for this shortage having a wait list or simply selecting 25% of the population and saying “you can’t have the surgery at all”?

MadAce · July 2007

Originally posted by Theutus

I was going to make this big reply with charts and graphs to counter yours...

You should have. I enjoy seeing my opinion tested. Hence why I change it a lot.
but then I decided to attack the root of this argument. I simply don't give a sh** what you or anyone else thinks is a better system for health care.
It's not what I think. It's what is proven. With figures. You even concemplated to refute "my" argumentds with statistics and charts. So you must put some trust into them. Then why ignore the ones I offered you?
I'm unwilling to share my wealth with the "less fortunate" in this country, since I did earn it with my blood and sweat, while they choose to work at McDonalds or receive the welfare checks I'm already forced to pay them.
That's an interesting argument. I honestly wonder what costs the government most. People that are unable to work because of health problems or people that recive help and can work. The policy in the majority (if not all of them) of well run, rich, developed, highly educated countries suggest the latter is much, much more profitable for society.
It is very easy to get ahead in the American economic system.
I beg to differ considering the amount of homeless in the US compared to other countries. Considering the massive amount of inmates in the US, costing the tax payer more money than a full social welfare system would ever cost, without any of the benefits of a full social welfare system. Considering the concept of the working poor in developed countries originates from the US.
Save more than you spend. Unfortunately the majority of the poorer classes here feel a sense of entitlement to my income.
I bet they don't enjoy "stealing" your money. Well, most of them. I work for my cities welfare system and have seen its entire working from top to bottom. People want to work, raise their kids and have a good and fulfilling life. That's 99% of them.

If and when I choose to give, it will be to the charity of my choice... not the governments choice.

That is your choice of course. Just consider what will cost you the most.

Originally posted by lomiller

Originally posted by MadAce

Originally posted by ixontes

I wish bad things on Michael Moore.
Why should I be taxed (pay for) someone else's health care?

At the moment you're paying more than what you would pay with universal health care. See my post with the charts and stuff.

Besides, you would pay for someone elses health because health bills are the main reason for bankruptcies in the US, costing the country billions each year. Not to mention the larger poverty have a very bad effect on the economy. A healthier popullation is a healthier country.

Very true, but in some ways very much a moot point. The US already spends almost as taxpayer money per capita on healthcare as other G8 countries that have universal publicly funded health care.

The average American spends nearly twice as much on healthcare as people in other G8 countries care and the US still and still ranks low in health care. The high cost and the burden on employers makes the US system the most economically damaging heath care systems in the world. It’s pretty clear there is something wrong, but what’s baffling is why people continue to insist on ignoring the solution that is clearly working in every other rich western country.

Personally I blame the lack of healthy self-criticism on unhealthy patriotism.

abbaba · July 2007

Originally posted by MadAce

Originally posted by abbaba

Originally posted by truenorthbg

Conservatives and liberals alike and agree with the film.

Hahaha, that's just absurd. Conservatives and Micheal Moore are about as opposite as you can get.

Michael Moore is a master of spin. I'm sure you've all heard the stories of people waiting months for "free" medical care that cost them their lives. I'm sure you've all heard of wealthy citizens in Britian who choose to go to private clinics even though they have access to free care.

In fact, the administrator of the British national health administration recently admitted that one in eight patients had to wait more than a year for treatment. That is absolutely unheard of in the United States. And if you think that it would work in the United States, which is 100x bigger and has a 4x bigger population you're nuts.

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,2098276,00.html

You can find link to articles about the problems in Britian's healthcare system here.

http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#britain

Translation:

"WTF do you mean, water helps to put our fires? There's this guy who used water when HE was on fire... And guess what. He still had burns. What's the deal with that? There's even people who prefer CO2 extinguishers. That just proves water does shit versus fire. So I know why I choose to pray nest time I'm on fire in stead of trusting what didn't help this one guy, thank you very much."

Umm...what?

lomiller · July 2007

Originally posted by MadAce

Originally posted by lomiller

Very true, but in some ways very much a moot point. The US already spends almost as taxpayer money per capita on healthcare as other G8 countries that have universal publicly funded health care.

The average American spends nearly twice as much on healthcare as people in other G8 countries care and the US still and still ranks low in health care. The high cost and the burden on employers makes the US system the most economically damaging heath care systems in the world. It’s pretty clear there is something wrong, but what’s baffling is why people continue to insist on ignoring the solution that is clearly working in every other rich western country.

Personally I blame the lack of healthy self-criticism on unhealthy patriotism.

Hmmm possibly, but I blame partisan politics. There is about 30% of the population in the US willing to believe everything the Republican Party tells them to believe no matter what. They refuse to accept information from any other source because it’s “biased” and therefore are completely defenseless against the partisan propaganda being fed to them. Just look at the number of people who still think Iraq had WMD and connections to Al Qaeda.

