Michael Moore - Sicko

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by identity-X, Jun 17, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    so much for this being your "last response...

    what in god's name are you talking about?

    of course it's a procedure. getting your appendix removed is a procedure. treating a cold requires following a specific.

    At the very least, essential procedures should be covered. Everything else is different story.

    You ARE aware that even in the countries with universal health care a good portion of the population buys supplemental insurance to cover the ELECTIVE surgery's that the government won't cover.

    The difference?

    - because not all of the health care burden falls on the insurance companies they aren't scrambling to save money at every turn
    - it's cheap for customers. premiums are low because the odds are they aren't going to need the insurance company to pay hundreds of thousands for care because the govt. has already paid for it

    If I'm buying 10lbs of Ramen Noodles a week just so my family can eat, it's not going to matter that costs are "less" or that I can "choose my own payment plan"...I'm STILL not going to have the money to pay for it.

    If a free market leads to my medicine costing $10 a week instead of $20 a week under a system of "government meddling" (of which you've STILL not provided a single example) and I only have $1 to spare each week it's not going to matter. Simple stuff dude...

    - what's that have to do with your knowledge of post-graduate education? [dunno]
    - nobody is BOASTing about anything, but it's not like bums teach at D-I universities

    i didn't say that. anywhere. [dunno]

    whoa...you're advocating government involvement? tax credits? vouchers? I thought you were pushing for a "freer market"?

    And again if there is 1) zero government involvement and 2) a family has ZERO (or negative) money leftover at the end of the week, then they aren't going to be able to afford even the cheapest health care. You think this is never the case? You think the guy in the movie who stitched his own cut at the beginning is the only person who has to turn to such measures because they don't have an extra dime to go to health care?

    Not all health bills are preventable. Are you going to tell someone who is crushed when a drunk driver plows into them that they shouldn't have been driving?

    :pus:

    you'll get a scan. parts will be blurred.

    not a single one.

    you attempted to equate Nixon's approval of GIVING money to help HMO's flourish as a reason for why insurance companies wouldn't provide coverage for their paying customers...but don't explain how

    you suggested that Clinton's push for universal health care - even when it DIDN'T PASS and, as such, has NO BEARING on the way insurance companies are run today - was a reason why insurance companies wouldn't provide coverage for their paying customers...but don't explain how

    It came from the Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health. Only reason I replyed is because I missed that last night. Figured as long as I'm replying now I might as well clear up a few misconceptions you keep demagoguing.

    According to the Gallup Poll 2006

    Americans were asked if they would like to replace their health care system
    With what your suggesting.

    39% - Replace
    51% - Maintain

    Shut up, pinko![/QUOTE]

    Doesn't change the fact that Moore's facts and figured were pretty on point

    You can't expect someone to take you seriously if you don't CITE your sources...Gallup shoots out hundreds of polls of year. Please provide a link, kthanx.

    - the above (replace/maintain) percentages mean shit unless compared with the percentages of populations in countries with different health care systems

    - you STILL have not cited this statistic...I call bullshit...

    - Even if it isn't bullshit, I wonder what the distribution of the above statistic looks like. Nobody can deny that the US has some of the best doctors and equipment on the planet. The movie wasn't about that anyway...it was about ACCESS to this care. It would make sense then that those who DO have access and have no problem paying would be extremely satisfied. But it would also make sense that those who don't have access would be even less satisfied than most people in other countries who, at the very least, have free access to essential care.
    test
  2. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    here's a link explaining what I was talking about. I thought i posted it already.

    www.aft.org/research/downloads/charter/EAI1997.pdf

    You'll need Acrobat Reader to view. (www.adobe.com). I know last time you said you had too much on your computer to install the software :)pus: it's tiny), so here's a link to the yahoo search I did. Click on the first link "How Private Managers Make Money In Public Schools: Update On the EAI ... (PDF)"

    http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt...timore eai school public private&y=Search&fr=
    test
  3. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    Fine I'll respond, but After this though, I'm seriously done with you.

    no really I am.

