Michael Moore's 'Sicko' Scrutinizes Canada's Healthcar

[SkyhookJackson]

Maybe you've been abandoned because it's like talking to a rock.

Imagine what some people will be like with a Democratic President in 2008.

Unless someone other than Osama oops, Obama and/or Hilary gets the nomination, that's highly unlikely. They're both quite interesting and quite unelectable.

Cheap shot at Obama. I'm surprised you forgot to mention his middle name: Hussein. If you want to talk unelectable AND uninteresting, look to the Republican field. I won't elaborate and go far off topic on this thread, but will happily discuss the candidates elsewhere. (By the way - I'm not a supporter of Obama or Clinton.)

[SkyhookJackson]

.....Waste, red tape and obscene profits have driven U.S. health care into the crapper. No good will every come from a system that pays it's CEOs over a $100,000,000 a year. Canadians appear to have a good, basic system to work on improving. It's not perfect, but it's fixable. The U.S., on the other hand, needs to wipe the slate clean and start from scratch.

If Canada does not have "waste, red tape, and obscene profits", what's the excuse for such poor performance wrt wait times, thorough diagnostics, imaging labs, and lack of other interventions at many points of delivery (e.g. post-MI revascularization). The Canadians headed south or abroad for faster access to such services and procedures find little comfort in better per-capita life expectancy back home.

Canada's system is not good when compared to other OECD nations with universal access as an objective.

You know, we can go round and round and round and round and round and still end up at the same place in this conversation. The bottom line is this: I might have to wait a few weeks for an elective procedure in Canada, but without insurance I will wait forever in the United States. This might sound like the same old blah-blah-blah to you, but I've been in chronic pain for 3 years after suffering a muscular injury while working out on the treadmill, trying to stay in good shape and healthy. I can't afford surgery and I can't afford the post-surgery physical therapy. If this had happened in Canada I would have been treated and well by now. Their system has problems that can be worked on, ours is a lost cause.

[margrace]

Oh yes the terrible Canadian system, my son cut his hand rather badly yesterday and went to Emerg in the small local hospital, treated and back out in less than an hour. Oh the terrible wait time.

[jbg]

Cheap shot at Obama. I'm surprised you forgot to mention his middle name: Hussein. If you want to talk unelectable AND uninteresting, look to the Republican field. I won't elaborate and go far off topic on this thread, but will happily discuss the candidates elsewhere. (By the way - I'm not a supporter of Obama or Clinton.)

Thank you for reminding me about that traitor's middle name. However, I was not taking a cheap shot at him. I had made a typo and was fixing it.

As far as likely GOP candidates:

1. McCain - in implosion mode;
   
2. Giuliani - My favorite, but really a Democrat (like myself) in the GOP purely because he needed to switch parties in order to become US Attorney. He stayed there since the Democratic Party in New York City is, not so much leftist as famously corrupt and closed. I am a Democrat primarily because not being a Democrat shuts one out of most primary voting in this area. Giuliani would be a good President but will have problems in the rest of the country in getting the GOP nomination. Again, the horse (the GOP nomination) goes before the cart (the general election);
   
3. Thompson - the right's favorite candidate now. He hasn't declared, and doesn't have much time if he wants to be up and running before the February 5 blowoff primaries (too many primaries in too many states, too early, on one day IMHO);
   
4. Mitt Romney - Decent candidate, who's shown he can win in a predominantly Democratic state, Massachusetts. Will have problems similar to Giuliani in getting nomination but for a different reason. He's a Mormon and that does not play well with fundamentalist Christians.
   

In short, this is a hard race to handicap on the GOP side. The way the US is built, there is a major bias towards Republicans, because of the Constitution's deliberate over-weighting of small states. The US Constitution drafters had reasons similiar to the drafters of the British North America Act, who over-weighted Quebec and the Maritime Provinces. Both drafters had simple reasons; the respective parts would not go along with the Constitution (and in your case Confederation) unless given a virtual veto power over the near-future direction of the country.

In the US, there are far more "small states" than large states. The US had a population of roughly 281,000,000 as of 2000. At that time, the following "large states" had the following populations (link to Census data):

1. California - 33,000,000;
   
2. New York - 19,000,000;
   
3. Florida - 16,000,000;
   
4. Texas - 21,000,000
   
5. Illinois - 12,000,000;
   
6. Pennsylvania - 12,000,000;
   
7. Ohio - 11,000,000;
   
8. Michigan - 10,000,000;
   
9. Geogia - 8,000,000;
   
10. North Carolina- 8,000,000;
    
11. Virginia - 7,000,000;
    
12. Massachusetts - 6,000,000
    

That accounts for 160,000,000, or well over half the populatin of the US, in 12 of the 50 states.

