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

[Xman]

Dang! I see that it is not restricted to Blacks only. Poor white folks can also be enslaved. Dang!

[bush_cheney2004]

Wasn't slavery in the Constitution as well? I guess from a strict Constitutionalist, it should have remained and slavery should have been left to businesses to decide. heh

It was..see US Civil War.

The US Constitution has provisions for amendment by states with a super majority. Those who want want commie-style health care should begin to get signatures at once!

[bush_cheney2004]

In the end, we're all in this together. You can't take it with you, BC2004. I'm pretty much done debating you since it's apparent you're in that 26% who would support King George even if he got on television and bashed puppies with a hammer.

Health care in the USA has little to do with "King George". Medicare Part D was actually passed on his watch.

You'll not find any post from me complaining about taxes....but you will find plenty from Canadians with respect to their health care system (or GST, or petrol, or etc.) That's because they have an entitlement mentality and expectation based on hard earned money and taxes paid. I have no such expectation, even though I paid more than $50,000 in taxes for 2006.

The USA already has a single payer system that dwarfs Canada's (Medicare). The real change will be in Canada, as they admit that a two-tier system exists and needs to be expanded for private care to improve medical professional staffing and facilities (capacity). Never underestimate the power of enterprise.

[Guest American Woman]

Wasn't slavery in the Constitution as well? I guess from a strict Constitutionalist, it should have remained and slavery should have been left to businesses to decide. heh

It was..see US Civil War.

The US Constitution has provisions for amendment by states with a super majority. Those who want want commie-style health care should begin to get signatures at once!

Commie-stlye healthcare would fie in this country well along with our commie-style roadways, our commie-style military, our commie-style education, our commie-style space program, and all our other commie-style federal government programs.

[Xman]

Consider the source. It's from bushcheney2004.

[Guest American Woman]

Unfortunately that's the kind of thinking that keeps us from progressing as a nation.

Edited July 12, 2007 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

Unfortunately that's the kind of thinking that keeps us from progressing as a nation.

Last time I checked, the "nation" was for all of us, not just the "progressives" who think they know what's best for everybody. Start by winning some elections....even the "progressives" in Canada got turfed.

[jdobbin]

Unfortunately that's the kind of thinking that keeps us from progressing as a nation.

Perhaps the new government in 2008 will have a different perspective than the one now.

[bush_cheney2004]

Perhaps the new government in 2008 will have a different perspective than the one now.

There will be no "new government" in 2008....just elections.

[KO2]

I haven't seen farenheit 9 11, yet.

Definetly not a movie goer.

[jbg]

Wasn't slavery in the Constitution as well? I guess from a strict Constitutionalist, it should have remained and slavery should have been left to businesses to decide. heh

It was deleted from the Constitution with the 13th Amendment.

[SkyhookJackson]

Unfortunately that's the kind of thinking that keeps us from progressing as a nation.

Last time I checked, the "nation" was for all of us, not just the "progressives" who think they know what's best for everybody. Start by winning some elections....even the "progressives" in Canada got turfed.

I wasn't going to respond to you anymore, but you sure know how to press the right button: Elections. If you will recall, in the year 2000, your boy was appointed to the presidency AFTER the Supreme Court stopped the counting of votes in Florida. (Their conclusion had an amusing passage about it causing irreparable harm to the plaintiff - Shrub - if the vote was to continue. The harm, of course, would have been the loss of the White House.) The votes, as you must know, were later tallied up and - surprise, surprise - Mr. Gore, in truth, won Florida, despite a whole lot of monkey business with the voting machines and overt voter disenfranchisement. Fast forward to 2004. For the first time in history all the exit polls turned out the be "wrong." The same polls used in other countries to verify the "truthiness" of their elections, suddenly failed in the greatest democracy on earth. Mr. Kerry was projected to be a landslide winner based on exit polling and Mr. Bush, unfazed, went to bed early. We all know what happened and the real tragedy was that Mr. Kerry, despite objections from Mr. Edwards, chose not to contest the results. Investigations have been done which strongly indicate more voting machine tampering in Ohio, as well as questionable behavior by their Secretary of State (who, oddly, was a huge Bush/Cheney water carrier in the state) and other election officials. The court battles are still going on and there are new "vote caging" revelations being exposed in the Justice Department's firing of federal prosecutors scandal. True, officially, my side lost and I can't be sure we won't lose in 2008 because of the same dirty tricks. But the real losers have been 3,611 Americans (as of yesterday) and upwards of a half million Iraqis. Meanwhile, Usama Bin Laden, who Bush doesn't think much about anymore (his words), is still dragging his dialysis machine around the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Edited July 13, 2007 by SkyhookJackson

[bush_cheney2004]

I wasn't going to respond to you anymore, but you sure know how to press the right button: Elections. If you will recall, in the year 2000, your boy was appointed to the presidency AFTER the Supreme Court stopped the counting of votes in Florida.

