Michael Moore's 'Sicko' Scrutinizes Canada's Healthcare

Twila

Nanah Potato
Mar 26, 2003
14,698
73
48
When I watch a documentary I prefer for the narrator to allow me to make my own judgement calls and not to encourage my feelings on the matter by infusing emotion into the issue. It's been awhile since I've seen a really good documentary that brought the facts before the audience and not the makers/producers/narrators feelings about the topic. MM infuses his movies with emotion and tells you what you should feel about some very biased "facts"

His pieces cause me to have to do way too much research....not really worth the $10.00.
 

paullind10

New Member
Feb 20, 2007
20
0
1
www.healthcarereviews.com
Canada Can't Afford Public Healthcare

5 provinces and the Senate have already made reports that our current healthcare system is unsustainable.

If it's unsustainable it means things are going to get worse, can't you anti-private healthcare advocates get that into your head?

Obviously you are all healthy and well to do people, otherwise you wouldn't deny people access to private healthcare because you have no idea how cruel and insensitive that is. (how many of you are on 1 year waiting lists for a seniors home or hip repair?)

If the governament cannot afford it than the private sector is the only other alternative.
---------
P.Fezziwig, http://www.HealthcareReviews.com , a website devoted to improving the healthcare system through patient feedback.
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
If nothing else he gets people talking.
I caught a bit of him on Larry King arguing with some Doc and it seems that the only one changing the facts was the Doc.

I could only take a few minutes of the bickering over minutia before I had to find something slightly more intellectually evolved on. Thank you Simpsons.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Micheal Moore does make sense occasionally. Sometimes he is right on the money. Moore is also an entertainer of sorts. He has wrought changes in some areas........not complete 180 degree changes, but he has got people to think. I've decided that we would be poorer without him.
 

YoungJoonKim

Electoral Member
Aug 19, 2007
690
5
18
5 provinces and the Senate have already made reports that our current healthcare system is unsustainable.
If possible, we Canadians can actually be flexible with our money and invest more in our health care.
We had SURPLUSES for Saint's sake!
Unlike USA where they have trillions of deficit each year
Our country can use that billions our surpluses and fund our health care.
its SO easy and obvious.
There ARE options to cool and be flexible and keep our care, for everyone.
MM infuses his movies with emotion and tells you what you should feel about some very biased "facts"

You see...health care IS emotional issue where there are injustice and death involved.
When you see a child dying in a film..documentry film, I bet you get emotional.
Apparently, in this documentry, people are being kicked out of hospitals, people are denied cares, a few actually died because they were denied cares, and 9/11 rescue workers were able to get care in Cuba which they could NOT in U.S.A.
So result is
9/11 rescue workers DID get care and U.S. government ignored them.
In this case, I see Fidel Castro as more compassionate man than Mr. Giuliani and Bush and health care industry despite of whatever Fidel have done.


Guys, I don't get it
Michael Moore is wealthy and that's a fact.
His wealth does not harm anyone, at all.
He earned it fair and square just as any other Americans would have earned.
But health industry is making profit through denying and rejecting care to American people which ultimate causes their death.
Michael Moore have not kill a single life, he is fighting to preserve one.
He is striving for better America if not you, him. With people who vision with him.
He was against Iraq war before you and I and he was proven right.
It should be the Bush Administration who should be sweared* at because they lied to American people and deceived them into war in Iraq which never will end until they pull out and let million die anyways* Mr Bush should be in PRISON for violating Genova Convention. He have took American's rights. He is now spending more than 2 trillion dollars in war on Iraq.
2 freaking trillion dollars would save those 45 million Americans who are UNinsured.
For poor sake, impeach.
 

Tim Hamilton

New Member
May 6, 2007
17
0
1
There is a limited amount of manpower and resources. To create a parallel system, you would have to take resources the taxpayer paid for, and give them to a private organization (which is then denied to the people who paid for it).

No, the private system would be creating its own resources. It isn't about privatizing existing facilities, it's about creating new private facilities from scratch.

Unless you're talking about the education of the people who would work in the system, but this would be true of anyone who has received a public education and shouldn't be a factor.
 

