well if 90% of americans are insured than 90% would be able to access and use the machines in a timely manner which isnt the case in a country with socialized medicine. if i needed an mri or a catscan i can drive ten minutes down the road and get one that day so the notion that socailized medicine is better is a false statement remember the government has nothing so to give to one the must take away from another and i sure would hate to be the person they take from
I love that Harvard lady for mentioning good 'ol Mr. Ford...Ford is a PERFECT example of how profit-seeking and entrepeneurship make things CHEAPER OVERALL for EVERYONE.
Adam Smith was WAY ahead of his time when he talked about the invisible hand, because the industrial revolution was LITERALLY a practical real-world manifestation of everything he preached. And it continues every day in the sectors in which we've managed to keep the government out.
Listen to Pelosi condemn that health insurance company for its gigantic profits. Go look into her finances and see how much money she's made over the last few years as a politician.
One thing about Mr. Moore. He makes people look like a fool. He has no idea (only what he thinks), that living in or even next to a communist country is no laughing matter.
This country is so fucked up because of hypocrite assholes like Nancy Pelosi who pretend to care about anyone but her rich friends.Moore is the same. Private business has its faults, but blows away government garbage.
Yes, even with the fact that you lost signal your cell phone is better. The Rotary dial phone only got signal in places it could be plugged into active phone lines. Once again Mr. Moore you show your lack of intelligence in the simplest ways.
The problem to me is that some people are covered under Medicaid (they don't pay a dime out of pocket, and alot of people covered by medicaid abuse the system for that reason) or Medicare.
Then there are some of us who pay out of our paychecks to get insurance.
And then there are the people who can't get either, and that is where the fault is.
We need a better hybrid medical system. A mix of what canada is doing, and private insurance companies who don't mind paying out of pocket.
Unfortunately, Mr. Stossel didn't bother to read any of the current literature that researches healthcare for profit. Had he done so, and not just blather on the ideology of profits, he would know that competition is one of the main factors that drives up the price of healthcare in America; it does just the opposite of what you'd think due to specific factors that can only be found in the realm of healthcare and health insurance.
@byrddust You're so wrong it's disgusting. Competition among business drives prices down. (for instance, my store sets prices lower then the other store, in order to gain business) Competition among consumers is what shoots prices up.
@vidman7 That which is the case in many sectors of the economy is NOT what is the case in the American Health Care system. Once again, one has to do the reading of the material explicitly dealing with this problem. Our Health care system is one of the few places where competition drives up the prices. Stop making ideological arguments and check the particular facts! This isn't a pet store pricing competition!
@vidman7 A small example: There's two major hospitals in my town. One bought new technology for brain surgery. Because they claimed they were the only hospital who had this "vital" technology, the other hospital bought it too. Now, in order to pay for this multi-million dollar machine, they both have been cited for over use of this machine just so they can bill medicare to pay for the cost of having it! Competition drove the prices up, not down! This isn't economic theory, it's fact!
@byrddust Your example is not an example of competition, but an example of the failures of the 3rd party system in USA healthcare. If medicare and insurance companies weren't involved and if health care in the USA were a true 2 party system, then competition would drive prices down. Government involvement (ie medicare, medicaid) is what are driving prices up, not competition. The keyword in your example is medicare, medicare drove the prices up.
@vidman7 Google "Understanding Health Care Cost Drivers" and read what it says about competition among hospitals, etc. This is only one study; do yourself a favor and read more, because there isn't much disagreement about this issue, unless you're just repeating tired arguments that have not bearing in reality. This is a problem that ideological claims about capitalist competition does NOT apply!
@byrddust The fundamental problem with healthcare is that there is no consumer pressure to keep the costs of healthcare in check because it is not the consumers paying for it (directly)...it is insurance companies and government programs (medicare, medicaid). Which makes costs/prices of healthcare a non-factor when decisions by the consumer are being made. You clearly don't understand basic economics....
@kahnk009All I can say my friend is that you can keep up the ideological claims, but the facts are facts. Your argument has no merit as it does not withstand scrutiny from within the medical community. The studies all agree with me, I know, because this is my field. Keep reading, as it may help someday.
with more machines than people are able to get the care they need and not have to wait and those who die may have a chance because the machine is there. my mom had a brain anyruesm and the doctor that operated on her makes 1.2 million a year... i think he should make 4 million a year mayb more because he saved my mother and if it wasnt for him she might not be here today so he is worth every penny that he EARNS because without him i wouldnt have a mom.
@mangano717 Having the machines is one thing, having the access to them is another. Many can't afford an MRI, let alone the procedure needed from the MRI diagnosis in the U.S.
Neurologists make close that amount in Canada too.
No one is arguing against private industry such as doctors working as independents or drug companies and so forth. There is just no need for the insurance industry,, Insurances only innovation is to raise prices on premiums or reduce benefits or come up with back out clauses like "preexisting conditions", the only thing insurance can do is making billing for the doctors easier and get them their payment faster and they don't they are just seen as an all around annoyance!
If Canada is so good with it's free health care why do we send so many Canadians down to the States?? Oh yeah, because it takes 6-8 months to get an MRI done here. A knee or hip replacement? Thats a couple of years of waiting. And its far from free. I look at my paycheck and my taxes say different! Our biggest problem is people in Canada are brainwashed into thinking this is as good as health care gets. What we need is a Public/Private parallel system.
@ompah2011 Its a myth that many Canadians go South for care, while 750,000 Americans went abroad for care they couldn't afford at home...including Canada. It does not take 6 to 8 months to get an MRI. The average wait times in Ontario for example, is 30 days. With urgent cases being done the same day. For hip replacement, avg. wait times are 62 days, according to the CIHI. 67 days for knee. A parallel system would only decrease wait times for the few, and increase time for the majority.
My Wife was suffering from numness, dizzy spells, vomiting, and sever headaches. She was given an appointment for an MRI after all other tests were inconclusive. The wait was 5 months. My mom had waited 6 months for a mri as we await results now. My step mother died of bone cancer which may have been caught earlier if she was able to get in sooner for an mri. The wait time in Ontario is 180 days. A parallel system would decrease wait time for eveything and everyone.
@SwagoRyan I'm sorry, but you if you go on to the wait times report for Ontario, the average wait time is 30 days. The wait time where 90% receive an MRI is 90 days for NON-urgent MRI's. I waited 10 days for an MRI for a simple chronic sinus infection. Where do you live??
Central The Ottawa Hospital 6-12 Month Ph:613-761-4831 Fax: 613-737-8611 Downtown St. Joseph MRI 1-2 Days St. Joseph MRI is a private facility located in Gatineau East CHEO 6 Weeks Ph: 613-737-7600 East Monfort Hospital 2 Months Ph: 613-746-4621 Fax: 613-748-4914 West Queensway Carleton 4 Months Ph: 613-721-2000
@SwagoRyan According to the Ontario Wait times website the wait times where 90% of patients have received an MRI, not the average, which would be lower. Again for NON-urgent wait times.
Oh well I guess bone cancer isn't urgent then. I would tell my stepmom that but she is dead. If she was able to get the MRI when she wanted/needed it not when she was brought in by ambulance because she was fused she may have had a chance. We have about 250 MRI machines in Canada, while the US has close to 10000. This system can not work the way its heading. Its to expensive and bloated.
@SwagoRyan Sorry for your loss, but your stepmom is anecdotal, and probably more an error on the consulting doc not recognizing the urgency then the system.
Our system is expensive, just like every other system on the planet, yet 2/3rd the cost of the U.S. yet we cover everyone. Having more MRI's means nothing if you can't affor the MRI or the treatment needed by the MRI diagnosis.
Profits actually make things cheaper. The AMA are what made things so expensive by driving up the cost of healthcare education. Also the government interfering and giving special privileges to nonprofit hospitals until they eventually took over and also giving more to Blue insurances (no savings account) over regular bargaining insurance companies (savings account) . Your insurance company used to be able to FIGHT with the hospital for cheaper rates based on what YOU could afford.
Also, The only thing that I think isn't driven well by profit are complete cures. There is no benefit to curing cancer because after so many years anyone can make your drug so you have to prolong the usage of a drug as long as possible before the time runs out. There is a cure for certain kinds of cancer that was found in Canada, it's an old and cheap drug that no one has any interest in developing because of that fact.
I want to see John Stossel investigating those guys who humbly call themselves "pick-up artists". Some investigatory journalists should expose the whole fake seduction community!
Think about it: millions of websites, ebooks, seminars sold worldwide (but it began in America), and there is not a single scientific evidence that such happening as seduction exists!
On seductionmyth c o m there are tons of studies quoted that prove seduction is completely irrational.
Micheal Moore is an idiot. God he makes the stupidest arguments sometimes. He acts like he is above everybody but at the same time "Is all for equality"
Cut the cost in half? Okay. That makes sense with Henry Ford and the Model T. What does it have to do with health care? Who does that? Liars. This is idiotic. What does any of this have to do with being able to afford going to the doctor to maintain normal health? People go to France and Britain for specialized treatments in some areas. What is the point? What does this have to do with insurance companies? They don't innovate anything. Propaganda, lies, bullshit.
@Orionx30 The people speaking on behalf of insurance companies in this segment are spewing propaganda. Do you mean to say that insurance companies lower the cost of healthcare? Also, as I said, you can find great innovations in countries whose population takes it as its right to have health care. WTF does Henry Ford have to do with ti?That is propaganda. They might as well wave a flag in your face. I repeat the people in this segment are spewing propaganda and they're not shy about it.
