Simplisticko

The next time MICHEAL MUTTONHEAD breaks a leg let him go to CUBA if he thinks its such a great place

Aren't all of Moore's films 'uninformed caricatures'?

Michael of Moore is so full of himself he's close to blowing his guts.
Leftists never have to give answers, it's we say so therefore it is.
Gore is another prime example. It was rich for him to stand here in Canada and say our government policy on GHG's is a "fraud" when he's closer to
being a fraud himself.
Simpletons would know better than to give them the time of day.

Never let it be said that Michael Moore let the facts get in the way of his making a buck.

I couldn't have said it better than you, Brian. Spot on. Moore is the archetypical manipulator.

91 percent fresh on Rotten Tomatoes! Tasty!

Moore is a showman and shit disturber, not an unbiased documentary film maker. He is doing exactly the same thing that right-wing nut jobs like O'Rielly, Steyn, Limbaugh, Coulter etc. do, except from a left wing perspective.

Ignoring his stunts, it's interesting to note that when he posted a request for "health care horror stories" on the internet, he got over 25000 responses in one week. Some of them, such as the man who had to choose which of two severed fingers to reattach (because he could only afford the $12000 "cheap" option) clearly highlight what a wonderful medical system exists in the US.

There are three countries in the world that do not currently permit their citizens to purchase healthcare privately. China, Cuba, and Canada.

ahhh, lberia, you are the perfect example of the propaganda stooge; you'll believe whatever the slick flick tells you. Like all such types, you never demand proof; you just 'lap it up'.

You know something, lberia, one can find even more horror tales in Canada - people refused treatment, people left to die in the ER hallways, people sent to other hospitals or sent home, dreadful mistakes in diagnosis and treatment.

But don't let facts bother you, lberia; you like propaganda, don't you?

iberia

*****it's interesting to note that when he posted a request for "health care horror stories" on the internet, he got over 25000 responses in one week******

just ask the question "are you under paid" and you will get just as many "stories", and yet the peoples of africa would luv to be thusly under paid. It's perspective my dear boy!!!

Moore the strident trash merchant.

btw: Hello all! I'm new here. Great blog!
Cheers.

The only difference between Moore and Jerry Springer and Vince McMahon of the wrestling world is that the wrestling and Springer audiences know the fix is in and they know that it's just a game of manipulating emotions for a cheap thrill.
Moore's playing the same game as any of the crazy Springer type shows and making millions doing it.
His audience isn't sharp enough to see that the joke is on them.

Nice handle lilli, although it implies you may be long in the tooth (WWI vintage).

Normally, one should not criticize something unless they have seen all of it but I make an exception for Moore. You do not have to go beyond the promos and trailers to see that there will not be anything that remotely has any truth to it. Like Lord Gore who is now telling all that he is spending lots of money to pimp out his residence to become eco-friendly, and omitting that this is only happening after he was outed. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

I was wondering while, ahem, jogging, what the male life expectancy would be like in a Moore-designed (sic) health care system (sic): I'm thinking maybe 55 like in Russia. (from memory, I believe that's close).

I can never understand why the left supports this guy. Even if they agree, his work is simplistic and misleading. I've read better informed lefty people on this blog, still disagree, but at least the debate was worth having.

"But don't let facts bother you, lberia; you like propaganda, don't you?"

Hahaha! That's pretty rich coming from you, ET. You are the person who is constantly confusing your personal opinion for the facts, and whenever you are confronted with proof that the facts don't match your opinion, you run away.

Now, reread my previous entry. Where did I write that Moore is 100% correct and that I believe everything he has to say? Where did I write that you won't find medical horror tales in Canada? Quit making stuff up, OK?

Michael Moore is best known as a film maker who has the equivalence of an entire Cuban family digesting in his intestines at all times.

I've seen this latest movie from Moore. It is little more than propaganda where the public health care systems of Canada, Britain, France, and, yes - even Cuba are held up as examples of successful and compassionate systems. He attempts to cover all angles that those on the "right" might use by showing us that British doctors drive fancy cars and French middle class people have a high standard of living.

Of course, like all liberals, Moore is very careful in giving you the feeling that all bases are covered when it is obvious that the examples are cherry-picked and made while ignoring the other realities. And, yes, he does make it look like Canadians get free and fast medical service without ever having to wait more than 45 minutes.

The only thing I will give Moore points on is his characterization of the problems with the American system. While I have nothing more than anecdotes either, I have heard some pretty funny and strange stories from some Americans I have met (non-Democrats by the way). For example...

- There was a man I met who was charged $8 per day for boxes of Kleenex while his wife was in the hospital to have their first born - even though they never used any Kleenex.

