"Sicko"

Moderator: Littlabit

The_Kairns
Whee!
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 11:44 pm
Contact:

"Sicko"

Postby The_Kairns » Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:41 pm

My Friends,

On June 25th, I was fortunate enough to see Michael Moore's new film "Sicko." If it wasn't enough to see the film four days before its opening, the ever satirical writer/director Mr. Moore himself was there for a Q & A moderated by Ron Howard. What an amazing experience and privilege it was to witness this event as it happened. You know how people always say they wish they could have been somewhere during a historical moment in time, or been apart of something historical, or lived in a period in time when exciting transformations occurred? Well, this was one of those moments! I believe this film is by far, Michael's best. And, despite what some people think of Michael, this documentary appeals to everyone, because it boils down to a very simple fact of life: People deserve (whoever they are) the right (not privilege) to receive EQUAL and UNCONDITIONAL medical attention.

I implore everyone I know, and everyone I don't know to see this film. Once you see this film or even if you don't get the chance, I further implore everyone to push their congresswoman/man to support HR 676 (US. Rep. John Conyers's Bill for expanding Medicare to all US citizens over the next 15 years). Don't let the AMA and Health Insurance Industry's rhetoric of "socialism" scare you away from Universal Healthcare. Be pragmatic and ask yourself who runs the public school system, the post office, the library system, the fire fighters, the police. The government. So, why can't the healthcare system be run by the government, instead of private companies seeking profit.

Unfortunately in the history of America, some of the greatest influences or catalyst for governmental action has come as a result of forced realization. Theodore Roosevelt created the FDA after reading Upton Sinclair's novel "The Jungle" (a novel about working conditions in the Chicago meatpacking industry, in June, 1906). Perhaps, (the democratic masses willing it) 101 years after Upton Sinclair's novel, Michael Moore's film "Sicko" will influence the creation of Universal Healthcare in America (something that England has had since 1948, Canada since 1966, France since 1945, Cuba since 1964).

Why can't the worlds richest nation, have it too? If we can spend (as of June 26, 2007) 437.9 billion dollars to fund the Iraq war, then we can find the money for healthcare.

Sincerely,

The_Kairns
Whee!
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 11:44 pm
Contact:

Postby The_Kairns » Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:24 pm

My Friends,



A dear friend pointed out to me, how helpful it would have been to add a web-link inside my letter, to help those who are unfamiliar with contacting their congresswoman/man. Below is a link to a site that will help you find your congressional representation. Additionally, it has a letter that you can use to encourage your representation to endorse the Universal Healthcare Bill HR 676.



http://www.healthcare-now.org/wr...gress.html



Sincerely,

Goofydoofy
Ride a cowboy, save a horse
Posts: 4692
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Bullhead City, AZ, USA
Contact:

Postby Goofydoofy » Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:48 pm

This is how America is run. From medicine to oil. As much as I would love to see things changed for the benefit of the people, I am pretty sure it will stay the same or get worse as time goes on. But, that is just me.
Level 105 Druid, Level 105 Enchanter, Level 105 Paladin
Drinal - Maelin Starpyre Server

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:14 pm

HMO's own the democrats, Big pharma owns the Republicans and the lawyers are all over.

Having lived with the healthcare system in the UK, I would advise you look into it seriously before you endorse it. People do die waiting to see doctors and, in fact, there is a booming medical insurance industry which can be useful when facing the reality of a two year wait for surgery etc.

I will allow the Canadians to comment upon their system - I think we have one or two in the guild.

I am not saying that the US system is great - far from it, but it pays to look at what you want to change it into before you endorse it.

For me I have found that the amount I pay for medical coverage is about what I paid in extra taxes in the UK, but I get more for my money here. However, I know that things are different for those that are not covered.

This issue is tied into so many other problems that there is no easy.
answer.

As for Moore, maybe "Sicko" will have the same effect upon the medical business as "bowling for Columbine" did for gun control.

I do want to see his opinion, however blatently biased it will be.