@GenghisCohen1 You missed the point of the video. Its people who are in control of their own health care that lower costs not insurance companies. Health Care is not a right. You can not own the right to the labor of other people, doing so is slavery. This is why I asked if you watched the whole thing. You obviously didn't.
@Orionx30 Wrong again. Nobody forces anyone to give somebody else healthcare. The people providing the care are paid. Nobody would own the right to labor. The issue is that you would receive care based on the fact that you are a human being as opposed to what is in your wallet. Again, I was commenting on things said in this segment. I didn't comment on the all six parts. Comparing people to cars is propaganda. Typical Neo-Con temerity.Healthcare is in the hands of corporations and not people.
@GenghisCohen1 And if the people who are paid to provide that care are paid less because the system that is set up by the government is unsustainable and they go on strike what then? What if the strike lasts a year? Do we force them to work, people have a right to health care.... Right? You are wrong, you have no right to health care same as you have no right to food.
Comparing people to cars is saying that competition drives innovation.
@Orionx30 Nice back tracking. So it isn't slavery you're worried about its unions. It is well established in other western nations that the health professionals are paid as well as any. Also, it is well established that innovative procedures are developed in systems different from our own. Your argument is really lacking in fact and is also unethical. No right to food? We have a right to life as well as freedom. You're placing material goods before human beings. Competion+cars+ok not people.
@GenghisCohen1 Your logic is flawed and your accusations are unfounded. I will restate. We have no right to another's labor. No back tracking... you just don't understand what I am trying to explain to you. You can not have a right to something someone else must produce, for the reason that if that person decides to stop producing, he is taking away your rights. It means you own his labor and no one owns the right to someone's labor. Competition facilitates innovation, its common knowledge.
@Orionx30 Of course if nobody is willing to provide healthcare then you will not have healthcare. However, there is a greater motivation to perform this act than monetary reward. That is actually why some doctors do it. Competition does create innovation but the matter is that it is not a necessary component for innovation. That applies rightly to things that are not basic needs for survival like cars.It works around the world. One should want a society that cares about its members.
@GenghisCohen1 Its beyond humans to care about 10,000 people let alone 300 million or 6 billion. For me to work half my day for free, so some guy I will never meet gets free health care is beyond me and beyond most people. The person I wanna help out is next door, down the street, at my church, local YMCA, ect. And I want it to be voluntary, not by force, cause you think its what "ethical" or what the Government thinks is right. I want to make my own decision.
@Orionx30 Where does the coercion come in on universal health care? Why does it matter if you know them? Wouldn't you like to see people helped when they need it? It should be what the popular will of the people decides and not the government, I agree. But, let's not pretend the government exists only when we want it to. Should we not be trying to achieve greater representational democracy to help all people? It is well within our means as a nation to ensure that all are cared for.
@GenghisCohen1 It is not within our means. Medicare is already broke and underfunded, how in the world are we going to fund the other 15% of the population? I explained to you how I would like to see people helped and I want it without force. I ALREADY EXPLAINED TO YOU.
@Orionx30 By the way 37 k is not pennies. That is a really distorted view of things. It is quite enough for a comfortable life especially when you don't have massive loans to repay. The US is all about debt. Is that empowering to its populous? If knowledge exists to limit or eliminate suffering why should it be entrapped in material wealth? You can have all the cars you want but don't deny someone a better well being.
@GenghisCohen1 Cont. Of course competition is not the only route to innovation, nor is getting a medical degree at Yale or Harvard the only way to get a degree in medicine. But because its not the only way should ship everyone to the Caribbean for med school?
@Orionx30 Sorry, I don't see the point of what you are saying in that last comment. Are you saying Yale and Harvard would not be able to run medical schools if it was not for insurance companies? In The UK the tuition for medical school isn't a racket like it is here. Also where do you get this that doctors will make some disparagingly small amount of money. In the UK you start (doctor in training) at almost 23 thousand pounds as of 2011. A gen. practitioner makes between 53 and 81 K in pounds.
@GenghisCohen1 23 thousand pounds is like 30 thousand dollars? That is pennies... Do you mean an intern or resident start at that much? and 81 k would be 121 thousand dollars. Which is nothing for 8 years of school. Family practice doctors make on avg 150 thousand dollars here. That is average. Again... You missed the point completely. Harvard would be considered a good medical school, the Caribbean would be considered the worse. That is the point.
@Orionx30 Like an intern. 23 k in pounds is almost 37 k in dollars and 81 is 128. Also like I said the tuition is not the issue it is in the US. It is subsidized which I'm sure will set off some more alarms for you. My point is that the cost is different for education and also the reasoning behind achieving the education is different. Realize this is already being done with great success. It is an activity on behalf of the people implemented by their representatives. By people for people.
@GenghisCohen1 The cost for education is no different, like you said its subsidized.... Someone is paying for that. And I disagree with your assumption of "great success." Many socialized countries are privatizing their health care due to the problems it creates. Socialized health care like any other entitlement program is theft. Voted in my the majority and collected by the threat of violence and imprisonment on a minority.
Some may overlook the fact that it's not the competing entrepreneur that INVENTS (drugs, machines, prosthetics etc.), but the emplyee (researcher) working for the entrepreneur. It seems that we've arrived at a point where if a cure for cancer will ever be found, we will be inclined to praise the financeer rather than the person wearing the lab coat.
@reghin79 And yet if the resources (overwhelmingly provided by the private sector which has a vastly superior record at determining what research is most promising and most beneficial) are not available to the person wearing the lab coat (who probably worked with countless others brought together by the entrepreneur), the invention never comes into being anyway.
If you haven't noticed, I was working around the issue at hand ("which sector is most efficient?"), and merely pointing out that whether it's private or public funding, the people INVESTING are not the ones INVENTING.
On the other hand, Pharma private sector has a superior record at determining the most promising research? Well, not quite. They're easily distracted by various domestic animals with runny noses.
@reghin79 Whatever you were working around, the issue of which sector is more efficient isn't a serious one - the public sector demonstrably can never win that one (and the distinction between investing and inventing is irrelevant to the issue. I'm not sure what the distraction comment specifically refers to but ... yes, quite ... there again the record isn't even close. The pivate sector's record isn't marginally superior but galactically so.
Hey, that's what the fellow with the mustache said to the fat guy who edits statements out of context and makes movies out of them. Wait a minute, are you trying to recreate the discussion in this video ? Cause if so, I couldn't play the fat guy in your little scenario. I'm not fat and I don't oppose capitalism - though I won't hesitate to point out the limits of this "galaxy" (as you put it) as well as those of centralized planning.
@reghin79 Lab coat - no. Different kind of scientist that bears directly on the discussion - economist.
I did not wish to portray you as Moore by any means and your response has clarified your position to a significant extent. That said, I'm curious what limits you believe are operating in this galaxy.
@reghin79 You said you "won't hesitate to point out the limits of this 'galaxy'" - presumably the free market given the counterpoint suggested was "centralized planning". I simply would like to know to which limits you are referring in that regard. It's a simple, straightforward question not answered by "full-assed answers" or "something, something [fill in economist or failed journalist here]".
It didn't strike me as tough challenge to present to you.
By failed journalist I assume you mean Hayek (nudge, nudge, wink, wink).
I can't answer the question because you'll end up calling me a commie. Whilst a socialist would call me ultra-liberal. In truth, I'm a moderate and much like the proverbial child with a black father and a white mother, instead of being the reconciler I am seen as an enemy to both sides.
Moreover, I don't want to answer the question because I don't enjoy discussions with people that lack a sense of humor
@reghin79 I promise not to call you anything (a commie in particular) for civil discourse. I'm not trying to trap or insult you (and the guys from the Comedy Workshop from my college days think I have a good enough sense of humor). If you don't feel the conversation will be productive, go in peace, but all I'm suggesting is that we explore those areas where you believe the market fails or, at the very least, does less well than the state or some other public enterprise.
@reghin79 I promise not to call you anything (a commie in particular) for civil discourse. I'm not trying to trap or insult you (and the guys from the Comedy Workshop from my college days think I have a good enough sense of humor). If you don't feel the conversation will be productive, go in peace, but all I'm suggesting is that we explore those areas where you believe the market fails or, at the very least, does less well than the state or some other public enterprise.
Oh and if you still believe I haven't answered your question regarding the limits of "the galaxy", then sorry, but to make it any clearer would mean to insult your intelligence. So I would presume that you weren't reading carefully enough and invite you to have another go at it.
@reghin79 I'm looking for specifics. There's nothing in what you have posited about the limits of "the galaxy" that can facilitate a discussion of what about markets you believe does not work. If you'd like to compare the efficiency of private medical reseacrh (which provides the majority of new drugs and medical procedures and does a better job of both bringing them to consumers and routing funding to more promising areas) with public research (and related bureacracy), that's fine.
@reghin79 You said you "won't hesitate to point out the limits of this 'galaxy'" - presumably the free market given the counterpoint suggested was "centralized planning". I simply would like to know to which limits you are referring in that regard. It's a simple, straightforward question not answered by "full-assed answers" or "something, something [fill in economist or failed journalist here]".
It didn't strike me as tough challenge to present to you.
