Michael Moore and healthcare

[EthanAllen]

Yes, I read that about Dr Paul. He really has walked the walk and talked the talk.

Have you ever read anything about his views on intellectual property rights for pharmaceuticals which are also a contributing factor to the high cost of healthcare?

[KBCraig]

This is completely off topic for this thread. But:

WHO has rated the USA 37th in healthcare...

And when Moore pointed that out while praising Cuba's system, he glossed right over the fact that Cuba is ranked 39th on that same list.

[CNHT]

Well I forgot how we got onto this but we can just stop....I just have one more question before I start drinking (I had a bad day today, accident and entanglement with the cops)

I think ours is ranked low for ACCESSIBILITY and CUBA's is for BOTH QUALITY and ACCESSIBILITY like Canada's is.

[kola]

The WHO Report was based on 5 catagories

http://www.photius.com/rankings/who_world_health_ranks.html

http://www.photius.com/rankings/world_health_systems.html

[error]

Can someone please move the health care debate to Endless Debate and Whining?

[kola]

I apologize, it is my fault. I brought up Michael "chub" Moore.

Kola

 

[Braddogg]

I got really pissed throughout that whole movie.  I got mad at the AMA and insurance companies colluding with government to restrict competition and raise prices (not to mention the bullshit senior drug benefits bill that stole money directly from my pockets through taxes).  I got mad at those people ranting and raving about how great French socialized medicine is.  I imagined them with handguns going door to door demanding their neighbors pay for their healthcare or get shot or get sent to the rape rooms. 

And as a long-time student of history, I got REALLY pissed with the Cuba scenes.  It's a goddamn Potemkin village!  The Cuban government was showing Moore a new Theresienstadt!  And it was SO CLEAR to me.  This is the guy who won't trust the US government to tell the truth about Iraq (and his skepticism is warranted), but is willing to take as gospel what the Cuban government shows him?  He just doesn't get it.  There's no such thing as the golden gun of government.  No matter who holds it, no matter what system is behind it, it's still a gun, and it still corrupts.

[MTPorcupine3]

Dr. Benjamin Rush, signer of the Declaration of Independence said [paraphrase], "If freedom of medicine is not guaranteed in the Constitution it will be a matter of time before medicine organises to create an underground dictatorship." What we need is not more freedom but TOTAL freedom of medicine (and food, drugs, etc.).

[kadar]

So you want socialized medicine?

Isn't paying into an insurance company for health care a form of socialized medicine, just on a different level?
I mean, whats the difference whether you pay the government a tax for your health or that you pay a premium to an insurer? Your money still goes to pay for someone else.

I think what we have now would work better if Big government would remove itself and any regulations that have been passed in favor of the corporations, and turn it over to state or local government where We The People could better control it.

One of the first things that needs to be done is make it that no one can be denied medical insurance. These denials for "pre-existing conditions" are BS. And its only going to get worse.

I know quite a few people who have been denied insurance for pre-existing conditions. They either have to do without care, get the care in the ER and not pay or turn to the welfare system and pray that they can be covered. Either way, we all still pay for their "socialized medicine".

[lowen]

I hate doctors and I loath insurance companies. I haven't visited a doctor in forever, I'd rather die from cancer than pay into the current system.

[Braddogg]

So you want socialized medicine?

Isn't paying into an insurance company for health care a form of socialized medicine, just on a different level?
I mean, whats the difference whether you pay the government a tax for your health or that you pay a premium to an insurer? Your money still goes to pay for someone else.

Force.  There's no gun involved in voluntarily subscribing to an insurance policy.  There is a big gun involved in a government tax.

I think what we have now would work better if Big government would remove itself and any regulations that have been passed in favor of the corporations, and turn it over to state or local government where We The People could better control it.

Why?  Wouldn't the state and local governments just do the same thing?

One of the first things that needs to be done is make it that no one can be denied medical insurance. These denials for "pre-existing conditions" are BS. And its only going to get worse.

Why?  What's BS about them?  Seems like good business sense to me.  If my insurance company knows someone has testicular cancer, and the guy applies for insurance, why should I be forced to pay a higher premium because the government forced the company to take him on?  Maybe you could help me out here . . . .

[EthanAllen]

So you want socialized medicine?

Isn't paying into an insurance company for health care a form of socialized medicine, just on a different level?
I mean, whats the difference whether you pay the government a tax for your health or that you pay a premium to an insurer? Your money still goes to pay for someone else.