Lanyder
Whee!
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:50 am
Contact:

Postby Lanyder » Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:41 am

So much to say so little time.

Are you familiar with what socialism actually means and is?

Significant changes need to happen in the health care system...but I think we are missing the real problem when we look at the provider or administrator of the system.

The real problem is unhealthy behavior...and improving the access to the health care system alone reduces accountability and actually could reduce overall health. There has to be an increased emphasis on wellness and staying healthy at the same time access is increased. Frankly, it needs to happen irrespective of an increase in access.

The US needs to move from a sick care system to a health care system. Right now people either don't know (I am shocked by the ignorance reported in statistics...people don't know that smoking isn't healthy?) or don't care that the activities they engaging in have a significant impact on their health.

At some point we will be forced to look at our health as something to be managed as a valuable resource. Instead most people look at health care as something to fix any problem that comes up...I can eat whatever I want and engage in whatever behavior I choose...and when I have a heart attack I will go and get treated. Why should I go and excercise? I can watch TV, play EQ and if I get overweight, end up with Diabetes, or am more likely to be depressed...the miracle of modern medicine will save me! And all with the convienience of a pill!

I could talk about the cost of health insurance for hours.... But in summary, there is very little consumerism in the health care market of those with health insurance. Most folks with HMOs think that it cost $20 to go to the doctor because that is all they pay. They don't care if the doctor and the hospital do the same tests...it doesn't cost them anything. If your employer paid $1,000 a month so you could go to the mall whenever you wanted or needed anything, how would that differ from your current shopping paterns? If a shirt cost you $20 regardless of the actual cost of $50 or $300 which would you pick?

And good luck getting the American people to support the additional funding that would be required to support medicare with its current coverage population, let alone increasing that population to include everyone.

Anyway, Mr. Moore is a pompous ass who thinks everyone is entitled to his opinion. Of course it takes one to know one! I really want to see this movie, but I REALLY don't want to support something associated with him.

Buaz
Whee!
Posts: 934
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:07 am
Location: Oregon
Contact:

Postby Buaz » Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:30 am

it boils down to a very simple fact of life: People deserve (whoever they are) the right (not privilege) to receive EQUAL and UNCONDITIONAL medical attention


Just because a condition is highly desireable, does not mean it is a right.

My wife has a non-life-threatening serious medical condition, and is involved in a research study. Should I send you a bill? Is it somehow better that all Americans pay the bill by spending more in taxes? Or more on the price of milk?

We are also looking into adoption. But there are some extremely expensive fertility treatments that we could have tried. Should we stop adoption, and go back to the fertility treatment, if they would be free to us? Should I send America a bill? Who will decide what treatments are "rights"?

I cannot demand you pay for these things, by claiming them as rights.
Image

Big Green Bait

User avatar
Nyrial
Whee!
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 6:52 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Postby Nyrial » Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:10 am

As someone without medical/dental/optical insurance, at times I do wish we could switch to a "free" system like Canada or the UK. However, as someone who has access to medicaid for my condition, I feel guilty taking advantage of the US taxpayers, who are paying for my prenatal care to ensure I have a healthy baby. However, there is no way I could manage this care on my own. The coverage I have is strictly limited to my pregnancy, and if anything else happens to me, I'm responsible for taking on the medical bills.

This happens to be why I have not had my teeth cleaned by a dentist for over 3 years, have cavities that need to be filled, fillings falling out (which I tap back in and pray), this is why I have not had an eye exam in over 3 years, which is probably much of the cause of the chronic headache pain I have, and also why I go without medication that I DO need for my body to function correctly for over a year at a time.

I do my best to stay healthy, I eat right, I don't smoke, I drink only on occasion, I exercise when I have the energy. However, there are unavoidable ailments that should be treated.

For example:
I live in an area where it is cold for half the year, I suffer thru sinus infections that last 2-3 weeks because I can't afford the treatment or the prescription. Sinus infections have nothing to do with how healthy a person is, they're supposedly not contagious, so how can I avoid them? Untreated infections can lead to seizure, eye infection/blindness, and blood clots.

