PDA

View Full Version : Sicko, the movie.



Panzerknacker
12-12-2007, 09:08 PM
The last documental movie of Michael Moore, splited in 13 parts in Youtube with spanish subtitles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4YVzKhP-Ww


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7-z6VEo-0w



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRpc7gZDSOI



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHTxU5yg1Io




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFaP4Y9tTMU




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VtgQO3YZus



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uApA4y0rLSI




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW0npEfYLMc




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PMouc_90lg




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mClfCTxLFWE




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG7361bhv2M




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZVdzq6cOYI


Actually I am not sure if youtube allows this content so you better watch before the delete buttons go on....:rolleyes:

Firefly
12-13-2007, 06:30 AM
I think, as with everyone that has an agenda Mr Moore plays to his audience. It does not necessarily mean that some of the things arent true, it just means that we have to be objective and sort the wheat from the chaff. He does have a lot of interesting things to say embedded in what is often a ludicrous piece of work.

Best to keep an open mind I say.

Man of Stoat
12-13-2007, 06:35 AM
Look at what he has to say about the NHS and see if it bears any resemblance whatsoever to your experience of it. It certainly didn't bear any resemblance to mine, nor that of my parents, or my great-aunt whose demise was recently hastened by MRSA acquired in a dirty NHS hospital...

Also compare what he says about Cuban hospitals with this: http://www.therealcuba.com/Page10.htm

tankgeezer
12-13-2007, 08:29 AM
Sorry, but any good he might have wished to do has been lost in the torrents of rhetoric, and scamming found to be in his "documentary" movies. The use of actors, and severe editing of supposed real interviews, and statements caused the academy board to disallow any of his work to submitted in the documentary section.
If he needs tricks, and half truths, and outright fabrications, he is just a huckster selling his personal agenda. No thanks.

Panzerknacker
12-13-2007, 09:06 AM
I think it was a huge mistake of Moore to go Cuba, there was many other countries that ofers the same type of care or bets without being a communist dictatorship, wrong message there, definately wrong :roll:

However the rest of movie is quite good I believed, of course I am not the best to jugde since I never used the US health services.

Man of Stoat
12-13-2007, 09:34 AM
Plenty of Canadians seem to think it's worth their while crossing their southern border to use the US health services, so they can't be that bad.

Egorka
12-13-2007, 09:49 AM
I think it is one is his worst film. The others were much better in my opinion.

Regarding "documentary" issue. You have to remember that he creates in a very special style. It is not a documentary strictly. And the issues he is rising are supposed to be provocative and partly subjective. That is part of genre.

For example the part where he plays the tape with Nixon's voice in internal conversation and then the official speach the next day. That was really good one! Or did he fake it?

And there was nothing wrong going to Cuba. Why not? It has nothing to do with Fidel. Cuba is know for they good level medical care considering they founding.

Learn to read between the lines...

Man of Stoat
12-13-2007, 09:54 AM
The "good level medical care" is for the party members and visiting paying customers. The ordinary people don't get squat, and have trouble acquiring simple medicines like paracetamol that the rest of us take for granted. Have a look on the link I posted above.

Nickdfresh
12-13-2007, 06:49 PM
Plenty of Canadians seem to think it's worth their while crossing their southern border to use the US health services, so they can't be that bad.


And many Americans wish that they had any access to healthcare at all...Which is ironic since we spend more on healthcare per capita than any nation on earth...

I have a copy of the film that I haven't bothered watching though, so I can't really comment.

But I think Moore's point in going to Cuba was that terror suspects in GITMO had better access to US heathcare than did many citizens...

Nickdfresh
12-14-2007, 08:24 AM
They do...Every person here in the U.S. has access to healthcare, even people who have come into this country illegally. We have Paramedics who make house calls and they NEVER..I repeat NEVER refused healthcare to anyone and even give rides to hospitals. I have never seen anyone not accepted to an emergency room.

Not true! People are routinely refused treatments in emergency rooms. And how many emergency rooms do you monitor? And even if they can get into the ER, many people without insurance cannot see a doctor until their situation is critical, which actually increases the costs to everybody than if they had had regular checkups...

Also, the leading cause of bankruptcies in the US are the result of catastrophic medical bills, even among people who've HAD medical insurance...

Nickdfresh
12-14-2007, 08:51 PM
#1) Treatments for what? Nothing life threatening

But yet they are still refused...


#2) I'm sure many more than you do. I'm a fire fighter In Los Angeles and have in the past 25 years transported 1000's to the hospital without insurance, They do get treatment..trust me. And they do not pay the bill.

