Page 1 of 1
Has anyone seen SICKO?

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:20 am
by Duo Prime
It was quite the powerful movie. If you've seen it, share your thoughts. I'd also like to get our brothers and sisters opinions from overseas on their country's healthcare system.
I know for one, the stories in there are very sickening, and i have experienced these kinds of issues first hand as well.
I went to the hospital when i was around 18 years old, and by that time, i was no longer able to benefit from my parent's insurance plan, so i had no insurance. I was playing around with friends and was accidentally hit in the head with the but of a BB gun that resembled a Glock-9. I was cut open pretty good and was bleeding all over the freakin place. I was pretty scared i might have a cuncussion or somthing of the like, so i rushed to the hospital. I went directly to the window where they check you in, and was asked(after i filled out an ass-load of unnessisary paperwork) if i had insurance. I explained the situation about recently being dropped from my parents plan, and they simple turned me away. I had to go home with the towel i brought from my friends place still trying to stop the bleeding. Luckily, this was not a life threatening situation, or i might not be typing this today. I found it very disgusting they wouldn't even have a look, even to let me know i could take care of it myself. I just took it as "oh well, i wish i had the money to got to the hospital", but now being older, i find this kind of sh*t un acceptable.
I actually have another story as well( heh, two in only 29 years), but this one involves my Dad. I'm still worrying over this and really, i find this unacceptable as well. I'll tell that as soon as we hear a little more from the rest of you. There needs to be change in this country, and it needs to happen now. I don't consider this to be an opinion either. I consider these things a matter of life and death for the whole country.
Re: Has anyone seen SICKO?

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:52 am
by Loki120
Duo Prime wrote:It was quite the powerful movie. If you've seen it, share your thoughts. I'd also like to get our brothers and sisters opinions from overseas on their country's healthcare system.
I know for one, the stories in there are very sickening, and i have experienced these kinds of issues first hand as well.
I went to the hospital when i was around 18 years old, and by that time, i was no longer able to benefit from my parent's insurance plan, so i had no insurance. I was playing around with friends and was accidentally hit in the head with the but of a BB gun that resembled a Glock-9. I was cut open pretty good and was bleeding all over the freakin place. I was pretty scared i might have a cuncussion or somthing of the like, so i rushed to the hospital. I went directly to the window where they check you in, and was asked(after i filled out an ass-load of unnessisary paperwork) if i had insurance. I explained the situation about recently being dropped from my parents plan, and they simple turned me away. I had to go home with the towel i brought from my friends place still trying to stop the bleeding. Luckily, this was not a life threatening situation, or i might not be typing this today. I found it very disgusting they wouldn't even have a look, even to let me know i could take care of it myself. I just took it as "oh well, i wish i had the money to got to the hospital", but now being older, i find this kind of sh*t un acceptable.
Well, I don't know what hospital you went to, but you certainly had a case against them. A hospital which treats emergency situations cannot turn anyone away, no matter you financial standing. You had the right to be seen by a doctor. A private practice, or an urgent care center has the ability to turn you away, since neither are equipped nor required to handle emergency patients.
I will not comment on Sicko, however, because 1) I have not seen it and 2) I refuse to see it. Quite frankly the director is of questionable standing, and would certainly never consider any of his work to by documentary in any sense of the word. Propaganda, perhaps, but not documentary.

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:58 am
by Duo Prime
Like i said, i have experienced these things first hand, so pretty much what i saw in the film was all true from my experience. Propaganda? Maybe for good purposes. I'd say the bennifit of American citizens is a pretty good cause, and definitely somthing to believe in.

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:51 pm
by Lord Starscream20
Michael Moore is, as usual, ignorant. His push for nationalized healthcare is completely blind. No intelligent person could actually prefer Canadian or British healthcare to America's.
Moore points out that British healthcare is free, which is true, but he apparently forgot that the wait for medical attention can be as long as 1.5 years depending on the case in that country. Additionally, in a country with as many citizens as America, we can't seriously expect the federal government to be able to provide adequate healthcare to about 300 million people. Treatment would fall below the level of the former USSR (2 aspirins for just about anything).
I really wish somebody could shut Moore up. He's just trying to scare people into agreeing with him. Just purely scientifically and mathematically, socialized healthcare is not feasible.

