Bluegrassrivals

Has anyone seen this yet? I've heard that it's along the same lines as the other stuff Moore has done, but does anyone know exactly what it's about?

Who plans on seeing it?

hmm i havent heard anything about it...but...if it is made by michael moore then i will more than likely see it!

ComfortEagle Wrote:Has anyone seen this yet? I've heard that it's along the same lines as the other stuff Moore has done, but does anyone know exactly what it's about?

Who plans on seeing it?

It's about the health care/Insurance industry.

Here's the Trailer:

Which...the movie IMO is going to be complete BS.

It is about having a National Health Care Program. While this would be a good idea, it would not work and the health care industry as a whole would suffer.

Michael Moore is Crazy and so are we, buy giving him Money when we watch his movies.
Lets all just buy some goats or something.

Have yet to see a movie. Not that I won't view another (although idiotic) view, I just don't want to give him more money.

Beef Wrote:Which...the movie IMO is going to be complete BS.

It is about having a National Health Care Program. While this would be a good idea, it would not work and the health care industry as a whole would suffer.

Why would this not work Beef?

Beef Wrote:Which...the movie IMO is going to be complete BS.

It is about having a National Health Care Program. While this would be a good idea, it would not work and the health care industry as a whole would suffer.

It works for Canada, why not us?

I will probably watch it.

I can't wait to see it,but it's not @ the movies in my area.I've been told it will be soon.Looking forwad to it.

I hate Michael Moore..He will not be getting my money! If he is so concerned with all of the problems wrong with this country, then take ALL of the money that he makes off of his films and give it to whomever! He kill me..!

PLAYBOY5 Wrote:I hate Michael Moore..He will not be getting my money! If he is so concerned with all of the problems wrong with this country, then take ALL of the money that he makes off of his films and give it to whomever! He kill me..!

I bet you would feel different if he did something to help you or your family.

Here are some reviews:

"It's as uplifting and heart-rending a thing as you will see at the movies all year. And it speaks of Moore's enduring faith -- his angry, nettled, exasperated belief that 'despite all our differences, we sink or swim together.' " -- Amy Biancolli, Houston Chronicle

"The weight of evidence Moore marshals for taking the profit motive out of medicine is overwhelming. In a summer of dumb, shameless drivel, Moore delivers a movie of robust mind and heart. You'll laugh till it hurts." -- Peter Travers, Rolling Stone

"'Sicko' is a beyond brilliant, nonpartisan expose' on American politics that should be mandatory for every student in America. Some rich person -- like maybe Angelina Jolie -- should sponsor a program where DVDs are sent to families or free screenings are held at local churches." -- Caroline Kepnes, E!

I bet you i wouldn't! And I KNEW YOU WOULD QUOTE ME..You always do..So how is this..I hate everything that you like..Is that any better!

DevilsWin Wrote:Why would this not work Beef?

One of the main reasons that I have heard is pharmaceutical research that is done in the US. There are billions of dollars (80+ percent of world money in this area) spent by private companies here trying to produce new products to help the sick, and with this, they have the ability to sell the products and make a profit (what this country is about). If you were to implement a national health care system, there would be a lot less invested in these areas. Companies would have no incentive to discover new drugs when they know that they can only sell these drugs in America for little if any profit after spending billions.

Would it be a good thing? Yes, it would help a lot of people, but when you look into the future, it would hurt because companies would drastically reduce their R&D, therefore, we would have less drugs in the future to help people with new problems and there along with not finding cures to problems that we currently have.

And is it REALLY free? There would be an increase in taxes for all to cover this program, and in the end, the upper class would be covering the lower class. There should be help from class to class, but where are people guaranteed health care? They are not in the US Constitution and the middle and upper class already cover the costs of all other government functions. There is not one government agency that runs efficiently, so what makes one think that this can? Does Social Security seem to be working correctly?

As of now, all Americans can receive emergency health care. If it were free, people would be less flexible with where they go and the treatments they receive. Not only this, individuals would go to the doctor more when they don't need to, in effect, raising the money spent on health care way above what it is now.

Lastly, why should healthy people who take care of themselves and don't need the doctor as much, pay for those who destroy their body -- smoking, drugs, over eating, etc.?

It just doesn't seem like the best way to go IMO.

Very well put Beef! Very well put my friend!

PLAYBOY5 Wrote:I bet you i wouldn't! And I KNEW YOU WOULD QUOTE ME..You always do..So how is this..I hate everything that you like..Is that any better!

:lmao:

Beef Wrote:One of the main reasons that I have heard is pharmaceutical research that is done in the US. There are billions of dollars (80+ percent of world money in this area) spent by private companies here trying to produce new products to help the sick, and with this, they have the ability to sell the products and make a profit (what this country is about). If you were to implement a national health care system, there would be a lot less invested in these areas. Companies would have no incentive to discover new drugs when they know that they can only sell these drugs in America for little if any profit after spending billions.

Would it be a good thing? Yes, it would help a lot of people, but when you look into the future, it would hurt because companies would drastically reduce their R&D, therefore, we would have less drugs in the future to help people with new problems and there along with not finding cures to problems that we currently have.

And is it REALLY free? There would be an increase in taxes for all to cover this program, and in the end, the upper class would be covering the lower class. There should be help from class to class, but where are people guaranteed health care? They are not in the US Constitution and the middle and upper class already cover the costs of all other government functions. There is not one government agency that runs efficiently, so what makes one think that this can? Does Social Security seem to be working correctly?