- There's antoher guy who, every three months (like clockwork) has the insurance company refuse to cover his daughter's asthma medication. On appeal, they always change their minds. But, he keeps a regular supply of pre-filled out appeal forms...just because their denials are always perfectly predictable and timed.

- My favorite was the woman who, when her mother had a heart attack, called an ambulance (natural thing to do). Her mother died in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. The insurance company refused to cover the cost. Their position was that, since the woman was going to die anyway, the ambulance ride was clearly not medically necessary. It was on appeal at the time I talked to the daughter.

I'm no booster of Douglas-style health care. But, I am willing to admit that the Americans have their problems. My personal opinion is that the Americans have a health oligopoly. Just like with the banks, pharmaceutical, and oil companies, an oligopoly (when it gets big and powerful enough) starts acting like a monopoly...which is never good. I am 100% positive that the solution is NOT a state-run monopoly.

But, I will give Moore a pass on pointing out problems in the US system. I think it's better than, for example, the Canadian system. But it's not all roses.

no, lberia - that's an invalid argument.

First - I don't make up facts and don't confuse my opinions with facts. So - that's invalid.

Second - the fact that you didn't state that Moore is 100% correct has nothing to do with what you DID state - which was to provide us with examples - as you state - which 'clearly highlight what a wonderful medical system exists in the US". You didn't inform us that Moore wasn't 100% correct; you instead informed us that his examples CLEARLY show us something. OK?

So, don't try the straw man tactic of telling us what you didn't say. And that includes what you didn't say about the Canadian system. After all, your agenda was to criticize the US system.

Focus on what you did say - which CLEARLY HIGHLIGHTed something.

And don't try to say that what you 'really meant' was that the US system was wonderful.

Ha ha! Iberia got bitch slapped.

question: as a percentage of population, who has the better doctor/patient ratio, Cuba or Canada?

Should a person in Canada who slips on the ice and breaks their leg be able to be medically treated to have their leg set and cast independently of their ability to pay cash on the barrel head? Of course. To behave otherwise would be uncivilized.

Should Canada's taxpayers be forced to cough up the majority of their income to pay for very expensive treatments that produce little value to society in terms of the longevity or productivity of Canadians? Of course not. That is a road to ruin.

Should a person who has saved a significant portion of their after-tax income be allowed to spend their personal private savings on a degree of medical care that is not available to those who do not have such resources? That's not optional. It has, does, and will happen, whether it's legal or not. Or to put it in the vernacular (if you disagree), who the hell do you think you are?

Thus if we are to engineer an effective medicine industry, we must take all the above considerations into account. Both Bentham and Mill count. You can't throw out either one without throwing out the bathwater, and then what would your nurse bathe you in?

"no, lberia - that's an invalid argument."

What's an invalid argument? That you're making things up about what I wrote? (You are.) Or that you confuse your opinions for the facts? (You do...just as you are doing right now, or you have done in the past on, for example, wage differentials of organized vs. non-organized workers.)

"the fact that you didn't state that Moore is 100% correct has nothing to do with what you DID state - which was to provide us with examples - as you state - which 'clearly highlight what a wonderful medical system exists in the US". You didn't inform us that Moore wasn't 100% correct; you instead informed us that his examples CLEARLY show us something. OK?"

So? His examples clearly do show us something. His movie does have a point: that the best medical technology in the world is useless if you can't afford to take advantage of it. His agenda is to criticize the US medical system. I was pointing out that he has a valid argument. Do you have a problem with that?

Sometimes you can be so obtuse.

Goebbels would be proud of Michael Moore's propaganda and all those who lap it up.

yoo hoo, lberia - an invalid argument in your case is both a lack of data and the use of a straw man tactic.

First - my arguments against your unions were valid. The fact that you are still muttering and festering about the issue - that's your problem.

Second - you weren't pointing out anything about the US medical system.
You said nothing about 'best medical technology' or indeed, anything about the US system.

You also said nothing about Moore's 'argument' - what argument does he have? You said nothing about his argument so you can't conclude that it's valid. All you were doing was 'clearly showing' the 'terrible' US medical system by providing us with one horrible example.
That's it. Do you call that a valid argument?

While I haven’t yet seen the movie, and I will, I have read that the facts, as presented, are true. http://edition.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/06/28/sicko.fact.check/index.html

Moore is obviously going to torque the story his way, as any social documentary film maker will regarding his subject. Hey, it’s his movie. The positive thing about this is that for a while, a lot of people will be talking about it, dissecting this and that until hopefully the truth comes out and better mechanisms for realistic health care delivery are put in place. Already, a lot of Canadians have supplemental private insurance coverage taking care of oral care and medication, things not normally covered by government basic health coverage. We just need to grow that sector. Quebec has private clinics that are doing well, 100% user pay, at reasonable costs. So it’s not impossible. And worse case scenario, there’s always the USA, India or China.

