Yes he’s back. That one man Republican resistance, that pariah of the pundits, Michael Moore has a new movie scheduled out and it’s a scathing indictment of the insurance and healthcare industry as we know it in America today.
Last night on the Democracy Now!(1) television broadcast, excepts from his new movie “Sicko” were played in between a tape of Moore speaking to the California State Assembly on the subject of healthcare reform.
His insightful, impassioned plea to the state lawmakers challenged them to lead the way for the country on healthcare reform. He made the case that the insurance industry as well as the private, for-profit hospital corporations such as Kaiser-Permanente, must be taken out of the equation when it came to every Americans’ health. He argued that these corporations’ bottom line is an immoral consideration in the context of peoples' lives. He presented testimony from a woman whose daughter was killed by an HMO, dying in the emergency room because the hospital that her daughter was taken to was not in the same network as her insurance provider. Another speaker who worked in a mission in downtown Los Angeles talked about how Kaiser regularly dropped sick and disoriented patients, with nothing but the hospital robe on their backs, in front of the skid-row mission because they had no insurance or means to pay for treatment.
Moore’s most powerful moments came when he escalated the war of words that he has carried on with the conservative right now for quite some time. Anticipating the scare rhetoric from conservatives about how government just makes a mess of things and that medicine cannot be allowed to be “socialized” as if that were an awful, dirty word, Moore was prepared with statistics. Statistics on how the overhead of insurance carriers’ bureaucracies now is over 30% and the overhead for Medicare is under 2%. As for medical care becoming socialized, he made the case that your local fire and police departments are socialized, that is, they are run by government. You wouldn’t want them to be thinking about their bottom line before they were answering a call to come to the scene of a fire or a crime.
This is true. And it’s true of the nonsensical demonization of government-as-boogeyman that the right has drummed into the heads of Americans for the past 30 years.
Moore fell a bit flat when he tried to make the case that we have become a “me” nation of people filled with “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” bravado. He said that we must become more of a “we” nation and that, as a people, we are better than the skid row drop-offs mentioned earlier.
Personally, I wonder. We are a nation with two faces. We are a frontier nation. We are the Wild West, the Gangs of New York; we slaughtered the Indians. We enslaved Africans and continue to enslave third world countries with predatory lending practices. We imprisoned the Japanese. We opened the Pandora’s box of nuclear fission. We are organized crime turned C Corp.
And yes, sometimes without strings, but often as some sort of act of contrition, we are benevolent. Maybe we’re all just suffering from a sort of collective low self-esteem from the countless horrors of our past. And we can’t imagine ourselves deserving of a national system that takes care of our personal well being.
(1) "Democracy Now! is a national, daily, independent, award-winning news program airing on over 450 stations in North America. Pioneering the largest public media collaboration in the U.S., Democracy Now! is broadcast on Pacifica, NPR, community, and college radio stations; on public access, PBS, satellite television (DISH network: Free Speech TV ch. 9415 and Link TV ch. 9410; DIRECTV: Link TV ch. 375); as a "podcast" and on the internet." You can go to their website, www.democracynow.org, hit the "stations" tab and find the local radio and tv broadcast stations and times for your particular area.
*Writer is in no way affiliated with Democracy Now! other than as volunteer and donor.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 43
Fantastic analogy. Have to remember THAT one. :)
As for why we are the way we are, as a country... it's mostly because we're adolescent (read:narcissistic) and haven't grown up yet...
I'm hoping we don't self destruct before we do... :x
Maybe when we all get so hot from Global Warming.....he will blow up like a beached whale in the heat and just go away !!
Maybe it will get so hot that all that nasty fur on his face and head will catch on a brush fire...
Mary
Joseph - thanks for writing this. I was struck by his analogy to police and fire services, too. It makes perfect sense. There is no reason for private industry, both medical and pharmaceutical, to say whether or not people get to live or die, or even get access to basic healthcare. One of the stances I like about the Democratic candidates is they will at least recognize the problem and put forth their own plans. The Republican candidates seem to continue to shrug it off as a non-issue stating that the market will provide. Well, it has provided so far - for the folks who can afford what they are demanding.