    Wait mintue, You said Universal health care would cover everything.
    now they turning to Private insurance companies. [lol] a Perfect-market giving individual choices is what all we really need.

    - Your argument is hypothical, including government intervention, and a WHAT IF on medicine cost. I have the funny feeling you're completely lost.
    - I provided an example of how it could work by demonstrating a perfect market performing perfectly in another Market place.
    - It is simple, so why can't you get? you're arguing the current state of things not my argument.


    I was explaining my situation. I didn't wine, blame others, make excuses, or cry like a bitch, I just went out and did it. That's how I am. I don't think I should be handed shit.

    Let me put it like this. If you are so poor how are you even affording post-grad education? especially when you have a child, no job, and are on the computer 24/7, Just exactly what are you getting a Doctorate in, arm-chair activism?[lol] If I wanted a masters degree in LAW, it wouldn't be hard. I studied Civics/Government Law & the Legal Systems in college. However, I know more money is to be made in entrepreneurship. If you can't afford cheap medicine and raman noodles you're a bum. An I seriously doubt you teach at any university.
    And I really don't care if you do or not.

    Yet you keep arguing as if my stance is the current model.
    That is why I don't want to talk to you. You're close minded.

    That guy was a bum in beginning of the movie... HE HAD NO JOB!
    He said that FLAT-OUT! I also thought he stitched his leg together pretty good.
    You are either a Misconstruer or just not understanding what i'm talking about here. i'm leaning towards the latter.

    I'm talking about fixing the situation..

    giving families the opportunity to own health insurance that is portable from job to job, freeing up some of their tax money to help them buy the coverage. The estimates of this plan would give a tax cut to 100 million working Americans and provide health insurance to up to 9 million more Americans without any new long-term costs to the federal treasury. The dynamic changes in the marketplace for health insurance would transform the system to offer health insurance that is more affordable, flexible, choice, and portable.

    The centerpiece of the plan is new standard deduction for health insurance. It would be available to any taxpayer who buys qualifying health insurance. Families would get a new $15,000 standard tax deduction, and individuals would get $7,500. You need not itemize and will get the full deduction even if the policy you buy costs less as long as it meets certain minimum requirements for catastrophic coverage. Families earning $50,000 a year could save more than $4,300 in income and payroll taxes and use the tax savings to buy health insurance.

    What about the uninsured? those with lower incomes? This proposal would lower the average tax bill of a family without coverage by $3,350. This would mean $3,350 of their pay would be available to buy insurance instead of going to taxes.

    But for many of the insured, this still would not be enough, so there is a second part to my plan involving the states: finding out what the state needs to create "Affordable Choices" in health insurance. Secretary Leavitt wants to help states make basic, affordable private health insurance policies available to their citizens. This could include, for example, grants in the form of vouchers or refundable tax credits to help low-income people purchase private health insurance.

    This proposal is very innovative and will take the policy community by surprise.
    it's basic philosophy in all we do, we must remember that the best healthcare decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors. And feer-Market is how we achieve this goal.

    You're option is thoughtless. it's all about FREE, FREE, FREE.
    Nothing in this WORLD is FREE. Not even the air I put in my
    tiers is.
    test
  4. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    No, I will tell them to sue the guy who slammed into them.


    Please, Halliburton is a perfect example of how government gets involved with big-business to control the Free-market. The government made sure no competition opposed halliburton for the Iraqi contract Similar sort of policy account for the Insurance/government business relationship.

    Nixon made possible our current health insurance problem, which is why the model of health-insurence today, as I don't deny, is not good in some areas. What Clinton wanted is what ilk are opting for. He even took it a step-further opting for complete Government control over the free-market, which is insane, Because I understand our government/laws every well.The federal government imposed wage controls in WWII. In response, employers offered inducements such as "free" medical care. Then medical care provided by the employer was made tax-exempt, while self-paid care was not tax-exempt. The employer-pay system has led to exploding costs and bureaucratization.

