1. I wrote something similar about this recently: http://pistolette.blogspot.com/2007/06/new-orleans-is-no-place-for-sick-only.html

I haven't seen the movie yet, but there probably isn't much he could say that isn't true. I'm not sure putting the government in charge is the best idea, but giving the insurance and pharmaceutical corporations some reform would be a good start. When 80 year-old republicans are crossing the borders to get cheaper drugs there is clearly a problem no matter what your political affiliation is.

Posted at 10:29AM on Jul 5th 2007 by Mitraillette

2. I don't think yours or Moore's point is valid. If you actually have some form of insurance, and can pay the deductible, it's unlikely you'll be denied care. You're far, far more likely to be denied care by bureaucrats in France, Canada, etc.

Healthcare costs are increasing everywhere, and there are scarce resources available. Consequently, everyone rations care. In Canada, this means that you'll often wait months for a simple MRI scan -- a delay which could easily result in your death (months matter when it comes to detecting and treating cancer). In the US, you'll get that scan the next day.

Moreover, there is the matter of patient satisfaction. The US is first in patient satisfaction with care received, which makes sense when you consider the waiting lists, the underpaid doctors, and the underfinanced healthcare facilities prevalent in nations with socialized medicine. The internet is full of horror stories resulting from socialized care.

You've got to consider that these issues involve trade-offs. Socialized medicine takes better care of the uninsured, but you're probably not better off under such a system if you already have insurance.

Posted at 12:27PM on Jul 5th 2007 by Owen Courrèges

3. I appreciate your point of view, Owen, but you seem a bit naive. We have been socialized to believe that socialized medicine is a bad idea, through propaganda generated by the folks who are making obscene amounts of money off of our health woes.

If the internet is full of horror stories about socialized care, it's also full of horror stories about insured people who got screwed by the people who are supposedly looking out for their health. Michael Moore put an ad on the internet looking for such stories, and received over 25,000 responses in a week. This doesn't include the millions of uninsured Americans who have no way to get decent health care, which is a crime in a country this rich.

In Canada, you may have to wait for an MRI, but you are guaranteed to get one if it's medically necessary. In the US, that's often not the case. Insurance companies regularly deny these tests to save themselves money, and people literally die fighting the system.

And if our health-care system is so great, why are so many Americans so unhealthy? Because health care costs so darn much, even when you're insured, people often wait too long to get the care they need. I'm not completely sold on socialized medicine, but we certainly deserve better.

Posted at 12:43PM on Jul 5th 2007 by Amanda

4. I understand that there are horror stories on both sides. That's my point -- both the existing American system and socialized medicine have considerable downsides. Moore ignores this. If you put ads on the internet for horror stories related to socialized medicine, I'm sure you'd get an avalanche of responses as well.

Moreover, delayed treatment is often no better than no treatment at all. If I find out from an MRI that I had a tumor that was probably operable two months ago when I got on the waiting list, but now the tumor is inoperable, it's little consolation that I had the right to a useless MRI. Most cancers require early detection and prompt treatment, which is often denied under socialized systems.

Furthermore, many systems of socialized medicine do exactly what American insurance companies do -- deny coverage to save money (i.e. rationing). Canada in particular has de-listed numerous procedures, including PSA tests for prostate cancer. The NHS in Britain recently denied coverage for a drug designed to treat kidney cancer in patients that don't respond to interferon -- and there are no other alternatives.

They also pay doctors far less than they're worth, and make up for the market distortion is causes by recruiting medical professionals from poorer nations (this is also done in the US, but not to the same degree).

I'm of the opinion that people should be responsible for getting their own insurance, although I concur that the current system is flawed. The government regulates health insurance to an extreme degree, basically forcing everyone into set packages and destroying market mechanisms that would ration care in the most efficient way possible. Moreover, the government controls at least half of the money going into healthcare already, which manages very poorly. The result is increased costs and too much overhead to manage the mess. We were better off before the bureacracy.

Socialized medicine would be one way of "solving" the mess of our quasi-public system, but I think the resulting problems would be worse. Currently, at least, the quality of the care we receive is top notch. We don't have to wait months to see a doctor or get an MRI, and when we do see our doctor it generally won't be some guy with dubious credentials imported from Saudi Arabia.

Posted at 6:40PM on Jul 6th 2007 by Owen Courrèges