Sicko
Over the next few weeks we can expect to hear from a lot of patriotic right-wing “fact checkers” who haven’t and won’t see the movie bashing that communist Michael Moore and his manufactured “liberal myths” about health care in the US.
Well, given Moore’s willful misrepresentations in the past, I’d say it won’t be hard.
Update: Says R. Neal: See what I mean? More criticism from someone who hasn’t even seen the movie. He should have taken us up on our offer of a free ticket.
I didn’t criticize the movie, I criticized Moore. And he’s right, I won’t see it. I saw Roger and Me and used to watch Moore’s show on Fox (Revenge or something like that?). And found it entertaining. But Moore’s blatant lies in Bowling for Columbine (which I watched twice) lend him zero credibility. He’s a hack and a liar and I’d have to double check if he told me the sky was blue. Any valid point he wanted to make, I won’t see due to his reputation.
And: The most puzzling thing to me, though, is why can’t 70% of the people drown out the noise of the 30% dead-enders with facts and logic? I guess we just need to make more noise.
Well, that’s rather the problem: Moore makes up the facts that fit his story. Sicko will be no different.
Update 2: In comments, BlountTruth (not someone I’d expect to agree with Moore) says:
Well I must say I have seen the film and he does (if only for once) make a good point. Bowling for columbine was a giant steamy load of horse shite, but he makes great points in “Siko”.
Even if you hate Moore the message in this film has fact and sad to say the present system sucks. Not much unlike our political system money has corrupted the system to a point that we let people die based on whether they have coverage and not based on respect for life.
This movie is not based on the sad, sad uninsured, but rather those of us that actually work and pay loads each month for the coverage that in out greatest times of need we are denied coverage. I have heard more than once over the course of the last 4 weeks that we would be better off if we were illegal immigrants due to the fact that their tab is picked up by the tax payer when it comes to health care, and this may very well be a fact.
Hate the man or not I will always listen to what anyone has to say, saving enough time to tell them why in my opinion they are wrong, and on this one it is my opinion that there has to be a better system out there then the present
Hate the man, but respect the message.
Now, I thought Moore’s overall point in Columbine was a valid one. And that point was blaming video games, rock stars, etc. for violence was stupid. However, it’s equally stupid to blame guns. Yet, he spent considerable time bashing pro gun folks and was less than forthright about it.
Ok, then.
Update 3: Well, patriotic right-wing “fact checker” Kurt Loder of MTV says:
Unfortunately, Moore is also a con man of a very brazen sort, and never more so than in this film. His cherry-picked facts, manipulative interviews (with lingering close-ups of distraught people breaking down in tears) and blithe assertions (how does he know 18,000* people will die this year because they have no health insurance?) are so stacked that you can feel his whole argument sliding sideways as the picture unspools.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Michael Moore is a lot like Al Gore. He is given wide latitude by true believers because in their heart they know he is doing the right thing. For the children. For the Planet.
Extremist liberals care more about feelings than facts. There are many tortured rationalisations at Progressiveville showing just how wonderful socialized medicine would be. The sound of one hand clapping. Echo, echo, echo…
The funny part about Moore is that his next stop is Iran. Only Sean Penn is a greater patriot.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:23 pm
Psychic prediction, it won’t be long until the word mouth-breathers is used. Book it and bank it.
“Dead-enders”, oh boy, that is the pot calling the kettle black isn’t it? You have to love the vocabulary.
I love this new meme that unless you see the movie from the pathological liar then it isn’t fair to make any comments. So typical.
Some people are very slow learners.
July 2nd, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Count-down to R. Neal meltdown in 5 … 4 … 3 … 2 …
(I’ve been de-linked! I am SO hurt!)
(Not!)
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:13 pm
Yep, that would be me… My attitude is that I don’t need to eat rat poison to know it’s bad for me.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Well I must say I have seen the film and he does (if only for once) make a good point. Bowling for columbine was a giant steamy load of horse shite, but he makes great points in “Siko”.
