View Full Version : CNN: Reality Check "Sicko"
Mitch
01-06-2008, 08:01 PM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JpKoN40K7mA
What do you think? Do you agree with the CNN Network or Michael Moore?
Locke
01-06-2008, 11:56 PM
Michael Moore was initially interesting, but I grew disenchanted with him, as he was no better than CNN in answering the challenges issued.
Both parties circumvented almost all of the arguments cited against them by replacing them with the concensus benefits of privatized/socialized healthcare.
I think the crowning CNN stat was "...15-20% of citizens use a healthcare system outside of the public one...", disregarding the fact that only 15-20% of people in most countries are able to afford a service better than the one already offered.
Also a lot of straw man arguments.
eharvester
01-12-2008, 06:50 PM
lol. Michael Moore was correct in that we have corporate medicine, but he was WRONG in his prescription for America. We don't need socialized healthcare, what we need is to free the doctors and have a free market system again.
Mitch
01-12-2008, 06:52 PM
eharvester: Where in the world is there a free market and private health care system that is successful?? Cuba, communist, best health care. Canada, mixed, decent health care. US, capitalist, horrible health care.
Hmm...
eharvester
01-12-2008, 06:59 PM
eharvester: Where in the world is there a free market and private health care system that is successful?? Cuba, communist, best health care. Canada, mixed, decent health care. US, capitalist, horrible health care.
Hmm...
Free market care is pretty much extinct, America used to have it in the early 20th and 19th century. It was replaced with corporate medicine.
That document youre citing leaves it to Cuba to tell them their statistics, I think I'd take that information with a grain of salt lol
Cattraknoff
01-12-2008, 07:07 PM
Free market care is pretty much extinct, America used to have it in the early 20th and 19th century. It was replaced with corporate medicine.
That document youre citing leaves it to Cuba to tell them their statistics, I think I'd take that information with a grain of salt lol
As opposed to your completely unbiased corporate-controlled reports and opinions? Unlike your just, righteous media outlets, right?
Locke
01-12-2008, 10:52 PM
Free market care is pretty much extinct, America used to have it in the early 20th and 19th century. It was replaced with corporate medicine.
What virtues, do pray tell, does "free market" medicine have that "corporate medicine" does not possess?
(ingest this post with a pill of Sardonix, marketed exclusively bu USDCORP.)
I assume you have a pin-up of Milton Friedman in scant habit on your bedroom wall?
ShadyPolitics
01-19-2008, 06:07 PM
The truth is that people don't want an socialized economy because they feel it a move toward stripping them of their rights. But, we need to realize that with both socialism and free market, our rights are being stripped. We have people running around all anti-socialism, but they don't understand that capitalism doesn't put power into the hands of the common citizen ethier, but into the hands of the big cooperations. So now we have cooperations that are out simply to make profit, flopping around with the health of American citizens.
The cooperations don't care about the common people, but merely profit. So now we have cooperations controlling the White House, because cooperations control the economy. In fact, our central bank, the Federal Reserve is a cooperation. And, its really amusing how the Federal Reserve operate. The Federal Reserve prints the dollar as loans to the United States Government, but this money they print has interest attached to it. This means that the money the United State Government borrow from the Federal Reserve has to be paid back with interest. But, the interest needed to pay back the Federal Reserve doesn't exist because it hasn't been printed yet. Which means, its impossible to pay off the debt without them printing more money for you to borrow (with interest rates attached to those too). Thats what happen when you let a cooperation control the flow of money.
Cattraknoff
01-20-2008, 01:14 AM
The truth is that people don't want an socialized economy because they feel it a move toward stripping them of their rights. But, we need to realize that with both socialism and free market, our rights are being stripped. We have people running around all anti-socialism, but they don't understand that capitalism doesn't put power into the hands of the common citizen ethier, but into the hands of the big cooperations. So now we have cooperations that are out simply to make profit, flopping around with the health of American citizens.
The cooperations don't care about the common people, but merely profit. So now we have cooperations controlling the White House, because cooperations control the economy. In fact, our central bank, the Federal Reserve is a cooperation. And, its really amusing how the Federal Reserve operate. The Federal Reserve prints the dollar as loans to the United States Government, but this money they print has interest attached to it. This means that the money the United State Government borrow from the Federal Reserve has to be paid back with interest. But, the interest needed to pay back the Federal Reserve doesn't exist because it hasn't been printed yet. Which means, its impossible to pay off the debt without them printing more money for you to borrow (with interest rates attached to those too). Thats what happen when you let a cooperation control the flow of money.
That's what happens when your "leaders" are imbeciles enough to implement such a system. Or corrupt enough; Either way the United States has been a slave nation for a very long time now. The people are just too blind to realize it.
Locke
01-20-2008, 05:30 AM
That's what happens when your "leaders" are imbeciles enough to implement such a system. Or corrupt enough; Either way the United States has been a slave nation for a very long time now. The people are just too blind to realize it.
Have they ever not been so, in one way or another? I cannot recall an era in with they were not.
Cattraknoff
01-20-2008, 04:12 PM
Have they ever not been so, in one way or another? I cannot recall an era in with they were not.
No, probably not. There were a few that came close (IE: Gaius Julius Caesar, although his corruption levels rose towards the end, and he was assassinated). But that doesn't mean we can't all hold out hope that something changes. I mean, we've had several millennia of idiots and fools, so a change is long overdue.
unknowngiver
03-24-2008, 08:35 PM
i followed that "debate"
sunjay gupta was right about how in canada the wait time is so long that free health care doesn't matter, since Ive been to canadian hospitals Alot of the times...and the minimum time i spent there was 3 hours!!
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.