Tim Hamilton

New Member
May 6, 2007
17
0
1
Also, hybridized public/private is the norm in most western countries, and not surprisingly, most of the western countries who use it rank considerably higher than us on the WHO's rankings.

Canada is one of the few countries that has actually banned private health care. Principles of universal health care should be about providing services to those who can't afford them, not denying services for those who can.

If someone wants to use their own resources on their own health, that should be their right. If you don't want to pay for private health care, don't pay for it, but if someone else wants to, this should be between the patient and her doctor. It's amazing how hypocritical peopole are when it comes to enforcing their own standards on others.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Also, hybridized public/private is the norm in most western countries, and not surprisingly, most of the western countries who use it rank considerably higher than us on the WHO's rankings.

Canada is one of the few countries that has actually banned private health care. Principles of universal health care should be about providing services to those who can't afford them, not denying services for those who can.

If someone wants to use their own resources on their own health, that should be their right. If you don't want to pay for private health care, don't pay for it, but if someone else wants to, this should be between the patient and her doctor. It's amazing how hypocritical peopole are when it comes to enforcing their own standards on others.

Canada has not banned private health care. Almost all the labs that do the blood work are private. Canada's health care system certainly has some warts but whoever named it thirtieth in the world was crazy. In an earlier post I cited that several friends and myself had all gone through heart surgery with very few hitches and hardly any waiting. We can now add Colpy and one more friend to our group. My brother just had laser eye surgery to both eyes. It sounds like problems are the exception rather than the rule.

I see no evidence that private health care will improve what we have......in fact all the evidence suggests that the reverse is true. What we need is one system that serves all.......not a bunch of different systems that cater to the rich.
 

YoungJoonKim

Electoral Member
Aug 19, 2007
690
5
18
I saw private health insurance advertisement on TV...in Canadian TV...
Perhaps, explain to that to me if we don't allow private health care?
Though I am firmly opposed to it..
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Im all for 100% private health care.

as long as we have 100% public insurance. But thats not what people want, they want to pay more to get treatment before less wealthy people.

Have as much private institutions as you want, as long as you don't accept anything but OHIP.
 

s243a

Council Member
Mar 9, 2007
1,352
15
38
Calgary
I don't think this thread should turn into a More bashing thread even if he deserves it. I have seen Micheal Moore interviewed about the movies and he actually said good things about Canada's health care system. Is it true that in the US there are children without healthcare? That just sounds wrong to me. Anyway, I think it is a good point that if we switch to having two parallel systems right away then there won't be enough Docters.

Perhaps the way to do the switch is grant a limited amount of licenses for private practices. If the amount of doctors grow enough to allow more parralel services then I can't see it not helping the public system. Every person that chooses the private system over the public system is one less patient the government has to pay for.

Oh BTW why shouldn't wealthy people jump the line. They make more money and pay more taxes. Wait times for them is a bigger cost to the government in terms of lost productivity then it is for a poorer person.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Oh BTW why shouldn't wealthy people jump the line. They make more money and pay more taxes. Wait times for them is a bigger cost to the government in terms of lost productivity then it is for a poorer person.

Hold on a minute here.....There are lots of "rich" people who are living off the wealth generated by their parents or grand parents. Why should these people be allowed to jump to the head of the line just because they happen to have the money? Also, all valuable people in this country did not come from wealthy backgrounds. We don't know where our next Nobel laureate is coming from.......there is nothing to suggest that he/she will be produced by a wealthy family who don't necessarily pay more taxes. Better we stick with our universal, single payer, health care system that is cheaper per capita than whatever the Americans have.
 

tracy

House Member
Nov 10, 2005
3,500
48
48
California
No, the private system would be creating its own resources. It isn't about privatizing existing facilities, it's about creating new private facilities from scratch.

Unless you're talking about the education of the people who would work in the system, but this would be true of anyone who has received a public education and shouldn't be a factor.

Why shouldn't that be a factor? The biggest problem the system has is staff shortages. Creating new buildings isn't going to solve that.