Even if you hate Moore the message in this film has fact and sad to say the present system sucks. Not much unlike our political system money has corrupted the system to a point that we let people die based on whether they have coverage and not based on respect for life.
This movie is not based on the sad, sad uninsured, but rather those of us that actually work and pay loads each month for the coverage that in out greatest times of need we are denied coverage. I have heard more than once over the course of the last 4 weeks that we would be better off if we were illegal immigrants due to the fact that their tab is picked up by the tax payer when it comes to health care, and this may very well be a fact.
Hate the man or not I will always listen to what anyone has to say, saving enough time to tell them why in my opinion they are wrong, and on this one it is my opinion that there has to be a better system out there then the present
Hate the man, but respect the message.
BT
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:28 pm
[…] SaysUncle weighs in I didn’t criticize the movie, I criticized Moore. And [R.Neal is] right, I won’t see it. I saw Roger and Me and used to watch Moore’s show on Fox (Revenge or something like that?). And found it entertaining. But Moore’s blatant lies in Bowling for Columbine (which I watched twice) lend him zero credibility. He’s a hack and a liar and I’d have to double check if he told me the sky was blue. Any valid point he wanted to make, I won’t see due to his reputation. […]
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:38 pm
Mary Katharine Ham is talking about Sicko and a negative review from an unusual source:
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/9c7ee491-6295-49de-aec7-80fff9020645
Just figured I’d share, since it’s relevant. The reviewer there DID see the movie, and DID have problems with it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:41 pm
[…] long as some of us are blogging about “Sicko”, I thought I’d link to two great health care posts from my favorite econ blogger here and […]
July 2nd, 2007 at 2:57 pm
What I found fascinating in the movie was one claim: The US is ranked just above Cuba in terms of health and healthcare access. Wooohooo! We’re better than those commies! Um, wait. Not Woohoo. Like it or not, Moore made a great point with that tidbit. The most powerful, richest, bestest country in the whole planet is just a couple ticks better than a dirt-poor country clinging to a bankrupt ideology. No matter what you think of Moore, that stings and says a lot about the state we are in regarding our health policies in this country.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:00 pm
What does that mean? I can, right now, walk into almost any hospital and get access to healthcare. That is, of course, depending on what you mean by the word. And it’s a serious question.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Having lived with “Universal” health care in Canada for many years, it is clear to me, from experience, that Moore’s solution is a disaster.
The “solution” of “universal” health care results in universally bad health care. Most people will get worse care, some will get the same, and nobody will get better care. Some solution.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:17 pm
I think the point is that in Cuba, you can do the same thing: Walk right in and get health care. They perform most of the same medical procedures as we do in the US, have the roughly the same life expectancy, lower infant mortality and less chronic illness (sources: CIA Factbook, US and CU entries and WHO ). When they need specialists, they get them in on fellowships from Canada and Europe. A lot of those specialists are licensed to perform procedures that are banned (or considered experimental) in the US because healthcare companies don’t want to pay for them and lobby to keep them that way. Sorry. They do as well as we do (or, more accurately, a little less better than we do) with much fewer resources. It’s a fact.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Randy Neal said:
Here’s my review: The next time some wingnut tells me to move to France, I just might.
Move to France Randy. Seriously.
Not only would you be happier but everyone else would be also. Say hi to Alec Baldwin.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Unk said: Moore makes up the facts that fit his story. Sicko will be no different.
The most telling “facts” in the movie are the Insurance people themselves testifying before Congress. Michael Moore makes up nothing that appears in SiCKO (just as nothing was made up in F 911), and it has been excruciatingly factchecked.
Uncle, on the other hand, made up that above statement…and it isn’t true.
Glad to see you keeping true to form, Unk.
July 2nd, 2007 at 3:57 pm
At least he has the option of moving somewhere that suits his ideology. If America gets turned into the political equivalent of Europe part 2, I can’t think of too many suitable places to go to.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:01 pm
Money doesn’t ruin systems. Money is only a means of conveying information about the value of things. Money allows us to efficiently allocate resources throughout society.