Clinical depression is also not something that can be prevented, I would jump at a chance to do something about mine, but I have to suffer with it, I can't just "buck up," it doesn't work that way.

Hypothryoidism cannot be prevented, no amount of healthy living can do anything about it. The medicine itself is not expensive, its the 2 or more doctors visits every year to get the dosage right, and they won't dispense more than a years' worth of refills. ALL bodily systems are affected by your thyroid, if it's not working properly, chances are not much else is. Going untreated, it can cause Mental deterioration such as apathy, confusion, and psychosis, hypothermia, extremely slow heartbeat (fewer than 60 beats per minute) ,heart failure and respiratory failure.

Just a few examples of the living healthy theory.


These are only a sampling of the things I live with, and they're mild compared to what other people live with. Living without health care is no picnic. Don't just tell me to get a job, I'm working on it. Where I live, jobs with decent benefits, or any at all, are few and far between at this time. Some people cannot get jobs, for various reasons. I'm one of the lucky ones, living with it temporarily.

I agree with Trabs when he says there is no easy answer, I would hate to be paying more for a universal system, so druggies and deadbeats and slackers could have access to the same things I do.. oh wait, they do already! They meet the low income cirumstances to get medicaid/medicare in this state, so I'm already paying for them. When I finally do graduate and get a job with benefits, I'll be paying for my own as well as theirs still.

However, given my current circumstances, a universal health care system sounds pretty good to me right now. Waiting two years for surgery or months to see a doctor would suck, but at least there would be the slightest chance to do it. I could get the prescription drugs I can't afford so that I'm not laid up for weeks, missing work, and the medicine my body needs simply so it can metabolize my food. I, for one, do NOT take health care for granted.


Of course if you don't know smoking isnt healthy, crawl out from under your rock.

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:54 am

I have found that the problem with any global 'welfare' type system, such as health care, is trying to weed out the slackers. All that happens is the system becomes overly cumbersome and expensive. Those that abuse the systems continue to be able to do so, where as those that need the systems are left behind.

The optimist in me (yes he exists) thinks that if you make the system easy to understand and accesible, then the benefits to those that would need it would overcome the deficit that abusers would inflict.

As Nyrial's post says, there are many health care issues that are not based upon a choice you make (although you DO live near Detroit right? :P ). However, I would also have to agree somewhat with Lanyder in that there any many problems that a person basically chooses to have. If you could reduce the money spent upon those things then maybe there will be more available resources for the other health issues.

I wonder if the Mr Moore chooses to deal with his obvious weight issue or whether he wants us to pay for any problems that come from it? Also does he address the massive unemployment that would result from killing off the HMO industry? I am not an advocate of HMO's but they employ a lot of people, not even a big government agency (such as socialised healthcare) can re-employ them all.

User avatar
Nyrial
Whee!
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 6:52 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Postby Nyrial » Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:22 pm

although you DO live near Detroit right? :P



OMG HECK NO!!!

A solid 3 hours away :)

I sold that to Canada last year. They just refuse to take ownership.

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:07 pm

I don't think they want it either

User avatar
Sevex
Whee!
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:25 am
Location: Mobile Al

Socialized Medicine

Postby Sevex » Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:12 pm

I am not singly you out nor trying to make anything personal. I have heard these issues before but certainly some of them resonate.

Why are you pregnant without having insurance?
Why do you choose to pay for a computer, ISP, and EQ subscription instead of paying for medical care(dental cleaning, etc)?

I really do not understand this. It's not socialized medicine at all. It's people choosing to spend their time/money on hobbies, habits, etc and then expecting free medical care. I am baffled.

Szork
Whee!
Posts: 1112
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:52 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Postby Szork » Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:46 pm

Right or wrong, Micheal Moore's specialty is convincing people of things. Although I typically agree with his agenda, you have to be careful to understand that he has an agenda. He does not hesitate to 'manipulate' facts to suit that agenda.