I think it's a holdover from their years as a minoroity in Congress but Republicans tend to be very "damn the facts, whatever the party line is what goes" no matter what the issue. Democrats seem much more willing to break with the party line if they disagree.

SagaBoy · July 2007

I think it's a bit odd that people take this "I refuse to share my wealth," attitude as if that is the main issue. To me, they come off as rather small minded in that you miss so many things that are included in the "big picture." Let's suppose that we get national health care and are taxed more heavily. In exchange for this tax there would need to be an overall increase in payroll period. A big selling point of anyone's salary is knowing that they get benefits (medical, dental, etc.). If we have national health care the money companies budget for health packages then becomes more or less free money they can then re-invest back into the company and hopefully the employees.

If I stood back and really looked at just how many times I go to any doctor, in any given year; the amount typically comes out to about six visits averaging about 20-30 bucks to me each visit. [I'm being very conservative as I make it a point to see my eye doctor three times a year, my general health doctor twice a year, a dermotologist at least once a year, and other specialty doctors for cancer checks/ physicals twice a year] Now I've been told that I go to the doctor more times than a normal healthy American but I'll have to take my numbers as the norm simply because I don't much feel like looking up statistics. Having seen the actual bill from these offices for the tests they run I'm often astonished at just how much all the crap cost, and this is just PREVENTATIVE tests. I'm quite healthy save for dodgy vision. My bills alone for just going in when nothing was actually wrong with me rounded out to approximately 2500 for the year, most which was covered by my medical benefits leaving me to only foot the bill on co-pays.

The point I'm trying to make is that in one way or another you get screwed over on the medical end of things as it is. The question I'd pose is if you'd rather be screwed while helping each other (read: fellow man) or screwed while only "thinking" you're helping yourself. Of course I'm just an average joe with little to no knowledge of the in's and out's of the industry. Maybe I'm the one with the narrow view on things.

Theutus · July 2007

Originally posted by MadAce

Originally posted by Theutus

I was going to make this big reply with charts and graphs to counter yours...

You should have. I enjoy seeing my opinion tested. Hence why I change it a lot.
but then I decided to attack the root of this argument. I simply don't give a sh** what you or anyone else thinks is a better system for health care.
It's not what I think. It's what is proven. With figures. You even concemplated to refute "my" argumentds with statistics and charts. So you must put some trust into them. Then why ignore the ones I offered you?
Very well your arguments have valid statistics. I still don't want the government providing me with anything except paved roads and a military.
I'm unwilling to share my wealth with the "less fortunate" in this country, since I did earn it with my blood and sweat, while they choose to work at McDonalds or receive the welfare checks I'm already forced to pay them.
That's an interesting argument. I honestly wonder what costs the government most. People that are unable to work because of health problems or people that recive help and can work. The policy in the majority (if not all of them) of well run, rich, developed, highly educated countries suggest the latter is much, much more profitable for society.
until we can find a way to determine who the healthy abusers of the system are and those who really need it, the system should be disabled.
It is very easy to get ahead in the American economic system.
I beg to differ considering the amount of homeless in the US compared to other countries. Considering the massive amount of inmates in the US, costing the tax payer more money than a full social welfare system would ever cost, without any of the benefits of a full social welfare system. Considering the concept of the working poor in developed countries originates from the US.
I agree. Inmates on death row should be put to death instead of riding out a lifetime waiting for their sentence to come to fruition. Criminals should feel the repercussions of their own inhumanity... opposed to riding out their term watching cable tv and pumping iron in their in-house spa. Ever wonder how many of those homeless people choose to be homeless? More than you would think. Everywhere I go I see help wanted signs in store fronts. I knew a few homeless people for a time in my youth... trust me the decision to work or not work falls solely on their shoulders.
Save more than you spend. Unfortunately the majority of the poorer classes here feel a sense of entitlement to my income.
I bet they don't enjoy "stealing" your money. Well, most of them. I work for my cities welfare system and have seen its entire working from top to bottom. People want to work, raise their kids and have a good and fulfilling life. That's 99% of them.
they don't have to feel any guilt, our robinhood government ensures that. All they have to do is sit back and receive a check. I have several in my employ at a fortune 500 company who have let it be well known that they are trying to get fired in order to receive unemployment. the government enforces a welfare mentality that spreads like a disease.

If and when I choose to give, it will be to the charity of my choice... not the governments choice.

That is your choice of course. Just consider what will cost you the most.
I have considered it, and I choose to make my own mistakes... not have "big brother" looking out for my interests.

Originally posted by lomiller

Originally posted by MadAce

Originally posted by ixontes

I wish bad things on Michael Moore.
Why should I be taxed (pay for) someone else's health care?