What ruins systems is governmental interference with prices and governmental injections of money into the marketplace. Whenever the government intervenes, the market shifts, much like bathwater shifts when an fat person sits in a full bathtub.
When the government will pay for inefficiency and crap, why provide efficiency and quality?
When the government raises the price of crap, who will pay for it?
When government lowers the price of quality, who would waste their time providing it?
Centralized allocation of resources is catastrophically inefficient. Isn’t this the one huge lesson we learned from the 20th century? To the extent that any health care system deviates from the free market, it fails. The failure of the american system is due to a trillion dollars a year of government handouts injected into the system. The purpose of health care in the US is not to heal or to care, but to absorb government largess. Remove the government from the equation and the system would become infinitely more efficient. More people would receive better care quicker.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:03 pm
Steve, follow a link. I provided several showing his various gaffes, lies and misrepresentations. But I made my case. You, of course, have not and cannot. I mean, I know you’re busy being all captain coo-coo banana and avoiding reality and stuff. And even Loder noted some odd alleged facts.
I’m having trouble deciding whether your divorce from reality is real or an act.
Or are you going to tell us again how only republicans are corrupt or one of your other boners?
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Many of us do work hard, pay our bills, raise our children the best we can, and we do it all knowing every day that we live in a country that wants to know we can pay before they are willing to give us even the most basic medical care.
The system is broken, and whining about how much you hate a film maker only proves the point that Americans are selfish and money hungry at the expense of people we deem lesser than. Instead of a diatribe against a film maker, why not take time to understand the valid points? Is your ego too fragile to accept that someone you disdain may sometimes have some truth to share?
The idea that medical care rests solely on ability to pay is so unAmerican that it should embarrass us all. We should be ashamed that we can value life so little.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Because I don’t trust him and therefore do not care what his points are. If the messenger’s not credible, neither is the message.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Michael’s full of it. The Canadian system sucks, been there, done that. My best friend’s girlfriend had to wait over a month for an MRI, and my other roommate in college had to wait over a month for cancer surgery. I had an MRI here in Seattle not too long ago, I had to wait 3 days and they apologized for the wait!
Universally bad health care is NOT the answer.
July 2nd, 2007 at 4:59 pm
My cousin’s dad’s secretary’s uncle had an inflamed whatsit on his butt, and he’s Canadian, and I heard they just jabbed it with a pen after they made him wait for seventeen hours on a cold steel bed. But when I went to the doctor in the USA, good things happened and I got a lollipop.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:01 pm
I’d scared to death of a Canadian/French style system in the US only because Americans have a habit of wanting top notch care, but not paying too much in taxes. If such a system passes, we’re practically guaranteed to have it run the government into so much debt the system bankrupts itself. Americans aren’t going to agree to European levels of taxation to pay for health care that most taxpayers already have.
I do kind of like the Jane Galt Health plan. I’d at least like to see some studies on how much it would cost. If it turns out to be cheaper than Medicare/Medicaid, I’d go for it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Nice try Sam, but I don’t know anyone close to me in the US, and most of my relatives live here, who’ve had those sorts of problems. I know, and know of, countless persons in Canada who have had unacceptable difficulties with their system.
And if you think having insurance companies dictate what care you get, try it when the government gets to make those decisions, it gets worse. The only thing “good” about it is that everyone is in the same shitty boat. My dad’s teaching partner at the public school he works at found this out. Had horrible pain in her knees for year
The only point I’m trying to make is that Canadian style health care is not the solution.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:17 pm
argh! stupid laptop mousepad! Anyway, she had horrible pain in her knees for years and the government wouldn’t let her have knee replacements, even though that’s what her doctors said she needed, because she was TOO YOUNG! Nice.