    Unfortunately, various insurance mandates by the state and federal government undermine the market for individual health insurance When government protects rather than violates the right to contract freely for health insurance, most people will find it in their interests to purchase individual policies to cover unexpected, high-cost medical problems. Such insurance is affordable and portable. It minimizes paperwork costs. And it preserves our liberty to pursue medical services free from bureaucratic controls.

    Here Is how I see michael moores points...

    Health-insurance should be less expensive and Government shouldn't be meddling.

    http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1472-6963-6-49.pdf

    I did cite my sources. Whether you take me seriously or not really doesn't matter to me. My source is not incorrect. Even michael moore doesn't disagree. This just proves my point you only know what michael moore tells you. Since you never heard michael moore saying anything on it... you get puzzled.


    I did cite the statistics are you blind?
    Call bullshit all you want, Doesn't make what I said bullshit though.
    test
  5. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    I actually got the software now... I could finally delete somethings.
    However, This has nothing to do with what i'm talking about.


    The term "school choice" refers to a general principle of parents having the freedom to choose which school would best educate their children in accordance with their own values. School choice can manifest itself in more than one way–through voucher scholarships and tuition tax credits, for instance–to enable parents to choose which public or private school their children will attend. Though the methods may differ, school choice ultimately represents competition among educational providers–something the current system lacks. Instead, a government-imposed monopoly on education now undermines market efficiency and jeopardizes moral instruction, often resulting in substandard schools, especially in poor and urban areas, which all can agree is tantamount to a crisis.

    freedom is essential to human dignity, as affirmed by St. Thomas Aquinas. School choice alternatives that permit free exchange and association are more in accord with a conception of freedom and the centrality of the parent to their children’s education. It is morally troubling to deny certain people educational choices because the government has set aside their tax dollars exclusively for a public school. As the celebrated thinker Frederic Bastiat stated in his classic book The Law, In creating a monopoly of education, the government must answer to the hopes of the fathers of families who have thus been deprived of their liberty; and if these hopes are shattered, whose fault is it?" At fault is a system of no competition.

    The absence of competition is why a government monopoly on education is failing our children. Due to compulsory attendance, government schools rarely need to worry about attracting students, operating efficiently, or being accountable to the public. As long as taxes are being paid, school bureaucracies can count on a constant cash flow. With little accountability, it is no wonder that a significant portion of the budget government school districts spend has little to do with teaching students and a lot to do with bureaucratic administration.

    Opening up competition for private and other schools will help remedy this problem. All schools will be forced to become more attractive to students, more cost-efficient, and more accountable if they are to remain competitive. If a school fails to accomplish these goals, students will leave that school and attend competing institutions that provide a better education. This creates the incentive for a school to offer innovative services, quality facilities, and excellent academics, for if it does not, its competitor a few blocks away will certainly land more students. The market has ways of ensuring superior products are rewarded and inferior products weeded out. A competitive marketplace for education would be no different.

    School choice leads to competitive education. Citizens paying taxes on the money they earn should have some say about how that money is applied. Vouchers and tax credits allow parents to do just that by using some of the money collected in taxes for tuition at their preferred school. This is consistent with a moral perspective, as Notre Dame Law Professors Nicole and Richard Garnett point out: They pay tuition to a private school in addition to the taxes they already pay to support government schools. (School Choice, the First Amendment, and Social Justice) Parents of all incomes should have this right to use their money as they see fit–in this case, choosing the best school for their children to attend.

    Opponents of school choice often claim that it will destroy the public schools, as they think students will leave for private options. Notwithstanding the pure irony of this argument (in 1994 book School Choice, David Harmer writes: If students can’t wait to leave, what does that say about the quality of schools? That is an argument for school choice, not against it. The exodus argument sounds like the old East German regime talking about the Berlin Wall: if we take it down, everyone will leave. Exactly; that is precisely why it should come down.), studies have shown that competition forces public schools to improve immensely so they can retain their student population. According to World magazine (July 1, 2000), in Florida, where a voucher system has been instituted, even the mere hint at opening competition among schools caused the public schools to seek improvements and become more effective in their academics and administration.