The "right" cannot stand Mr. Moore, not because he is a very effective propagandist but because the information that he brings forth exposes the harsh reality that conservative ideology is hurting this country. They cannot oppose him with facts, so they're forced to oppose him by mocking his appearance, or brushing aside all that he says as "leftist," as if that alone would make the troubling facts go away.
It's truly sad that those on the "right" are so frightened at the prospect of actually discussing truly important issues in an intelligent, rational manner, but it's also quite telling. They're just flat out on the wrong side of most of the important issues of the day, and they cannot face that reality, so they choose to walk away from the discussion altogether, by marginalizing and mocking those who speak the truth.
The fact is, this country is in serious economic trouble, specifically because of "conservative" policies that have driven us deeply into debt. This failed ideology opposes necessary changes in the health care system, not because they have any rational, factual basis for opposing them, but because they cannot force themselves to stray from their ideology.
Nonetheless, the vast majority of Americans favor universal health care. The "right," once again, is on the exact opposite side of the American public, whether they like it or not. Once again, they are shown to be radical extremists who're completely out of touch with mainstream America. Makes it sort of hard to marginalize a Michael Moore for proposing what the majority wants. No wonder they want him silenced.
I hate to admit that I watched Mr. Moore when he was on Oprah. It is always entertaining to see how "in your face" he can be - taking 9/11 responders with life threatening breathing problems to Gitmo and then on to Cuba for medical assistance. I look forward to seeing Sicko. Can't say I always agree with Moore's views, but his films are worth seeing.
Namaste, Wayne
Sorry to get off subject here, Joseph, but I was listening to C-Span this morning and Brian Lamb was reading emails they had rec'd from fans of Michael Savage. Their issue was that C-Span did not broadcast a speech made by Mr. Savage. C-Span's position was that they never broadcast speeches presented to them on DVD's, only live speeches, and that they had invited MR. Savage to come on the program a number of times, but he refused.
What was striking and appalling about the emails that Brian Lamb read from these protesters was their:
1) total lack of correctness - all of them stated that C-Span was supported by US tax dollars - it is not - it is a private company with no ties to the government;
2) total use of derogatory, hateful language and name-calling, especially their reference to Mr. Lamb personally; and,
3) that many of these emails were signed by people with professional and military titles in front of their names.
It was truely embarrassing to listen to the absolute hatred and evil in those emails. What has this country come down to? These are supposedly educated people. All I could think of while listening to their words was the propaganda that was spewed in pre-war Germany about the Jews and how they stirred relatively normal human beings into unreasonable, illogical and violent hatred with this propaganda.
I saw that. How telling, huh? You could literally feel the visceral hatred and ignorance flowing from those people. It's no surprise at all that people that listen to the likes of a Michael Weiner Savage would be ignorant, bigoted, and hate filled. What a horrible little creature he is, to create such a vile, revolting following. The email presentation was a wonderful expose of the truly ugly nature of Mr. Savage and his listeners.
I've been dealing with people on political forums for a long time now and conservatives have not cornered the market on hatefulness. I noticed it coming from liberals over 7 years a go when I first started posting on chat sites.
And even educated people can get down and roll around in the mud.
I know nothing about Mr. Savage, but I assume he's one of these so-called talk show hosts who have a few extreme agendas they want to push. I can't imagine an audience like those represented in the C-span emails listening to someone who is balanced and polite. They were truely astounding!
I don't hate PEOPLE, like the Savagites do. I hate hurtful, wrong-minded, horrible policies, and the utter refusal by some to accept reality. As for name calling, I don't have any problem calling a duck a duck, if that's what it is. When I see blinding ignorance, stupidity, dangerous anti-American behavior, intolerance, bigotry, etc., I have no problem whatsoever in calling it down.
President , why not.
At least he can speak in complete sentences , unlike the current "idiot ion chief" .
The FD analogy is only meaningful in the sense that it shows that some things are better left to the public commons. Privatized fire departments WERE tried in this country, and they failed miserably. The collective society quickly found that fire departments HAD to be public domain, in order to provide true public safety.
Your extension of this analogy across health care is not congruent. If communities or states were to adopt their own universal health plans, not only would it still leave millions uncovered, but would also create a condition in which populations would flock to states that offered health care when they became ill, thus crippling that state or community's operating budget. This is why a NATIONAL universal health care plan is required.
"National studies indicate this would drop insurance premiums about 20%."