July 2nd, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Cuba has a “lower infant mortality rate” bacause they don’t count preme deaths. Those are considered into a separate category.. We figure them into the infant category.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:04 pm
“we live in a country that wants to know we can pay before they are willing to give us even the most basic medical care.”
No, most of the bankruptcies in this country are from people who received medical care and were unable to pay for it. Note that they received medical care despite lacking the financial means. Note that this is america, the country you appear to be referring to in your post.
July 2nd, 2007 at 6:21 pm
to the person who said there were no lies in Fahrenheit 9/11:
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
Seriously — the guy lied in all of his other movies. He presents only things helpful to his argument in addition to his lies. He “creatively” edits. Why should I trust he’s suddenly changed for this movie?
July 2nd, 2007 at 7:16 pm
I’m curious why people jump so quickly to the defense of a well know liar? It’s really his hucksterism that he’s best at, his films all kinda suck majorly from a cinematic POV. They’re tedious recitations of various flim-flammery.
I can’t see why anybody who works at the DMV should be let anywhere near Health Care or real money – but Kaiser doesn’t think the same as me…
July 2nd, 2007 at 10:24 pm
Everybody go back and read Jim W.’s comment. He nailed it.
July 2nd, 2007 at 11:16 pm
Given that said offer appeared on the “progressives only” KnoxViews, I’m not sure that the offer was actually available to Uncle, or the rest of us non progressive heathens.
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:00 am
Moore’s movies don’t usually contain lies (though they sure are sloppy–see Unk’s links) . . . what they contain is fallacious conclusions. This “fact” linked with this “fact” (but leaving out these facts) leads to a certain conclusion (certain also in the sense that Moore has a point he’s trying to make and assembles “facts” to suit his agenda). No, I’m not going to put money in Moore’s pocket as he spins his Leftwing fairytales and crams them down my throat?
My wife and I randomly watched a show about dwarfism on TLC last evening and it was interesting how this Canadian couple had to come to the U.S. to get the help they needed. They got next to NO treatment in Canada . . . no experts . . . dumbfounded doctors . . . Anecdotal? Sure, but every “documentary” Moore produces is one honking anecdote.
July 3rd, 2007 at 2:14 am
I grew up in Canada and most of my family is there and I’ve lived in the US for the last 7 years or so. My experience is that in general there is little difference between the two systems that most people are going to notice. Day-to-day healthcare needs are filled similarly and there is very little difference.
There are two differences that I’ve personally experienced…one is all of the co-pays and in- and out- of network coverages. In Canada I can go to any doctor without worrying about whether my insurance company will cover the cost. There is no pre-approval or any of that kind of crap.
The other difference, that I’ve personally experienced, is that wait times in emergency roooms for non-critical care is a lot shorter in the US. My first encounter with US healthcare was as follows…
I was riding my bike to work and going through an intersection a vehicle did a “California stop” and kept rolling. I slammed into the vehicle and my hand was sore. I stopped for a few seconds and kept on going to work. Upon getting to work, I told some co-workers what had happened and everyone encouraged me to go to the hospital to have my hand checked out. I didn’t dream of doing so, I figured I’d wait for a few hours and see if my hand got better before heading to the hospital.
Ultimately, my co-workers won out and I headed to the hospital making sure that I brought along reading material settling down for a long slog figuring I’d be sitting in the waiting room all day. I shouldn’t have bothered..I was in and out in an hour and told that there was nothing wrong. I barely had time to finish all the paperwork before being told that I would be seen.
While it was a nice convenience to get in and out that quickly, I did cost the healthcare system for what was ultimately an unneeded visit that I wouldn’t have bothered going to if I were in Canada and had to wait hours and hours.
July 3rd, 2007 at 7:26 am
Given that said offer appeared on the “progressives only” KnoxViews, I’m not sure that the offer was actually available to Uncle, or the rest of us non progressive heathens.
The offer was open to anybody who sent an e-mail requesting tickets. There were some conservatives there. Some of them came away with some things to think about.