Don't dismay, they all say that but come running back for more.

What does your rant have to do with Canadian or American health care? Do you think things would be just ducky if Big Al were president? What was Kerry's excuse?

Why can't "progressives" mobilize enough political support to prevail on health care or other issues?

[SkyhookJackson]

I wasn't going to respond to you anymore, but you sure know how to press the right button: Elections. If you will recall, in the year 2000, your boy was appointed to the presidency AFTER the Supreme Court stopped the counting of votes in Florida.

Don't dismay, they all say that but come running back for more.

What does your rant have to do with Canadian or American health care? Do you think things would be just ducky if Big Al were president? What was Kerry's excuse?

Why can't "progressives" mobilize enough political support to prevail on health care or other issues?

Just educating the Canadians on the screwed up country to their south . . . and yes, if "Big Al" had been president, I think the United States would have been a better place today. At the moment, the forces that might bring decent health care to the U.S. are hamstrung by numbers. In the Congress they do not have a veto-proof majority and in the Senate they don't have the numbers to prevent a filibuster. Sadly, the Republicans are filibustering virtually everything. Sane people can only hope the 2008 election brings an end to the madness.

[Guest American Woman]

Unfortunately that's the kind of thinking that keeps us from progressing as a nation.

Last time I checked, the "nation" was for all of us, not just the "progressives" who think they know what's best for everybody. Start by winning some elections....even the "progressives" in Canada got turfed.

You say "progressives" as if it's a dirty word. Don't tell me you think progress is a bad thing?

[lost&outofcontrol]

Nice article on Znet about the cnn vs. sicko "incident"

link

[Guest American Woman]

Good article. Thanks for the link.

[bush_cheney2004]

You say "progressives" as if it's a dirty word. Don't tell me you think progress is a bad thing?

Progress is a good thing...when it is progress. The USA already has a single payer system existing alongside private for-profit health care. Only Canada, Cuba, and the DPRK have legal restrictions on such an approach. 100% CommieCare would certainly not be progress.

[Guest American Woman]

You say "progressives" as if it's a dirty word. Don't tell me you think progress is a bad thing?

Progress is a good thing...when it is progress. The USA already has a single payer system existing alongside private for-profit health care. Only Canada, Cuba, and the DPRK have legal restrictions on such an approach. 100% CommieCare would certainly not be progress.

The U.S. doesn't have a single payer system for everyone. Our single payer system, Medicaid, is for the elderly. That doesn't help the 40+ million uninsured Americans, so it's hardly "existing alongside private for-profit health care". But then, I'm sure you already knew that.

[bush_cheney2004]

The U.S. doesn't have a single payer system for everyone. Our single payer system, Medicaid, is for the elderly. That doesn't help the 40+ million uninsured Americans, so it's hardly "existing alongside private for-profit health care". But then, I'm sure you already knew that.

That's the point....America has what Canada is afraid to have....public and private systems coexisting on the up and up. Medicare also provides for the disabled, renal care for those younger than 65, and other special cases. There is also Medicaid (which is not for the elderly), SCHIP, and state programs like MediCal and BadgerCare.

You don't have to be insured to get health care in the United States.

Edited July 14, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

The U.S. doesn't have a single payer system for everyone. Our single payer system, Medicaid, is for the elderly. That doesn't help the 40+ million uninsured Americans, so it's hardly "existing alongside private for-profit health care". But then, I'm sure you already knew that.

That's the point....America has was Canada is afraid to have....public and private systems coexisting on the up and up. Medicare also provides for the disabled, renal care for those younger than 65, and other special cases. There is also Medicaid (which is not for the elderly), SCHIP, and state programs like MediCal and BadgerCare.

You don't have to be insured to get health care in the United States.

No. The United States doesn't have "public and private systems co-existing." The "public system" is hardly for everyone. It's not for the vast majority. Who it serves is highly selective.

This discussion isn't about needing to be insured to get health care; it's about not being able to PAY the high cost of medical treatment when one isn't insured. Furthermore, some medical facilities will not treat without payment up front, so if one cannot pay for it, one cannot get it. Furthermore, many who manage to get it go bankrupt as a result. This has all been pointed out already.

[geoffrey]

Nice article on Znet about the cnn vs. sicko "incident"

link

Dr. Gupta is right. Moore is dead wrong. The US system is better in many ways to Canada's. The Europeans sure are a way to look.

