Michael Moore's "Sicko"

[scaeagles]

Alex hits it on the head, as is common.

Smoking is the best evidence of what is coming, and it will only be hastened by some form of uniform health care. You smoke? Well, then you don't qualify for these procedures because you are willingly putting yourself at higher risk, and as was evidenced by Hillary's health care plan some 15 years ago now, seeking treatment outside the system (or providing it) would be a crime.

Transfats are being banned even though they cannot possibly affect the health of those around them, as has been the argument regarding second hand smoke. There are already talks of taxes on fast food restaurants because the food is unhealthful.

Put the government in charge of health care and there will be more of the same. Mandatory exercise programs. Overweight or obese? Government diet programs and taxes by the pound. Drunk? Pay the tax. The possibilities for abuse are unlimited.

I don't think I'm being paranoid. With smoking, the beginning was a simple warning on packages. Then bans on airlines, and it has continued to advance, with some municipalities even trying to ban smoking in private residences now.

I don't think so.

[innerSpaceman]

One of the main purposes of the tax code is to act as a carrot and stick to promote behaviors desired by the government (purportedly at the behest of the American people).

So I don't see anything wrong with using taxes to promote health, and reduce costs on public health care.

Alex is right about one thing: there's no such thing as "Free" - and since he didn't bother to see the film (I haven't yet either), he's simply assuming that's what Moore is recommending. From the extensive interviews I've heard Moore give, he is simply recommending that the profit motive be removed from health care, and I heartily agree. Whether or not that would stifle innovation, it's blatently immoral to make health decisions for individual people based on profit motive.

Everyone's morals are different. But I'd like to see some rationale for this kind of thing being morally justified. And I'd like to see any such justifications include a hypothetical involving the justifier's self or loved one.


Just a request.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

he's simply assuming that's what Moore is recommending.

As blueerica pointed out, the assumption I am making is that mousepod correctly stated the position of the movie.

Whether or not that would stifle innovation, it's blatently immoral to make health decisions for individual people based on profit motive.

I disagree, and that is why no justification I could offer for my views will be seen by you as reasonable. We are simply beginning from completely different axiomatic points of view.

However, even if you remove "the profit motive" (oh that evil thing) from the equation you are still not removing "mak[ing] health decisions for individual people based on" financial considerations. Removing the profit motive is simply price caps and rationing. Instead of an HMO telling you that they "won't pay for some very expensive procedure but you an go do it yourself" you'll have the government telling you that they "won't pay for some very expensive procedure and feel free to go to Thailand if you want it anyway."

Now, there are many things I think could be done to improve our "health system" in this country. But they don't remove the profit motive. But I was just responding to the range of things I've seen in Moore's discussions and particularly to mousepod's summary of the movie's.

[blueerica]

To be fair, Alex used the term "free" not of his own invention, but rather, as a response to Mousepod's definition of what Moore wants, or whatever.

Originally Posted by mousepod

In a way, that might be why the movie is so effective. He actually doesn't propose any specific system, except that it's "free". He shows how the US system fails even the insured, and how the systems in Canada, England, France and Cuba take care of their people.

When I have less of a screaming headache, I'll post some stuff. But in short, and no I haven't seen the film, I do feel there should be a profit motive, for truly innovative research requires big bucks. With such high risk, there must be great reward and I'm sorry, saving someone I love probably won't cut it for them. People I know and love need that sort of innovation so that they can stop preventing death and start finding a way to a cure.

[Tref]

Originally Posted by blueerica

People I know and love need that sort of innovation so that they can stop preventing death and start finding a way to a cure.

Fear not, young friends, there will always be innovation. Indeed, it is in our genetic make-up to want to improve life. As the old stand up joke goes (and what follows is the non-funny version of same), so long as there is the opposite sex to attract, society will continue to grow and improve on the past, if only to help the person get laid.