In one city, the ones already transported...


#3) When you go to an ER..you are seen by a triage nurse...if it is a true emergency you will be seen by a doctor right away. The problem is people are using ER;s for there health care...that's not the purpose of ER's but its happening everyday.

Exactly! That's the point. This is what drives up the cost overall when preventive medicine is denied...


Here in L. A. hospitals close for an hour here an hour there because the beds are full of people who are there because they have the flu..are drunk..crazy...I can go on.

Well, there's nothing that is going to solve that...

But mentally ill are not treated? People going to ERs for the flu, it's because they cannot get access to a PC physician or psychological screening...


I know this sounds crazy but if people don't like the free health care they are getting they can always get jobs and get better insurance. For poor family's here in the U.S. the children up to age 18 have insurance..its called Medical / medicaid / dental cal and that for preventive treatment.

But that's no solution. A lot of good jobs are dropping all benefits and routinely making people pay for their own insurance.


Our insurance system could be better and I would like to see it improve but government run health care is not the answer. Do you want the people running the department of motor vehicles handling your health issues too?

Well, apparently HMOs, pharmaceutical lobbyists that prevent cheaper drug options, and treating people based only on what they can afford are not the answers either, because in the end this all just drives up costs...And gov't does run healthcare, it's called Medicaid, for better or for worse.

Gen. Sandworm
12-15-2007, 12:33 AM
Now its hard to compare the 2 but Ive just gotten back from Norway which is on par with the US in terms of wealth. And I can say our health care system sux.
I happen to like Mr. Moore but its not what he says it what he does. I admire him for doing something. But I dont buy all the crap he says. He is rather entertaining thou.

Regardless of his agenda............I can tell you that I think we have a major problem in the US. I have been to many countries and talked about their health care systems and understand the differences. Any American that says we dont have a major problem with our health care system doesnt know what they are talking about or is living in a world of make believe. I will also note that my Brother in law who is a MD and my sister a soon to be Doctor in Nursing agree.

Just my opinion!

Nickdfresh
12-16-2007, 08:05 AM
I think we need too forget about the corporate and libertarian driven "everything is just fine, nothing to see here" mentality. It's not going to go away. And gov't either works for the people, or for corporations. Or it doesn't work on purpose for corporations. And we're ALREADY footing a significant tax bill for healthcare. Who benefits? Not us plebeians in the middle classes!

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0718/p17s01-wmgn.html

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/PrescriptionForChange/story?id=2563381

And I don't agree with Hillery Clinton on a lot, and don't particularly like her much either despite the fact that she was formerly my Senator. But her healthcare plan is far from "socialized medicine," and when Republicans have even talked about the need for healthcare reform because Bush's White House has effectively used tax cuts as an excuse to wash his hands and dump the problems on the states (effectively shifting your national tax bill to your state and local tax bill, and actually raising taxes on some since "blue" states like Cali'funia, Massachusetts, and New York that drive the US economy get less and pay more )...

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9825823&top_story=1


http://www.pbs.org/healthcarecrisis/healthinsurance.html

How much does health insurance cost? The cost of health insurance has increased dramatically over the past decade, far surpassing the general rate of inflation in most years. Between 1989 and 1996, the average amount an employee had to contribute for family coverage jumped from $935 to $1,778. In 1990, American companies spent $177 billion on health benefits for workers and their dependents; that number rose to $252 billion by 1996, or more than double the rate of inflation.

Who pays for the rising costs of health insurance? Employees, consumers and taxpayers pay. Businesses pass along a portion of rising premiums to their workforces in the form of lower wage increases. Companies add the cost of the fringe benefits, including health insurance, to the price of their products and services. Government programs pay 47 percent of the health care tab in the U.S.; spending on health care makes up 20 percent of the federal budget, and most state budgets too. If you paid $5,000 in taxes last year, around $1,000 went to health care programs. (source: http://www.nchc.org)


Hillary's cure-all
Seeking a second chance

Sep 18th 2007 | NEW YORK
From Economist.com (http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9825823&top_story=1)
Hillary Clinton's ambitious health-care plan

AP

ON MONDAY September 17th Hillary Clinton became the third of the three Democratic presidential frontrunners to offer voters a comprehensive health-care plan. It is a sign of how far America’s health-care debate has shifted that the first opponent to fire a broadside at it was Mitt Romney, a Republican who also hopes to be president. Predictably, Mr Romney criticised her proposal as a heavy-handed plan that would generate a lot of bureaucracy. But as governor of Massachusetts Mr Romney brought a similar, and widely-praised, scheme to his home state. Such has been the shift in attitudes towards covering America’s 47m uninsured.