I doubt this. Despite all of the glorious talk from the right about how competition slashes rates to consumers, I can't honestly think of a single case in which this has been proven true. What happens is that companies that find ways to save money, pocket the extra profits.
"The premiums of those with insurance are paying for this "free" medical care."
Which is precisely why it is false to claim that we're not currently paying. We pay dearly to NOT have it.
"Thirdly, the threat of litigation has raised the cost of healthcare about 30%."
This isn't true. The most recent study that I found indicated that rising malpractice insurance and defensive medicine caused a 10% increase in health care costs. And, it should be noted that the major reason for rising malpractice insurance is that there are fewer carriers offering it, and those that remain are hoping to remain profitable at it.
While it's true that while there are fewer claims of malpractice, those that are filed are seeking higher damage amounts, and there may be valid discussion about what is "too much," but I would ask you, how much is your life, or that of your spouse or child worth? If a doctor were to maim or kill your child, for instance, would you be willing to settle for a cap on the amount of money for damages that you could receive?
If a life is deemed only to be worth x amount of dollars, how is that amount assigned? What if the person killed were to become another Bill Gates, worth billions of dollars? What if the person were to become a brilliant surgeon or research scientist that saved countless lives? Who decides, arbitrarily, that all humans are only to be worth x amount of dollars, in order to spare private insurers the "pain" of having to actually put their products into use?
This discussion of arbitrary caps on damages for loss of human life doesn't sit well with me at all.
ROTFLMAO, we can only hope!
What if . . . Clark. Do we now value human lives on potential contributions? Should a poor person or a retarded person be somehow considered worth less in monetary terms than a genius or a wealthy person?
I agree that caps are a poor idea . . . but I think the reason is that one cannot put a true value on a human life . . . . or, for that matter, whatever misadventure, misconduct, or outright indifference led to that loss of life. Each case, therefore, should be weighed individually . . . and not be assigned an abitrary value. Once an abitrary cap is placed . . . you can rest assured that the financial calculation will be made by someone - eventually - and factored into a decision making process . . . with profit as a goal.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
I feel all warm and fuzzy now!
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
So what? He's extremely effective. How effective would he be if he weren't a lightning rod?
Besides, after 6+ years of the most extremist white house in history, it seems a bit shallow to dislike a film maker because he's "too extreme."
"Oh and Clark, it is true. In the state of Maryland alone, premiums have gone up 30%"
Guess what? You saying it's so doesn't necessarily make it so.
http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/medicalmal/
"A February 2006 study, prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers for America's Health Insurance Plans, examined the factors contributing to rising health care costs and analyzed where the health care dollar goes. It found that medical liability costs and defensive medicine account for 10 percent of medical care costs. Defensive medicine is when doctors order more tests, prescribe more medication and make more referrals than they believe are necessary to protect themselves from being accused of negligence. The study, "The Factors Fueling Rising Healthcare Costs 2006," also estimates that health insurance premiums rose 8.8 percent between 2004 and 2005."
Malpractice insurance in only a small part of the cost increases. Also, "fear of litigation" is not the predominant factor in driving malpractice insurance costs up. A lack of carriers offering the product, coupled with larger dollar amount lawsuits are what is driving the increases.
"Capitalism allows everyone to get their fair share"
No, it doesn't. You're confusing capitalism with democracy. Capitalism doesn't give two shits if Paris Hilton is able to buy more toys than you can, nor does it give two shits if you can afford health insurance or not, which is why we currently have nearly 47 million people uninsured.
"Standardized health care will escalate taxes"
Sorry, but there is absolutely no proof to this claim whatsoever, and significant evidence to the contrary. You're grabbing myths and deceptive talking points that aren't based in fact.
"perhaps just transfer funds from going to insurance companies to the government."
Another myth. Medicare is a single payer health care system that we currently have in this country. It operates at less than 2% overhead, compared with up to 30% for privatized health care. No comparison whatsoever, and once again, you're offering nothing but baseless talking points.
"But, then what happens if the government decides to cut healthcare like they cut educational funding?"
What happens today when a private insurance company decides that it's not going to cover the treatment that you need to survive, or if they decide that the transplant you require is just a teensy bit too costly for your policy?
Further than this, your comment is yet another baseless talking point, this time laced with irrational fear mongering. You don't understand what a single payer, universal system is, so you're falling back on these meaningless talking points to "make your case."