If such a system passes, we’re practically guaranteed to have it run the government into so much debt the system bankrupts itself. Americans aren’t going to agree to European levels of taxation to pay for health care that most taxpayers already have.
As Jim W pointed out, medical costs are one of the leading causes of bankruptcy in the U.S.
As for taxes, a worker in the UK or France making $50K takes home approx. $7000 more than his/her US counterpart and has all his/her health care covered in the deal. The US employee still has to buy health insurance, and most also pay state and local income tax.
Health care expenditures represent 15.2% of the GDP in the US, compared to 9.9% in Canada, 8% in the UK, and 10.1% in France.
But those are facts “made up” by a “liberal”, so y’all feel free to deny them.
July 3rd, 2007 at 8:34 am
I haven’t disputed the facts you presented. You have much more credibility than Moore.
July 3rd, 2007 at 9:27 am
If our healthcare is so much better…how come we’re not healthier?
July 3rd, 2007 at 9:44 am
I’ll blogwhore here and say I’m actually doing a series of posts about the way we do health care in this country. This post here is about the high cost of prescription drugs. My simple statement is that if there was an economic incentive, perhaps supply-a-demand would moderate drug prices.
While my savings on a particular drug were modest, (12% off), I still think I’m on the right track here. I know it’s a radical idea, but with a large base of consumers actually, you know, shopping for prescription drugs, the prices for everyone will go down. Having everyone pay a co-pay, like a flat $20 fee, does absolutely nothing to help control prices.
I’m also going to be running with the novel idea that having consumers shop for health care services will bring prices down in other sectors of the health care industry, so say tuned.
July 3rd, 2007 at 9:47 am
Heck, that’s an easy one. Look at our diet. Couple that with our sadly sedentary lifestyle, and voila… instant diabetic with a touch of heart disease.
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:00 am
I think “Neal” needs to go back and refigure his tax burden on the Brit, French and Canadian employee. Also go ask the average Brit or Canadian about their experiences in dealing with “their” health care systems.
One last one for him. If he was sick, do yoou think he would rather check into a Cuban hospital or an American one?
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:01 am
Heck, in the case of the Brits, ask the DOCTORS involved with the system.
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:18 am
Yeah, but lots of cultures eat lots of greasy, rich foods. It’s not just about us being a bunch of lazy KFC eating maroons (although I agree that’s part of it). We also lag in preventing preventable diseases, getting preemptive care, vaccinating ourselves, etc.
We pay more to get less health. I’m not saying the Canadians or the Brits have it right, but pretty clearly we don’t either.
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:21 am
I don’t get the sudden religion R. Neal has on this issue. How intuitive is it that we would be better off with the .gov running health care?
We are overtaxed in this country now, some people desire more taxes? I thought we learned something from TennCare? Guess not everyone paid attention.
The tax analysis is weak and just scratches the surface. The EU has many other taxes not taken into account. The other big issue is that the EU healthcare is not that great.
Michael Moore is a good technical editor. But he is a pathological liar and I don’t get how anyone can not see through his clever editing. True believers. They are born every minute.
I am surprised Andy Axel or metulj did not come over here and call us mouth-breathers. Such restraint.
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:26 am
As I’ve said before, even if you convince me that the .gov can pull it off in terms of price and cost, I still don’t want the people who spend $900 on a hammer making medical decisions for anyone.
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:40 am
And it’s strange to think that some of the people shouting the loudest about possible identity thief from the carelessness of government employees regarding yours and my Social Security numbers, NSA warrentless wiretapping, FBI misuse of the perpetual PATRIOT Act, and some of the strongest advocates of the unenumerated right to privacy (well at least in the extremely narrow concept of one specific medical procedure preformed on females) would be more than willing to hand the entire kit and kaboodle over to the looming federal bureaucracy for safe keeping and management.