    In addition, those who warn that vouchers or tax credits will not cover transportation costs of students need to keep this in mind: a competitive market will invite a number of new schools to open across existing districts. To get the competitive edge, many competing schools will also offer transportation to students who do not live in the immediate area. Options and services increase as the market operates freely.

    By denying parents the right to a competitive product, the government system of schools continues to provide low-performing, unsafe, and inefficient schools. Granted, there are many fine public schools in the country that truly prepare children for life with a solid education, but there are just as many that do not, making the case for competition even more sensible. The answer is not pumping more tax money into a command system; the failed socialist experiments of Eastern Europe have proven that no matter how much money is budgeted for a government program, it is the lack of competition that causes such systems to become unaccountable to its forced consumers.

    It is time for this unnatural monopoly to be stripped of its exclusive supply of education. Competition through school choice will accomplish just that.
    test
  6. Tequila Jong-il

    Tequila Jong-il SALAD TOSSER

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,426
    Blah. Finally bothered watching this and it was just a string of anecdotes. Anyone who found this persuassive needs to up their critical thinking game.
    test
  7. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    and what if it's no-fault? what if it's a natural disaster? what if it's an accident?

    pay up bitches...

    indeed [dunno]

    how is it similar??? it's not like money is being given to a SINGLE insurance company. 30+ years ago government money was given to set up a SYSTEM of health care. each individual company - Blue Cross, Kaiser Permanente, Cigna, blah blah, so on act independently of each other...and they're ALL screwing their customers.

    - first...either 1) you don't have a single thought of your own or 2) you're continuing to copy and pasting ideas from elsewhere without citing. I've bolded everything that came from the below website...

    http://www.i2i.org/main/article.php?article_id=1370

    ...wow dude.

    - making it possible for a model to run is not the same as government meddling. again, regardless of how insurance companies who run on this model came to be so prevalent, they STILL run independently of one another. they make decisions based on whether they will make profit...not based on what the government will say about it.

    it isn't like these "exploding costs" and "bureaucratization" have raised costs so much that insurance companies are struggling and going under. they're making RECORD profits quarter after quarter. if rising profits are outpacing rising costs on a regular basis WHILE customers are complaining that they are not receiving the care they are paying for it can only be the result of one factor...greed.

    Posting a statistic and saying where you got a statistic is not the same as citing a statistic. Saying "a 2006 Gallup poll said..." when there are many of them carried out a year is not citing a source. Nobody is going to thumb through a 17 page document looking for the particular statistics you posted unless you post a page number. (Furthermore, it looks as if the article is comparing satisfaction between general practitioners and chiropractors in the US vs. satisfaction between general practitioners in chiropractors in Canada...which is NOT the same as comparing overall satisfaction in Canada vs. the US. You're better off using a specific Gallup Poll. I'll wait for you to post the one you claim you got your initial stats from. Keep in mind such widespread polls are biased and miss the opinions of those who are probably most dissatisfied with health care...poor people without phones, the homeless, etc.)

    Citing involves providing dates, publications, page numbers, internet addresses, etc. College undergraduates understand this (well most...the others lose big points in my class) and since you know so much about academia and graduate studies, surely you understand something that your average freshman in college understands.

    you're above bit of intellectual property theft is proof you don't have a thought of your own. you could have at least paraphrased, but jesus...you're making it easy on me.









    and it's time to update your profile. your pseudo-communist leanings aren't at play anymore and your profile should reflect your new outlook. you should post something about your love for free markets or whatever flavor-of-the-week economic or social system you're behind at the time being
    test
  8. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    but I want to know what YOU think...I don't want you to copy and paste (without even paraphrasing) what someone else wrote.

    For those interested, the original article is below, though the entire thing can be found above, passes of as menaz' own thoughts.

    http://www.acton.org/ppolicy/education/market/
    http://www.ontheborderline.net/?p=2655



    Fucking christ dude...



    and the original article had plenty to do with what you're talking about.

    - "school choice" doesn't have to be the antithesis to "public school"

    - it's a case of public school becoming privatized (which is your suggestion), performance and test scores falling, and investors making a buttload because they lie about performance.

