We won't get national health care until consumer protection lobbyists have as much money to spread around Congress as insurance/pharmaceutical/physician/hospital lobbyists have. Dream on. If Congress cared about the country we wouldn't be in Iraq, we wouldn't have the Patriot Act, and the list goes on but there's no point in depressing myself. (I don't think my insurance covers it.)

And to paraphrase Reid:

"and if you don't have health insurance you're a third world country."

Time for change!

Not for nothing, but speaking of 3rd world countries, I'm currently in Botswana and the health care is so reasonable I have been paying for all my medical expenses out of pocket. Same held true for when I was living in Belgium. True, I haven't had a triple bypass in either country, but have been hospitalized and found the care to be both inexpensive and first rate. (Belgian doctors still do housecalls!)

To paraphrase: citizens get the health care they deserve.

What I was surprised by is how there was basically no new information from what was in Michael Moore's SICKO. Anyone who has been barely paying attention to the health care debate would know the basic ideas that were communicated in the piece.

The one piece I thought was the most useful was the case of Taiwan, illustrating how one starts to do a reform from scratch.

Medical Industry is an oxymoron ...

I'll repeat what the Mad Professah said above: "What I was surprised by is how there was basically no new information from what was in Michael Moore's SICKO" and use it to slam Kevin for saying this in his previous post on the Frontline special: "looking for the more serious, more substantive, more balanced version of Michael Moore's Sicko — and who hasn't?"

That was a gratuitous slam against a film that was both entertaining, infuriating, and fundamentally accurate. What was the point?

And didn't you love Reid's repeated question in each segment: "Has anyone in your country gone bankrupt due to medical bills." Blank stares and disbelief that such a thing could happen. Love it!

I caught the correspondent for this show, T.R. Reid, on Charlie Rose the other night. With Rose ever the apologist for the status quo, as he is with most things, the conversation went something like this...

ROSE: But doesn't the U.S. have the bestest healthcare system in the whole wide world?

REID: Um. No. [Actual facts.]

ROSE: But surely more people are better off even without insurance here than any other country?

REID: Um. No. [Actual facts.]

ROSE: But don't people have more choices, more options, better quality healthcare in the U.S.?

REID: Um, No. etc.

ROSE: But still, doesn't the U.S. have the bestest... ad nauseum

As someone who just got yet another warning from Oxford/United ($1000 per month policy) that one of my physicians will no longer be covered by them (that makes 1 primary care, 3 specialists, and the entire Quest lab system eliminated), the choice issue hits home. Remember when Harry & Louise told us that under Hillary's plan, we wouldn't be able to choose doctors? One day, America might finally move into the 20th century on this issue.

While I'm in favoring of programs that help the lowly poor (including me), I'm very fearful where national healthcare is concerned. Yes, I would like luxuries such as regular dental check-ups for my rotting, painful teeth and getting the big varicose vein in my right leg removed and the tiny broken blood vessel underneath my right eye zapped, but what about privacy rights?

Since we are all just underlings to our corporate overlords, the government ALREADY abuses us every which way for private gain. The semi-autonomous U.S. Postal Service tracks us down and sells our addresses. Everytime you fill out a Change of Address form any debt collector or other private interest who is a subscriber to this information is immediately notified of your new location. The IRS and Social Security people, also, track you and give out the information to private corporate interests.

And then of course the information is sold and re-sold.

Does anyone seriously think that it won't ALSO work in exactly the same way with health care? They might not be giving out the details of your medical treatments, but your whereabouts, your payment histories, etc., etc., will all be fair game.

Despicable.

These ideas aren't as foreign as they seem. If you're a U.S. veteran, your healthcare is like Britain. If you're a senior citizen on Medicare, you're Taiwan. If you're a worker who gets insurance from your employer, you're Germany.

Frontline these days, *#%@, it just ain't the good ole news program it used to be.

I am ready to move to Taiwan. That medical-history card is a dream come true. I recently had an ultrasound and blood work through my primary care doctor, and next week I go to the gynecologist and they have none of that info available to review. Plus, I am desperate to go to a new PCP, because the current office is a disaster: They never call back with test results; the receptionist just chirps, "No news is good news." Argh.

There are medical privacy laws, and even if there weren't I care more about quality care than the government knowing that I have a rash. Besides, they know it already if they're tapping my phone or reading my e-mail....

The other thing I was blown away by was the careful, methodical way that Taiwan went about developing a health-care system. What a concept.