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:52 am
To the poster who says I need to recheck my numbers (and who apparently has not read the post at my blog, oh, wait, maybe I didn’t link to it, oh well), I point out all the other taxes (VAT v. sales tax – you pay zero VAT/sales tax on groceries in the UK, and about one fourth as much for groceries in France as you do here), corporate taxes (lower in France and the UK), capital gains, etc.
Yes, they have property taxes, just like us. Yes they have gas taxes and other taxes just like us. But we’re talking about income tax and social security (insurance) taxes, apples to apples.
But I realize that the facts have a liberal bias and can cause discomfort. At any rate, as I said in the blog post, I’d appreciate any factchecking or help with a more exact calculation for French deductions, which are hard to understand. The UK numbers are from a salary/deduction calculator, so they are correct. The US numbers are from the IRS, so they are correct.
To the poster who wonders about my “sudden religion” or whatever, that’s a disingenuous remark (i.e. a lie). He/she knows good and well that I have been advocating for health care reform for a long time, and even longer than I have been blogging. In fact, the last big proposal I came up with was far less radical than “socialized medicine”. But again, don’t let facts get in the way of an opportunity to troll and argue.
Y’all really need to do some homework and make better arguments. I think most folks who understand the magnitude of the crisis are ready to listen to all rational debate and any proposed solutions, none of which seem forthcoming in discussions such as this.
July 3rd, 2007 at 11:18 am
Y’all really need to do some homework and make better arguments.
And where may this argument take place? At KnoxViews? Not likely.
When you excommunicate people from your blog due to your partisan prejudice you run the risk of being perceived as a person who refuses to have a two way discussion.
Is this really not much different than the tactics of Michael Moore? In fact the basis of your defense that socialised medicine would be better for America is a chart showing that it would not cost much more than what we have now. Your point being that people who don’t have good insurance would receive medical attention without going bankrupt. Are you willing to bankrupt the whole country for this altruism?
So all you have done is take a page from the play book of Al Gore and Michael Moore. Is a PowerPoint presentation far off?
What is special is that you accuse others of being disingenuous. You know what is really disingenuous, when you call poeple trolls for merely disagreeing with you. Then you excommunicate them. That doesn’t sound like religion to you? The Church of KnoxViews is not open to all the people. Just the special ones.
July 3rd, 2007 at 11:21 am
Healthcare and lifestyle are not commensurate.
July 3rd, 2007 at 11:36 am
The many lies of Sicko.
I thought the Pied Piper was a little trimmer and didn’t wear a baseball cap.
July 3rd, 2007 at 12:17 pm
No doubt. I think my larger point, as I later clarified, is that even in non-lifestyle dependent metrics we still don’t have better healthcare.
July 3rd, 2007 at 2:09 pm
I’m a great fan of Prime Minister’s Questions on C-SPAN. In recent weeks Blair has been touting the new program at the NHS (National Health Service) to get “door to door” times to a certain goal. That meant they were trying to get the time between walking into a hospital seeking treatment and the time you walk into the door of the specialist who will treat you to a new low.
That goal? Eighteen weeks! And Blair was proud of it.
Also, Neal’s points about taxes between Europe and America have some side issues that are very important. Mostly, the US shoulders a very large part of the military defense, and defense research, of Europe. We pay several percent more of DGP on defense than they do. If European nations had similar spending levels for their own defense as we do, their taxes would be commensurately higher. But we pick up the tab for their security and they spend the difference on their social safety net.
It should also be mentioned that most European nations set the prices for most prescription drugs. Usually much lower than even manufacturing and shipping costs. We pick up the tab for the difference. You’re welcome, Europe!
And, just out of curiousity, does Neal include council/estate fees and BBC license fees and the like in his calculations? Just curious.
July 3rd, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Also go ask the average Brit or Canadian about their experiences in dealing with “their” health care systems.
Well, I was born and raised in Canada and I have few complaints about the Canadian system. Likewise, I have few complaints about the US system that I’ve been using for the better part of 7 years. Brits I know have similar experiences..for the most part pretty good. All systems have people who fall through the cracks.