Since each states gets a minimum of three electoral votes, the over-weighting of small states is obvious. And if you look at the nature of most of those states, they tend to vote Republican, and to be deeply Christian. Thus, just because it is "obvious" to you that Bush is far to the right of center, he isn't in our country.

[B. Max]

Oh yes the terrible Canadian system, my son cut his hand rather badly yesterday and went to Emerg in the small local hospital, treated and back out in less than an hour. Oh the terrible wait time.

It probably wasn't to bad then. I wonder who had to wait who really did have an emergency.

[B. Max]

As far as likely GOP candidates:

Tom Tancredo still looks like the best of all the GOP candidates so far when you look at his positions. Your list represents who's been getting the most media coverage.

[Guest American Woman]

Oh yes the terrible Canadian system, my son cut his hand rather badly yesterday and went to Emerg in the small local hospital, treated and back out in less than an hour. Oh the terrible wait time.

It probably wasn't to bad then. I wonder who had to wait who really did have an emergency.

From my experience, the emergency room patients are divided into groups according to who needs urgent care and who doesn't, so no one who "really did have an emergency" would have to wait longer than someone who didn't. But that begs the question; how do you know a child who "cut his hand rather badly" wasn't "really an emergency?"

[B. Max]

; how do you know a child who "cut his hand rather badly" wasn't "really an emergency?"

Maybe because I've cut my hand before, and quite bad. Fixed it myself. Numerous reports on emergency rooms claim most people don't really need to be there.

[jdobbin]

Unless someone other than Osama oops, Obama and/or Hilary gets the nomination, that's highly unlikely. They're both quite interesting and quite unelectable.

The members of the right wing still trying to say he is a Manchurian candidate from a madrassa?

We know you are voting Republican in the election but when you use words like traitor in commentary like you have in this thread, it isn't funny nor wise.

As for your contention that Democrats are unelectable because of the small state scenario, I think that is wishful thinking. Republicans right up to the end thought they had the Senate and the Reps in the bag for the mid-terms.

Healthcare won't be the major issue in the U.S. election but Iraq will be.

[jbg]

Oh yes the terrible Canadian system, my son cut his hand rather badly yesterday and went to Emerg in the small local hospital, treated and back out in less than an hour. Oh the terrible wait time.

I'm not a Canadian, but I am in touch with one who had a real horror story. His colon cancer was mis-diagnosed by a hard-pressed, overworked Pakistani doctor (in Ontario) as diverticulitis. There is now metastasis to surrounding organs.

The sense I get is that there is pressure to find a "non-emergency" since the doctors are overwhelmed by the unlimited demands of a "free" system, and underpaid. Because of the "border bleed" many Canadian trained doctors, including one our family uses from time to time, are right here, in the Excited States. There are no linguistic or cultural barriers keeping them there.

[jbg]

Unless someone other than Osama oops, Obama and/or Hilary gets the nomination, that's highly unlikely. They're both quite interesting and quite unelectable.

The members of the right wing still trying to say he is a Manchurian candidate from a madrassa?

He was a Muslim for a period of time. Not something, in the current environment, he wishes to highlight.

We know you are voting Republican in the election but when you use words like traitor in commentary like you have in this thread, it isn't funny nor wise.

As for your contention that Democrats are unelectable because of the small state scenario, I think that is wishful thinking. Republicans right up to the end thought they had the Senate and the Reps in the bag for the mid-terms.

Healthcare won't be the major issue in the U.S. election but Iraq will be.

How do you know how I'm voting? I am spoiling for a chance to again vote Democratic. It goes deep into my heritage. The two leading candidates are nauseating. I am not alone in that view.

I believe Iraq is a mass media issue. Remember, Viet Nam was a draftee war; Iraq is not. And last I checked, the Republicans are doing fine in Nebraska and the Dakotas, states that send many volunteers and almost always vote Republican. Why they vote Republican and the very similar province of Saskatchewan votes NDP is a mystery to me.

[jdobbin]

I'm not a Canadian, but I am in touch with one who had a real horror story. His colon cancer was mis-diagnosed by a hard-pressed, overworked Pakistani doctor (in Ontario) as diverticulitis. There is now metastasis to surrounding organs.

