Michael Moore's Latest Target: Your HMO

Is everyone with their hand out not worth helping?

For the most part, yes.

If you are of sound mind and able body, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to 'hold your own' in this country at the very least.

I think that when most people look at their failings in life, there's usually only one person they can honestly point the finger at: themselves.

No, the Fed. Goverment will simply (and I'm simplifying here) subsidize and make the exsisting providers more affordable, their not eliminating anyone.

Anytime federal money gets involved, you can expect federal strings attached.

Make no mistake -- with nationalized/socialized/universal health care, you should expect all the compassion of the IRS and the efficiency of FEMA.

No, the Fed. Goverment will simply (and I'm simplifying here) subsidize and make the exsisting providers more affordable, their not eliminating anyone.

I see what you are saying and that is consistent with what mainstream politicians are calling for. I was responding, however, to Michael Moore's comments which seemed to imply that we need to get rid of insurance companies and let the government run the health care industry.

I see what you are saying and that is consistent with what mainstream politicians are calling for. I was responding, however, to Michael Moore's comments which seemed to imply that we need to get rid of insurance companies and let the government run the health care industry.

Oh, I see..

Anytime federal money gets involved, you can expect federal strings attached.

Make no mistake -- with nationalized/socialized/universal health care, you should expect all the compassion of the IRS and the efficiency of FEMA.

Well efficiency or lack thereof and the overall delivery system has been a major part of the existing problem, and will be a major area of focus.

I hope you've got some better sources than just a movie.

Matty - I work in insurance regulation. My agency (who shall remain nameless but is a state agency that regulates insurance in a state on the eastern sea coast probably in close proximity - or surrounding - the city in which I reside) has issued many orders against insurers who have improperly and intentionally denied claims. I will say it is not the common practice and does not occur with great regularity. It does, however, occur on both the large scale and small scale and either as an anomaly or through a systematic business plan.

What is common is for insurers to look for ways to deny coverage and interpret any gray area against the claimant. Most times it is simply not feasable for consumers to fight the denial of a $500 claim that falls into those gray coverage areas.

Well efficiency or lack thereof and the overall delivery system has been a major part of the existing problem, and will be a major area of focus.


I'd still take the inefficiencies of private industry over the inefficiencies of government any day.

I suppose we'll have to define our premise: I'm speaking of Moore's apparent position that gov't will completely take over, and there's NO private health care facilities period. If that's the case, then there's no one to turn to for grievances -- there is no competition. The beauty of the free market is, if someone isn't treating the consumer right, the consumer simply goes to somebody else for better service.

Can't do that when government controls everything.

I definitely agree Beem. Competition is seen as a bad thing, but it's really not so black and white like that

I'd still take the inefficiencies of private industry over the inefficiencies of government any day.

I suppose we'll have to define our premise: I'm speaking of Moore's apparent position that gov't will completely take over, and there's NO private health care facilities period. If that's the case, then there's no one to turn to for grievances -- there is no competition. The beauty of the free market is, if someone isn't treating the consumer right, the consumer simply goes to somebody else for better service.

Can't do that when government controls everything.

No, that's not correct, the government will not completely take over. They'll play a large role in ensuring that those without coverage will be through the national healthcare plan.

Those who are currently covered by their employer will most likely see very little if any difference in their plan. The changes will be gradual, and depending on the candidate, may take at least one full term to fully implement.

Matty - I work in insurance regulation. My agency (who shall remain nameless but is a state agency that regulates insurance in a state on the eastern sea coast probably in close proximity - or surrounding - the city in which I reside) has issued many orders against insurers who have improperly and intentionally denied claims. I will say it is not the common practice and does not occur with great regularity. It does, however, occur on both the large scale and small scale and either as an anomaly or through a systematic business plan.

What is common is for insurers to look for ways to deny coverage and interpret any gray area against the claimant. Most times it is simply not feasable for consumers to fight the denial of a $500 claim that falls into those gray coverage areas.

Seems like his source is a bit more legitimate than just a movie...