I am interested in seeing the show, but I'll keep an appropriate amount of skepticism handy!

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:01 pm

/agree Szork. Although Moore's agenda is very transparent thankfully. As always it is the stuff they hide behind the obviousness that is worrying.

Just fyi my scepticism of pharmaceuticals comes from working 'in da bidness"

User avatar
Nyrial
Whee!
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 6:52 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Socialized Medicine

Postby Nyrial » Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:39 am

Why are you pregnant without having insurance?
Why do you choose to pay for a computer, ISP, and EQ subscription instead of paying for medical care(dental cleaning, etc)?


1) It happens, sometimes quite unexpectedly. I'm not planning on having 5 kids on the government's money, well not 5 at ALL.

2) I need a computer for my schoolwork, I don't go to a conventional school that has a lab or library open 24 hours a day, and I often end up doing homework late at night. I need a computer that can handle the programs I need to run without crashing every 2-3 minutes.

3) Again, I need it for school as well for research/online classes. It's also an outlet for creativity/frustration and communication with people who live far away.

4) It's a cheap luxury, much cheaper than going to a movie, going out to eat,or going out drinking with friends each week. It's something I can do anytime of the day or night, when I can grab some free time to myself.
1 month = 15 dollars, 1 doctors visit=75 dollars base + any tests they may run, so it would take at least 6 months to take that eq money and put it towards a problem that happens now, in which case, a typially healthy body has had time to fight off whatever it is.

Plus, a typical self elected health insurance premium, when purchasing it yourself, costs a lot more than 15 dollars a month.

So what it comes down to is, I pay my share of taxes from the money I make, why can't I take advantage of the few benefits I qualify for from the government for the short time I qualify for them? I'm hardly living off the system, I dont take food stamps, I don't accept welfare or WIC when I could because I'm "technically" single and "technically" head of household with a small child already.

I like to think I'm the exception, the person who takes only what she needs, then leaves the rest for people who need it too. The problem is, not everyone does that.


EDIT: Although, it gives me a sick sense of satisfaction that the Jack#$% who cut me off at the stop sign and almost plowed into my backseat is paying for medicaid. Thats just the sick, twisted, evil side of me though.

User avatar
Cruz
Whee!
Posts: 803
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:50 am
Location: Tucson, Arizona (USA)

Postby Cruz » Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:45 am

Like many of our other members I have been affected by this issue as well. My son is disabled and I had no insurance after leaving the military. I eventually went bankrupt from the medical bills. The system is most certainly broken.

However, with the current climate in Washington, I hope that we do not try to address this issue any time soon. People of opposing parties cannot even talk to each other in a civil manner. Coming out of that climate, no legislation and complete deadlock is much preferable to some poorly thought out legislation bitterly shoved down the other party’s throat.

This movie seems squarely targeted to the political arena and has little to do with getting a deeper understanding of the issue and what is needed to fix it. I don’t have time for people who spew hate and vitriol on either side of any debate (both sides equally guilty). In this case I doubt there are any ‘good’ solutions and am certain there are no ‘easy’ or ‘ideal’ solutions.

Perhaps in a few years liberal, conservative, democrat and republican won’t be used as a slur by the opposite side. Until then I will vote to keep as little of my money from their coffers and to give them the least amount of power to enact any meaningful change.

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:57 am

Cruz makes the most sense so far and that is disgusting (not Cruz, but the state of politics today).

I would like to think that in an ideal situation (hahahaha) that when the decision is made to change/improve the system that there is consideration of the many possibilities that exist. Nobody has a 100% health care system but the opportunity to mix and match the best parts of all should be taken.

User avatar
Nyrial
Whee!
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 6:52 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Postby Nyrial » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:00 am

I was going to say,

The voice of reason has spoken!

User avatar
Sevex
Whee!
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 10:25 am
Location: Mobile Al

Postby Sevex » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:06 am

I am overweight at 6ft 250lbs. I consume more calories than required. I don't have any medical condition that "caused" my weight gain. My grandmother and mother had/have diabetes. I know the risk, but I indulge in icecream and cookies. I know I have an obsession about food. Should I expect society to take care of me when my weight leads to a significant health issue?