The sense I get is that there is pressure to find a "non-emergency" since the doctors are overwhelmed by the unlimited demands of a "free" system, and underpaid. Because of the "border bleed" many Canadian trained doctors, including one our family uses from time to time, are right here, in the Excited States. There are no linguistic or cultural barriers keeping them there.

I'm sure you can go tit for tat back and forth with anecdotal stories about cases gone bad in the U.S. and Canada.

The bleed that you refer to has now largely stopped. Doctors are not leaving in large numbers for a variety of reasons. First, they have received large pay increases pretty much from every province, numbers of doctors in medical schools have increased so that overworked doctors know that there are more doctors coming down the pike, more doctors are receiving internships, fellowships, residencies, teaching positions and research positions. These all combine to retain and attract doctors. The Canadian dollar is up so the spread between doctor wages is narrowing. The Canadian economy is booming and doctors who are in a booming economy that is investing in new hospitals and medical system are less likely to leave than when an economy is in recession and cutting hospitals.

I know that elements of the right wing want universality to end to keep 15 to 20% of the population out of the medical system so that it frees of space for paying customers but that is the wrong way to go. It would be better to retain universality and find ways of improving it.

[jdobbin]

He was a Muslim for a period of time. Not something, in the current environment, he wishes to highlight.

How do you know how I'm voting? I am spoiling for a chance to again vote Democratic. It goes deep into my heritage. The two leading candidates are nauseating. I am not alone in that view.

I believe Iraq is a mass media issue. Remember, Viet Nam was a draftee war; Iraq is not. And last I checked, the Republicans are doing fine in Nebraska and the Dakotas, states that send many volunteers and almost always vote Republican. Why they vote Republican and the very similar province of Saskatchewan votes NDP is a mystery to me.

And you want to emphasize that he is a traitor. Nice politics.

I don't believe that you will ever vote Democratic again in your lifetime. I don't see you voting for any of them.

As for your Dakotas argument, if I recall North Dakota has a two Democratic Senators and one Democratic Rep.

South Dakota has one Democratic Senator and one Democratic rep.

Nebraska has one Democratic Senator and all its Reps are Republican.

These states do have a history of voting Democratic on the federal front and given eight years of Iraq which is extremely unpopular in every state in the U.S., I think it is possible that the Presidential vote might swing that way as well. Given who the Republican candidates are, I think that is very possible.

As far as your star Guiliani:

Edited July 15, 2007 by jdobbin

[runningdog]

He was a Muslim for a period of time. Not something, in the current environment, he wishes to highlight.

How do you know how I'm voting? I am spoiling for a chance to again vote Democratic. It goes deep into my heritage. The two leading candidates are nauseating. I am not alone in that view.

I believe Iraq is a mass media issue. Remember, Viet Nam was a draftee war; Iraq is not. And last I checked, the Republicans are doing fine in Nebraska and the Dakotas, states that send many volunteers and almost always vote Republican. Why they vote Republican and the very similar province of Saskatchewan votes NDP is a mystery to me.

And you want to emphasize that he is a traitor. Nice politics.

I don't believe that you will ever vote Democratic again in your lifetime. I don't see you voting for any of them.

As for your Dakotas argument, if I recall North Dakota has a two Democratic Senators and one Democratic Rep.

South Dakota has one Democratic Senator and one Democratic rep.

Nebraska has one Democratic Senator and all its Reps are Republican.

These states do have a history of voting Democratic on the federal front and given eight years of Iraq which is extremely unpopular in every state in the U.S., I think it is possible that the Presidential vote might swing that way as well. Given who the Republican candidates are, I think that is very possible.

As far as your star Guiliani:

great vid! Cheers for posting!

[geoffrey]

As far as your star Guiliani:

Why would you post such BS? I would think your intelligence would prevent you from posting such garbage. The entire thing is an appeal to the emotions of people, there is no facts at all in the whole thing. Oh, it's sad what firefighters had to go through on 9/11, but that's their job. The fact they picked an occupation to do just that has nothing to do with Rudy.

Stories of personal sadness make nice soundbites and sway the CNN crowd, but really it's useless in a real discussion.

[Guest American Woman]

Why would you post such BS? I would think your intelligence would prevent you from posting such garbage. The entire thing is an appeal to the emotions of people, there is no facts at all in the whole thing. Oh, it's sad what firefighters had to go through on 9/11, but that's their job. The fact they picked an occupation to do just that has nothing to do with Rudy.

Stories of personal sadness make nice soundbites and sway the CNN crowd, but really it's useless in a real discussion.

