Michael Moore's Latest Target: Your HMO

I actually think it's sad that you don't seem to have much pity for those that are less fortunate, and you assume that people that are homeless are homeless because of personal choice, they're dumbasses, and don't give a shit.

Sad.

You might be surprised to find out how many homeless people are there by personal choice or because of personal choices. I would think that drugs and alcohol are responsible for about 75% of homeless cases. The remainder being largely mentally ill (you can't force people to stay in mental hospitals since the 1970's, which is oddly when homelessness emerged). There are very few people in this country who are sane, willing to work and who don't have a place to live. It's very rare. Think about it. You would have to lose your job, have no family, have no friends, have no church, and on and on and on.

You can feel pity for someone and understand that it's their own fault at the same time. The two are not really related.

MOore went off on CNN
The Raw Story | Michael Moore slams CNN, Wolf Blitzer on live TV (http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Michael_Moore_shames_CNN_Blitzer_on_0709.html)

Breitbart.tv » Michael Moore Mocks Indian Anchor’s Name During On-Air Tirade Against CNN (http://www.breitbart.tv/html/2823.html)

I can't watch the video but tell me if it is any good.

He's probably drinking again. He's a well known juicer.

You might be surprised to find out how many homeless people are there by personal choice or because of personal choices. I would think that drugs and alcohol are responsible for about 75% of homeless cases. The remainder being largely mentally ill (you can't force people to stay in mental hospitals since the 1970's, which is oddly when homelessness emerged). There are very few people in this country who are sane, willing to work and who don't have a place to live. It's very rare. Think about it. You would have to lose your job, have no family, have no friends, have no church, and on and on and on.

You can feel pity for someone and understand that it's their own fault at the same time. The two are not really related.

Regardless of how or why it happens, do they still not deserve a helping hand? I guess the prevailing opinion would be they don't, considering how we treat our sick, elderly, mentally ill, and homeless in this country.

Honestly I'm not sure what the ultimate answer should be. Should health care be run by the gov't only, or should it be run by private industry and the gov't, or a does private industry just need more oversight by the gov't?

I really don't know, all I know is the system needs fixing.
The federal goverment is already involved in the health care industry with expensive mandates that we have to pay for weather we need the coverage or not. A good example is mandated drug adiction coverage which I myself do not need but have to pay for every single month.

Regardless of how or why it happens, do they still not deserve a helping hand? I guess the prevailing opinion would be they don't, considering how we treat our sick, elderly, mentally ill, and homeless in this country.
I would say that most people are willing to give a helping hand to people willing to help themself. I have belong to several organizations which help in the comunity and I see so many people who are willing to receive help but are totaly unwilling to help themself. The group I belong to now has a very,very tough time finding people who are not just looking for a hand out rather than a helping hand.

Regardless of how or why it happens, do they still not deserve a helping hand? I guess the prevailing opinion would be they don't, considering how we treat our sick, elderly, mentally ill, and homeless in this country.

The point is that they have already gotten what they deserve. The question is, should we help them even though they don't deserve it? I'm inclined to answer yes, BTW.

Is there a post on this thread that summarizes "Sicko"? What reforms can be made without giving it over to government control?

I don't mean fortune as in luck but rather circumstance, opportunity, and environment. One of your assumptions is that everyone has a chance to succeed. I'm glad you got where you are by working hard but I bet you if you think for a moment you can name 3 crucial events or opportunities in your life you can attribute your success to. To say you're where you are today ALL because of your hard work would be disingenuous.

I mean, compare yourself to people from Sudan. How do you think your life stacks up against theirs? Are they poor because they didn't work hard or because they aren't smart? The world isn't black and white like you make it out to be. It's many shades of gray filled with spots and squiggly (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHoDcj6wwMw) lines.

I'm not trying to compare apples to oranges...so I apologize for not being specific, although I did already mention I am referring to American's only. I have never lived in another country, so I do not know what it takes to be successful there. However, even in those countries, if you follow my basic principles, you can be more successful than the person next you even in those countries. You are not doomed by circumstance.

Thought this might be relevant to the discussion.

Richard Carmona - Bush’s first Surgeon General.
C43uqebvycY

jsarno, while i feel I'm in the same boat as you, when it comes to hard work and basically over achieving, you fail to remember one thing. everyone cant be the chief. you need some Indians, also. that janitor making 12.00 an hour, we need him as much as the boss raking in six figures

Just remember...EVERYTHING you do has a consequence. You don't always know what it is. But when you make poor choices, then your opportunity for success becomes less. When you think negatively, your opportunity for success dramatically decreases. In fact, I would wager that anyone that believes they can't be successful is right. Negativity is a cancer. It's also something that a lot of people here keep spewing. All the "can't" comments are astounding, and they don't even realize it.
dmek, I never said we don't need him, I think you are assuming I think he is a "useless" person. He is not. He didn't have initiative, and didn't want to be something more. Those kinds of people become complacent. The majority of the country is that way, and it doesn't make them bad people, or dumbasses...it just means they don't aspire for more. That's their CHOICE. They could also die completely happy that way. More power to them. But I have a desire for more, and I will work to get it. I do not apoligize for being successful, nor should anyone begrudge me for it. Those that complain about "the rich" most of the time, are jealous that things didn't fall into their laps. Nothing comes to you, you HAVE to go get it.

ps- everyone is an Indian in some way...even CEO's report to board members. Even the general of the army has to report to the president. While I have been management for years, I have ALWAYS had a boss. It has to do with making wise decisions, being accountable for your actions and working hard enough to reach for the brass ring.
Our society has become accepting of failure. A lot of comments here prove it. I'm not accepting of it. I am successful, but I will be a lot more successful because I will never quit.