"What happens when they decide to fund a war instead of a new hospital? Are there more women dying in emergency rooms without assistance? I think so."
More baseless fear mongering. There's a reason why 36 other nations, all of which have universal health care, lead this nation in care. Do some reading up on it and find out why.
My point is that arbitrary caps aren't right. Surely, any rational person would assess more dollar value to the life of a Bill Gate than to a Charles Manson. Should there be a cap of $250,000 for loss of life, knowing that, with each life lies the potential for another Bill Gates (or Charles Manson, for that matter)?
Wait...even better...spread some capitalism around and go see this movie.
Wow, this is interesting. I provided you with documented PROOF to back my statement, yet you can discount it because "in MY mind, it isn't real." Does that seem just a little bit delusional to you, because it sure does to me. You're dealing in here say. That is not the same as fact.
"Talk to a doctor off the street, that's how I get my information, not off the internet.
Oh, so you can judge the intricate machinations of the entire nation's health care costs by talking to one doctor, but I'm the loonie for gathering a documented report on the internet. Ok. That seems rational.
"I'm talking about talking to the people that are affected by the insurance premiums."
I'm sorry, but a doctor who pays more for his malpractice premium isn't inherently an expert in the minute details of national health care costs, any more than I am by mere factor of my own premiums rising every year. Sometimes, we need to rely on actual studies for this information.
"I don't disagree with you that universal health care would be an excellent thing, just in the logic of how it's going to go on."
Simple. Anyone with a SS number gets a policy from the government. The insurance industry is removed from the picture. Bills for medical services rendered are paid through the single source of this government insurance policy. Costs drop dramatically overnight as a result, the economy booms because employers and employees save hundreds and hundreds of dollars each per month, and the long term health of the nation improves, lowering health care costs longterm, because everyone is insured and is receiving proper preventative care.
"I think Michael Moore is an extremist that doesn't look at both sides of the coin."
I disagree. He has an agenda, but I don't see him ignoring both sides of issues.
"drop into an emergency room in a large urban city, and you'll see that people without insurance get treatment all the time"
I think I said that, and pointed it out as one of the major reasons why our health care continues to rise, didn't I? This is the most costly way to be treated, yet it is the ONLY way for those without coverage. Seems a bit foolish to me.
"So, per to your nasty remarks, take your book off your face and go out and see the world, you'll see that it's a bit more interesting. "
Sorry to obstruct your clouded vision with some reality.
I don't have any exact information or documentation on this, but I would be willing to bet that government regulations and government-protected cartels are what is enabling the skyrocketing healthcare prices. In lieu of being proven wrong, I prefer to take the position that less government would be better than more government in this instance as in most.
Few people realize that so many issues are actually problems that government creates or allows to happen, so that they can offer the people a "solution" that invariably includes further expansion of empowerment of government -- a self-perpetuating mechanism.
Sort of like 9/11 -- allow the attacks to happen, then offer the "solution:" expansion of government and police-state powers.
This is what is wrong with our country -- people falling for things like this, from people with absolutely no credibility or qualifications.
The Health Care System in this country is ridiculous. "The rich stay healthy and the sick stay poor'".
Unfortunately politiciams tend to be in the back pockets of the insurance companies.
Single Payer socialised medicine is the only way to go.
It really is insane that the medical industry is run as a for-profit business when you think about it.
Whether you have insurance or not you are at risk. The leading cause of bankruptcies are medical bills. I know a woman, she had/has insurance and still had to declare bankruptcy after her treatments for breast cancer.
There is something seriously wrong here!
If this country spends 100 billion a year on medical (this is by no means meant to be accurate) and 30% goes to the insurance companies only 70b goes to health care. How ridiculous is that?
Why in the hell do we need a middle man for health care. Most western countries look at health care as a right.
I have known so many intelligent, well spoken conservatives. Unfortunately that same quality has not presented itself on this site
While those with true grievances against medical facilities and/or physicians were held at bay by the caps.
I wonder if it is Bush in disguise.
No conservative in here has posted any solid/legit info to prove otherwise.
Please, just stop posting and trying to be right all the time, its getting old.
I think Moore has it down and I'm looking forward to seeing "sicko."