No facts?? It's all about fact. The fact that the firefighters' radios didn't work. It's not "stories of personal sadness," it's stories of faulty equipment, and Guliani's lies about it, claiming the firefighters chose to stay inside.

[SkyhookJackson]

Cheap shot at Obama. I'm surprised you forgot to mention his middle name: Hussein. If you want to talk unelectable AND uninteresting, look to the Republican field. I won't elaborate and go far off topic on this thread, but will happily discuss the candidates elsewhere. (By the way - I'm not a supporter of Obama or Clinton.)

Thank you for reminding me about that traitor's middle name. However, I was not taking a cheap shot at him. I had made a typo and was fixing it.

As far as likely GOP candidates:

1. McCain - in implosion mode;
   
2. Giuliani - My favorite, but really a Democrat (like myself) in the GOP purely because he needed to switch parties in order to become US Attorney. He stayed there since the Democratic Party in New York City is, not so much leftist as famously corrupt and closed. I am a Democrat primarily because not being a Democrat shuts one out of most primary voting in this area. Giuliani would be a good President but will have problems in the rest of the country in getting the GOP nomination. Again, the horse (the GOP nomination) goes before the cart (the general election);
   
3. Thompson - the right's favorite candidate now. He hasn't declared, and doesn't have much time if he wants to be up and running before the February 5 blowoff primaries (too many primaries in too many states, too early, on one day IMHO);
   
4. Mitt Romney - Decent candidate, who's shown he can win in a predominantly Democratic state, Massachusetts. Will have problems similar to Giuliani in getting nomination but for a different reason. He's a Mormon and that does not play well with fundamentalist Christians.
   

In short, this is a hard race to handicap on the GOP side. The way the US is built, there is a major bias towards Republicans, because of the Constitution's deliberate over-weighting of small states. The US Constitution drafters had reasons similiar to the drafters of the British North America Act, who over-weighted Quebec and the Maritime Provinces. Both drafters had simple reasons; the respective parts would not go along with the Constitution (and in your case Confederation) unless given a virtual veto power over the near-future direction of the country.

In the US, there are far more "small states" than large states. The US had a population of roughly 281,000,000 as of 2000. At that time, the following "large states" had the following populations (link to Census data):

1. California - 33,000,000;
   
2. New York - 19,000,000;
   
3. Florida - 16,000,000;
   
4. Texas - 21,000,000
   
5. Illinois - 12,000,000;
   
6. Pennsylvania - 12,000,000;
   
7. Ohio - 11,000,000;
   
8. Michigan - 10,000,000;
   
9. Geogia - 8,000,000;
   
10. North Carolina- 8,000,000;
    
11. Virginia - 7,000,000;
    
12. Massachusetts - 6,000,000
    

That accounts for 160,000,000, or well over half the populatin of the US, in 12 of the 50 states.

Since each states gets a minimum of three electoral votes, the over-weighting of small states is obvious. And if you look at the nature of most of those states, they tend to vote Republican, and to be deeply Christian. Thus, just because it is "obvious" to you that Bush is far to the right of center, he isn't in our country.

Why do you consider Obama a traitor?????? The last time I checked, babies couldn't choose their own names and little kids didn't have much of a say about what country they might live in and what schools they would attend. He must be more of a contender than I thought if that's a serious talking point. As for Ghouliani, the "hero" of 9/11, his answer to health care (the topic of this thread) is to let market forces work. 47 million Americans have a news flash for him: been there, done that, it hasn't worked. My favorite Republican solution for health care is Mike Huckabee's. It amounts to "lose weight." Apparently, in Huckabee's world, only fatsos require health care. Mitt, of course, has distanced himself from that gem of a plan he came up with in Massachusetts. Why? Because premiums had doubled before the ink was dry on the bill. By the way, I have a hard time believing you're a Democrat, but I suppose stranger things have happened. Lieberman, after all, still claims to be one.

[bush_cheney2004]

...47 million Americans have a news flash for him: been there, done that, it hasn't worked.

News flash for them....they can't/don't all vote in elections. There are far greater voting numbers with competing interests and dollars to leave things just the way they are, and the issue of healthcare has to share limited bandwidth with Iraq, illegal immigration, and "terrorism".

Good luck with that HillaryCare thing...again.

[B. Max]

Good luck with that HillaryCare thing...again.

News flash for Americans. Under Hillary care 250 million Americans will lose their health insurance to pay for an unknown number, most of them illegals, cost them 10 to 15 thousand a year for the average person and more for the well to do, and get the right to a waiting list behind abortions and sex change operations.