Privatization is what has caused this economic collapse globally. Perpetual Wars have become PRIVATE profit paradises for Halliburton's like companies & friends. It might have sounded good in the past but Today Privatization is root of all evil
I know a guy who is on SSI and his federal check frequently is late every month. Also, people forget that it was the private sector that developed & built all the weapons, vehicles and technology the U.S. military has ever owned & used. So, America winning wars (not to mention drastically reducing U.S. military casualties) actually is in most part due to the efficiency of the private sector producing the weapons, vehicles and technology the military uses.
it isn't about whether health care is free or not free...its about insurance companies denying people who have the money and will pay, but since they are sick they don't get any coverage or have to pay outrageous amounts. Also, lets not always tie insurance to jobs. If I want to buy my own policy outright it should be affordable. thats my 2cents.
what the hell is this John Stossel trying to do? He is getting paid BIG TIME to say this type of things, how can you say that a profit based health system is good? Advanced Medicine, sure, but seriously... all the system based in this? Americans who buy this are just s...id
Michael Moore is a liar and so is Al Gore. Both of them lie for profit. The suckers who believe their stuff are free to be dumb and waste their time, energy, and money.
HEY MOORE YOU DUMBASS if the USPS does so well why is it 2.5 biillion in the rears??? Government can't even make itself work right how can they make heath care work!!!!
The profit model IS evil, period. When the drive is not to provide for everyone, not to take care of everyone, and not to think of the good of ALL, but is instead money - that is evil. People die because others want more wealth. That is revolting.
@Silvertaker Profit isn't evil. It's the reason you have money to buy things and a computer to type on. Name ONE thing that you like do or thing that you own that isn't in any part produced by someone who made/wanted to make a profit.
@lockdown260 the profit agenda is the only reason people are homeless, people starve, and war continues. a resource-based social economy is the only humanitarian way to go, but then the greedy would have to settle for a wildly comfortable life instead of a wildly excessive life - which is the drive of the profit agenda. personal wealth is what ruins humanity and makes monsters every day.
@Silvertaker Skirting my question I see. Comfort is subjective. Some people are comfortable in ghettos. Others in trailers, other in 100k, 200k, 300k etc. houses.
Also, people starve b/c economic illiterates like you(no offense) think that planning economies and not gaining valuable skills to sell for profit actually works. Planned economies have been tried. It's called communism and socialism. It resulted in the deaths of millions. So judging by body count. Profit isn't evil.
@lockdown260 To answer your question, nothing I do or own -requires- the profit agenda to exist. Nothing. As for your comments on planned economies - I have to ask how you can make those comments and then call ME an economic illiterate? The failure of those systems had NOTHING to do with the reliability or viability of the systems and EVERYTHING to do with, once again, the greed of those at the top, those who were trusted to carry out the plan. The profit agenda is immoral. Period.
@Silvertaker Nothing you say? How about the very computer you are typing on? Or your mode of transport? Or the food you eat? The Job you go to? The clothes on you back? The house you live in? Someone in there made money, you included.
And considering the fact that planed economies have ALWAYS IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD produced more poverty than free(ish) markets w/ profit motive, yes it's safe to say you know nothing of economics. Your plan makes poverty. Who's immoral again?
@lockdown260 I didnt say that profit didnt drive the creation of things I use or own or do. I said none of that REQUIRES the sick profit drive. Not one bit of it. And you're repeating yourself. Do some research. There is nothing evil about communism, or socialism. The fact is a TRUE communist or socialist state has never existed on this earth, due to the corruption and greed of those at the top. It is always corrupted, with all the wealth and resources going to the few.
@Silvertaker "I said none of that REQUIRES the sick profit drive" That's a baseless assertion. No person has ever proven 1st world life to be possible w/o profit. If you know any proof please provide it. Also you've yet to provide proof profit is bad.
Also I call bull on you never been socialism nonsense. Ever heard of La Reunion ,Brook Farm,Harmony Society, to name a few? They failed just like the big countries did.
When an idea consistently fails a smart person moves on. You should too.
@lockdown260 Youve yet to point to a TRUE socially-driven, resource-based economic model. It has NEVER been truly tried, and has never happened in the history of the world. Simple fact is with our technology, and the resources available just NOW (not to mention in the future), ALL people could be fed, housed, and entertained at a first-world level, for the next 1300 years. (4000 years of sustainable green energy). That is simple fact. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it untrue.
@Silvertaker "ALL people could be fed, housed, and entertained at a first-world level, for the next 1300 years. (4000 years of sustainable green energy). That is simple fact. " Ok. Please point to any peer reviewed study that proclaims that.
"Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it untrue." Don't like it? Who would dislike such news if it were true? My position is based on history and economics, not feelings.
@lockdown260 Check out the Venus Project. And do some more research. Because right now, you're just parroting the same nonsense the right-wing fanatics like to yammer when they are trying to protect the status quo. The status quo, by the way, that is destroying our environment, our culture, and our health at an exponentially increasing rate - all in the name of more and more money for themselves.
@Silvertaker I have done my research. You're the one who is trying to ignore history & economics. You may call it nonsense but you fail to address any of the facts I present with anything other than a " I-don't-like our-system-AND-it's-bad-cause-I-said-so" argument. I repeat myself because that how people learn. PLANNED ECONOMIES FAIL ALWAYS. How many have to suffer and die b4 you guys get it?
Also I checked out the venus project. Good luck getting anyone to build that society w/o pay/profit.
@lockdown260 There is no need for pay or profit in a resource-based, technologically-driven economy. Products would not be constructed for planned obsolescence (forcing people to replace them at a cost), therefore less resources would be used and all could be provided for. All it takes is for people to let go of trash culture, let go of laziness and selfishness, and let go of shallow materialism. Period. I am not claiming it would be easy - it will probably take a huge disaster to wake us up.
@Silvertaker "There is no need for pay or profit in a resource-based, technologically-driven economy." Yes b/c engineers don't have wants or desire therefor they won't mind using their hard-to-come-by abilities and resources for free.
"All it takes is for people to let go of trash culture, let go of laziness and selfishness, and let go of shallow materialism." So all it takes if for people to not be people. Cool. That worked so well in the past, just like ignoring how reality works.
@lockdown260 Because a comfortable existence for all people, in a world that is improving and in synergy with us, and us with it, where all the needs of all are met, including the needs of the engineers, constitutes "free"? I'm done, there's no point discussing this with someone whose mind is so rooted in all the things that hold us back.
@Silvertaker The venus project has only produced films as far as I've seen and they don't explain how they will implement full automation or how resources will be attained from outside of their centers.
@Ravengaurd6 They have produced films, but also have a technology center and working models for many of their ideas. I suggest you join - you seem like a very intelligent person, whose mind and ideals are in the right place - you seem to have a full grasp of the failures of our model of existence, as stated in your post below about capitalism - and why it is that we keep going in circles, degenerating instead of advancing (i.e. the elements of our human "nature" which keep us selfish)
@Silvertaker What exactly are their working models? are they functioning cities populated by volunteers? And what of human "nature"? I know I cannot change other people and that people can only change themselves,but why and how should the project change people?
@Silvertaker Capitalism has never existed either. the very first thing wrong is the currency system. Capitalism has existed because of the Governments sick desire to control. as of now all Governments have monoploies on Force and on printable currency. in light of that not only does democracy dade but Capitalism never comes to be. there's no such thing as a pure economy because the elements of certain practices give to certain tendencies and behaviors.
@Silvertaker So I should hope the company I work for dose not make a profit? And then when I'm out of a job what should I do ask the government for help? I'm sorry but when a company is not making a profit that is a bad thing it means people will lose jobs.
@Epica124 There is nothing wrong with profit in and of itself. It is the profit agenda that is sick, however. The drive to make MORE and MORE, far more than you would ever need or use to any end but waste. The companies don't stop at being happy about making a healthy profit - they will cut jobs, cut wages, all in the names of making more and more and more profit. This is the huge problem with the medical and insurance industries. They will literally let people die to make more money.
@Silvertaker That's the whole point of starting a company up to make bigger profits to make the company better and open up in more places. If you are just fine with having a small company heck that is fine to. Other wants there companies to grow and get bigger so as to give more jobs to more people and make more new things and so on. With out profits big or small companies will close there doors.
@Epica124 You really believe that? Look into the insurance industry. Read the stories of people who lost family members because they were denied the insurance they PAID for. Read the testimonies of the policy hitmen who quit the industry but whose jobs it used to be to find any way possible to deny coverage to people who paid them and needed it. You are eyes-closed, if you really think that the 1% who control 90% of the wealth won't let the bottom 99% die to get richer.
you IDIOTS...ofcourse prime minister of Italy,sheiks and other ''important'' dicks come to U.S. for healt care becouse they have money to pay for it...but all the other sick people can only depend on god, since health system is here to make and not save lifes...Idia of social medicine is that you pay in found, and yes for someone else who is sick in that moment, but when you are sick someone else is paying for you...problem is when people hear world social they related with socialism
@promars85 If the government runs the social medicine then it is socialism. If a compnay runs the social medicine it is called private healthcare. All insurance companies run on the principal you promoted above. I have no problem with cooperative insurance companies. they should be allowed to compete. The only problem I see with the american system is that the government has taken over insurance companies through legistlation, making it impossible for free competition. Endorsing monopolies.
i have no problem being part of a system that uses money and competition as incentives to make better things and produce better ideas, but it seems that these same incentives run the wrong way because the fact is it is cheaper to treat than cure.
quite upsetting when you realize modern medicine this perceived force for good, is in reality a bunch of cons and frauds using gains and profits as their main incentive.
and we wonder why the U.S. is ranked in the 30's for Healthcare
while other minuscule nations who have almost half the medical innovations utilized in their countries do better
its because they have a devout sense of care for one another
@Zanthios As you've just said, they are minuscule nations. Here, we are a very big nation with a lot of health problems to begin with. The simple fact is, I will make something better and cheaper than the other guy (faster, I might add) when I have a reason other than helping a stranger. Sure, I would love to help you out, but why should I invest millions of dollars to do so when I won't get that back? The government sucks at making good things because it doesn't have to compete.