My point is choice. Yes, some ailments reported in this thread are outside the scope of choice. No one should have to pay for your choices.

My ex-girlfriend is a smoker. Her 2 adult-aged children living at home also smoke. I would estimate the 3 of them burn through $15/day smoking. My ex consistantly had problems paying her bills. We'd get into fights from time to time as I got tired of seeing $400/month go to cigs instead of her paying her own phone bill, power bill, etc. Everytime I paid her bills for her, I was enabling her to continue a choice.

If you cannot pay for prenatal care, how can you pay for food, diapers, clothing, education, etc that a child will require? I am assuming your pregnancy was a choice. You volunteered to have sex. Why should others be burdened by a choice you made?

Probably 10 percent of the population will cost 70 percent(or more) of any health budget. Those with severe ailments, genetic defects, etc. So first and foremost, we need to decide if ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL means that human life in ANY form should be saved at ANY cost.

We have 6 billion people on this planet now. At what point will overpopulation dictate health policy? When we have food and water shortages here in America? Wars over resources reign?

When I see famine relief, I cannot help but think of the vicious cycle. We send money and food to solve the immediate problem. That money/food allows another generation to reproduce in an area of insufficient food resources. 20 years later you have a repeat of history.

I don't have the answers, but any "patch" to the health care system is going to be destroyed when the world sits at 10 billion people, 20 billion, 30 billion, etc. Estimates are the world will be at 20 billion+ in our lifetimes.

User avatar
Kahlyla
Bork! Bork! Bork!
Posts: 761
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:03 am
Contact:

Postby Kahlyla » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:47 pm

Nobody has a 100% health care system but the opportunity to mix and match the best parts of all should be taken.


I completely agree with this. The Canadian system, just off the top of my head, has a number of pros and cons, and also has elements that either do or don't appeal to me personally, and that everyone has a different opinion on. As it is, it is not "free" health care, and the government does not pay for a lot of the things some people may think it does.

Prescription drugs, for example, are not covered by provincial insurance; private or employer insurance companies generally do pay for them, and they do so reasonably - ie. they pay for the generic brands, and not for "lifestyle" drugs such as Viagra (that's the only one I can think of; for anyone who may be wondering, birth control is not in this category, it is covered by all plans I'm familiar with, which is a lot, as a former pharmacy technician).

It should also be noted that prescription drugs are covered for those on social assistance, and for seniors - they pay a $2 co-pay per prescription, and a lot of pharmacies waive this (which is their private decision). Given that, this would be an example of one of the quirks of the system that I have no real issue with, but some people - legitimately - might. More people have access to private insurance than you might think, through their parents, their university, their employer, or one of the cheaper private plans, but I do know that there are lots of "working poor" for whom prescription drugs are prohibitively expensive. I think it's a fairly reasonable system though.

Eyeglasses are not covered, and I believe Ontario just recently stopped covering eye exams - again, private plans do cover them, usually a certain dollar amount every year or what have you. I don't think dental care is covered provincially either. I lean towards thinking that these should be covered, especially for children and seniors, because they are undergoing more changes more quickly, problems can be prevented by catching them early, etc.

I don't believe any intensive cognitive therapy (psychiatrists and the like) is covered. It was barely covered by my parent's private plan. I think most surgery is, but boy, do you wait. Labour and delivery is, but I think you need to have private insurance or pay out of pocket to stay in the hospital beyond a certain length of time after giving birth, if it's not an emergency situation (not certain on that).

To be honest, I've never in my life been without private insurance from one source or another, so I'd be hard-pressed to say what is covered by the province and what isn't. It could be that a lot of the things I took for granted as a kid were actually covered by my father's work plan. I don't know.