I think what we have now would work better if Big government would remove itself and any regulations that have been passed in favor of the corporations, and turn it over to state or local government where We The People could better control it.

One of the first things that needs to be done is make it that no one can be denied medical insurance. These denials for "pre-existing conditions" are BS. And its only going to get worse.

I know quite a few people who have been denied insurance for pre-existing conditions. They either have to do without care, get the care in the ER and not pay or turn to the welfare system and pray that they can be covered. Either way, we all still pay for their "socialized medicine".

We don't need to "socialize" or "privatize" health care. We need to "mutualize" it. At the turn of the 19th century, "friendly societies" took up the call to voluntarily come together as a group (mutual aid based on reciprocity) to address specific needs for insurance and health care.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_Society

excerpt:
A friendly society (sometimes called a mutual society, benevolent society or fraternal organization) is a mutual association for insurance-like purposes, and often, especially in the past, serving ceremonial and friendship purposes also. It is a benefit society composed of a body of people who join together for a common financial or social purpose. Before modern insurance, and the welfare state, friendly societies provided social services to individuals, often according to their religious or political affiliations. Unlike guilds, society members do not necessarily share a common profession.

Before large-scale government and employer health insurance, friendly societies played an important part in many people's lives. In some countries, half the population was covered by such societies.[citation needed] Many of these societies still exist. In some countries, they have been incorporated into the health system and become like insurance companies and lost their ceremonial aspect; in others they have taken on a more charitable or social aspect.

In their heyday, members typically paid a regular membership fee and went to lodge meetings to take part in ceremonies. If a member became sick they would receive an allowance to help them meet their financial obligations. The society would have a regular doctor who the member could visit for free. Members of the lodge would visit to provide emotional support (and possibly to check that the sick member was not malingering). When a member died, their funeral would be paid for and the members of their lodge would attend in ceremonial dress—often there was some money left over from the funeral for the widow. Friendly societies also had social functions such as dances, and some had sporting teams for members to participate in. They occasionally became involved in political issues that were of interest to their members.

Each lodge was generally responsible for its own affairs, but it was associated with an order of lodges such as the Independent Order of Odd Fellows, or the Independent Order of Foresters. There were typically reciprocal agreements between lodges within an order, so that if a member moved cities or countries they could join a new lodge without having to serve any initiation time. The ceremonies were also fairly uniform throughout an order. Occasionally a lodge might change the order that it was associated with, or a group of lodges would break away from their order and form a new order, or two orders might merge. Consequentially, the history of any particular friendly society is difficult to follow. Often there were unassociated orders with similar names.

[Braddogg]

Sure, that sounds fine, EthanAllen.  I presume that there's no force involved in this system?  Then I'm not against it

[Caleb]

So you want socialized medicine?

Isn't paying into an insurance company for health care a form of socialized medicine, just on a different level?

I think it is. For all the talk about it being "voluntary", the reality is that the big corporations offer insurance "benefits" as a sort of quid pro quo for their government partners. This in turn raises the cost of health care dramatically. It's voluntary ... sort of. The costs continue to rise, though, as a result of the business/government relationship, and I don't have too much control over that, so the whole system doesn't seem that voluntary to me. The best system for keeping costs under control is a system in which no one has insurance of any sort and pay for everything out of pocket. This sounds expensive when you think about the current costs of health care, but under such a system costs would fall to the point that they were within reach of everyone.

[Braddogg]

So you want socialized medicine?

Isn't paying into an insurance company for health care a form of socialized medicine, just on a different level?

I think it is. For all the talk about it being "voluntary", the reality is that the big corporations offer insurance "benefits" as a sort of quid pro quo for their government partners. This in turn raises the cost of health care dramatically. It's voluntary ... sort of. The costs continue to rise, though, as a result of the business/government relationship, and I don't have too much control over that, so the whole system doesn't seem that voluntary to me. The best system for keeping costs under control is a system in which no one has insurance of any sort and pay for everything out of pocket. This sounds expensive when you think about the current costs of health care, but under such a system costs would fall to the point that they were within reach of everyone.

I don't think that's what kadar had in mind when he mentioned it being the same as socialized medicine.  But I think you're right about the collusion, Caleb.  The first half of Michael Moore's movie, while it had its flaws, really did a decent job at addressing the issue of AMA/Big Pharma/Insurance Companies colluding with government.  I don't know if that makes it non-voluntary, but that's quibbling over terminology -- we both agree the damn system's gotta change.