Micheal Moore... how is that land lines reception at the same location? Last I checked, when driving down the freeway, my land line didn't work either.
@mattynaynay talking about how free market and profit interest drive the healthcare market and then use a guy that sponsored a dictatorship and didnt approve of a free workforce market is really really relevant to the issue...
ABC is completely missing the point. American socialists and supporters of universal healthcare don't think America's quality of service is bad. In fact if you are a rich ambassador or artist from a foreign nation sure, come to America, we have great healthcare. The problem is that the overwhelming majority of Americans can't afford it, and that is what Moore is arguing. Anyone who believes this is an instrument of corporate America whose only goal is to gain money. They don't care about you.
@LucasKesslerFilms I would almost agree with you, but the average american spends about 3k per year on healthcare. Meanwhile, they spend 16k a year on a house, and 6k per year on cars, or 8k on entertainment. So can't afford it? maybe cause back on entertainment by 1/3 and you'll double the available money for healthcare.
As far as poor, you should look up friedman on healthcare when he spoke to the mayo clinic, room full of doctors.
@bluefootedpig Your facts may be true; however, healthcare should be provided to your dependents as well, so for a family of four, this 3k that you suggest would then turn into 12k. Boom. That's nearly the annual salary of a minimum wage worker. Even then, you still must pay in part for service and not everything will be covered. Plus, your fact probably excludes those who receive paid healthcare through their job.
@LucasKesslerFilms It includes those that get health care through their work, hence it is lower than higher. And this is the average family. My apologizes for not wording to better communicate that information. But are you honestly saying that you think that people spend more on health care than entertainment?
There are also other ways, look up friedman on health care, he has two short answers on it that address how a free market would actually handle it.
@bluefootedpig Additionally, your facts also consider the conditions of upper middle class and wealthy people who will spend many thousands of dollars a year on things such as entertainment and cars. But socialized healthcare is not built to serve the ultra wealthy. It is there to protect the lives of the working class who deserve equality. The war against democratic socialism is unnecessary and uneducated. Consider circumstance, do more than examine bloated "facts".
How can anyone use Dick Chaney as an example. He is a multi-millionaire. He gets the best medicine money can buy not mention he was the VP of the USA at the time of this report. So comparing him to the rest of society is ridiculous.
It's not ridiculous at all, Jr. The care he enjoys now was neither technologically or financially possible just a few decades ago. The profit driven medical industry in the U.S. inspired advancements in treatment that made his current care possible. While the former VP of the US no doubt gets better coverage than most, the poorest here at home and around the world are also beneficiaries.
Sadly, you statement reveals your lack of respect for the life of a fellow human being.
@desmionjohn No it does not! This was not a dig on Chaney in any way. My claim is Millionaires can afford better Doctors and better care. They can also afford better insurance. You and I are at the mercy of out Insurance company's. We get the care our Insurance company's are will to pay for not what we might need. Chaney has a new heart device that is better than the older pace makers, but they are more expensive. Your insurance company may not pay for that device, but they might pay for the
It's not ridiculous at all, Jr. The argument is about the efficacy of our health care system. His current care was not technologically possible at any price just a few decades ago. The profit driven medical industry in the U.S. invested their monies leading to the advancements in treatment making his current care and quality of life possible. While the former VP of the US no doubt gets better coverage than most, the poorest here at home and around the world also benefit.
Stossell say's health care is complicated....like U.S. can't do it. If Canada and Mexico can do it efficiently, the U.S. could too. It will happen eventually.
Governments don't do anything efficiently. Private enterprise does things efficiently all the time, because if they don't they'll go out of business. But government CAN'T go out of business, they just take more of our money when they fail.
Doctor's waiting rooms aren't great, but compare them to the DMV. It's much more pleasant to go to a doctor's office or ER than it is the DMV, and that's factoring in the illness!
@mpc91 ......The U.S. spends like 16% of GDP on healthcare. Canada...only 7%. And they cover everyone. I doubt they'd want to trade systems with us. Insurance companies are making record profits.....which is just money being syphoned out of the system by middlemen. Some great system we have.
@Andreas748 - I'm not saying the American system is perfect. But the problem is not that there's not enough government involvement, it's that there's too much government involvement already, and Obamacare will not reduce the costs, only increase them. To think that government involvement will take away middlemen is just naive.
The solution is increased competition, not increased regulation and government involvement. Remove the interstate restrictions, and enact tort reform.
@Intransitman no there isn't. as soon as you get government involved the market is no longer honest, it's manipulated, and that throws off the natural order of the private economy.
I love Moore's comment that the government used to be good at things, like defeat the NAZI'S! Yes that was good, but what an idiotic comment in the context of the conversation.
if you morons would actually educate yourselves it would make for a better conversation ... learn about free enterprise ppl ... it will blow your minds
@Madhabber93
well if 90% of americans are insured than 90% would be able to access and use the machines in a timely manner which isnt the case in a country with socialized medicine. if i needed an mri or a catscan i can drive ten minutes down the road and get one that day so the notion that socailized medicine is better is a false statement remember the government has nothing so to give to one the must take away from another and i sure would hate to be the person they take from
mangano717 3 days ago
I love that Harvard lady for mentioning good 'ol Mr. Ford...Ford is a PERFECT example of how profit-seeking and entrepeneurship make things CHEAPER OVERALL for EVERYONE.
Adam Smith was WAY ahead of his time when he talked about the invisible hand, because the industrial revolution was LITERALLY a practical real-world manifestation of everything he preached. And it continues every day in the sectors in which we've managed to keep the government out.
Spjungen 1 week ago
Its pretty ****ing sad that America absolutely hates free markets more than most other countries in the world....
IxenBlaze 2 weeks ago in playlist More videos from Jimmypop97
Listen to Pelosi condemn that health insurance company for its gigantic profits. Go look into her finances and see how much money she's made over the last few years as a politician.
kommisar 2 weeks ago
God Michael Moore is such a fat fuck idiot, its no wonder the other idiots swarm around him like flies.
You people who follow this guy are fucking DUMB.
Wake the fuck up.
Shaymeonyoo 2 weeks ago
hahaha LETS LISTEN TO THIS FUCKING FATASS ABOUT HEALTHCARE!!!!!
Shaymeonyoo 2 weeks ago
One thing about Mr. Moore. He makes people look like a fool. He has no idea (only what he thinks), that living in or even next to a communist country is no laughing matter.
belmont4511 3 weeks ago
Moore can laugh all he wants, but let him argue with Tomas Sowell and Milton Friedman.
torr59622 3 weeks ago
@torr59622 Think he actually went up against Milton Friedman, when he was younger and skinnier!
rehwr 2 days ago
This country is so fucked up because of hypocrite assholes like Nancy Pelosi who pretend to care about anyone but her rich friends.Moore is the same. Private business has its faults, but blows away government garbage.
torr59622 3 weeks ago
Yes, even with the fact that you lost signal your cell phone is better. The Rotary dial phone only got signal in places it could be plugged into active phone lines. Once again Mr. Moore you show your lack of intelligence in the simplest ways.
BillyJoe1305 1 month ago
@BillyJoe1305
Yeah, but he is too fat and lazy to walk far enough to get out of the dead zone.
RetSquid 4 weeks ago
The problem to me is that some people are covered under Medicaid (they don't pay a dime out of pocket, and alot of people covered by medicaid abuse the system for that reason) or Medicare.
Then there are some of us who pay out of our paychecks to get insurance.
And then there are the people who can't get either, and that is where the fault is.
We need a better hybrid medical system. A mix of what canada is doing, and private insurance companies who don't mind paying out of pocket.
halfasser 1 month ago
Unfortunately, Mr. Stossel didn't bother to read any of the current literature that researches healthcare for profit. Had he done so, and not just blather on the ideology of profits, he would know that competition is one of the main factors that drives up the price of healthcare in America; it does just the opposite of what you'd think due to specific factors that can only be found in the realm of healthcare and health insurance.
byrddust 1 month ago
@byrddust You're so wrong it's disgusting. Competition among business drives prices down. (for instance, my store sets prices lower then the other store, in order to gain business) Competition among consumers is what shoots prices up.
vidman7 1 month ago
@vidman7 That which is the case in many sectors of the economy is NOT what is the case in the American Health Care system. Once again, one has to do the reading of the material explicitly dealing with this problem. Our Health care system is one of the few places where competition drives up the prices. Stop making ideological arguments and check the particular facts! This isn't a pet store pricing competition!
byrddust 1 month ago
@vidman7 A small example: There's two major hospitals in my town. One bought new technology for brain surgery. Because they claimed they were the only hospital who had this "vital" technology, the other hospital bought it too. Now, in order to pay for this multi-million dollar machine, they both have been cited for over use of this machine just so they can bill medicare to pay for the cost of having it! Competition drove the prices up, not down! This isn't economic theory, it's fact!
byrddust 1 month ago
@byrddust Your example is not an example of competition, but an example of the failures of the 3rd party system in USA healthcare. If medicare and insurance companies weren't involved and if health care in the USA were a true 2 party system, then competition would drive prices down. Government involvement (ie medicare, medicaid) is what are driving prices up, not competition. The keyword in your example is medicare, medicare drove the prices up.
kahnk009 1 month ago
@vidman7 Google "Understanding Health Care Cost Drivers" and read what it says about competition among hospitals, etc. This is only one study; do yourself a favor and read more, because there isn't much disagreement about this issue, unless you're just repeating tired arguments that have not bearing in reality. This is a problem that ideological claims about capitalist competition does NOT apply!
byrddust 1 month ago
@byrddust The fundamental problem with healthcare is that there is no consumer pressure to keep the costs of healthcare in check because it is not the consumers paying for it (directly)...it is insurance companies and government programs (medicare, medicaid). Which makes costs/prices of healthcare a non-factor when decisions by the consumer are being made. You clearly don't understand basic economics....
kahnk009 1 month ago
Comment removed
byrddust 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kahnk009All I can say my friend is that you can keep up the ideological claims, but the facts are facts. Your argument has no merit as it does not withstand scrutiny from within the medical community. The studies all agree with me, I know, because this is my field. Keep reading, as it may help someday.
byrddust 1 month ago
Michael More is a total jackass.