I do know that all emergency care is covered by the province, and that you would never, ever need to flash a credit card at someone to be treated if in need. If it's not a dire emergency, though, you will wait. Szork once waited 13 hours in the emergency room, and I always remember waiting several hours as a kid.

Sevex mentioned paying for smokers' health care. In some ways, I am as reticent as he to do this, but to be fair, there is an enormous tax on cigarettes here. A pack is over ten dollars - whatever the difference is from a pack in the States, you can be pretty sure most of that is tax. And it keeps going up and up. And things tend to even out - smoking is a choice, but so is overeating, being out of shape, having children, putting yourself at risk of injury through playing sports, driving, etc., and a myriad of other things.

It's obviously a mixed bag, and I'm not certain it's the best mix it could be right now. I've heard repeatedly that for a truly functional universal health care system, one should not look to Canada or the UK, but to Scandinavian countries. I'd be very interested to learn about their system, myself.

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:24 pm

my knowledge of the Scandanavians is limited but I know they are relatively well paid and very highly taxed. The population is also very small. Obvioulsy, we have members that know the system a lot better than my generalisations.

Oaklen
Whee!
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:03 pm
Contact:

Postby Oaklen » Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:13 pm

First off let me say this thread is pretty decent.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure I want to say up front that I loathe Michael Moore and ALL others like him who use their (admittedly considerable) wits and guile to mislead and bamboozle decent folks who are actually enlightened enough to listen to new ideas. I have no problem with him being an advocate, I just expect EVERYONE to try to act with integrity and honesty whether I agree with the point they are trying to make or not.

All that being said, this issue has many admittedly has many textures to it. Howerver, at rock bottom its base is inescapably trapped in simple math. I am continuously amazed by the fact that the vast majority of US Citizens/National/Permanent Resident Aliens simply REFUSE to stop and analyze the numbers involved.

The Social Security Trust Fund administrated by the Treasury Dept. (this is the fund that most if not all disability dollars comes out of in addition to being a ‘safety net’ for folks of retirement age) will cease being able to make any payments to anyone in 2016 unless the Federal governments starts to pay back the treasury bonds ‘held’ by the Treasury Department on behalf of the Trust Fund. These bonds are what allow the US Government to conduct what is casually referred to as ‘deficit spending’ (you and I would go to jail for doing this very thing with our own accounts) so you can start to see why the government may not be all that keen on repaying these ‘loans’.

The Outstanding Public Debt as of 28 Jun 2007 at 11:40:10 PM GMT was: $8,807,080,990,929.40...

How do those who suggest we create vastly more government spending suggest we deal with our current account deficit?

A Trustee for Social Security & Medicare testified before the Senate Budget Committee a while back. Here are highlights of some of his comments to the committee:

• Today Medicare is America's second largest entitlement program, behind Social Security. In 2004 it accounted for 13 percent of the Federal budget, 2.6 percent of GDP and required general revenue transfers equal to 10.7 percent of federal income taxes.
• By 2024 Medicare spending is expected to exceed Social Security spending and the differential will continue to escalate thereafter.
• Taking all three parts of Medicare together we owe the current generation a total of $29.2 trillion and future generations will add another $32.5 trillion to this obligation.
• Thus, the total Medicare debt is a staggering $61.6 trillion. Let me put this number in perspective for you.
• Assuming that federal income tax revenues remain at the 50 year average ... the Medicare debt of $61.6 trillion is 62 percent of all future federal income tax receipts.

Now for some additional perspective if you take 2007’s total Defense spending (including all those nifty supplementals) you do not even have half of the cost of Medicare alone and we are in the middle of a major war! This is not even counting Social Security which is even bigger than Medicare.

I ask again, how are we supposed to pay for an extension of this program? I for one and going to want to hear a WHOLE LOT more on that side of how we are magically going to come up with the dough. How about less Political Science and more MATH.