As of now, all Americans can receive emergency health care. If it were free, people would be less flexible with where they go and the treatments they receive. Not only this, individuals would go to the doctor more when they don't need to, in effect, raising the money spent on health care way above what it is now.

Lastly, why should healthy people who take care of themselves and don't need the doctor as much, pay for those who destroy their body -- smoking, drugs, over eating, etc.?

It just doesn't seem like the best way to go IMO.

Just curious Beef.... Where did you get all of these "facts".

Here's what happens when saving a health insurance company money becomes more important than providing health coverage for someone paying into Humana Health Insurance.

This guy is alive today only because Michael Moore decided to help him in his fight to recieve a pancreas transplant.

This piece was done during the Clinton Administration and after viewing this you can no longer say that Michael Moore is a partisan propagandist.

See for yourself it's just a 10 minute clip.

DevilsWin Wrote:Here's what happens when saving a health insurance company money becomes more important than providing health coverage for someone paying into Humana Health Insurance.

I think by not having it we are more than saving the health insurance companies some money, we are actually saving the health insurance (and all the jobs they provide)

And I believe that the only fact I reported is that the US has 80% of the investment into research and I heard that on TV one day. The fact that they would reduce this is just common economics.

I think Beef would like to save 10 minutes of his life by not watching that junk that he puts out! Like Beef said, it is common economics!

Afraid you might learn something? Keep living in the bubble boys and we'll all pass you by. So long.

Speaking for myself, I wish you all would pass us by and get out! You can take you, your little gasless lawnmower engine of a car that looks like a hat on wheels, your tasteless organic whatever it is that you feed yourselves/don't kill animals and please no guns, save a tree/smoke more weed sticker, don't kill the man who murdered my family and pissed on them because they are humans just like me attitude and PLEASE LEAVE US STUBBORN ASS HOLLER RAT HILLBILLIES ALONE! THIS IS EASTERN KENTUCKY PAL...IT IS THE WAY IT IS AND WILL BE LIKE THIS FOR ETERNITY!

And Myself..i Like It Just Like It Is!

Charles Darwin wrote a book one time called " The Origin Of Species". This is where the theory of evolution was first documented for study. In that study Darwin found that what allowed some species to flourish was their ability to adapt to their environment. It is also in this book where the phrase "Survival of the Fittest" was born.
If you refuse to adapt you will perish.

Martin Luther King Jr once said,
"We should all learn to live together as brothers or we shall perish as fools."


Albert Einstein said,
"Change is always met with violent anger from mediocre minds."

Robert Hunter said,
"The Wheel is spinning and it can't slow down, you cant let go and you can't hold on. You can't go back and you can't stand still. If the Thunder don't get you then the lightning will.



Are you going to survive Playboy?

DevilsWin Wrote:Keep living in the bubble boys and we'll all pass you by. So long.

What bubble am I living it? By not believing that National Health Care would be a good thing for our country? I agree that humans need to adapt, but this is not needed. Isn't it "Survival of the fittest?"

PLAYBOY5 Wrote:PLEASE LEAVE US STUBBORN ASS HOLLER RAT HILLBILLIES ALONE! THIS IS EASTERN KENTUCKY PAL...IT IS THE WAY IT IS AND WILL BE LIKE THIS FOR ETERNITY!

I don't agree with Playboy here.

My daughter watched it but she didn't pay for it thank goodness. She watched it on one of those illegal DVD's that people sell that have been filmed from inside the theater. She said it was a boring movie and she didn't even finish it!

bball fan Wrote:My daughter watched it but she didn't pay for it thank goodness. She watched it on one of those illegal DVD's that people sell that have been filmed from inside the theater. She said it was a boring movie and she didn't even finish it!

Does your daughter have a health plan that she pays into?

Beef Wrote:One of the main reasons that I have heard is pharmaceutical research that is done in the US. There are billions of dollars (80+ percent of world money in this area) spent by private companies here trying to produce new products to help the sick, and with this, they have the ability to sell the products and make a profit (what this country is about). If you were to implement a national health care system, there would be a lot less invested in these areas. Companies would have no incentive to discover new drugs when they know that they can only sell these drugs in America for little if any profit after spending billions.

Would it be a good thing? Yes, it would help a lot of people, but when you look into the future, it would hurt because companies would drastically reduce their R&D, therefore, we would have less drugs in the future to help people with new problems and there along with not finding cures to problems that we currently have.

And is it REALLY free? There would be an increase in taxes for all to cover this program, and in the end, the upper class would be covering the lower class. There should be help from class to class, but where are people guaranteed health care? They are not in the US Constitution and the middle and upper class already cover the costs of all other government functions. There is not one government agency that runs efficiently, so what makes one think that this can? Does Social Security seem to be working correctly?

As of now, all Americans can receive emergency health care. If it were free, people would be less flexible with where they go and the treatments they receive. Not only this, individuals would go to the doctor more when they don't need to, in effect, raising the money spent on health care way above what it is now.

Lastly, why should healthy people who take care of themselves and don't need the doctor as much, pay for those who destroy their body -- smoking, drugs, over eating, etc.?

It just doesn't seem like the best way to go IMO.

Preach on, brother! :thumpsup: