|
National Health Care
I watched Sicko last night. Mike mentioned that it was worth a watch, so I checked it out. Although some parts were over the top (loving adoration for all parts of the french social system for example), it certainly makes one think about health care. I recommend it.
I particularly was interested in the segments on the Canadian and British national health care systems. When asked about compensation, a British doctor explained that a large component of their compensation is based on outcomes. I.e., if they can get patients to quit smoking or reduce blood pressure, they get paid more. I think that makes great sense. As for the Canadian system, for as long as I can remember I have heard Americans say "Socialized medicine is awful in Canada - people die waiting for operations due to equipment and doctor shortages." However, I have known lots of Canadians and I have yet to meet a single one that had anything bad to say about the health care system. Without exception, they have all been passionate advocates. Maybe I just haven't met the right people. Furthermore, it seems that there are far more Americans dying off due to lack of access to health care. Thousands of poor and uninsured die each year in the US due to the prohibitive cost of cancer treatments, heart surgery, etc. And Canadians and Brits are far healthier than we are in the US, on average. That could have multiple explanations, but it makes one think. |
We have a different culture and I truly doubt you can find many people dying from lack of access.
We have persons on drugs, alcoholics, and with poor eating habits that die. And people in the slums who probably don't get good health care, even if they qualify for Medicaid. Sometimes, we ignore the adage, that poor people have poor habits. By no means do I have all the answers to access and affordability. And I never understood when health care changed from a service to a God given right, but society has some how magically made that transition. But I don't see the linkage between health care, i.e., having operations or stuff diagnosed as affecting people as much as lifestyle. I don't visit physicians unless I'm in a sports accident. Every couple of years when I do, my good health habits, excerise habits and reasonably good constitution have produced a moderately healthy individual. I work in health insurance, heath systems analysis, and the structural aspects of health care every day. There are significant communication problems, some difficulty in finding affordable assurance, but there also lots of stupid people who place themselves in dire situations. Yet many believe it's society's responsibility to care for the mistakes of stupid people. At some point, an adult shoulders the responsibility for his own health. We have many persons in our society shirking that responsibility. |
Quote:
Their anecdotal evidence blows, but mine is rock solid. |
I really enjoy MM movies. Most people bash them without ever having seen them.
I recently re-watched "Roger and Me" and "Bowling for Columbine," both of which I thought were very interesting. I bet if you asked 10 folks what they thought of Bowling for Columbine was about, they would answer that it was left wing anti-gun propaganda. When in reality, it is not anti-gun at all. It is an attack on our media. Sicko was equally such. Most people were bashing it before it even came out. MM went on the Today show or something to that effect last year before the movie even dropped. When was this....maybe June? A copy of Sicko had been leaked on the web and was being downloaded. MM said he didn't mind at all, so that weekend I downloaded it and watched it. I enjoyed it and the message I took from it was a bi-partisan critcism on our health care....it wasnt saying that socialism was the answer, only that we should look to other countries to see what we can take to improve our current system. Yet on CB (again, not a good litmus, I know), everyone was bashing it saying that it was the usual MM anti-republican rhetoric. Simply not true. MM is a honk and a self-promoter, but his documentaries are interesting and worth the watch. |
Quote:
Quote:
I am a strong believer in public education, as are a majority of Americans. Admittedly, public education is basically "socialized education". The question is, why not health care? Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I also downloaded Sicko after MM said it was cool and quite enjoyed it. Having serious concerns about universal healthcare, I enjoyed how the thrust of the movie is that our current system sucks, not necessarily that socialized medicine is the answer. I was already painfully aware of how much our current system sucks, but I think a lot of people don't realize that yet.
It makes sense to me that we should look to other countries and identify pros and cons and see what we can do to fix our system without running into the same issues. It seems to me that an awareness of the problems of our system is requisite for there to be any motivation to fix it, and in that regard Sicko is very effective. |
Quote:
Kinda nice. Quote:
I watched Fahrenheit 9-11 and it's a bunch of crap. There are countless examples of flat-out lies and even more times when Moore ignores evidence that doesn't support his twisted view of the world. If he wants to make movies that promote his agenda, fine. But people who think he's going out to find the truth about controversial issues are up in the night. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
There is a difference between sarcasm and insincerity. I am sarcastic, not insincere. Although I can be a master at both when I want to be. For example, "Lingo, you are really cool and really funny." |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Maybe I should. |
To your 9-11 point, of course this movie seemed anti-GWB. It WAS anti-GWB. It was never advertised as anything else. Did you expect it to be pro-GWB?
Movies like Bowling, Roger & Me, Sicko, and The Big One are typically attacked for being anti-Republican. My point is that upon even a cursory viewing, it is plain that MM attacks both sides. These editorials are not the anti-conservative exposes they are made out to be. If you didnt like GWB criticism in 9-11, you may want to skip Captain Mike Across America, his newest one coming out later this year. Perhaps someone on the conservative right should make a pro GWB documentary to point out all the wonderful things he has accomplished while in office. It will be sort of a "Profiles in Courage" type piece, I am sure. |
Quote:
Most people I know think MM is interesting, but nothing more. His personal agendas are plain to see and, ultimately, he is in the business of selling tickets to his movies. |
Quote:
Also, I live in Idaho. |
Quote:
What part of 9-11 did you not like? When he was asking congressmen to send their kids to Iraq? Or when he documented how many days W was on vacation or at Crawford Ranch pulling weeds or driving his golf cart around? |
Quote:
Quote:
It's not that Moore doesn't have good points... he's just incapable of portraying these points without resorting to outright deception. EDIT: I think the main reason I dislike Moore is that I attended his speaking engagement at UVSC in 2004. I was expecting him to go over some points from Fahrenheit 9/11 or something, but that's not exactly what we got. First, he kept the crowd waiting 50 minutes past the originally scheduled start time because he had a press conference. When he finally did show up, all he did was bash Bush's stuttering (highly original), rip on Utah for ignoring the Bill of Rights, and praise UVSC's student government for being "courageous". No discussion of issues... he instead decided to pull the race card and insinuate that all Republicans are racist. Unimpressive. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I can point you to places where you can read about people waiting in pain for a joint replacement because its considered "elective" surgery. Also there are new techniques and materials but they only pay for "your grandfather's" joint replacement, not the new materials (e.g. metal or ceramic vs plastic). Some of them have been going to India for it. This is not to say there aren't similar problems in America with insurance coverage issues of the same nature. |
Quote:
The reality is the Canadian system is not great, not bad, but pretty good. There are problems such as an acute lack of access to family doctors. There simply aren't enough of them and the one's practicing are overworked and a little underpaid (IMO). The entire system is predicated upon referrals starting with the family doctor. Once the referral is made you get absolute access to the service, despite a potentially long wait (several weeks or a couple of months) for an elective procedure. If a condition is potentially life threatening etc. a patient is moved to the front of the line and the care is immediate … and yes, it is the SAME level of care available in the states. In many regards the system is slow to adopt new procedures, techniques and materials –but ultimately they ARE adopted and in fact many MORE procedures are available to EVERYONE and not merely those with insurance! It is regularly argued in parliament that there should be some privatization of some elective services to permit those who can afford to accelerate the process to do so instead of going south or elsewhere. I might ad that an equal number of Americans are going to Malaysia and India for such services because it is more immediate and or cheaper ;) Our current conservative government might very well pass legislation that privatizes some services. I also think a nominal fee should be charged for each visit to a clinic. People who need to take an aspirin and get a good nights sleep overrun the clinics and place incredible stress on the aforementioned overworked family doctors. The bottom line is I have lived in Canada for 14 years. I have NEVER come across a single person who has been denied the best care available in modern health sciences, myself included. Furthermore I am not a fan of MM and consider his work fiction … his fiction is as dangerous as the fiction one often hears about the Canadian health system by Americans who ignorantly fear national health care. |
Quote:
:rolleyes: |
Quote:
Society made the determination that an educated workforce was more productive and better for the economy. If we promoted wellness, by virture of good health habits, that is something society should promote and look to subsidize. But we cannot afford unlimited health care consumption which public funded health care would become. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I agree that we dont turn people away....but in big cities, we kick them out quickly, for sure. That being said, I have no practical solutions, either. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm no proponent of socialized medicine, but too many conservatives have their heads in the sand about health care problems in our society. I believe these people are simply hastening the day when we have socialized medicine in the US. The day will come when the solutions are proposed around the table, and if most of the conservatives have stayed their current course, the proposals will, for the most part, be socialized medicine and "Don't do anything". And in that case, socialized medicine will win, because the problems are real. One thing I liked about Romney was his willingness to try a more conservative approach to these problems in MA. Whether or not I liked his solution, I admire his willingness to look for a creative solution based on more conservative principles. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
England has 50 million people Canada has 26 million people France has 60 million people Its a lot harder to give good healthcare with so many people. Look at brazil they are have half as many people as the US and their systems suck. Look at India and China. Conversely sweden has fantastic healthcare. The US is doing pretty good if you take its size into consideration |
Quote:
I didn't think it was possible, but I am even more against it now. |
Quote:
|
One question: In Zion, will all have equal access to medical care, in your opinion?
