Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog

"...nothing America says during this long war trumps our deeds." - In that regard, Abu Graib, Gitmo, and other secret prisons, Rendition, and "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" stand in marked contrast to our expressed ideals and purposes.

In his case, no, I don't think so. His self-promotion stands in the way of me believing that he has America's interests at heart. If something he believed boosted Michael Moore at America's expense, I don't feel he would stop to do it. I would be much more inclined to listen if I didn't get the sense that disagreeing with him meant you were a Minion of Cheney. As such, he simply seems a partisan hack.

Michael Moore is a sincere Marxist proposing a Utopian Marxist solution for our Health System. Other countries have "been there, done that." We know how they work. You end up having your health care provided by a "Post Office" version of the Government.

Socialism works tolerably in small, uniform, well-disciplined societies like Denmark or Sweden. We can't do it. The answer is to turn the system into what we are good at -- a competitive industry driven by profit to provide excellent service and constant innovation. That we could do in the USA. Socialized medicine in the USA would have all the vices of our current stupid system, plus lots, lots more. Life and death decisions made in slow motion by the registry of motor vehicles. We would have rotten health care for the vast majority, and a small number of very wealthy people who could afford premium privately provided health care. If you think inequality is bad now, wait until only the very wealthy are getting new kinds of medicine, or flying to India for medical tourism to get procedures that are rationed or not government-approved here. It will be ugly.

For the herculean job the Post Office does, they do remarkably well. I have never understood the thoughtless knee-jerk way that people gripe about it.

And wouldn't a potential government-run healthcare plan be better compared to things like Medicare or Medicaid or even Social Security?

Moore's major point that he expresses in every interview is that private insurance must, by law, maximize profits for their shareholders. The more they pay out, the less they can give to their shareholders in profits. So insurance companies must find any way possible to avoid paying out. That means a trend of denying legitimate claims rather than paying illegitimate ones.

you ought to read the family jewel,of course a very tiny glims of what
went on for decades.it is not just during the bush.how they spiced &
experimented on us citizens,how they try to crush the anti-war
movement.how James angelton created secret police agencies in 16
different countries.how they wire tap,assasination of political figures.
as new york times says the reson for declassifying this ,is to prevent
the search for the complete picture of what the polices were, &
perhaps to save some face. we want civilized golbalization, we want
peace not at the expense of freedom & independence,but a peace
that acompany both. happay independance day.

Every time I see Moore, I am reminded of the wise words of David Lee Roth: "The key to success in show business is sincerity. When you can fake that, you've got it made."

I'm trying hard not to start a flame-war, but calling MM names is *so* 2004...we've all heard the arguments about how he's going to abolish the military, force Marxism to be taught instead of intelligent design, and turn your kids into Europeans. Can we focus on his point instead of himself? He was able to do this for most of his own movie, after all...

This is obviously a quality of life issue. America does best when it attracts the best and brightest, right? Why will smart people continue to come to America when it's easier everyday to innovate/work from overseas, you're not as likely to get a health care denial (and you're MUCH less worried about the stress of all this), you're guaranteed long vacations, etc.

Our current health-care system pushes away the riff-raff from our society, but sometimes those are the types that make the innovation...does a pre-existing medical condition preclude me from being a successful entrepreneur here? Or would my medical bills make it impossible to start a business? Also, why would a smart American without a college degree stay here - someone with an idea who goes all-out to pursue it...these are the people we need to keep.

Also, as someone passively looking for a new job...good benefits are a must.

It's amazing anyone would call the NHS here in Britain an example of Socialism -- though I really doubt I need to explain to this crowd the ideological nature of socialism vs. access to govt. sponsored health-care. If the NHS didn't exist, thousands of Britons would not have access to treat the most basic of ailments, such as pneumonia. I've had great emergency care given to me by the NHS, and I also have the option to access private care, in case I need a specialist or a certain type of surgery. Another shocker (for me, at least): That health care should be "for profit" -- ever hear of the Hippocratic oath?

For those of you who would dismiss socialized medicine's ability to succeed in the United States, remember that it exists here already, it works quite well on average, and it's vastly more efficient and cost-effective than private insurers, it's called Medicare.

I haven't seen Michael Moore's movie, but I plan to. What I know of the medical system in this country comes from personal experience, along with what I've learned from friends and family who spent decades working in the system. Here's something to keep in mind, if you become gravely ill, or you suffer massive trauma in an accident, most often you will be far better off in our system if you don't have health insurance. This is because the way the law is written in this country, you can't be denied medical procedures or tests if you aren't covered by anyone.

On the other hand if you have health insurance, the decision to give you multiple MRIs or cat scans or any number of other procedures which your insurance provider has a say in approving, may be denied you if that insurance company balks. This is one of the frightening realities of managed-care. The rest of the time, some insurance is usually better than no insurance, but this irony is one of the sickening realities of having profit-making entities involved in life and death decisions.

At the other end of the wellness spectrum, often insurance companies resist when doctors want to take preventative measures, and patients must wait until their conditions become more severe before they receive the care they need, care that most often would've prevented the condition from worsening in the first place. It's as if insurers only want to cover a small narrow band of what is entailed in maintaining health, and the reason they operate in this manner is for no other reason than to maintain high profit margins.

In the current system in America, patients, doctors, hospitals and health-care workers all suffer while insurance companies capitalize on that suffering, that's the way it is, and anyone who denies it, just hasn't spent enough time in the system.

On a personal level, I'm a Class of 2007 college grad who's job-searching right now. Medical coverage is important. I don't want to be coddled. I want to be productive and earn my pay, but at the same time, medical insecurity is scary indeed. And that's as a relatively young single man. I can only imagine how I'd feel as an older married man whose body is showing wear and tear and is responsible for the physical welfare of wife, children, perhaps also elder parents.

In the bigger picture, I agree with antonymous. I see medical security as a competition issue on the global market. If we want the American economy to become more adaptive and flexible in a dynamic, competitive global market, that will inevitably include loss of jobs and pay cuts. I believe a minimum level of healthcare should be built into the social infrastructure. Healthcare as public good would go a long way to allay insecurity and lack of confidence on the part of labor in our society as the economy becomes more unstable on the ground level. Also, decreasing the responsibility for healthcare on employers should reduce costs for them.

Moore is amazing as a presenter and for his courage. There is a bit of P. T. Barnum in there, over which the right discredits itself by jumping all over it and not addressing the content. Putting aside the question of ideology, he cares. He cares about jobs, about violence and about health.

In fact, a friend of mine stated after seeing Sicko that Moore's real complaint in film after film is not a criticism of conservatism, or of Bush, but of the apathy of so much of the American citizenry. He is upset at how much we let go -- it is a subtle point, and he (my friend) may not be right. But it made me view Moore differently.