/rant off

P.S. I also grew up with socialized medicine in Samoa and I am no fan of it. I don't know how many horror stories I could tell you about malpractice problems. Let alone the ambiance of sitting for hours and hours on concrete benches with no air conditioning in the tropical heat surrounded by wailing children and babies. It was that glorious universal heath care system that made me loathe having to go to the doctor even to this very day.
Sensei Oaklen <Celestial Navigators>
Monkeying around since 2k

Buaz
Whee!
Posts: 934
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:07 am
Location: Oregon
Contact:

Postby Buaz » Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:28 am

Your faction standing with the Democrat Politicians could not get any worse.
Your faction standing with the Republican Politicians could nto get any worse.
Your faction standing with the Rational Beings could not get any better.
Image

Big Green Bait

User avatar
Vitala
wishes Lanyder had a tail
Posts: 541
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

Postby Vitala » Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:36 am

I prolly shouldn't post anything about this, as I tend to run people out of the guild if I post on sensitive issues like this, but I am going to anyway! Sensitive readers beware. :/

When I saw the movie poster for Michael Moore's latest piece of trash, I was incredibly excited. I turned to Lanyder and said, "Does he die at the end of this one? If so, can we please go see it?"

I am trying to reconcile my firm belief that Szork is completely amazing with this revelation that he agrees with most of Moore's destroy-America agenda. I am confidant I can do this somehow. :P

Now, for the serious stuff.

I understand that some health issues are unavoidable. I agree with Lanyder that a sizable chunk of health issues in America today could be eradicated or at least substantially mitigated if people would take ownership of their own choices & begin practicing healthy (or at the very least less UNhealthy) lifestyle behaviours. I also think Sevex makes some very good points about getting yourself into situations you aren't prepared for. Frankly, the saying that 'people who don't know that smoking is bad for you need to crawl out from beneath the rock they're hiding under' could also stand for people who think that having sex isn't a precursor for getting pregnant. If you're not prepared for the possible consequences, maybe that's a sign you shouldn't do it.

Where do we (any of us) get the right to say who is, and who is not, deserving of lifesaving health care? I have seen some fingers pointed at 'druggies' and others as an example of those NOT deserving of benefiting from others' taxes and hard work, but I bet if you asked them, many of these people would then point the finger at someone else and explain how these things just happen sometimes and it's really those homeless no-good low life types who REALLY don't deserve the handouts. After all, many people addicted to drugs still hold down jobs and contribute in some way to society (also of course many don't, but I'm making an example here). Who is to say who deserves it? If I can pinpoint someone specifically, let's take Nyrial for example. Clearly she has some health care needs that are not being met (or take Cruz' son if you prefer). If these needs were met, it's entirely possible that she would be a happier, more productive member of society. How can you put a price on something like that? Is she any less deserving than say, one of the overpaid blow hards that call themselves Congressmen? Absolutely not. She needs full health care as much as anyone else (and prolly she does more in service to her country than the aforesaid ridiculously overpaid 'public servants').

I'm trying to demonstrate that justifying something you yourself believe is morally or perhaps just societally ambiguous by saying 'at least I deserve it more than the other guy' is not perhaps the most convincing of arguments.

Having said all of that... if I cannot say who does or does not deserve health care, then perhaps the only socially responsible thing to do is give incentives to the general populace to encourage healthy lifestyle behaviours (pecuniary incentives would most likely be the most effective) to cut down on the unnecessary medical expenditures, & provide basic assistance to make sure that critical care is available to those too destitute to afford it. Perhaps a combination approach is the only way to accomplish this, where those with privately held insurance take advantage of private health care providers, and those completely incapable of providing for themselves (for whatever reason) can apply to a public health care system at a drastically reduced rate (perhaps a sliding scale system based on income with those below poverty limit paying little-to-nothing). Those dependant on public health care systems would have the benefit of low (or non-existant) payments, but would of course have to deal with the inefficiencies of a government-run system & long wait times determined on critical assessment of need.

Oaklen is completely right in that this is a complex issue that ultimately comes down to the mathematics.. as much as everyone might 'deserve' health care, there is a limited fiscal ability to meet the demand.