|
Quote:
:) |
Quote:
I pay too much in taxes right now. I don't want to pay more. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I can figure out where you're going with this, but I'd rather know that my taxes are going to something that is for national defense than to have to pay more for something that people could get if they did what they needed to do to get it. If people would take advantage of the educational opportunities available, they could better their lives and that betterment would include being able to get health care. As I said, socialized medicine would be yet another expense. I'd rather invest that money in order for my kids to have something for their future. |
Quote:
http://www.cimca.ca/newsletter/issue04_05.html http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewa...p-surgery.html http://www.embassymag.ca/html/index....ch/28/tourism/ Sample "I was in real pain, and then he told me I had to wait two years, and my life was gone," recalls the mother of three and grandmother of six, who struggled even to get off the couch some days. "My little grandson would come down, and before I got bad, we used to walk all around Chester. "We’d look at the ferry boat and we’d stop and throw things to the birds. I could not do that anymore. Eventually, I could not even get on our boat, walk down to the wharf. (Walking) was an absolute struggle." Others continue to wait. The latest Capital health authority figures put the median wait time for hip replacement at 302 days, well above the medically accepted standard of 180 days. The wait for knee replacement stands at 349 days. As of November 2007, 553 patients were on the list for the hip procedure, while 946 patients waited for knee replacements. And almost 3,700 were still waiting for all orthopedic procedures." http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1039971.html |
Quote:
|
Quote:
To add to our anecdotal database: I network online with parents of other kids with with the chromosomal disorder my son has. There are parents from overseas, but for the most part these are American and Canadian parents. The impression that I get is that on a day-to-day basis, these kids are getting better care in Canada, but that when it comes time to schedule a surgery, the kids are often subjected to long waiting times because their surgeries are inevitably classified as "elective." Here in the States, American kids can get the surgeries they need without delay, but have to wait a year or more to get the wheelchairs/walkers/other equipment they need while the insurance companies try to figure out a way to deny the claim; and most of the day-to-day care matters are left up to the parents, with no assistance from either the government or from private insurance. In general, my impression is that Americans who have little need for healthcare are the ones willing to defend our system to the ends of the earth, mostly because they have no first-hand experience with the problems of the system. Personally, I think we should be ashamed that we are the only industrialized nation that fails to provide care for its citizens. Perhaps MRD has a point that the sheer numbers make the matter hopelessly difficult, but my immediate thought is the same as Lebowski's: that this should provide more resources to make the system workable. |
Quote:
I'm not saying that everyone who doesn't have health care deserves it. There are many in a situation in which they are unable to get it. But I feel rather confident that the majority in that situation are there as a result of their own choices. If, after they do all they can do on their own, are unable to get what they need, then I have no problem in finding ways to help them. I'm just tired of doing everything I do in order to take care of me and my family and then being told I have to do more for those who are unwilling to do it as well. I'll suggest the same thing I suggested on utefans in a debate like this. I challenged all those who want socialized medicine to voluntarily pay extra taxes in order to make it happen. Those of us who chose not to won't be able to access that health care. Sound fair? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.