Exactly what I’ve been saying all along:
If you go see Michael Moore’s “Sicko” you will probably leave the theater wondering why nobody ever presents the other side of the story. Most people agree that Moore’s critique of American health care is not just right, but his answers are seriously off-base. I mean, c’mon — CUBA, for Pete’s sake?Moore’s premise — that over-reliance on Third Party Payers results in bureaucratic interference in medicine — is sound. But his remedy — to create one colossal Third Party Payer in the federal government — will only make the existing problems that much worse.
Grace-Marie Turner with more:
Moore has also been doing the TV interview circuit, and one question he was asked seemed to get to the heart of his incongruity. An interviewer for FoxNews asked why he would be calling for a health care system run by government when he is so opposed to government in the first place. “Good question,” Moore responds. He then uses the opportunity to slam the Bush administration, saying that government used to do things right before the current administration took over.Exactly when was it that we had that perfect government?
Today, it is overwhelmed just trying to issue passports. Could any government magically run an infinitely more complex health care system for 300 million Americans?
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Let’s break this down then. In medicine when you have a challenging problem, the hardest task and the one most likely to help most patients is getting an accurate diagnosis.
You are saying that his diagnosis is correct. You simply disagree with his treatment plan … and you think the reason for this is not that it can’t work but that you don’t trust the government to run a health plan because they are slow getting passports out.
But passports are a pretty lousy comparison when we have several direct and obvious health-care related comparisons.
The government currently pays for MORE THAN HALF of the healthcare costs in the US. Couldn’t you point to failures of Medicare, Medicaid and the military, Federal Employees, and VA systems instead? And then please point out systemic surveys based on real scientific data that show that patients who get care from the US government which is currently doing the job are worse of than those who don’t.
The fact that people use things like the post office and passports to compare to health care is a sure sign they are trying to deflect the argument and you ought to be aware of that by now Kevin.
It is good to see that you think Michael Moore is right about what’s wrong with the US healthcare system though. I thought you wouldn’t be able to see that.
” . . . the government used to do things right before the current administration took over.”
Hello Mr. Moore??? Yours truly was crewed in public service (the National Health Service Corps) DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION.
There’s NO evidence yet (nearly ten years later) that the government has a ^&%$#* clue how to do things “right”.
Evan,
Your ideology is clouding your memory! Go back and read even just this blog’s posts on the damage medicare has done, and the way that many physicians won’t even take it because it’s insufficient to cover their costs.
But, I know, you feel that this blog puts forth many falsehoods and that government is, in fact, a panacea. Just do even a tiny bit of research on news sites that aren’t blogs. I’m not going to do it for you and link a bunch of articles you won’t trust anyway, so do it yourself. Even a small amount of due diligence will show you with great clarity that government is consistently the slowest, most wasteful, least efficient and most corrupt way to handle virutally anything from the military to health care to postage to food stamps.
Check it out for yourself, take a moment to really take an honest look at your ideology and the facts you’re opting to ignore, then come back and post again with greater attention to real information and accuracy.
Two words: Walter Reed.
The passport analogy is a good one, although I realize that your political predispositions give you a strong urge to create differences where there really aren’t any. Comparing the way government runs monopolized services to the way government runs other monopolized services is hardly a deflection. It’s accurate, useful and informative.
Try again.
I take it anyone who doesn’t take issue with the VA has never worked there. It is absurd. The most incompetent people last for decades because they’re government employees and cannot be gotten rid of. Nobody does ANYTHING because there is no incentive to actually work instead of just hiding for 8 hours. The collective laziness of the nursing staff (compared to the ones out in the real world busting their asses) is truly breathtaking and the system serves as a reservoir for physicians too incompetent to practice on patients with choices.
If the US health care system becomes like the VA, I would leave medicine. No amount of money is worth stroking out trying to get some labs back in timely fashion.
I haven’t seen the movie, so I cannot really comment. I do, however, have first-hand experience with the health system in the former Soviet Union. While there were good doctors and bad doctors, as everywhere, the system as a whole had a lot of problems.
Soviet Union had different clinics for people with “connections” and for regular people. I’d be surprised if it is not the same in Cuba. Given that Castro wanted to “show off” the Cuban system, I imagine that the care Americans who went to Cuba received is not exactly the same as that received by average Cubans. Given that Castro has complete control in choosing which aspects to show Moore, I wouldn’t make any judgements about Cuban system based on this movie. This is probably one reason I don’t plan on going.
Really, why couldn’t he take some Western country? At least over there he would be able to see anything he wanted and trust that people he interviews say what they really think.
Carlos,
So Walter Reed is bad. Are all hospitals that are run privately better? Are there no horror stories in FFS medicine in the US?
I am asking for … and still never get … ACTUAL DATA that show that FFS is objectively FAR better, as all of you posters here are convinced is the case than the care the US government currently gives to many people. Yet I never see it.
Assertions made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Curious, are there studies that show that government run tax-payer funded healthcare in the US is objectively FAR better than fee for service?
Are there surverys that show that patients who get care from FFS are worse off than those that get it from the government?
Here’s an idea -
The constitution guarantees legal representation for criminal defendants. Let’s nationalize it. Require all criminial defendants to use a government provided lawyer, who will work at government determined rates. If you want to use a private attorney, you have to contract with an attorney, in advance of being charged, for his rates. Furthermore the attorney must have opted out in advance, and must agree not to take any government sponsored cases for at least two years. Or diallow private retainers all togeher.
After all, this is a constituionally guaranteed right, unlike healthcare. This may even reduce some of the diparities in the criminal justice system! Ah, utopia!