Nevertheless, it is time we start looking at health care the same way we do our fire and police departments. Somehow, these two groups survive even without handing us a bill for saving our house from fire or burglary. Thankfully, we live in a society whereupon if my home was set ablaze or robbed, the police and fire departments would not first ask if I had the fire/robbery equivalent to Blue Cross, before doing their job.

When health care does pass, and I believe that it someday will, it will not be perfect (the fire department can not save every house) but it will be vastly superior to what we have to-day.

For the moment, the naysayers have the stage. They'll bluster and sputter and shake their fist in the air, but when its all done, and free health care arrives, we'll wonder how, as a society of caring people, we ever lived without it.

I haven't seen the movie yet, either, but God bless Michael Moore.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Tref

Fear not, young friends, there will always be innovation. Indeed, it is in our genetic make-up to want to improve life. As the old stand up joke goes (and what follows is the non-funny version of same), so long as there is the opposite sex to attract, society will continue to grow and improve on the past, if only to help the person get laid.

Nevertheless, it is time we start looking at health care the same way we do our fire and police departments. Somehow, these two groups survive even without handing us a bill for saving our house from fire or burglary. Thankfully, we live in a society whereupon if my home was set ablaze or robbed, the police and fire departments would not first ask if I had the fire/robbery equivalent to Blue Cross, before doing their job.

When health care does pass, and I believe that it someday will, it will not be perfect (the fire department can not save every house) but it will be vastly superior to what we have to-day.

For the moment, the naysayers have the stage. They'll bluster and sputter and shake their fist in the air, but when its all done, and free health care arrives, we'll wonder how, as a society of caring people, we ever lived without it.

I haven't seen the movie yet, either, but God bless Michael Moore.

Amen!

[scaeagles]

Firemen respond in the case of an emergency. The biggest issue with health care is that it goes far beyond that emergency. I don't call and schedule an appointment with the local fire department to come check the status of my smoke alarm batteries, plan a fire escape plan for my family, inspect the pool fence, They aren't making sure that I have a fire extinguisher which we are all trained to use.

The police aren't liable for your own personal security. If they don't get there, they don't get there. There was a case I have cited before where a woman had a restraining order on her ex. He kept stalking her, the police would not sit outside her door to make sure it was abided by, and they guy eventually killed her. The family tried to sue the police, but the supreme court ruled that the police are not a private security force. They maintain the peace. They cannot, nor are they required, to stop all crime before it is committed. They can't.

I hope we never view health care as the fire department or the police department.

Because I do care, I realize that profit motive is just as much the mother of invention as is necessity. It would surely be nice if that were not the case, but it is. Until there is a general change in human nature, I'm not thinking taking the profit motive out is a good idea.

The logical course, should there be socialized medicine, is that the market no longer controls how many doctors and of what type there are. There will be shortages because of the exorbitant cost of medical school, meaning that there will be cries for free education for those who would be government doctors. Those doctors will be told what they have to practice. The huge amount of medicare fraud that there already is will expand with the expanding government system, requiring an even larger bureacracy to manage.

The government does not even do well that which it is specifically mandated to do (control the borders among them). I do not care to trust them with the management of my health care.

[Kevy Baby]

I just don't know how to respond to this. Simply because I cannot understand how people believe that socialized medicine is better. I would rather wait a couple of weeks, maybe a month or two on the outside, for a needed surgery than to wait a couple of years as it would be in Canada.

And as for Michael Moore, considering the proven hypocrisy and intentional misleadings of his past films, why should I want to see it? I haven't experienced death first-hand, but I know enough about it that I know to avoid it.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

I would rather wait a couple of weeks, maybe a month or two on the outside, for a needed surgery than to wait a couple of years as it would be in Canada.

And I would rather people not be denied life-saving procedures because their insurance company determined it wasn't in their economic interests to approve it.

[scaeagles]

And I would rather people not die while on incredibly long waiting lists for lfe saving procedures.