At the moment you're paying more than what you would pay with universal health care. See my post with the charts and stuff.

Besides, you would pay for someone elses health because health bills are the main reason for bankruptcies in the US, costing the country billions each year. Not to mention the larger poverty have a very bad effect on the economy. A healthier popullation is a healthier country.

Very true, but in some ways very much a moot point. The US already spends almost as taxpayer money per capita on healthcare as other G8 countries that have universal publicly funded health care.

The average American spends nearly twice as much on healthcare as people in other G8 countries care and the US still and still ranks low in health care. The high cost and the burden on employers makes the US system the most economically damaging heath care systems in the world. It’s pretty clear there is something wrong, but what’s baffling is why people continue to insist on ignoring the solution that is clearly working in every other rich western country.

Personally I blame the lack of healthy self-criticism on unhealthy patriotism.

Theutus · July 2007

Originally posted by SagaBoy

I think it's a bit odd that people take this "I refuse to share my wealth," attitude as if that is the main issue. To me, they come off as rather small minded in that you miss so many things that are included in the "big picture." Let's suppose that we get national health care and are taxed more heavily. In exchange for this tax there would need to be an overall increase in payroll period.
so in your world more tax creates wealth? an across the board increase in disposable income would increase inflation, devaluing everyones wealth. Same thing happens when the minimum wage gets a hike prematurely.
A big selling point of anyone's salary is knowing that they get benefits (medical, dental, etc.). If we have national health care the money companies budget for health packages then becomes more or less free money they can then re-invest back into the company and hopefully the employees.
If I stood back and really looked at just how many times I go to any doctor, in any given year; the amount typically comes out to about six visits averaging about 20-30 bucks to me each visit. [I'm being very conservative as I make it a point to see my eye doctor three times a year, my general health doctor twice a year, a dermotologist at least once a year, and other specialty doctors for cancer checks/ physicals twice a year] Now I've been told that I go to the doctor more times than a normal healthy American but I'll have to take my numbers as the norm simply because I don't much feel like looking up statistics. Having seen the actual bill from these offices for the tests they run I'm often astonished at just how much all the crap cost, and this is just PREVENTATIVE tests. I'm quite healthy save for dodgy vision. My bills alone for just going in when nothing was actually wrong with me rounded out to approximately 2500 for the year, most which was covered by my medical benefits leaving me to only foot the bill on co-pays.
ultimately you are trying to waterdown your own health bills with my income. I'm supposed to suffer financially because you are a hypochondriac?
The point I'm trying to make is that in one way or another you get screwed over on the medical end of things as it is. The question I'd pose is if you'd rather be screwed while helping each other (read: fellow man) or screwed while only "thinking" you're helping yourself. Of course I'm just an average joe with little to no knowledge of the in's and out's of the industry. Maybe I'm the one with the narrow view on things.

MadAce · July 2007

Conclusion:

Universal health care = cheaper (for the tax payers)

universal health care has long term revenue private health care doesn't have

Universal health care is better in terms of waiting lines, service, ...

Cabe2323 · July 2007

Originally posted by MadAce

Conclusion:

Universal health care = cheaper (for the tax payers)
universal health care has long term revenue private health care doesn't have
Universal health care is better in terms of waiting lines, service, ...

We have a system of Universal Health Care in the US. The Military has it. Guess what we have worse service then in the private sector. I have a condition that is potentially life threatening and I have to wait 5 months just to see the Surgeon for a consult. Yes my health care is free and in some cases that is nice. For instance in the Military they are more willing to do tests just to confirm an outcome and not worry about the cost. But you have to wait a lot longer. If you have the money to get good health care then private health care is a lot better. Heck if you have the cash to not even have health insurance that is the best care possible.

dendea · July 2007

We arnt Fing France, where the US. Just because France has a working system that seems cheaper then are system doesn't mean we can just push there plan into the system without crap hitting the fan. We are inefficient, wasteful, are bloated with large companies.

Honestly do you want another Social Security, 3x as expansive?

Cabe2323 · July 2007

What we need is less government not more. Let the states each finance healthcare if they want. The federal government should do foriegn relations, Post service, and Military. They really shouldn't be involved in much else imo.

The problem with the healthcare system currently is that the government is too involved now. We have these bloated systems with tons of red tape that causes problems. If you can't afford your own healthcare then I guess you better not get sick. There is no reason that our citizens should be made to care for other people. And especially not people outside of their own communities. What do I care if there is someone in California with no Healthcare. How does that affect me over here on the east coast? The last thing I want to do is have more taxes taken out to provide more social programs. Our country needs to let people fail and leave it up to the communities to help each other out.

Howdy, Stranger!

Sicko

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Sicko

Comments