HansonjSolo 1 month ago
Relax it's FedEx.
redsox1006 1 month ago
@madHabber93
with more machines than people are able to get the care they need and not have to wait and those who die may have a chance because the machine is there. my mom had a brain anyruesm and the doctor that operated on her makes 1.2 million a year... i think he should make 4 million a year mayb more because he saved my mother and if it wasnt for him she might not be here today so he is worth every penny that he EARNS because without him i wouldnt have a mom.
mangano717 1 month ago
@mangano717 Having the machines is one thing, having the access to them is another. Many can't afford an MRI, let alone the procedure needed from the MRI diagnosis in the U.S.
Neurologists make close that amount in Canada too.
Happy your Mom is alive.
MadHabber93 1 month ago
No one is arguing against private industry such as doctors working as independents or drug companies and so forth. There is just no need for the insurance industry,, Insurances only innovation is to raise prices on premiums or reduce benefits or come up with back out clauses like "preexisting conditions", the only thing insurance can do is making billing for the doctors easier and get them their payment faster and they don't they are just seen as an all around annoyance!
juxtn 2 months ago
It seems like a lot of non americans come here for complicated stuff but a lot of americans go to other countries for cheaper simple stuff.
ca1cifer 2 months ago
If Canada is so good with it's free health care why do we send so many Canadians down to the States?? Oh yeah, because it takes 6-8 months to get an MRI done here. A knee or hip replacement? Thats a couple of years of waiting. And its far from free. I look at my paycheck and my taxes say different! Our biggest problem is people in Canada are brainwashed into thinking this is as good as health care gets. What we need is a Public/Private parallel system.
ompah2011 2 months ago
@ompah2011 Its a myth that many Canadians go South for care, while 750,000 Americans went abroad for care they couldn't afford at home...including Canada. It does not take 6 to 8 months to get an MRI. The average wait times in Ontario for example, is 30 days. With urgent cases being done the same day. For hip replacement, avg. wait times are 62 days, according to the CIHI. 67 days for knee. A parallel system would only decrease wait times for the few, and increase time for the majority.
MadHabber93 2 months ago
@MadHabber93
@MadHabber93
My Wife was suffering from numness, dizzy spells, vomiting, and sever headaches. She was given an appointment for an MRI after all other tests were inconclusive. The wait was 5 months. My mom had waited 6 months for a mri as we await results now. My step mother died of bone cancer which may have been caught earlier if she was able to get in sooner for an mri. The wait time in Ontario is 180 days. A parallel system would decrease wait time for eveything and everyone.
SwagoRyan 2 months ago
@SwagoRyan I'm sorry, but you if you go on to the wait times report for Ontario, the average wait time is 30 days. The wait time where 90% receive an MRI is 90 days for NON-urgent MRI's. I waited 10 days for an MRI for a simple chronic sinus infection. Where do you live??
Anecdotal stories don't paint the entire picture.
MadHabber93 2 months ago
@MadHabber93
Central The Ottawa Hospital 6-12 Month Ph:613-761-4831 Fax: 613-737-8611 Downtown St. Joseph MRI 1-2 Days St. Joseph MRI is a private facility located in Gatineau East CHEO 6 Weeks Ph: 613-737-7600 East Monfort Hospital 2 Months Ph: 613-746-4621 Fax: 613-748-4914 West Queensway Carleton 4 Months Ph: 613-721-2000
SwagoRyan 2 months ago
@SwagoRyan According to the Ontario Wait times website the wait times where 90% of patients have received an MRI, not the average, which would be lower. Again for NON-urgent wait times.
Montfort 52 days, Children's 22 days, Queensway 100 days.
Provincial wait times show it at 97 days where 90% of people waiting have received an MRI.
Claiming its 6 months is not factually correct for the average. Can you wait that long, yes, but less than 10% of patients do.
MadHabber93 2 months ago
@MadHabber93
Oh well I guess bone cancer isn't urgent then. I would tell my stepmom that but she is dead. If she was able to get the MRI when she wanted/needed it not when she was brought in by ambulance because she was fused she may have had a chance. We have about 250 MRI machines in Canada, while the US has close to 10000. This system can not work the way its heading. Its to expensive and bloated.
SwagoRyan 2 months ago
@SwagoRyan Sorry for your loss, but your stepmom is anecdotal, and probably more an error on the consulting doc not recognizing the urgency then the system.
Our system is expensive, just like every other system on the planet, yet 2/3rd the cost of the U.S. yet we cover everyone. Having more MRI's means nothing if you can't affor the MRI or the treatment needed by the MRI diagnosis.
MadHabber93 2 months ago
MICHEAL MOORE IS A FUCK NUT
fuvkyougoogification 2 months ago
Profits actually make things cheaper. The AMA are what made things so expensive by driving up the cost of healthcare education. Also the government interfering and giving special privileges to nonprofit hospitals until they eventually took over and also giving more to Blue insurances (no savings account) over regular bargaining insurance companies (savings account) . Your insurance company used to be able to FIGHT with the hospital for cheaper rates based on what YOU could afford.
Prinnycakes 3 months ago
Also, The only thing that I think isn't driven well by profit are complete cures. There is no benefit to curing cancer because after so many years anyone can make your drug so you have to prolong the usage of a drug as long as possible before the time runs out. There is a cure for certain kinds of cancer that was found in Canada, it's an old and cheap drug that no one has any interest in developing because of that fact.
Prinnycakes 3 months ago
If I ever get cancer, I'm just gonna die. No hospitals or Meds.
LibertarianIdeals 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I want to see John Stossel investigating those guys who humbly call themselves "pick-up artists". Some investigatory journalists should expose the whole fake seduction community!
Think about it: millions of websites, ebooks, seminars sold worldwide (but it began in America), and there is not a single scientific evidence that such happening as seduction exists!
On seductionmyth c o m there are tons of studies quoted that prove seduction is completely irrational.
SeductionMyth 3 months ago
Micheal Moore is an idiot. God he makes the stupidest arguments sometimes. He acts like he is above everybody but at the same time "Is all for equality"
Insanelyrically 3 months ago
Cut the cost in half? Okay. That makes sense with Henry Ford and the Model T. What does it have to do with health care? Who does that? Liars. This is idiotic. What does any of this have to do with being able to afford going to the doctor to maintain normal health? People go to France and Britain for specialized treatments in some areas. What is the point? What does this have to do with insurance companies? They don't innovate anything. Propaganda, lies, bullshit.
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 Watch the whole thing he explains how it cuts cost. Don't write something and call it propaganda until you hear the whole argument.
Orionx30 3 months ago
@Orionx30 The people speaking on behalf of insurance companies in this segment are spewing propaganda. Do you mean to say that insurance companies lower the cost of healthcare? Also, as I said, you can find great innovations in countries whose population takes it as its right to have health care. WTF does Henry Ford have to do with ti?That is propaganda. They might as well wave a flag in your face. I repeat the people in this segment are spewing propaganda and they're not shy about it.
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 You missed the point of the video. Its people who are in control of their own health care that lower costs not insurance companies. Health Care is not a right. You can not own the right to the labor of other people, doing so is slavery. This is why I asked if you watched the whole thing. You obviously didn't.
Orionx30 3 months ago
@Orionx30 Wrong again. Nobody forces anyone to give somebody else healthcare. The people providing the care are paid. Nobody would own the right to labor. The issue is that you would receive care based on the fact that you are a human being as opposed to what is in your wallet. Again, I was commenting on things said in this segment. I didn't comment on the all six parts. Comparing people to cars is propaganda. Typical Neo-Con temerity.Healthcare is in the hands of corporations and not people.
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 And if the people who are paid to provide that care are paid less because the system that is set up by the government is unsustainable and they go on strike what then? What if the strike lasts a year? Do we force them to work, people have a right to health care.... Right? You are wrong, you have no right to health care same as you have no right to food.
Comparing people to cars is saying that competition drives innovation.
Orionx30 3 months ago
@Orionx30 Nice back tracking. So it isn't slavery you're worried about its unions. It is well established in other western nations that the health professionals are paid as well as any. Also, it is well established that innovative procedures are developed in systems different from our own. Your argument is really lacking in fact and is also unethical. No right to food? We have a right to life as well as freedom. You're placing material goods before human beings. Competion+cars+ok not people.
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 Your logic is flawed and your accusations are unfounded. I will restate. We have no right to another's labor. No back tracking... you just don't understand what I am trying to explain to you. You can not have a right to something someone else must produce, for the reason that if that person decides to stop producing, he is taking away your rights. It means you own his labor and no one owns the right to someone's labor. Competition facilitates innovation, its common knowledge.
Orionx30 3 months ago
@Orionx30 Of course if nobody is willing to provide healthcare then you will not have healthcare. However, there is a greater motivation to perform this act than monetary reward. That is actually why some doctors do it. Competition does create innovation but the matter is that it is not a necessary component for innovation. That applies rightly to things that are not basic needs for survival like cars.It works around the world. One should want a society that cares about its members.