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:57 pm
by Duo Prime
Really, this isn't quite the discussion i had in mind, but what else could be expected from Decepticons. It just seems like the intrest of the people isn't really anyone's concerns, besides people like him, and quite frankly, i love every film i have ever seen of his. And i believe i have figured out the faction of republicans(as if it wer'nt obvious all along). It seems they are always the first to "ATTACK!!!!", as Megatron might put it.
Aside from that, there are many countries with socialized healthcare, not just the ones he mentioned. And besides that, he is not the only American advocate for socilized healthcare. Many have tried, but all seems to fail in the arena with the mighty dollar.
As lord starscream says, "the wait for medical attention can be as long as 1.5 years depending on the case "(i know it's not the whole quote, but it's really all i need for this), that is why i invited some of our British Seibertronians to comment on this and see just how accurate Michael Moore is about it. I like to get the facts straight. Oh, and lord starscream, where did you obtain your information on the subject?

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:19 pm
by Loki120
Lord Starscream20 wrote:Michael Moore is, as usual, ignorant. His push for nationalized healthcare is completely blind. No intelligent person could actually prefer Canadian or British healthcare to America's.
Moore points out that British healthcare is free, which is true, but he apparently forgot that the wait for medical attention can be as long as 1.5 years depending on the case in that country. Additionally, in a country with as many citizens as America, we can't seriously expect the federal government to be able to provide adequate healthcare to about 300 million people. Treatment would fall below the level of the former USSR (2 aspirins for just about anything).
I really wish somebody could shut Moore up. He's just trying to scare people into agreeing with him. Just purely scientifically and mathematically, socialized healthcare is not feasible.
I've already linked several stories about the shortcoming of socialized healthcare in this thread -
http://seibertron.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8184&start=15&sid=Really, this isn't quite the discussion i had in mind, but what else could be expected from Decepticons. It just seems like the intrest of the people isn't really anyone's concerns, besides people like him, and quite frankly, i love every film i have ever seen of his. And i believe i have figured out the faction of republicans.
Of course it's the interest of the people. I'm not thinking about it from a financial "money-grubbing" standpoint, but socialized healthcare does not work. That's already been proven a dozen times over in other countries, and it's not going to be any different if introduced in America.
But like I said, it's a great way to buy votes.
I like to get the facts straight.
Previous threads seem to indicate otherwise, but oh well.
That's a long wait!
What was that about not getting approval for drugs because all they do is pay for it? That seems to be the whole problem.
Hope you have the lucky number!
I hope you don't smoke, or are overweight! Who else isn't worthy of receiving healthcare? Or are you going to say "It'll be different here!" Dream on.

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:49 pm
by Lord Starscream20
Oh, and lord starscream, where did you obtain your information on the subject?
Which subject? About English healthcare, the 1.5 year stat came from a Democratic strategist named Bob Beckel. The USSR/2 aspirins thing came from a government/history textbook. The size of America's population came from...well, a whole bunch of places!
Oh, and just for fun...I believe that

happens to be a red symbol, just ask:


Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 6:11 pm
by Duo Prime
Loki120 wrote:Lord Starscream20 wrote:Michael Moore is, as usual, ignorant. His push for nationalized healthcare is completely blind. No intelligent person could actually prefer Canadian or British healthcare to America's.
Moore points out that British healthcare is free, which is true, but he apparently forgot that the wait for medical attention can be as long as 1.5 years depending on the case in that country. Additionally, in a country with as many citizens as America, we can't seriously expect the federal government to be able to provide adequate healthcare to about 300 million people. Treatment would fall below the level of the former USSR (2 aspirins for just about anything).
I really wish somebody could shut Moore up. He's just trying to scare people into agreeing with him. Just purely scientifically and mathematically, socialized healthcare is not feasible.
I've already linked several stories about the shortcoming of socialized healthcare in this thread -
http://seibertron.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8184&start=15&sid=Really, this isn't quite the discussion i had in mind, but what else could be expected from Decepticons. It just seems like the intrest of the people isn't really anyone's concerns, besides people like him, and quite frankly, i love every film i have ever seen of his. And i believe i have figured out the faction of republicans.
Of course it's the interest of the people. I'm not thinking about it from a financial "money-grubbing" standpoint, but socialized healthcare does not work. That's already been proven a dozen times over in other countries, and it's not going to be any different if introduced in America.
But like I said, it's a great way to buy votes.
I like to get the facts straight.
Previous threads seem to indicate otherwise, but oh well.
That's a long wait!
What was that about not getting approval for drugs because all they do is pay for it? That seems to be the whole problem.
Hope you have the lucky number!
I hope you don't smoke, or are overweight! Who else isn't worthy of receiving healthcare? Or are you going to say "It'll be different here!" Dream on.
Thats all fine, but i could find double the articles about people right here in America getting much less than that. You are the one with out your facts straight "Capitalism Magazine". I have posted information without agenda on the other thread
http://www.seibertron.com/forums/viewto ... rt=30&sid=All your stuff seems to be from corrupt lobbyists

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:59 pm
by Loki120
Duo Prime wrote:All your stuff seems to be from corrupt lobbyists
I was unaware that the BBC was a corrupt lobbyist...but you know...even in the face of truth...whatever.
And FYI, just in case you were unaware Exxonsecret.org is about agenda laden as you can get.