    How that can make anyone support a greed based...err, profit-based education system is beyond me.
    test
  9. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    I didn't have time for all that or else I would have wrote it myself like I always do. I try to treat all my conversations like real life conversations.I wasn't under the notion we were both getting graded on providing links. I gave sources mind you, you should have looked them up. Is this a term paper? NO! am I in college any more? NO! I'm having a conversation with a unreasonable demogogue who is a bum and fails to realize the current state of the public educational school system is in fucking complete shambles.

    My thoughts have already been intune with everything that information proped up. Clearly this your attempt at character assassination because you can't argue it. You're only proving my point. You can't argue against anything I say, or anything someone in support of my view props up, So you poison the well. This isn't your class room nor is it my class room. I see no difference between posting a link or copying and pasting a little bit of infromation to prop up my already existing argument. An argument I've already stated a MILLION TIMES in my own words in this very thread which you fail to acknowledge. Granted I should have put qutation marks around it like I always do, thought I did, but I guess I forgot. Also you've been using michael moore one liners throughout this conversation and probably other sources as well, but I'm not going to attack that. You see how stupid your attack is yet? You attacked what was a common error instead of the infromation I used to prop up my already existing argument. I only pasted the examples for you anyway. Everything else I've been saying all long. You're a typical demogouge.


    It has nothing to do with what I'm talking about here.



    You're talking for-profit corporations.

    - I'm talking non-profit groups,
    - per-pupil state aid from the school district,
    - funding grants for charter schools,
    - private donors and foundations,
    - non-profit vouchers.


    How can you support the current ineffective school system littered with union bullies? A welfare school system set-up by the democrats intended to oppress minorities making sure they fail so they will remain poor/uneducated later in life and completely dependant upon the democrats welfare-state as if they even give a dam? There is little to none pedagogy in the class room enviroment when it comes to public school systems. You should look at your parties history it's terrible retrospectively and still today (only masked).

    You talk about me not having a thought of mine own? When I came up with my thoughts first? And only used a few sources to prop up my already existing argument? Please stop posining the well. You're whole existence is revolves around michael moore and regurgitate whatever Psychoanalytic nonsense he throw-up at the moment.

    Right chief, I can't speak for myself when all you can do is post random PDF'S which have nothing to do with what I'm talking about in the first place. Do you even read what I say? Or just reply with something that has nothing to do with anything, but sounds good?

    Billions of dollars are pumped into the current public school system yet nothing changes, And when the public school systems do manage to change inner-city schools the educational-level is still poor. What is the money for these public schools doing? Nothing! What a failed bureaucratic system. And it was set-up by whom? your democratic buddies.


    I see you dening a perfect-market educational system, yet plenty of
    them are thriving better than the public school systems. Not only that, But public schools Vs perfect-market-schools will make for academia competition. Which will lead to better education, attendence records, teachers, and facilities.

    I know my argument, So keep personally attacking me it won't change a thing when it comes to the information I either say or provide to prop up what i've been saying.

    It's like your ilk don't want people to see alternatives to school reform, I figured out why long ago. See, If your ilk can't oppress the Blacks and Latino's then the Democritic party ceases to exist. Your ilk must oppress and hoodwink Blacks and latino's into state-welfare at all political cost. While I'm trying to do exactly the Opposite. The perfect-Market will help Latinos and blacks thrive, Welfare schooling has been the democratic policy equivalent to Bush's stay-the-course-in-Iraq, for years. And Like bush's policy democratic educational policy is on the brink of failure so it's time to give what I'VE been stating in this thread for the past some odd posts a real chance. I don't care, if you disagree.
    test
  10. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    Katrina Victims are suing fema.
    Accident, you can sue someone for an accident.
    Mcdonalds gets sued all the time.




    Who set-up our current corrupt system?
    federal Government policy. This policy needs to be reformed.



    We know that's not true because I've been giving my thoughts throughout this whole thread. It also took thought to look up something I wanted to prop up my already existing argument.