Both her methods and her past are sure to make Mrs Clinton’s plan controversial. The concept is that Americans would have an “individual mandate”, like the insurance coverage required by car drivers. Everyone is obliged to be covered in one way or another: through an employer’s plan, privately purchased insurance, or one of two government plans, either a version of Medicare (currently for old folks) or a scheme covering federal workers. Larger employers would have to pay for insurance or pay a penalty. The concept of a “mandate” irks the small-government Republicans. And some Democrats find it too pushy, believing the state should act as the single payer for health care instead. But the idea is close to mainstream opinion about how to extend coverage to all Americans.

Mrs Clinton’s plan resembles not only Mr Romney’s in Massachusetts but also that of John Edwards, who is running for the Democratic nomination a little to her left. Mr Edwards sought to steal attention on the day she launched her plan by promising to take away the health insurance of congressmen and senators unless they passed a universal health-care bill by mid-2009. The idea is unlikely to pass, but scores easy political points at the expense of Congress, always the most unpopular branch of government. Barack Obama, the other top Democratic contender, wants to bring down the cost of insurance, but his plan lacks the individual mandate.

Mrs Clinton’s approach is unsurprising in itself—all Democrats must have ambitious coverage plans these days. But her announcement was striking because of her role in her husband’s administration, crafting a health-care plan in 1993-1994. That has passed into political folklore as disaster on such a scale that it led to a Republican takeover of Congress. Mrs Clinton’s defenders say that her plan was not so bad and that many elements have since become fashionable. Right-wing detractors, however, accused her of trying to socialise a huge swathe of the economy. Democratic Hillary-haters say she was bullying and uncompromising, threatening to “destroy” even Democratic congressmen who were not wholly behind her.

Yet just as the health-care debate has moved on, so has Mrs Clinton. Many Republicans say they would vote for the devil himself before the junior senator from New York. But her steadiness and caution, though often caricatured as cynicism, has won her admirers, including a few reluctant Republicans. She has lengthened her lead in the polls over Mr Obama for the Democratic nomination. Though his advisers claim that he is deliberately aiming not to peak too early, she remains the clear frontrunner.

Mrs Clinton has shown herself astute at picking unpopular enemies: to pay for her plan, she would seek ways to cut costs but would also raise taxes on those making over $250,000, she says. She boasts that “these proposals will not make me the insurance industry’s woman of the year.” But Mrs Clinton also stresses the positive, using the word “choice” at every opportunity (to allay Americans’ traditional fears that government health care will take away their right to select the doctors and hospitals they want). If her politicking puts her in the White House in 2009, and if she also enjoys a Democratic majority in Congress, she would finally get a second chance to do something about America’s health-care mess.

Nickdfresh
12-16-2007, 08:20 AM
Of course our health care system can be better, I don't think anyone is saying it cant be improved upon. Our car insurance, life insurance, home owners insurance,dental insurance,pet insurance, I can go on and on can be improved upon too.
Who's gonna pay for it? The Government? Well the government is us..and that just means more taxes. I already pay enough taxes don't you?
Where do we draw the line? Should we have free houses? Free cars? Free food? Free college? Free life insurance? Free vacations?
Children from poor family's in this Country have free health insurance NOW until they turn into an adult. Its hard for me to feel sorry for an adult who has been to lazy to work hard to better his life and I'm not willing to pay MORE in taxes because of that.

"Moore claims 50 million Americans lack health insurance. In the Moving Picture Institute’s nine-minute film, “Uninsured in America,” Stuart Browning deconstructs the more common “45 million uninsured” sound bite and finds that 9 million of these people earn over $75,000 annually and can buy coverage but don't. (freemarketcure.com) Some 18 million are healthy, 18-34-year-old “young invincible's” whose priorities exclude insurance. Another 14 million fail to enroll in Medicaid and other low-income health programs for which they are eligible. Even if these numbers somewhat overlap, Browning estimates that just 8 million Americans chronically lack coverage."

BTW Mike. I like you and respect your public service as a firefighter and indeed have relatives that do the same.

But I find it hard to be lectured by a gov't worker who receives what I presume to be generous health benefits, largely won by pro-union politicians, on this subject....