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:52 pm
by Shadowman
Michael Moore is way too preachy. I can't stand him.
"Cuba can supply better Helthcare than America?" Guess what, Mikey, Cuba doesn't even have 1/8 of the USs population, and they aren't as deep in debt. Same with the UK and Canada. They can afford to do those things. And you know what else? They never work out right.

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:07 pm
by Lord Starscream20
Loki120 wrote:Duo Prime wrote:All your stuff seems to be from corrupt lobbyists
I was unaware that the BBC was a corrupt lobbyist...but you know...even in the face of truth...whatever.
And FYI, just in case you were unaware Exxonsecret.org is about agenda laden as you can get.
Very true. Plus, the BBC is about as liberal a network as a person could find in the entire western world, so you know that if they're posting something critical to a (more than less) liberal cause, it's bad.
The Telegraph has a very high reputation and is by no means "corrupt."
The other sites seem OK too, so I don't see any corrupt lobbyists.
(I know you don't need backup, but there it is anyway.

)

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:08 pm
by Tammuz
long wait times are a factor in the NHS, but then long wait times are a large factor in alot of surgery(it's not like we can grow spare organs). but then it's at least something, i mean which is better Knowing that you will get the surgery eventually or knowing that you're never going to afford it....
though one thing to remember about britain's healthcare is that you can always go private if you've got money or insurance, the NHS is just a safety net for when something big goes wrong.
everyone's entitled to good health no matter how much money they have.

Posted:
Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:15 pm
by Lord Starscream20
That's a good point, Tammuz, about being able to go private.
Ideally, about everyone deserving healthcare, I'd agree with you. But the problem becomes that knowing you'll get an organ in one year is meaningless security if you're only going to live for 6 more months.

Posted:
Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:07 am
by Loki120
Well, there is a difference between being on a waiting list because you need a new organ, it's an entirely different animal to be on a year-plus waiting list for any and all surgery just because socialization has pushed out surgeons and demand has increased.
(I know you don't need backup, but there it is anyway. )
Much appreciated.

Posted:
Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:25 am
by Tammuz
Loki120 wrote:Well, there is a difference between being on a waiting list because you need a new organ, it's an entirely different animal to be on a year-plus waiting list for any and all surgery just because socialization has pushed out surgeons and demand has increased.
(I know you don't need backup, but there it is anyway. )
Much appreciated.
this seems blatant one rule for the rich and one rule for the poor; demand hasn't increased, the same number of people still need medical attention, just that all of them are entitled to it rather than just those who can afford insurance.
and once again i state; if you can afford insurance there is no waiting time if you choose to go private.

Posted:
Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:40 am
by Loki120
Shadowman wrote:Michael Moore is way too preachy. I can't stand him.
"Cuba can supply better Helthcare than America?" Guess what, Mikey, Cuba doesn't even have 1/8 of the USs population, and they aren't as deep in debt. Same with the UK and Canada. They can afford to do those things. And you know what else? They never work out right.
That easy for Moore to say when you only see half the problem. The Cuban Government has a two-tiered medical system that caters to foreign tourists while denying native Cubans access to basic medical needs. This is an obvious attempt to draw foreign dollars as one of many programs that were necessary once the Soviet subsidies ended in the early nineties.
Of course this is basic knowledge that Mikey just loves to omit so he can beat his dead horse.

Posted:
Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:53 pm
by Brakethrough
I <3 my Canadian healthcare.

Posted:
Fri Jun 29, 2007 10:58 pm
by Duo Prime
Tammuz wrote:Loki120 wrote:Well, there is a difference between being on a waiting list because you need a new organ, it's an entirely different animal to be on a year-plus waiting list for any and all surgery just because socialization has pushed out surgeons and demand has increased.
(I know you don't need backup, but there it is anyway. )
Much appreciated.
this seems blatant one rule for the rich and one rule for the poor; demand hasn't increased, the same number of people still need medical attention, just that all of them are entitled to it rather than just those who can afford insurance.
and once again i state; if you can afford insurance there is no waiting time if you choose to go private.
Yes, and it seems to be so hard to convince other Americans with money that they are not the only ones who need healthcare. It always seems to be survival of the richest here, and that is total bullshit(pretty much Starscream's "survival of the fittest" speach, except, there is no Unicron out there to make us better). I see no problem with insurance as long as there is somthing that normal people that don't make a ton of money can get in order to keep themselvs alive. Cheers, Tammuz!!!!