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 Its beyond humans to care about 10,000 people let alone 300 million or 6 billion. For me to work half my day for free, so some guy I will never meet gets free health care is beyond me and beyond most people. The person I wanna help out is next door, down the street, at my church, local YMCA, ect. And I want it to be voluntary, not by force, cause you think its what "ethical" or what the Government thinks is right. I want to make my own decision.
Orionx30 3 months ago
@Orionx30 Where does the coercion come in on universal health care? Why does it matter if you know them? Wouldn't you like to see people helped when they need it? It should be what the popular will of the people decides and not the government, I agree. But, let's not pretend the government exists only when we want it to. Should we not be trying to achieve greater representational democracy to help all people? It is well within our means as a nation to ensure that all are cared for.
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 It is not within our means. Medicare is already broke and underfunded, how in the world are we going to fund the other 15% of the population? I explained to you how I would like to see people helped and I want it without force. I ALREADY EXPLAINED TO YOU.
Orionx30 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Orionx30 By the way 37 k is not pennies. That is a really distorted view of things. It is quite enough for a comfortable life especially when you don't have massive loans to repay. The US is all about debt. Is that empowering to its populous? If knowledge exists to limit or eliminate suffering why should it be entrapped in material wealth? You can have all the cars you want but don't deny someone a better well being.
GenghisCohen1 1 second ago
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 Cont. Of course competition is not the only route to innovation, nor is getting a medical degree at Yale or Harvard the only way to get a degree in medicine. But because its not the only way should ship everyone to the Caribbean for med school?
Orionx30 3 months ago
@Orionx30 Sorry, I don't see the point of what you are saying in that last comment. Are you saying Yale and Harvard would not be able to run medical schools if it was not for insurance companies? In The UK the tuition for medical school isn't a racket like it is here. Also where do you get this that doctors will make some disparagingly small amount of money. In the UK you start (doctor in training) at almost 23 thousand pounds as of 2011. A gen. practitioner makes between 53 and 81 K in pounds.
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 23 thousand pounds is like 30 thousand dollars? That is pennies... Do you mean an intern or resident start at that much? and 81 k would be 121 thousand dollars. Which is nothing for 8 years of school. Family practice doctors make on avg 150 thousand dollars here. That is average. Again... You missed the point completely. Harvard would be considered a good medical school, the Caribbean would be considered the worse. That is the point.
Orionx30 3 months ago
@Orionx30 Like an intern. 23 k in pounds is almost 37 k in dollars and 81 is 128. Also like I said the tuition is not the issue it is in the US. It is subsidized which I'm sure will set off some more alarms for you. My point is that the cost is different for education and also the reasoning behind achieving the education is different. Realize this is already being done with great success. It is an activity on behalf of the people implemented by their representatives. By people for people.
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
Comment removed
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
@GenghisCohen1 The cost for education is no different, like you said its subsidized.... Someone is paying for that. And I disagree with your assumption of "great success." Many socialized countries are privatizing their health care due to the problems it creates. Socialized health care like any other entitlement program is theft. Voted in my the majority and collected by the threat of violence and imprisonment on a minority.
Orionx30 3 months ago
Comment removed
GenghisCohen1 3 months ago
Stossel has no idea what he's talking about. The best the planned economies produced is the Yugo, and that's one epic car!
ThiefFanatic 3 months ago
@ThiefFanatic That's funny.
quarterxchange 3 months ago
@ThiefFanatic I think Indian ambassador takes the cake.
tjohn1986 3 months ago
seriously, cell phones are worse? he just lost some credibility.
theuser69696969 3 months ago
13th century?! In the 13th century there was no capitalism! There was no drive to make new and better shit! Micheal Moore is a retard!
thawescc 4 months ago
Some may overlook the fact that it's not the competing entrepreneur that INVENTS (drugs, machines, prosthetics etc.), but the emplyee (researcher) working for the entrepreneur. It seems that we've arrived at a point where if a cure for cancer will ever be found, we will be inclined to praise the financeer rather than the person wearing the lab coat.
reghin79 4 months ago
@reghin79 And yet if the resources (overwhelmingly provided by the private sector which has a vastly superior record at determining what research is most promising and most beneficial) are not available to the person wearing the lab coat (who probably worked with countless others brought together by the entrepreneur), the invention never comes into being anyway.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago in playlist John Stossel
@FletchforFreedom
If you haven't noticed, I was working around the issue at hand ("which sector is most efficient?"), and merely pointing out that whether it's private or public funding, the people INVESTING are not the ones INVENTING.
On the other hand, Pharma private sector has a superior record at determining the most promising research? Well, not quite. They're easily distracted by various domestic animals with runny noses.
reghin79 4 months ago
@reghin79 Whatever you were working around, the issue of which sector is more efficient isn't a serious one - the public sector demonstrably can never win that one (and the distinction between investing and inventing is irrelevant to the issue. I'm not sure what the distraction comment specifically refers to but ... yes, quite ... there again the record isn't even close. The pivate sector's record isn't marginally superior but galactically so.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Hey, that's what the fellow with the mustache said to the fat guy who edits statements out of context and makes movies out of them. Wait a minute, are you trying to recreate the discussion in this video ? Cause if so, I couldn't play the fat guy in your little scenario. I'm not fat and I don't oppose capitalism - though I won't hesitate to point out the limits of this "galaxy" (as you put it) as well as those of centralized planning.
Have you worn the lab coat ?
reghin79 4 months ago
@reghin79 Lab coat - no. Different kind of scientist that bears directly on the discussion - economist.
I did not wish to portray you as Moore by any means and your response has clarified your position to a significant extent. That said, I'm curious what limits you believe are operating in this galaxy.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
You're the economist. What are you asking me for ? Why settle for half-assed answers when you can give yourself full-assed answers ?
By the way, I hope you will employ your sense for metaphors when descifering this entire discussion.
reghin79 4 months ago
@reghin79 You said you "won't hesitate to point out the limits of this 'galaxy'" - presumably the free market given the counterpoint suggested was "centralized planning". I simply would like to know to which limits you are referring in that regard. It's a simple, straightforward question not answered by "full-assed answers" or "something, something [fill in economist or failed journalist here]".
It didn't strike me as tough challenge to present to you.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
By failed journalist I assume you mean Hayek (nudge, nudge, wink, wink).
I can't answer the question because you'll end up calling me a commie. Whilst a socialist would call me ultra-liberal. In truth, I'm a moderate and much like the proverbial child with a black father and a white mother, instead of being the reconciler I am seen as an enemy to both sides.
Moreover, I don't want to answer the question because I don't enjoy discussions with people that lack a sense of humor
reghin79 4 months ago
@reghin79 I promise not to call you anything (a commie in particular) for civil discourse. I'm not trying to trap or insult you (and the guys from the Comedy Workshop from my college days think I have a good enough sense of humor). If you don't feel the conversation will be productive, go in peace, but all I'm suggesting is that we explore those areas where you believe the market fails or, at the very least, does less well than the state or some other public enterprise.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reghin79 I promise not to call you anything (a commie in particular) for civil discourse. I'm not trying to trap or insult you (and the guys from the Comedy Workshop from my college days think I have a good enough sense of humor). If you don't feel the conversation will be productive, go in peace, but all I'm suggesting is that we explore those areas where you believe the market fails or, at the very least, does less well than the state or some other public enterprise.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
@reghin79 commie.
ultimategoobah 3 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Oh and if you still believe I haven't answered your question regarding the limits of "the galaxy", then sorry, but to make it any clearer would mean to insult your intelligence. So I would presume that you weren't reading carefully enough and invite you to have another go at it.
reghin79 4 months ago
@reghin79 I'm looking for specifics. There's nothing in what you have posited about the limits of "the galaxy" that can facilitate a discussion of what about markets you believe does not work. If you'd like to compare the efficiency of private medical reseacrh (which provides the majority of new drugs and medical procedures and does a better job of both bringing them to consumers and routing funding to more promising areas) with public research (and related bureacracy), that's fine.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
As stated: (re)read my earlier comment that begins with the words "By failed journalist (...)". You'll get it eventually.
reghin79 4 months ago
@reghin79 Sigh. Okay, if you've no point to make, go in peace.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Right. And a good day to you.
Keep an eye out for my point.
reghin79 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reghin79 You said you "won't hesitate to point out the limits of this 'galaxy'" - presumably the free market given the counterpoint suggested was "centralized planning". I simply would like to know to which limits you are referring in that regard. It's a simple, straightforward question not answered by "full-assed answers" or "something, something [fill in economist or failed journalist here]".
It didn't strike me as tough challenge to present to you.
FletchforFreedom 4 months ago
@FletchforFreedom
Something, something, Adam Smith... Something, something, Ludwing von Mises... Something, something, Milton Friedman... Something, something, Friedrich Hayek... Something, something, J.M. Keynes... Something, something, Karl Marx.
reghin79 4 months ago
Privatization is what has caused this economic collapse globally. Perpetual Wars have become PRIVATE profit paradises for Halliburton's like companies & friends. It might have sounded good in the past but Today Privatization is root of all evil
MAZDAKPRODUCTION 4 months ago
I know a guy who is on SSI and his federal check frequently is late every month. Also, people forget that it was the private sector that developed & built all the weapons, vehicles and technology the U.S. military has ever owned & used. So, America winning wars (not to mention drastically reducing U.S. military casualties) actually is in most part due to the efficiency of the private sector producing the weapons, vehicles and technology the military uses.