    Of course it is. Our government set-up the current corrupted state of affairs for insurance companies. They all act as monopolies gouging under the federal-policy. Exactly, Get rit of the government policy. Government policy legally allows them to do this. You should be Blaming the government policy which the corporations will take advantage of especially if it's not illegal and a president condoned it.




    Obviously, No amount of links I provide matters. you'll never admit the truth.You'll just make up an excuse. However, If that is your logic than why not apply it to michael moores statistics as well? All statistics have margins of error. Also It's not like canadians don't die just because they have free-health-care. Those are the real statistics and I don't give a fuck how you try to unfactually spin it. Obviously I thumbed throw it.

    "Which of the following approaches for providing health care in the United States would you prefer: replacing the current health care system with a new government run health care system, or maintaining the current system based mostly on private health insurance?"


    Replace Maintain Unsure
    % % %
    11/9-12/06 39 51 10
    11/7-10/05 41 49 10
    11/7-10/04 32 63 5
    11/3-5/03 38 57 5
    11/8-5/01 33 61 6





    Not ONCE has REPLACING won over a period of time.
    Maintain is the middle numbers... starting with 51%.

    If you think I'm making this up GOOD. I don't care what you think!
    I refuse to respect anyone like you. However, if anyone else would like this link... Leave me a message and I will personally send it to you.


    This isn't college. If I were still in college I would follow my professors requirements. You are not a professor, You are not a teacher, you are
    a bum, who is hoodwinked by the KKK-democrats.

    You personally attack me for infromation I only provided inorder to prop up my already existing argument sounds more like your a typical demogouge to me.



    I was a communist until I woke up! You're communist mind-set is exactly the reason you will fail in this country. That mind-set does not work here.
    Sorry, it just doesn't. I really should up-date my profile you have point there. However, I think you should up-date your profile to obese annoyingly pinko obsessed internet loser pretending to be a teacher online. I'm sticking with my classical-libertarian stance. I see how It could help the poor in this country if they'd only stopped relying on the democratic slave-master party providing them a welfare-state which has never worked.
    test
  11. Crates

    Crates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,798
    If you think America should have a gov't run healthcare system then go to the search sections of Canadian news sites like CBC or Britain's BBC News to read what they are reporting about their own systems. Just type in waiting-lists.

    America needs to find ways to improve on our market system not get rid of it.
    test
  12. Crates

    Crates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,798
    test
  13. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    i don't want government run healthcare. Neither does moore.

    How is it this is always brought up??
    test
  14. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    nobody is chastizing you for using another person's work to back up your point...."we stand on the shoulders of giants", eh?

    but when you don't CITE it (quotations are not citations), it looks as if you're passing it off as your own intellectual property. TWICE in this thread you've done this...the first time you picked and chose different paragraphs and pasted it within your own thoughts. It looks shady. And it takes .5 seconds to copy and paste a link [dunno]

    I DON'T support the current ineffective school system.

    I'd support a school system where per pupil expenditures are NOT determined by property taxes. A system where school districts with richer residents don't provide twice as much or more money per pupil than school districts with poorer residents.

    As with health care, we're the ONLY industrialized country where this is the case. And as with healch care, we're falling behind others in terms of overall performance...even though we're the most wealthy country in the world.
    test
  15. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    jesus...

    they're suing FEMA because of their (lack of) response to a natural disaster.

    If a tornado comes through, demolishes a house, and family members are hurt while in a basement there's nobody to sue. you can't take a tornado to court.

    If you're standing in your yard enjoying a frosty beverage on a hot summer day and a branch comes crashing down and cracks your skull there's nobody to sue. you can't take a tree to court

    the didn't set it up. they passed an act to 30+ years ago to fund it's expansion. not the same...

    ...and has NOTHING to do with whether or not they'll approve a procedure or not. keep up.

    remember when you didn't cite said arguments....

    twice

    There isn't a federal policy to go buy...there was an act passed to funnel money into the system 30+ years ago. it still has NOTHING to do with whether or not an insurance company will approve a procedure or pay for care. keep up.

    Two pages later and you still haven't given an example of HOW government intervention directly influences the company decisions.