I’d personally like to see a 100% user pay system and have a proportional tax drop in return. Buy insurance if you can. But I’m a minority. So stuff your face with Big Macs, smoke, drink and be merry, as long as I don’t have to pay for your cardiac, cancer, hepatitis or AIDS treatments. Don’t like to wear a helmet, wear a seatbelt? Knock yourself out buddy! I would however have complete medical care coverage for those under 18 years of age and those born with a lifelong debilitating condition.

"Nice handle lilli, although it implies you may be long in the tooth (WWI vintage)."

Not to be pickey - the music was composed in '38 and popularized in the 1940's - the era it is famous for : )

Oh, and I'm not that long in the tooth. My great grandfather fought at Vimy.

-

I know plenty of Moore fans, read his "books", watched his "movies", and argued frequently with these benighted consumer types.

His commercial success is largely due to the historically ignorant\ revisionististic audience that gobbles it up. Sad really.
I'm sure the Cannes Film Festival will select his "film" and award it the Palme d'Or with many accolades to follow.

ET and Iberia:

What the heck's going on there?

So Iberia made a post where he suggested that there are points to be scored when criticizing the US system. No system is perfect - and cost is a weakness in the US system...big deal.

ET, I saw nothing in that original post to suggest that Iberia was being a "propaganda stooge." On the contrary, he qualified his remarks well by making it clear that he doesn't think Moore is someone to trust.

I absolutely detest Michael Moore and will openly accuse him of lying, omitting, and misrepresenting facts to push his agenda. But, even I acknowledge that there are things that can be used as valid criticisms of the US system (particularly the advent of HMO's). Moore criticizes those and I think he has a point.

Does that make me a propaganda stooge?

ET and lberia,

Let's just compromise and say you're both wrong.

//problem solved

Also, when my dad had cancer he paid to get a P.E.T. scan in the US because it would have taken months in Canada. Had he, and the doctors, waited for months he would have died. He's fully recovered BTW.

I understand that my dad is part of the "rich" but I'm pretty sure that we don't limit people from using their hard earned money on things less important than health care, so why put hard working and talented individuals in a dangerous situation?

The Canadian system is nothing short of Communism ('everyone' gets the same care, except for politicans and the rich). I suggest reading animal farm if you don't understand. Ask Paul Martin about what clinics he attends for his medical treatment, and Frank Stronach...

Four legs good... two legs better.

//rant off

Watched our hero on Larry King live the other night.

Larry:"critics say in Canada, they have to wait up to 17 weeks to see a specialist".

Moore, " that's not true, completely untrue".

My wife, a nurse, exploded at the TV, " bullshit".

If anyone wants to hear about the marvellous Canadian health care system, contact Dr. Brian Day, of the Cambie Surgical Center in Vancouver.

The former head of heart surgery at Vancouver general is not afraid yo tell the truth about our failing system.

He was quoted a few years back, on a BCTV series about health care in B.C.,"every surgeon in this Province has people dying on his waiting list".

The BCTV series should be rebroadcast, as it's even more relevant now.

BRIAN DAY.
According to a customer of mine, who knows Brian Day very well, one of the reasons he ended up starting that Cambie Clinic was that in the public system his surgery had been capped at about 4-5 hours a week -- not enough to keep up his skills. He's a highly regarded orthopedic surgeon. That's rationing pure and simple.

Third party payor systems -- whether private or public -- will always experience the moral hazard of overuse and the rationing response.

Deductibles should always be substantial and the coverage should be limited, i.e., being focused on "catastrophic" medical illness eschewing all routine stuff. The US private insurance response was HMOs; in Canada, as we all know, it's rationing (but not of course for the elites).

We have to come up with ways to have the consumer spend his "own" money on health care, even if some or all of that money was given him as an annual allotment in advance because then it is his "own" money and will be spent much more judiciously.

I'm a very big believer, for example, in tax-assisted medical savings accounts.

"So Iberia made a post where he suggested that there are points to be scored when criticizing the US system. No system is perfect - and cost is a weakness in the US system...big deal."

Thanks, bryceman. That's really all I was trying to say.

ET:

Look, I don't mind debating you occasionally, but you are really being an idiot today. You need to stop confusing your opinions for facts and you need to stop attacking people for what they didn't say. Contrary to what you may think, you are not always right.

I'm certainly not "festering" about our previous labour discussion. I just find it interesting how then, as you so often do, you claim your opinion is a fact. You provided only one link when I called you on it, and your link proved you wrong. Then you ran away and refused to engage in further debate. Very disappointing.