MrConservative608 4 months ago
it isn't about whether health care is free or not free...its about insurance companies denying people who have the money and will pay, but since they are sick they don't get any coverage or have to pay outrageous amounts. Also, lets not always tie insurance to jobs. If I want to buy my own policy outright it should be affordable. thats my 2cents.
desernight 5 months ago
what the hell is this John Stossel trying to do? He is getting paid BIG TIME to say this type of things, how can you say that a profit based health system is good? Advanced Medicine, sure, but seriously... all the system based in this? Americans who buy this are just s...id
DinisJDS 5 months ago
Only the rich and ignorant support Capitalism (enter George Bush).
98raza20 5 months ago
@98raza20
Only complete morons support anything else.
zoulkyud 5 months ago
Stossel obviously is a friend of capitalism. loool
WasGibtsLeute 5 months ago
OMG "The government did things like fighting the nazis." What a retard, rofl
seppsters 5 months ago
Moore is a dumbass. He can't get better signal on his phone. THEN BUY A BETTER PHONE THAT CAN GENIUS.
wolfengheist 6 months ago
Michael Moore is a liar and so is Al Gore. Both of them lie for profit. The suckers who believe their stuff are free to be dumb and waste their time, energy, and money.
miazagora 6 months ago
00:14. hahahhahahaha She had to lead the audience in booing!!! They had to be told how to feel and react. not surprised
BigDaddyDJD 7 months ago
but all the people from other countries who were treated here have money to be treated here. what about our own citizens being treated?
saphiredewdrop 8 months ago
He bitches about cell phones too? Maybe he should use a Walkie-Talkie, lol.
heavym3tal 8 months ago
HEY MOORE YOU DUMBASS if the USPS does so well why is it 2.5 biillion in the rears??? Government can't even make itself work right how can they make heath care work!!!!
dixidreamin 8 months ago
The profit model IS evil, period. When the drive is not to provide for everyone, not to take care of everyone, and not to think of the good of ALL, but is instead money - that is evil. People die because others want more wealth. That is revolting.
Silvertaker 8 months ago
@Silvertaker Profit isn't evil. It's the reason you have money to buy things and a computer to type on. Name ONE thing that you like do or thing that you own that isn't in any part produced by someone who made/wanted to make a profit.
lockdown260 8 months ago
@lockdown260 the profit agenda is the only reason people are homeless, people starve, and war continues. a resource-based social economy is the only humanitarian way to go, but then the greedy would have to settle for a wildly comfortable life instead of a wildly excessive life - which is the drive of the profit agenda. personal wealth is what ruins humanity and makes monsters every day.
Silvertaker 7 months ago
@Silvertaker Skirting my question I see. Comfort is subjective. Some people are comfortable in ghettos. Others in trailers, other in 100k, 200k, 300k etc. houses.
Also, people starve b/c economic illiterates like you(no offense) think that planning economies and not gaining valuable skills to sell for profit actually works. Planned economies have been tried. It's called communism and socialism. It resulted in the deaths of millions. So judging by body count. Profit isn't evil.
lockdown260 7 months ago
@lockdown260 To answer your question, nothing I do or own -requires- the profit agenda to exist. Nothing. As for your comments on planned economies - I have to ask how you can make those comments and then call ME an economic illiterate? The failure of those systems had NOTHING to do with the reliability or viability of the systems and EVERYTHING to do with, once again, the greed of those at the top, those who were trusted to carry out the plan. The profit agenda is immoral. Period.
Silvertaker 7 months ago
@Silvertaker Nothing you say? How about the very computer you are typing on? Or your mode of transport? Or the food you eat? The Job you go to? The clothes on you back? The house you live in? Someone in there made money, you included.
And considering the fact that planed economies have ALWAYS IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD produced more poverty than free(ish) markets w/ profit motive, yes it's safe to say you know nothing of economics. Your plan makes poverty. Who's immoral again?
lockdown260 7 months ago
@lockdown260 I didnt say that profit didnt drive the creation of things I use or own or do. I said none of that REQUIRES the sick profit drive. Not one bit of it. And you're repeating yourself. Do some research. There is nothing evil about communism, or socialism. The fact is a TRUE communist or socialist state has never existed on this earth, due to the corruption and greed of those at the top. It is always corrupted, with all the wealth and resources going to the few.
Silvertaker 7 months ago
@Silvertaker "I said none of that REQUIRES the sick profit drive" That's a baseless assertion. No person has ever proven 1st world life to be possible w/o profit. If you know any proof please provide it. Also you've yet to provide proof profit is bad.
Also I call bull on you never been socialism nonsense. Ever heard of La Reunion ,Brook Farm,Harmony Society, to name a few? They failed just like the big countries did.
When an idea consistently fails a smart person moves on. You should too.
lockdown260 7 months ago
@lockdown260 Youve yet to point to a TRUE socially-driven, resource-based economic model. It has NEVER been truly tried, and has never happened in the history of the world. Simple fact is with our technology, and the resources available just NOW (not to mention in the future), ALL people could be fed, housed, and entertained at a first-world level, for the next 1300 years. (4000 years of sustainable green energy). That is simple fact. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it untrue.
Silvertaker 7 months ago
@Silvertaker "ALL people could be fed, housed, and entertained at a first-world level, for the next 1300 years. (4000 years of sustainable green energy). That is simple fact. " Ok. Please point to any peer reviewed study that proclaims that.
"Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it untrue." Don't like it? Who would dislike such news if it were true? My position is based on history and economics, not feelings.
lockdown260 7 months ago
@lockdown260 Check out the Venus Project. And do some more research. Because right now, you're just parroting the same nonsense the right-wing fanatics like to yammer when they are trying to protect the status quo. The status quo, by the way, that is destroying our environment, our culture, and our health at an exponentially increasing rate - all in the name of more and more money for themselves.
Silvertaker 7 months ago
@Silvertaker I have done my research. You're the one who is trying to ignore history & economics. You may call it nonsense but you fail to address any of the facts I present with anything other than a " I-don't-like our-system-AND-it's-bad-cause-I-said-so" argument. I repeat myself because that how people learn. PLANNED ECONOMIES FAIL ALWAYS. How many have to suffer and die b4 you guys get it?
Also I checked out the venus project. Good luck getting anyone to build that society w/o pay/profit.
lockdown260 7 months ago
@lockdown260 There is no need for pay or profit in a resource-based, technologically-driven economy. Products would not be constructed for planned obsolescence (forcing people to replace them at a cost), therefore less resources would be used and all could be provided for. All it takes is for people to let go of trash culture, let go of laziness and selfishness, and let go of shallow materialism. Period. I am not claiming it would be easy - it will probably take a huge disaster to wake us up.
Silvertaker 7 months ago
@Silvertaker "There is no need for pay or profit in a resource-based, technologically-driven economy." Yes b/c engineers don't have wants or desire therefor they won't mind using their hard-to-come-by abilities and resources for free.
"All it takes is for people to let go of trash culture, let go of laziness and selfishness, and let go of shallow materialism." So all it takes if for people to not be people. Cool. That worked so well in the past, just like ignoring how reality works.
lockdown260 7 months ago
@lockdown260 Because a comfortable existence for all people, in a world that is improving and in synergy with us, and us with it, where all the needs of all are met, including the needs of the engineers, constitutes "free"? I'm done, there's no point discussing this with someone whose mind is so rooted in all the things that hold us back.
Silvertaker 7 months ago
@Silvertaker The venus project has only produced films as far as I've seen and they don't explain how they will implement full automation or how resources will be attained from outside of their centers.
Ravengaurd6 6 months ago
@Ravengaurd6 They have produced films, but also have a technology center and working models for many of their ideas. I suggest you join - you seem like a very intelligent person, whose mind and ideals are in the right place - you seem to have a full grasp of the failures of our model of existence, as stated in your post below about capitalism - and why it is that we keep going in circles, degenerating instead of advancing (i.e. the elements of our human "nature" which keep us selfish)
Silvertaker 6 months ago
@Silvertaker What exactly are their working models? are they functioning cities populated by volunteers? And what of human "nature"? I know I cannot change other people and that people can only change themselves,but why and how should the project change people?
Ravengaurd6 6 months ago
@Silvertaker Capitalism has never existed either. the very first thing wrong is the currency system. Capitalism has existed because of the Governments sick desire to control. as of now all Governments have monoploies on Force and on printable currency. in light of that not only does democracy dade but Capitalism never comes to be. there's no such thing as a pure economy because the elements of certain practices give to certain tendencies and behaviors.
Ravengaurd6 6 months ago
@Silvertaker So I should hope the company I work for dose not make a profit? And then when I'm out of a job what should I do ask the government for help? I'm sorry but when a company is not making a profit that is a bad thing it means people will lose jobs.
Epica124 4 months ago
@Epica124 There is nothing wrong with profit in and of itself. It is the profit agenda that is sick, however. The drive to make MORE and MORE, far more than you would ever need or use to any end but waste. The companies don't stop at being happy about making a healthy profit - they will cut jobs, cut wages, all in the names of making more and more and more profit. This is the huge problem with the medical and insurance industries. They will literally let people die to make more money.
Silvertaker 4 months ago
@Silvertaker That's the whole point of starting a company up to make bigger profits to make the company better and open up in more places. If you are just fine with having a small company heck that is fine to. Other wants there companies to grow and get bigger so as to give more jobs to more people and make more new things and so on. With out profits big or small companies will close there doors.
Epica124 4 months ago
@Silvertaker And no they will not let people die to make money. That is the biggest lie I have ever heard.
Epica124 4 months ago
@Epica124 You really believe that? Look into the insurance industry. Read the stories of people who lost family members because they were denied the insurance they PAID for. Read the testimonies of the policy hitmen who quit the industry but whose jobs it used to be to find any way possible to deny coverage to people who paid them and needed it. You are eyes-closed, if you really think that the 1% who control 90% of the wealth won't let the bottom 99% die to get richer.