Szork
Whee!
Posts: 1112
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:52 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Postby Szork » Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:12 pm

I am trying to reconcile my firm belief that Szork is completely amazing with this revelation that he agrees with most of Moore's destroy-America agenda. I am confidant I can do this somehow.


Alright, maybe I'll amend my comment to "some" not "most"

To be honest, I was referring to "Bowling for Columbine" more than anything. He agenda there seemed to be more about raising awareness, mind you he did a lot of finger pointing, I think. It's been a while since I saw it.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was interesting to watch (everyone loves a good conspiracy theory) but not really believable. I think this is where I realized that Mr. Moore was ... creative ... when it comes to facts.

I guess my own political views are quite a bit more liberal, and slightly more socialist than the American parties, so some of what Moore has to say falls on my side of the fence, as it were.

Note: if Moore came and opened my house door (like he did in Bowling for Columbine to several Canadians to prove his point about 'locked doors'), I would probably kick him in the junk. Just because I don't lock my door does not mean you can just barge in!

User avatar
Vitala
wishes Lanyder had a tail
Posts: 541
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

Postby Vitala » Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:17 pm

Haha!

Where can I sign up for the 'Szork kicking Moore in the junk' film?

Now THAT I would pay good money for!!!

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:29 pm

Bowling for balls?

Goofydoofy
Ride a cowboy, save a horse
Posts: 4692
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Bullhead City, AZ, USA
Contact:

Postby Goofydoofy » Fri Jun 29, 2007 1:52 pm

How about this? Some woman says you are the daddy of her baby. Either you do not get the summons to appear in court on the matter because nobody really tried to make sure you got it, or you don't appear for whatever reason.

You are now the new daddy. Even if you have a private DNA test that shows you aren't, you are paying child support until that kid is 18 or you die. The only way you can not be found to pay is if you have a vesectomy and make sure it is impossible to get a woman pregnant.

So all you women who want a free monthly income, start fucking everybody in town and find the top 5 richest men in your area and name them the father and hope one doesn't show!

Welcome to stupidty in America. Where you can prove without a doubt you are not the father and yet you will pay child support because it is in the best interest of the child, who isn't yours.
Level 105 Druid, Level 105 Enchanter, Level 105 Paladin
Drinal - Maelin Starpyre Server

Jhereg
Whee!
Posts: 4572
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:11 pm
Contact:

Postby Jhereg » Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:14 pm

I'm not a big fan of Michael Moore. Each of his films do have points though that I agree with.

I didn't watch Fahrenheit 9/11 but from what I've read about it there were so many things taken out of context it was a travesty of a documentary. A lot of it was stuff that the average person would have to take hours and hours to double check too.

I did watch parts of Bowling for Colombine and the main thing I remember was thinking 'wow, almost no one I know leaves their door unlocked but apparently everyone in canada does'. I do know a few who do, but not many.

I really wish there were still documentaries from multiple sides where people could actually discuss things instead of harange you with one side.

Btw, a friend loves the Frontline series of documentaries. He's more along the lines of Moore's views but mainly likes how well they research and document things instead of a lot of showboat stuff that Moore does.

User avatar
Jaffod
Postcount Whore
Posts: 3502
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37 am
Location: Holland MI - break out the wooden shoes!
Contact:

Postby Jaffod » Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:51 pm

Goofy, what about the flip side to that argument. Guys who get women pregnant and then disappear, leaving the state to pick up their tab? I am not sure which situation is the more prevalent but I have my suspicions.

I am not 100% up on the going to court thing to list a guy as a father, but I am sure of one slight inaccuracy in your statement - you pay child support until the child is 21 if the child goes to college. The college industry has eliminated any other career option so if you want your child to 'be anything' then college is a must.

Buaz
Whee!
Posts: 934
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 8:07 am
Location: Oregon
Contact:

Postby Buaz » Fri Jun 29, 2007 3:20 pm

All this talk of babies ...
Just a reminder ... my wife and I are looking to adopt. :wink:
PST.
/auction off
Image

Big Green Bait