He is a genius at working the left-leaning crowd for maximum profit. A capitalist extraordinaire!
Excuse me? What has happened whenever the public commons has become privatized? The cost has increased DRAMATICALLY. Where exactly are you getting your misinformation?
:"Secondly, the studies you quoted are snapshots of single years. Examine the trend over the last ten years.:
Bring it. Let's see what you've got.
"Thirdly, I don't care how much profit the insurance companies generate as long as my premiums drop."
When was the last time your premiums DROPPED? I've GOT to see this.
"Remember the lady that spilled a cup of hot coffee on herself, and was awarded one a million dollars in damages? "
You know NOTHING of this case. Read and learn:
http://www.vanfirm.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm
"Name one entitlement program that hasn't created nasty financial or social consequences?"
Medicare. It's run on less than 2% administrative costs. Show me ANY private entity that compares. There is none.
Immigrants and low-income people most of whom have deductions taken from their pay just like everyone else, often do not file 1040's because of fear or ignorance of the system so even more of their pay stays in the system that would otherwise be returned as refunds. To imply that everyone currently on public insurance is using, working or never paid into the system and are getting "free" healthcare is wrong and completely motivated out of some form of latent or not-so-latent bigotry.
Someone commented about "doctors she talks to on the street." Last time I checked there weren't any "doctors on the street." Most of them are in air conditioned glass offices worrying about how they are going to pay back their $200,000 student loan note.
What Moore I think is trying to do, and it probably is "pie in the sky", is get us back to a country doctor mentality when people actually cared about one another. But it's alll too clear conservatives care about no one - they only believe in enemies and enemies of my enemies.
It's funny to me that people who say that publicly funded social services always have negative consequences and completely ignore the privately funded negative consequences like Enron. Who loses more capital - emotional, spiritual, financial all tolled - the taxpayers into a system that aspires to pay for it's own (saints or scoundrels notwithstanding), or the losing stockholders in a scandalous embarrassment to the nation? Or the children of a nation disillusioned by greedy, me-centered "owners" in an ownership society.
We're all just renting here on this planet folks. It's time we start treating each other and the planet we live on a little nicer.
Thanks brother Clark.
So now I have to choose--not for the first time--between my doctor and a higher premium. What are the lyrics to that old song -- "there must be forty ways to leave your lover"? There should be just as many ways to leave doctors--and a congress--who are in love and in bed with a free market system that is anything but free for the vast majority of us. Healthful habits just don't prevent or cure everything that ails us. Time for some systemic surgery!
We live in a fascist state, and that is the absolute truth. The definition of fascism is a partnership between corporations and government ("Corporatocracy) which oppresses tho common citizen. If anyone has any doubts as to this being the actual state of our nation's government/economic/social system, please do some research on the Federal Reserve System and how it works.
The Fed is literally a partnership between a private banking cartel and our government. This unltimately is the source of all corporate cartels and monopolies that enjoy government-sponsorship and protection. Our laws are designed to protect banks, corporations, and Big Industry (such as the pharma and insurance industries) from us -- not the other way around.
If we could force Congress to abolish the Fed, and return the Constitutional method of currency production (Congress mints, issues, and regulates currency, free of usurous interest), we would ultimately end up with:
i) a sound and stable monetary unit, which would protect our savings and wages from confiscation through the hidden tax called inflation, ii) more jobs, because our government wouldn't be able to finance the devastating trade deficit with fiat dollars (unbacked, unlimited bank-issue money) so we would HAVE to produce as much as we consume, and jobs wouldn't get sent overseas, iii) an end to all government-sanctioned cartels, which would mean a REAL free market economy, wherein service and cost-effectiveness are rewarded by consumers, instead of political alliances being rewarded by government largesse.
In other words, health insurance (along with everything else), would suddenly become much more affordable and cost-effective(and the value of our money would be stable, as its purchasing power wouldn't be siphoned off to Wall St. and Washington via the inflation tax).
We haven't had REAL free enterprise in this country for a hundred years or more. All the so-called "Free trade agreements" are really just government-managed trade, which are designed to erode our sovereignty in preparation for the North American Union, and eventually one-world government.
Real free enterprise, combined with a sound and adequate money supply, would provide for everyone.
For a detailed analysis on how our economic and political system was hijacked and destroyed, check this out Money Control in America