Silvertaker 4 months ago
you IDIOTS...ofcourse prime minister of Italy,sheiks and other ''important'' dicks come to U.S. for healt care becouse they have money to pay for it...but all the other sick people can only depend on god, since health system is here to make and not save lifes...Idia of social medicine is that you pay in found, and yes for someone else who is sick in that moment, but when you are sick someone else is paying for you...problem is when people hear world social they related with socialism
promars85 8 months ago
@promars85 If the government runs the social medicine then it is socialism. If a compnay runs the social medicine it is called private healthcare. All insurance companies run on the principal you promoted above. I have no problem with cooperative insurance companies. they should be allowed to compete. The only problem I see with the american system is that the government has taken over insurance companies through legistlation, making it impossible for free competition. Endorsing monopolies.
daobagua 8 months ago
i have no problem being part of a system that uses money and competition as incentives to make better things and produce better ideas, but it seems that these same incentives run the wrong way because the fact is it is cheaper to treat than cure.
aadeebindy 9 months ago
quite upsetting when you realize modern medicine this perceived force for good, is in reality a bunch of cons and frauds using gains and profits as their main incentive.
and we wonder why the U.S. is ranked in the 30's for Healthcare
while other minuscule nations who have almost half the medical innovations utilized in their countries do better
its because they have a devout sense of care for one another
something the U.S. government needs to show
Zanthios 9 months ago
@Zanthios As you've just said, they are minuscule nations. Here, we are a very big nation with a lot of health problems to begin with. The simple fact is, I will make something better and cheaper than the other guy (faster, I might add) when I have a reason other than helping a stranger. Sure, I would love to help you out, but why should I invest millions of dollars to do so when I won't get that back? The government sucks at making good things because it doesn't have to compete.
m1ndfr34k117 9 months ago
we have both free and private, free long wait private expensive.
lisalight55x 10 months ago
Stossel Rocks !
Moore Flops !
53dumey 10 months ago
Micheal Moore... how is that land lines reception at the same location? Last I checked, when driving down the freeway, my land line didn't work either.
bluefootedpig 11 months ago
henry ford? as an example of making things better? the guy was agains labor unions and supplied hitler during wwII.. great example...
sirbongalong 11 months ago
@sirbongalong that not releveant to the point they are trying to make.
mattynaynay 11 months ago
@mattynaynay talking about how free market and profit interest drive the healthcare market and then use a guy that sponsored a dictatorship and didnt approve of a free workforce market is really really relevant to the issue...
sirbongalong 11 months ago
ABC is completely missing the point. American socialists and supporters of universal healthcare don't think America's quality of service is bad. In fact if you are a rich ambassador or artist from a foreign nation sure, come to America, we have great healthcare. The problem is that the overwhelming majority of Americans can't afford it, and that is what Moore is arguing. Anyone who believes this is an instrument of corporate America whose only goal is to gain money. They don't care about you.
LucasKesslerFilms 11 months ago
@LucasKesslerFilms
stossell and many other blame the insurance companies for high prices, if ppl hadto payh out of their own pockets prices would fall
fuckoff187 11 months ago
@LucasKesslerFilms I would almost agree with you, but the average american spends about 3k per year on healthcare. Meanwhile, they spend 16k a year on a house, and 6k per year on cars, or 8k on entertainment. So can't afford it? maybe cause back on entertainment by 1/3 and you'll double the available money for healthcare.
As far as poor, you should look up friedman on healthcare when he spoke to the mayo clinic, room full of doctors.
bluefootedpig 11 months ago
@bluefootedpig Your facts may be true; however, healthcare should be provided to your dependents as well, so for a family of four, this 3k that you suggest would then turn into 12k. Boom. That's nearly the annual salary of a minimum wage worker. Even then, you still must pay in part for service and not everything will be covered. Plus, your fact probably excludes those who receive paid healthcare through their job.
LucasKesslerFilms 11 months ago
@LucasKesslerFilms It includes those that get health care through their work, hence it is lower than higher. And this is the average family. My apologizes for not wording to better communicate that information. But are you honestly saying that you think that people spend more on health care than entertainment?
There are also other ways, look up friedman on health care, he has two short answers on it that address how a free market would actually handle it.
bluefootedpig 10 months ago
@bluefootedpig Additionally, your facts also consider the conditions of upper middle class and wealthy people who will spend many thousands of dollars a year on things such as entertainment and cars. But socialized healthcare is not built to serve the ultra wealthy. It is there to protect the lives of the working class who deserve equality. The war against democratic socialism is unnecessary and uneducated. Consider circumstance, do more than examine bloated "facts".
LucasKesslerFilms 11 months ago
How can anyone use Dick Chaney as an example. He is a multi-millionaire. He gets the best medicine money can buy not mention he was the VP of the USA at the time of this report. So comparing him to the rest of society is ridiculous.
jrwilson98 11 months ago
It's not ridiculous at all, Jr. The care he enjoys now was neither technologically or financially possible just a few decades ago. The profit driven medical industry in the U.S. inspired advancements in treatment that made his current care possible. While the former VP of the US no doubt gets better coverage than most, the poorest here at home and around the world are also beneficiaries.
Sadly, you statement reveals your lack of respect for the life of a fellow human being.
desmionjohn 11 months ago
@desmionjohn No it does not! This was not a dig on Chaney in any way. My claim is Millionaires can afford better Doctors and better care. They can also afford better insurance. You and I are at the mercy of out Insurance company's. We get the care our Insurance company's are will to pay for not what we might need. Chaney has a new heart device that is better than the older pace makers, but they are more expensive. Your insurance company may not pay for that device, but they might pay for the
jrwilson98 11 months ago
It's not ridiculous at all, Jr. The argument is about the efficacy of our health care system. His current care was not technologically possible at any price just a few decades ago. The profit driven medical industry in the U.S. invested their monies leading to the advancements in treatment making his current care and quality of life possible. While the former VP of the US no doubt gets better coverage than most, the poorest here at home and around the world also benefit.
desmionjohn 11 months ago
if he wan't fedex he has to pay for it more!! but not everyone can afford fedex!! So what is more important you or the common good?
tinarett 11 months ago
in the uk its free and great and fast..........its tha best !!!!!!
i cant beleive that people have to pay to see a doctor and pay for meds
claire664 1 year ago
Moore is so pathetic.
rumco 1 year ago
Comment removed
BellaaMarlene 1 year ago
lol @hidden fedex marketing
myztic123 1 year ago
the more i watch this, the more i wish this fat fuck would get a heart attack and die in his own piss and shit.
tubebellator 1 year ago
Stossell say's health care is complicated....like U.S. can't do it. If Canada and Mexico can do it efficiently, the U.S. could too. It will happen eventually.
Andreas748 1 year ago
@Andreas748 - Canada doesn't do it efficiently.
Governments don't do anything efficiently. Private enterprise does things efficiently all the time, because if they don't they'll go out of business. But government CAN'T go out of business, they just take more of our money when they fail.
Doctor's waiting rooms aren't great, but compare them to the DMV. It's much more pleasant to go to a doctor's office or ER than it is the DMV, and that's factoring in the illness!
mpc91 1 year ago
@mpc91 ......The U.S. spends like 16% of GDP on healthcare. Canada...only 7%. And they cover everyone. I doubt they'd want to trade systems with us. Insurance companies are making record profits.....which is just money being syphoned out of the system by middlemen. Some great system we have.
Andreas748 1 year ago
@Andreas748 - I'm not saying the American system is perfect. But the problem is not that there's not enough government involvement, it's that there's too much government involvement already, and Obamacare will not reduce the costs, only increase them. To think that government involvement will take away middlemen is just naive.
The solution is increased competition, not increased regulation and government involvement. Remove the interstate restrictions, and enact tort reform.
mpc91 1 year ago
13th century? Yes because serfdom of the middle ages was capitalism. Why people actually listen to Michael Moore amazes me.
Jebusrulez 1 year ago 31
liberals love him.
hint0122 1 year ago
@Jebusrulez becuz hes right
guineapiggyman 8 months ago
@Jebusrulez Capitalism= Free market economy?
Are you claiming the market was not free?
Was it plan economy then, hahahah.
gulbirk 4 months ago
michael moore's ideas fail. he knows it too. he's a paid shill.
danogzilla 1 year ago
@danogzilla There's space for both private & public health care.
Intransitman 1 year ago
@Intransitman no there isn't. as soon as you get government involved the market is no longer honest, it's manipulated, and that throws off the natural order of the private economy.
danogzilla 1 year ago
@danogzilla Government can be bought too.
Intransitman 1 year ago
I love Moore's comment that the government used to be good at things, like defeat the NAZI'S! Yes that was good, but what an idiotic comment in the context of the conversation.
ahoov123 1 year ago
1984 people. It's happening.
sameer137 1 year ago
if you morons would actually educate yourselves it would make for a better conversation ... learn about free enterprise ppl ... it will blow your minds
holmes328 1 year ago 33
@holmes328
Business governed by the laws of supply and demand, not restrained by government interference, regulation or subsidy. also called free market.
AND? WHAT?
mynthon11 1 year ago
@holmes328
SAME THING LIKE IN PART 3/6 OF THIS SERIES...PEOPLE WAITING, "FREE" GASOLINE.... THERE IS NO "FREE" IN THIS WORLD MATE
mynthon11 1 year ago
@mynthon11
health savings account...Thats same kind of "system" we have in here...it works good
mynthon11 1 year ago