    Furthermore, "allow" is not the same as "force". By saying "allow", you're recognizing that insurance companies are making their decisions ON THEIR ON VOLITION. If they're taking advantage of government policy that "allows" them to do this, what makes you think they won't do the same in a completely free market...where it's also not illegal and where free-market politicians will also condone a hands off approach.

    All you have to do is cite it. Takes 2 second. Cite an internet address. Cite the author. Cite a journal, volume number, issue number, page number. As I tell my students...give me enough information that I can find the information you borrow myself. You didn't do that until after I asked...and later didn't do it at all. I had to SEARCH for the source. That'll get your grade lowered in any college course. That'll get you an outright denial if you try to publish an article without properly citing.

    Feel free to ask me to provide a source any time I toss out a number or statistic...I'll be happy to oblige.

    And guess what...Moore's facts check out.
    http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/06/28/sicko.fact.check/index.html

    [funny]

    are you kidding..."i'm not going to give you the link because you called me out for not citing my sources earlier"? how fucking lame...

    You know what...it doesn't suprise me that most people would say they do NOT want to replace the current system with a government run health care system.

    hell I don't want to replace the current system with a government run system.

    universal care does not have to be government run. it isn't synonymous

    "government run" is the type description anti-socialist fear mongers use to make sure the market system stays in place. it holds about as much weight as "do you want the government to tell you what time you can go to the doctor?" or "do you want the government choosing your doctors?" (meanwhile, with HMO's you have to choose docs within the system...oh the irony).

    correction: provided and did not cite

    I could go the Republican Party route and call you a flip-flopper...

    ...but I'm above that.
    test
  16. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    [funny][funny][funny]

    alright...so after being forced to search for an article where menaz got his information about health care satisfaction I finally found the report he's talking about...

    The report - Joint Canada/United States Survey of Health, 2002-03 - can be found HERE: www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/jcush_analyticalreport.pdf



    And guess what...it comes as no surprise that menaz is either 1) just plain making shit up or 2) is unable to read statistical graphs. I truly hope the former is not the case.

    here's his original quote:

    If you'll look on page 22 of the article you'll see something quite different. Here's a screenshot of the graph in case you don't want to open the Acrobat document.

    [​IMG]

    Hmmm, what do we see here...

    - just over 8% (EIGHT!) of Canadians ARE NOT satisfied with care (5.5 being somewhat dissatisfied and 2.6 percent being very dissatisfied). This is a far cry from the 83% menaz originally claimed
    - 87% of Canadians ARE satisfied with care (43.7 are very satisfied and 43.3 are somewhat satisfied.
    - about 5% were neither satisfied or dissatisfied

    - just over 53% of Americans are "very satisfied" with care. This is a far cry from the 87% menaz originally claimed

    Conclusion?

    menaz is a fucking liar. I'm STILL waiting for a source that will back up your original statistics.








    addendum: I think we should keep in mind that the above statistics are indicators of satisfaction concerning health care SERVICES. I'll be the first to tell you that we have the best care possible, best technology, and best doctors.

    I'm wondering what statistics would look like if each were asked about their satisfaction regarding the payment process or availability of care. I've got a pretty good idea...
    test
  17. Crates

    Crates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,798
    Judging from what I've seen of Moore in recent interviews he doesn't seem to have a problem with gov't run healthcare. He seems to be suggesting that America should go that route when he compares our system to all the countries that do have gov't healthcare.
    test
  18. Crates

    Crates Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,798
    As far as France being number one in healthcare. This may be true but it has come at a very high cost to France. The high taxes it takes to fund their healthcare and social welfare system has hurt economic growth in France and it's healthcare system is running a very high deficit. This is why they like Sweden have recently elected fiscally conservative presidents to bring about needed reforms.
    test
  19. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    Moore would probably tell you that he supports universal health care...which isn't the same as "government run" health care. It sounds nitpicky, but the two don't have to be synonymous and I think he shows that in this film pretty well (especially the scenes where he's in the UK)
    test
  20. Leila Night

    Leila Night efrain,you're my one&only

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,830
    Please clarify.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)