It has become quite clear that your modus operandi is:
1. Claim your opinion is a fact.
2. Avoid providing proof unless cornered like a rat.
3. Make false claims about what the other person has said.
4a. Run away from the discussion when facts prove you wrong.
4b. Keep making confusing arguments until any further debate is pointless.

Obviously, today is a 4b day.

Iberia, where can I buy your best seller like Steyn's America Alone? Book was well written, well reseached and what he wrote about seems to be coming true as recent events in Britain, Europe and Canada are showing. For a right-wing nutjob appears to be pretty brilliant. MacLeans to the Chicago Sun-Times think he's a pretty good writer to.

Moore's stuff is full of lies and staged set-ups. Read "Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man" and see the real Moore.

Jackie Mason Video Blog: "Michael Moore Is The Sicko":

video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-5259840625372271146

Oy !-)

This is not necessarily the forum for health care horror stories, but a friend of mine needs new knees. He can barely walk and its a real challenge to get to work every day. Luckily his employer can keep him working despite his limited mobility. OHIP will not provide him with new knees until he is 65. He is 50 something. He will be totally crippled and wheelchair bound by the time he is 65.

"OHIP will not provide him with new knees until he is 65. He is 50 something. He will be totally crippled and wheelchair bound by the time he is 65." - mbaron at July 2, 2007 10:00 PM

That's one of the aspects that drives me absolutely bonkers about our system here in Canada. I've had friends and acquaintances who have been hard-working, committed workers most of their lives. Then in their late 40s or 50s, the hips or the knees go. They need to keep working and their services are valued by customers, but the system just keeps them waiting for the surgery for so damn long that eventually they can no longer work. And guess what? Not everybody can afford or is provided with disability insurance. If the health system can't be there when the working man or woman needs it, what is the good of it?

lberia - no- I'm not running away; there's nothing to run from. You haven't provided an argument. All you did was provide one horror story. As has been shown, every system can provide one and more horror stories. That is not an argument. It provides neither data nor conclusions.

Cost is most certainly an issue - and the slowness of treatment or lack of treatment in Canada is directly related to the high costs of our health service. We spend a lot on trivial visits, which probably take up 60% of costs, and the expensive necessary treatments are thus shafted to one side.

That's a major problem with a system that is set up so that the users cannot evaluate the costs of their use of the system. It's astonishing how the majority of people define our health care as 'free'. The fact that a major proportion of our high taxes goes to that service is rejected or unknown.
If we were aware that each visit costs us, let's say, $1,000 (doctor, bureaucracy) - would there be a reduction in trivial visits?

After all, Americans are well aware of the Canadian system, and have rejected it - well, people like Moore don't know anything about the Canadian system - but - those who do, have rejected it.

The key factor is costs. Our taxes go to support not only the actual health practioners but the massive bureaucracy that handles the money. Obviously, one side - the medical side - is losing out.

The problem with Moore is that he passes his films off as documentaries which sort of implies that true facts are being put forth when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

The American system is not perfect but it can and does change. The Canadian system has major issues and the only change that Canadian sheeple understand and allow is to throw more taxpayer's money at it. Anything else is a sacrilege.

I have yet to see or hear anyone discus any other option besides the Canadian Tommy's way or the evil American capitalist system. Nobody has even even looked at say the Australian system where public and private systems work side by side and hardly anyone is dying in the streets (sarcasm).

There is little difference between MICHEAL MOORE and JOSEPH GOBBELS both were producers of lies and propeganda

Actually Ryan there are four...you forgot that lovely socialist state of North Korea.

Are you sure you can't buy health care in China?

mbaron and felis corpulentis. Knee and other joint operations from what I have been told by medical friends can only be done optimally twice as more than 2 seem to decline in efficiency. As the operation normally last up to 10 years the medical profession wants to delay doing the first one as long as possible so you don't end up crippled in your later years. Good article on this by Dr. Gifford-Jones in the Toronto Sun.

David Hand:
I appreciate what you are saying and it makes sense to a point. But that point is long passed when working men and women have to carry out their daily tasks in extreme pain, or cannot work any more. This is not caused by a medical protocol; it is caused by a waiting list that is too long and a system that does not take sufficient concern for the working people who pay its bills through their taxes and the taxes on their employers. This system provides and acts through inappropriate incentives and misallocation of resources.

Further to the knee replacement issue, I recall listening some years ago to Dr. Barry Dworkin on CFRA discussing this matter. He stated that the standard government-issue (read "cheap") replacement has a life span of approximately 10 years. There is a better quality, longer-lasting part available, but one is not allowed to purchase an upgrade. Equality for all under the system, you know. Really stupid short-term thinking. So, have your knee replaced at 65 and have to undergo the operation again at 75-80, when the original cheapo replacement fails and you're less able to withstand the rigors of surgery. If you need another knee at 90, forget it. What the h*** are you doing living that long anyway.