Gen. Sandworm
12-16-2007, 11:18 AM
Of course our health care system can be better, I don't think anyone is saying it cant be improved upon. Our car insurance, life insurance, home owners insurance,dental insurance,pet insurance, I can go on and on can be improved upon too.
Who's gonna pay for it? The Government? Well the government is us..and that just means more taxes. I already pay enough taxes don't you?
Where do we draw the line? Should we have free houses? Free cars? Free food? Free college? Free life insurance? Free vacations?
Children from poor family's in this Country have free health insurance NOW until they turn into an adult. Its hard for me to feel sorry for an adult who has been to lazy to work hard to better his life and I'm not willing to pay MORE in taxes because of that.


I didnt say it needs to be a little better I said we have a major problem. It needs to be alot better.

Idealistically the government represents us.......but I think we can see that it is not always working in our interest.

I dont know you Mike.........but if you where hurt I would help you. Even if it meant paying for it. Dont care if you were poor or rich. And wouldnt care if you paid me back. Helping ppl is good for everyone. Community and Country.

Mike also if you had another career. I imagine you would still put your life on the line to help someone else. I dont imagine you do your job for money.

As most mothers say in someway "You cant do anything until your well" .........or mine said "You must take care of yourself before you can take care of anything else" ....... I believe is the truth. The government has a basic job to help us. If it is willing to protect us from the evil-doers or the axis of evil..........wouldnt it be fair to say that is could give us some protection in the area of health. IMO it should not matter if your poor, lazy, stupid, rich or just plain clumsy.

I think if you take a look at one of our most famous letters (DoI) the protection of life is considered a right of our ppl. We cannot save everyone but we can and should do the best job possible. Im quite sure you would give your life to protect your family and squander your fortune to protect them from harm. Health problems are a terrorist that will never go away.

Not trying to attack you Mike just debating! And if you think im crazy thats your right and I wont hold it against you. :)

Nickdfresh
12-16-2007, 12:13 PM
If you call Blue Cross HMO health plan generous..I guess your right, its not the best but its okay for us. If I wanted better I could pay more and get it but this one has been okay and by the way the city takes money out of my check every two weeks to pay for that plan. My union pays for my dental and every two weeks money comes out of my check to pay for that plan too. I also have disability insurance and guess what I PAY FOR THAT TOO.. Not to bad from a guy with a high school diploma huh?

No, not bad at all...

And everybody can contribute to their healthcare, but I think a lot of issues need to be addressed...


Im sure ther real reason is..I dont agree with you...LOL

Just curious Nick..what's your Job ..What do you do for a living and I'm sure you have health insurance right?

Actually, I think you once called my credentials or statements into question on an other thread. Is turnabout not fair play now? It certainly wasn't meant as a personal attack.

I'm in sales, and yes, I have insurance purchased privately, but will switch to the company plan when that expires...

Nickdfresh
12-16-2007, 12:22 PM
...
I dont know you Mike.........but if you where hurt I would help you. Even if it meant paying for it. Dont care if you were poor or rich. And wouldnt care if you paid me back. Helping ppl is good for everyone. Community and Country.

... :)


That's certainly great on a humanitarian level, but the truth is that there is as much evidence that we could save money by restructuring insurance, and forcing the standardization of procedures and coverages...

Sort of like the proverbial example given by the candidates (Edwards?). Something to the affect of "what's the sense of a heathcare system that will pay for the amputation of a diabetics gangrenous foot, but won't pay for a diabetic shoe that would SAVE that foot?!"

Perhaps there is some hyperbole there, but anecdotal experience says it isn't much. Is that really saving anybody money in the long run?

And why can't I purchase cheaper health plans from other regions of the country? Why not fully apply the "market" rhetoric often deceptively employed by the HMO/pharmaceutical lobby? Why can't I buy cheaper drugs from Canada when they're standards are every bit as rigorous as US pharmacies?

Why do I see dozens of commercials for male impotency drugs, which must cost billion$ over the course of years?

Chevan
12-17-2007, 03:20 AM
Any American that says we dont have a major problem with our health care system doesnt know what they are talking about or is living in a world of make believe.
............................................
I didnt say it needs to be a little better I said we have a major problem. It needs to be alot better.

Idealistically the government represents us.......but I think we can see that it is not always working in our interest.

I dont know you Mike.........but if you where hurt I would help you. Even if it meant paying for it. Dont care if you were poor or rich. And wouldnt care if you paid me back. Helping ppl is good for everyone. Community and Country.

Now we know what think the american who lived in Scandinavia for the enough long time:)
Tell us Gen, was it a TOO high the taxpays in Norway to get the FREE MEDICAL SERVICE for the people?
Is it not strange guys than the world riches state who spen a hundred billions for the military operations per year and about the same for the military researhes could not care about health all of their citizents:)
That what a brillian future plann for us the domestic "democrats" who always like to portray the America as ideal:)Welcome to the f.....ng capitalism:)
Nice ideal:)
If even the some of americans do realise that there a lot of unsolved social problems that nobody even wish to solve.