[Guest American Woman]

News flash for Americans. Under Hillary care 250 million Americans will lose their health insurance to pay for an unknown number, most of them illegals, cost them 10 to 15 thousand a year for the average person and more for the well to do, and get the right to a waiting list behind abortions and sex change operations.

"Most of them illegals?" Costing "10 to 15 thousand a year for the average person ...?" I'd really appreciate a source for your figures.

[jdobbin]

Why would you post such BS? I would think your intelligence would prevent you from posting such garbage. The entire thing is an appeal to the emotions of people, there is no facts at all in the whole thing. Oh, it's sad what firefighters had to go through on 9/11, but that's their job. The fact they picked an occupation to do just that has nothing to do with Rudy.

Stories of personal sadness make nice soundbites and sway the CNN crowd, but really it's useless in a real discussion.

Why would you respond if you thought so little of it? This is the type of attack ad we are going to see from now on. It is going to get worse and worse because it works. Swiftboat ads work. I think the last election proved that.

Guiliani has made September 11 his number 1 issue. The firefighters are basically calling him on it.

Surely, I think your intelligence would tell you that.

[B. Max]

"Most of them illegals?" Costing "10 to 15 thousand a year for the average person ...?" I'd really appreciate a source for your figures.

That is an estimate based on the cost in this country. In this country the average for a family of four, per capita, spent by the provincial governments is 14056.31 It is estimated that by 2020 healthcare in this country will consume 90% of the federal budget.

The source is here. You'll have to do your own math.

http://www.taxpayer.com/main/content.php?content_id=6

[Guest American Woman]

"Most of them illegals?" Costing "10 to 15 thousand a year for the average person ...?" I'd really appreciate a source for your figures.

That is an estimate based on the cost in this country. In this country the average for a family of four, per capita, spent by the provincial governments is 14056.31 It is estimated that by 2020 healthcare in this country will consume 90% of the federal budget.

The source is here. You'll have to do your own math.

http://www.taxpayer.com/main/content.php?content_id=6

I doubt whether the source you cited will confirm your claim that most of the uninsured in America are illegals, so I don't think I'll waste my time trying to sort through all those links for the information I asked for. Seems to me if you make the claim you should be able to back it up, but I'm not surprised that you can't.

Secondly, since every nation with national healthcare doesn't have the same per capita budget for health care that Canada does, much less the exact same health care program, again, your source won't support your claim on how much it would cost the average American to have had universal coverage under Hilary's plan.

Last but not least, U.S. taxpayers already pay more for health care than Canada does because we have a higher margin of profit here. I believe Bush_Cheney2004 was the one to first point that out.

Edited July 15, 2007 by American Woman

[B. Max]

name='American Woman' date='Jul 15 2007, 04:57 PM' post='237842']

http://www.taxpayer.com/main/content.php?content_id=6

I doubt whether the source you cited will confirm your claim that most of the uninsured in America are illegals, so I don't think I'll waste my time trying to sort through all those links for the information I asked for. Seems to me if you make the claim you should be able to back it up, but I'm not surprised that you can't.

The source was never intended to show most uninsured are illegals. However illegals are the source of the uninsured and for the most part the cause of others who are uninsured. So gather what you will from this link.

http://www.parapundit.com/archives/001395.html

Secondly, since every nation with national healthcare doesn't have the same per capita budget for health care that Canada does, much less the exact same health care program, again, your source won't support your claim on how much it would cost the average American to have had universal coverage under Hilary's plan.

True, but it's a damn good estimate and I delibately tried to keep it low using our own numbers.

Last but not least, U.S. taxpayers already pay more for health care than Canada does because we have a higher margin of profit here. I believe Bush_Cheney2004 was the one to first point that out.

Something to be feared most of all. Making my estimate a low ball. With all the illegals it just gets worse. What's more, it will lead to a full blown transfer system as we have here and will create economies of illusion. With less productive states consuming an ever larger amount from the more productive until it can no longer be sustained.

Edited July 15, 2007 by B. Max

[bush_cheney2004]

Something to be feared most of all. Making my estimate a low ball. With all the illegals it just gets worse. What's more, it will lead to a full blown transfer system as we have hear and will create economies of illusion. With less productive states consuming an ever larger amount from the more productive until it can no longer be sustained.

Yes....this is the worst case of all. States like Mississippi and New Mexico have already been cited in national studies for universal healthcare care as never being able to pay their way without significant transfer payments. Entitlement programs are already very expensive and will bankrupt the USA long before any wars or defense budgets.

Edited July 15, 2007 by bush_cheney2004