We were alerted to this fine program (no surprise it's PBS - the thorn in the side of CONSERVATIVE REPUGS) by my husband's brother (a Seattle physician)...my favorite thing outside of the excellent information and presentation was the little grin on Reid's face as he asked the questions of those he interviewed (especially the one about how many patients go "bankrupt" providing for their health care)...This should be required viewing in all HS and colleges with the assignement that those seeing it make their parents and other family members see it...course that would be like allowing an athiest to speak in a church!!!

OOPS, atheist....

I'd like to know which coutries have similar systems as the US.

R. Porrofatto on April 16, 2008 at 8:24 AM:

ROSE: But still, doesn't the U.S. have the bestest... ad nauseum

Didn't Charlie Rose go to France for heart surgery?

I'd like to know which coutries have similar systems as the US.

I'm not sure whether such masochism can be exhibited on the state level. When the British Tories had a policy review some years ago, their top people went to a lot of other countries to see what they were doing with healthcare. The US wasn't on the itinerary.

If the US had a reasonable healthcare system, the cost would drop from 16% to about 9% of GDP. That is a historical boost to the economy, freeing up funds for consumers for other goods and services. It seems like a fabulous opportunity to move forward. Conservatives are actually retarding economic progess at a criminal level.

I watched the show online and thought it was pretty decent. The one element that is present in each system that was discussed are cost controls. There is ONE approved price for a given procedure, test, etc. They need to do a follow up program and focus on just this one element in all the various plans (how is it determined, etc.). Maybe throw in another country or two. This element is so vital IMO, because THAT is what is really keeping us from adopting significant health care reforms. We're uniquely hung up and averse to controlling the price of a service. It isn't just big Pharma, it is really going to be about physicians. When Medicare in Canada was being implemented doctors were threatening to strike, etc. I would expect something similar here as well.

Like WVNG, above, (and repeating my own comment from the pre-show post) I still want an explanation about Kevin's comment, "more serious, more substantive, more balanced" than Michael Moore. Do you have a specific problem with "Sicko"? I'd really like to hear it. It seems to be taken on faith that Moore is somehow unfair, but I'd like to see some substantive arguments about that.

The AMA/pharmacy/insurance lobby is just more dysfunctional tail wagging the dog. Nowadays, patients are just means for them to earn six figure incomes.

grape_crush,

I'd completely forgotten that. I dunno, maybe Rose favors a two-tiered concept for health care—one for people like himself and one for eveyone else—or maybe he just thinks he has to play devil's advocate in the extreme. The problem with playing the devil's advocate against truth is that you end up pushing lies.

one of the most interesting things about the author's work is the big question that americans do not answer like their 5 peers

is each and every american is entitled to healthcare?

is it a basic right?

is it a basic entitlement?

i think it is

I've lightly been following this debate and believe that Reform is definately needed in this country. But not until I had a up-close-and personal-experioence with our current system did I become outraged. We have Tri-Care and like the insurance. My soon to be Son-In-Law had no insurance upto a month ago. His experience literaly has shaken up the whole family. He Broke his leg in two spots 1 week before his "company provided" insurance kicked in. He is 24 years old and making approx. $13.00/hr. He had three surgeries and was out of work for nearly nine weeks. His Bill was $34,000.00 and Sentary Hospital arranged a $1400.00 monthly payment arrangement. He tried repeatedly to work out a payment arrangement he could realistically meet, but Sentara didn't budge. They ended up in court and the judge told him to work out arrangements with Sentara which he tried to do. The best deal Senara offered was for him to pay $25,000.00 in one payment and they would take off the remaining $9,000.00. He tried to get a loan, but was denied because he's already over extended. Since he couldn't pay the $25,000.00 they placed three Judgements against him for a total of $34,000.00. His only option is to seek relief through bankruptcy. The boy is 24 years old. and I'm sure this is precisely how the system wortks across the country.

Dammit! It's on DVR waiting for me, and now that I know I'm Germany...

I was in Japan a few weeks ago and saw, first hand, how effecient the system is.

We were in Hiroshima and my wife, who lives in Tokyo, needed medical care. She made a call and found out where the nearest clinic was, took a taxi to the clinic, saw the doctor, had the test admistered and the results read by the doctor in less than 15 minutes. She had the presciption and paid the bill all in less than 20 minutes. Total cost, $11.30.

AMAZING

It would have taken hours in the states.

I got into a health care discussion with the fuckface jackass accountant (former) of ours. His entire complaint was about how much more taxes would be with a universal system and that it shouldn't be done.