I don't think it's reasonable to look at health care in a vacuum, unlike Moore. Saying Cuba spends $25 per person on health care and is therefore better is purely ridiculous. Go live in Cuba if you believe that. No one does. Many Cubans die trying to escape their system to go to the United States. We could spend $25 per person, but we'd also have our doctors living in third world poverty. Up to you.

Canadians do wait longer than anyone else. The suffering in Canada is unjustified and enourmous, and the SCC agrees with me in the judgement I've posted here many times. Many Canadians have to go to the US for care now. My own family had to fly down to Minnesota for a month to get my sister seen by a doctor, as the Canadian system said she simply cost too much. She was treated and now enjoys a normal life, where as she would be in constant pain and suffering in Canada.

Fortunately we could afford it. Most Canadians probably couldn't. People die because of quotas and expense limits in Canada far more than they do under an HMO.

Don't ever tell me that we have it better here, we don't. Too many people suffer and die because of some ridiculous ideology that Canadians in general are just too thick to overcome. Ideologies have the US in Iraq, have creationism in Southern schools and Tommy Douglas's ghost floating around our hospitals.

Our system is terrible. It's criminal. It's filth. To have Moore saying how good we have it is deceptive. Canada has one of the worst systems in the Western world.

[bush_cheney2004]

No. The United States doesn't have "public and private systems co-existing." The "public system" is hardly for everyone. It's not for the vast majority. Who it serves is highly selective.

Of course it does, just not to the 100% "universal" level that you advocate. The entire system serves about 85% of the nation, and 60% of those have favorable views of the system and their choices. Some people don't want to pay for health insurance of any kind because they have other priorities or will not use services. That's why the "progressives" can't get it done. Let's see...should I trade what I have for the unknown of CommieCare...nope!

Even those on Medicare can buy insurance to fill in the gaps and copays. Can Canadians do that "legally"?

Edited July 14, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

No. The United States doesn't have "public and private systems co-existing." The "public system" is hardly for everyone. It's not for the vast majority. Who it serves is highly selective.

Of course it does, just not to the 100% "universal" level that you advocate. The entire system serves about 85% of the nation, and 60% of those have favorable views of the system and their choices. Some people don't want to pay for health insurance of any kind because they have other priorities or will not use services. That's why the "progressives" can't get it done. Let's see...should I trade what I have for the unkown of CommieCare...nope!

Even those on Medicare can buy insurance to fill in the gaps and copays. Can Canadians do that "legally"?

Repeating that the systems "co-exist" doesn't change the fact that they don't. "Public" health coverage isn't selective; it covers the entire public. As for 85% of the public being served by the entire system (the majority by private healthcare); again, that leaves 40+ million NOT being served. That's a lot of people not being served. That leaves a lot of people going without or drowning in debt. And the 60% with favorable views is hardly an impressive majority and I'm guessing that figure is getting lower and lower with passing time.

But "CommieCare?" Surely you have more intelligence than that ...

[jdobbin]

Dr. Gupta is right. Moore is dead wrong. The US system is better in many ways to Canada's. The Europeans sure are a way to look.

I don't think it's reasonable to look at health care in a vacuum, unlike Moore. Saying Cuba spends $25 per person on health care and is therefore better is purely ridiculous. Go live in Cuba if you believe that. No one does. Many Cubans die trying to escape their system to go to the United States. We could spend $25 per person, but we'd also have our doctors living in third world poverty. Up to you.

Canadians do wait longer than anyone else. The suffering in Canada is unjustified and enourmous, and the SCC agrees with me in the judgement I've posted here many times. Many Canadians have to go to the US for care now. My own family had to fly down to Minnesota for a month to get my sister seen by a doctor, as the Canadian system said she simply cost too much. She was treated and now enjoys a normal life, where as she would be in constant pain and suffering in Canada.

Fortunately we could afford it. Most Canadians probably couldn't. People die because of quotas and expense limits in Canada far more than they do under an HMO.

Don't ever tell me that we have it better here, we don't. Too many people suffer and die because of some ridiculous ideology that Canadians in general are just too thick to overcome. Ideologies have the US in Iraq, have creationism in Southern schools and Tommy Douglas's ghost floating around our hospitals.

Our system is terrible. It's criminal. It's filth. To have Moore saying how good we have it is deceptive. Canada has one of the worst systems in the Western world.

Gupta was shown to be wrong in the figures he used. It wasn't $25 a day for Cuba as is mentioned in the link. It was also shown in Moore's movie where WHO ranked Cuba.

18,000 die every year in the U.S. as a result of not receiving care as has been noted in several newspapers including the Washington Post. I don't think that Canadians die at that rate but if you can find the numbers, please let me know.

Canada needs to improve its system but I don't know that there is evidence that a massive privatization will do that.