Chevan
12-17-2007, 03:34 AM
People are routinely refused treatments in emergency rooms. And how many emergency rooms do you monitor? And even if they can get into the ER, many people without insurance cannot see a doctor until their situation is critical, which actually increases the costs to everybody than if they had had regular checkups...

Also, the leading cause of bankruptcies in the US are the result of catastrophic medical bills, even among people who've HAD medical insurance...
That's right Nick, i'm fully agree.
The ER is FAR NOT enough for FULL medical service that needs for the peoples.
The preventive healthcar like the sanatorial treatments , regular mass inoculations, preventive medical observations and ets- ARE very importaint for the healthcare.
So if the peoples are forced to refuse it coz of lack of medical insurance, jod or money - this good healthcare is a great problem for them.

Panzerknacker
12-17-2007, 06:02 PM
And there was nothing wrong going to Cuba. Why not? It has nothing to do with Fidel. Cuba is know for they good level medical care considering they founding.



I am pretty sure it was wrong.

why ?, maybe the simple people might believe that a political system like the Cuban one could be good for some, and it is not. :rolleyes:

Egorka
12-17-2007, 06:20 PM
I am pretty sure it was wrong.

why ?, maybe the simple people might believe that a political system like the Cuban one could be good for some, and it is not. :rolleyes:

Political systems are neither good nor bad. It is people that make them so.
Moore called Fidel dictator number of times. I wonder who did not get the message?
If you are affraid that people might see some advantages (not always realised ones) that are imbeded into the current Cuban system then one may say you have an agenda.

Egorka
12-17-2007, 06:28 PM
Some one here mentioned something like "people in Cuba can't even get simple paracetamol". And guess what? It is true. But the question is why?

Well, I can tell you what I have heard. My Danish friends wentto Cuba couple of years ago as turists. And they took many of these basic pain killer pill pacages with them because it was the best currency to pay the locals. And they mentioned that it is because of the USA'strade restrictions the cubans can notget paracetamol.

Is it wrong?

Panzerknacker
12-17-2007, 06:31 PM
Hahaha. ;)

You should know me better by now, I have an Agenda and I am extremely proud of it.

Nickdfresh
12-17-2007, 07:33 PM
Some one here mentioned something like "people in Cuba can't even get simple paracetamol". And guess what? It is true. But the question is why?

Well, I can tell you what I have heard. My Danish friends wentto Cuba couple of years ago as turists. And they took many of these basic pain killer pill pacages with them because it was the best currency to pay the locals. And they mentioned that it is because of the USA'strade restrictions the cubans can notget paracetamol.

Is it wrong?

Well, there's always rum...

Panzerknacker
12-17-2007, 08:15 PM
And mambo :)...that is something that I always love about that country, the leftist always praise it but I dont see anybody of them moving to that paradise.
Wathever, the thing is that there is many capitalist countries that could provide his people with at list a minimum of health care, and I mean free health care.

In november of 2006 I has my gallblader removed ( More rocks than in the Andes there) and I did it in a public hospital...cost of the entire operation and days in the medic facilities = 0 $.

redcoat
12-20-2007, 01:42 PM
Look at what he has to say about the NHS and see if it bears any resemblance whatsoever to your experience of it. It certainly didn't bear any resemblance to mine, nor that of my parents, or my great-aunt whose demise was recently hastened by MRSA acquired in a dirty NHS hospital...


MRSA and other hospital acquired infections are a problem world-wide, for example, there are estimated to be around 2 million cases of hospital acquired infection in the USA each year, and they contribute to the death of approximately 80-100,000 patients each year.

Egorka
12-20-2007, 06:04 PM
And mambo :)...that is something that I always love about that country, the leftist always praise it but I dont see anybody of them moving to that paradise.Who in a right mind can call Cuba a paradise? Or any other country for that matter?
That whould just be an extreme view just like the view that trashes everything Cuban jusst because Fidel assumed dictatorial position.

Wathever, the thing is that there is many capitalist countries that could provide his people with at list a minimum of health care, and I mean free health care.
Of course. Right.

Panzerknacker
12-20-2007, 06:22 PM
Who in a right mind can call Cuba a paradise? Or any other country for that matter?

Some people here does, remember that this is the country wich Che Guevara born...so....you figure.

I repeat many people praise Cuba, but I does not know anybody, not a single person willing to move there.