So I pointed out that I'd gladly exchange the $10,000 a year I spend in out-of-pocket maximums, co-pays and premiums, and give the government an extra $4,000 a year in taxes.

It's a win-win: I'm up six grand, and everyone in the country has at least basic coverage.

He just kinda stared at me with this blank look, and then went on about how great his insurance is.

Turns out the douche gets his health care through the VA -- you know, government ran health care.

There are so many dickbags out there who just can't do the math, or don't care about anyone but themselves. And until that attitude changes, nothing will change.

Turns out the douche gets his health care through the VA -- you know, government ran health care.

It's always the case: the people who think that health care doesn't need to change are the same people who are already hooked-in to good coverage. Or the rich who can afford to keep a doctor stashed in the trunk of their car should the need arise.

fuckers.

Goodness, such a trove of comments here to reply to (I watched the show, too):

R. Porrofatto said:

One day, America might finally move into the 20th century on this issue.

Anon said

Yes, I would like luxuries such as regular dental check-ups for my rotting, painful teeth...

Holy mother of God. Does Anon REALLY consider regular dental check-ups to be a LUXURY??

Anon also said

...what about privacy rights?

First off, there is a near certainty that all of that is already in that database already.

Secondly, wasn't it interesting to see all those populaces that actually TRUST their own governments? One gets the impression that those governments have actually DONE something to earn that trust, doesn't one?

Where does one find such governments? Can we have one like that, too?

But that would be a luxury - a government that actually ACTS as if it is a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

For all those doubting people who might think those countries are the exception, there are a LOT of other countries - some we consider second or third world countries, even - that weren't shown that also have national health systems. None of those are perfect, either, but regular dental check-ups are not a luxury in a HUGE portion of the world.

Socialism defined (Wikipedia):

Socialism refers to the goal of a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community.[1] This control may be either direct — exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils — or indirect — exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state, worker, or community ownership of the means of production, goals which have been attributed to, and claimed by, a number of political parties and governments throughout history.

Taking that as generally accurate, it says that under socialism government acts on behalf of the people in order to control the distribution of wealth. With 1% owning 90-something percent of the wealth, it is clear who stands threatened by the bugaboo of "socialism". It is not, of course, Anon at risk, in need of dental care, but convinced he/she is at risk of having his/her medical information out there for the doctors and nurses to see in some un-secured network that someone would use to injure Anon in some way. (In our system, it would be to deny Anon some services - maybe even deny Anon dental care.)

Surely the ones at risk are the wealthy, and they spend a grat deal of time, effort and money, apparently, to market the un-healthy characteristics of socialism to all of us so that the "bitter" people lower in our caste system will sign on to their argument that socialism will steal our lives and hand them over to the monolith of government.

Would we not be better off owned by a benign government than by the wealthy? Isn't that pretty obvious?

But a government OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people is the LAST thing the wealthy want. In that kind of system, the wealthy lose out, while the normal people win by being able to have dental check-ups. What a horrible way to run a country... Surely we wouldn't want that.

I'm dumbfounded....we know all this already..we know
pretty much without doubt that we could have a health care system far better...we just don't seem to have the political well to make it happen...and I don't mean our political leaders...I mean we the citizens.

I have to take issue with "if you're a worker who gets insurance from your employer, you're Germany". I lived in Germany and never ever had the kind of shitty access as I have here in the US.
There were few co-pays and you essentially just walked into the doctor's office when you needed to (OK, then you had to wait).
The payment for office visits is 10 Euros A QUARTER, and there is a small co-pay for drugs. Waiting a month for an appointment with your primary physician, no access to specialists and paying a ton for everything doesn't exist there.
And the fact that prescrition drugs aren't considered part of healthcare here drives me up the wall.

The way health care is in this country, soon the joke will be that the British have better teeth than us.

Yeah baby! Yeah!

Concerning anon @ 8:36 AM's fears about privacy - why not unite the VA's patient-tracking system to a Medicare expanded to include all citizens and place it under a non-political governmental unit on the order of the Social Security Administration? The SSA's record for not leaking information is better than the CIA's.
And I am in full agreement with Bob M at 10:23 AM - in every argument I have ever heard about how much a national health service would cost, no one seems to recognize that even a 10-fold increase in the Medicare tax rate would be more than offset by not having to pay health insurance premiums that may amount to as much as 25% of income (and that does not include the co-pays and "minimums").

It is necessary to remove the profit motive before the medical situation can be rememided.

If this be socialism makes the most of it.

Charles Chambers