Plus, the money to build those new hospitals and buy those new machines is going to come from the same pool of money that pays for the public system. No one can find a private system that's been cheaper than a public one.
 

s243a

Council Member
Mar 9, 2007
1,352
15
38
Calgary
Hold on a minute here.....There are lots of "rich" people who are living off the wealth generated by their parents or grand parents. Why should these people be allowed to jump to the head of the line just because they happen to have the money? Also, all valuable people in this country did not come from wealthy backgrounds. We don't know where our next Nobel laureate is coming from.......there is nothing to suggest that he/she will be produced by a wealthy family who don't necessarily pay more taxes. Better we stick with our universal, single payer, health care system that is cheaper per capita than whatever the Americans have.

Okay, I'll buy that. Statistics would be interesting though. And what income level do you think it would be before people start using the private system over the public?
 

s243a

Council Member
Mar 9, 2007
1,352
15
38
Calgary
Why shouldn't that be a factor? The biggest problem the system has is staff shortages. Creating new buildings isn't going to solve that.

Plus, the money to build those new hospitals and buy those new machines is going to come from the same pool of money that pays for the public system. No one can find a private system that's been cheaper than a public one.

I think there can be a solution for the transition. Issue a limited number of licenses for private clinics. Charge some kind of fee for that license and use the money to help train more doctors or re-certify more doctors from other countries.
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Oh BTW why shouldn't wealthy people jump the line. They make more money and pay more taxes. Wait times for them is a bigger cost to the government in terms of lost productivity then it is for a poorer person.

Do you agree wealthy people should get shorter prison and jail terms for the same reason? Should they also get first response from firefighters? What about first dibs in schooling?

They contribute more, surely you should get more votes based on the amount of money you make, they have a larger stake in the country after all. 1 vote per dollar we'll say? thats fair right?
 

YoungJoonKim

Electoral Member
Aug 19, 2007
690
5
18
Let's talk about something that is morally wrong for us.
GROSSLY wrong.

First of all, we know that U.S. health care denies people's care to make profit.
FACT.
The way they do this is by minimizing the care.
FACT
With minimizing the care, it doesn't matter whether U.S. has nice infrastructure because only LIMITED people are going to receive it.
TRUE.
So U.S. health system is just front page picture, as seen by most of Americans. But within that book of health care, its disgusting.

Is Canadian any better?

Yes, we are BETTER.
WHO says so.
UN says so.
Not the government of U.S.A.
U.N which represents the world.
WHO says socialized medicine and health industry creates better quality for all the citizens.
WHO says France is better than U.S.
Britain is better than U.S.
(As in terms of providing care for everyone)
And U.S. is suppose to be the richest country on Earth.
Or perhaps they are the richest because health care industry is making profit?
....*sniff*
And George W. Bush said, "no one will be left behind."
But its so evident is SO clear people ARE left behind, even though they are huge* minority.
In terms of allowing many people as possible, even at to the extend of being bankrupt.
Because we allow as many people as possible, more and more people are avail to get care.
In terms of morality providing resources for the poor AND rich, we are socially correct.
And because its correct, we pay the price of waiting time and shortage of funds (<- not true, surpluses can cover it)
I think there can be a solution for the transition. Issue a limited number of licenses for private clinics. Charge some kind of fee for that license and use the money to help train more doctors or re-certify more doctors from other countries.
Depends on their situation.
Everybody has situation.
Don't except homeless to have private health care, that is not happening.
 

s243a

Council Member
Mar 9, 2007
1,352
15
38
Calgary
Do you agree wealthy people should get shorter prison and jail terms for the same reason? Should they also get first response from firefighters? What about first dibs in schooling?

They contribute more, surely you should get more votes based on the amount of money you make, they have a larger stake in the country after all. 1 vote per dollar we'll say? thats fair right?

Obviously if they are in prison there contribution to society is questionable. One vote per dollar is obviously not an ideal way for things to function but in terms of corporations that is how things work. People in wealthy neighborhoods have considerably more value in there property and as a consequence extra protection from fires is not completely unreasonable. If they have the money why shouldn’t they be able to buy a good education with it?

edit:
As a side not I think property taxes should be sufficiently high to pay for those services.
 
Last edited:

YoungJoonKim

Electoral Member
Aug 19, 2007
690
5
18
In other word..injustice?
Rich are more valuable than some poor African-American (Canadian)?
Its not injustice for them to buy education, better education. This is a different concept.