Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Michael Moore's New Film Leaked To BitTorrent

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the blame-canada dept.

Movies 1088

Jared writes "Michael Moore was afraid the Feds might sieze his new documentary Sicko, a scathing indictment of the US health-care system, because part of it was filmed in Cuba despite the US embargo. So he stashed a copy of the film in Canada just to be safe. He might as well not have bothered — the film has shown up on BitTorrent and P2P networks everywhere. So it's safe now."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


yet another... (0, Flamebait)

Bizzeh (851225) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547477)

...set of lies and twisted "truths" from this nutjob, who wouldnt know the actual truth if it came up and bit him.

Re:yet another... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547493)

slashdot 5 days behind on another story

Re:yet another... (4, Funny)

dattaway (3088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547533)

...set of lies and twisted "truths" from this nutjob, who wouldnt know the actual truth if it came up and bit him.

Because we all know the President Bush tells the truth and would never mislead us.

Re:yet another... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547585)

How simple minded do you have to be to assume that hating Michael Moore equals loving Bush?

Re:yet another... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547861)

As simple minded as an United States citizen. Thank you.

Re:yet another... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547695)

Because we all know the President Bush tells the truth and would never mislead us.

The fact that Bush has often misled the american people does not prove that Michael Moore is telling the truth.

Re:yet another... (5, Insightful)

feepness (543479) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547759)

Because we all know the President Bush tells the truth and would never mislead us.

Because when someone disagrees with a liar they are automatically telling the truth.

For example, I too think Bush is a liar. Also, your hair is on fire.

Bush, Rush, Coulter etc. vs Clinton, Moore, Franken, etc... it's the circus part of the bread and circus formula. Their goal is to really change very little but get you all worked up about it in the process.

Re:yet another... (4, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547787)

"Because we all know the President Bush tells the truth and would never mislead us."

Right, so piling on more mistruths is totally justified. I feel full of insight, now.

Re:yet another... (5, Funny)

LarsWestergren (9033) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547713)

...set of lies and twisted "truths" from this nutjob, who wouldnt know the actual truth if it came up and bit him.

I kind of liked The Onion's take on it [theonion.com]:

Half Of Nation Outraged At New, Not-Yet-Released Michael Moore Film
  "This film is absolutely tasteless and misguided, and I can't believe theaters are even showing it," said GOP presidential candidate Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), who, along with the rest of the nation, has not yet seen the film.

Uh Oh... (3, Insightful)

shirai (42309) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547495)

Whether you like him or not, believe what he says or not, you have to agree that Michael Moore is influential.

If you are for P2P, I'm not sure if this is the guy you would want on the other side of the debate.

Re:Uh Oh... (5, Informative)

Scoria (264473) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547515)

Moore isn't on the other side of the P2P debate. He has stated several times that he would rather someone pirate his work than not see it at all. The studios, on the other hand, might be totally different animals!

Re:Uh Oh... (1, Informative)

shirai (42309) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547779)

Thanks for the clarification.

I can't believe my original post got moderated a troll though. Especially since I never said he was on the other side of P2P at all. Only that one wouldn't want him on the other side.

The suggestion was that putting an unreleased film of his on P2P might not make him amenable to be on the P2P side of things. Since I wasn't sure where he stood now, I tried to make the original post neutral as to his current position.

Anyways, Ouch.

Re:Uh Oh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547803)

So in other words, he's on the same side as microsoft?

Re:Uh Oh... (4, Insightful)

stox (131684) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547531)

He achieves the top objectives of a film maker, to get the audience to think about the topic and discuss it. Whether it is right or wrong is optional.

Re:Uh Oh... (2, Interesting)

tinkertim (918832) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547567)

Whether you like him or not, believe what he says or not, you have to agree that Michael Moore > is influential.

If you are for P2P, I'm not sure if this is the guy you would want on the other side of the

I can be certain that he needs his films to make enough money to fund making more films. I'm sure he also wants to eat, I'm sure enough pepople will purchase this movie as a symbolic gesture that he doesn't get too upset.

If he got upset prior to actually knowing if this really hurt his wallet, well, I think he'd be defying the very sense of logic that makes him so appealing to many people.

I would never see his movies otherwise, I refuse to buy them in the store because I don't like the license and restrictions that come with them. So I have to watch a copy that someone else obtained. I'm not picky on how they obtained it :) I feel me buying one is more hurt than help, supporting him isn't as important to me as not buying crap I can't share.

Re:Uh Oh... (1)

unlametheweak (1102159) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547663)

If Michael Moore was more objective and used less propaganda, he would probably be a lot more relevant.

I remember scene in Bowling for Columbine when he stated people in Toronto don't lock their doors. This is an exaggeration to put it mildly.

He has some interesting ideas, too bad I can't take them seriously because he just props up his own biases. Yes I will probably end up (eventually) watching his movie, but more for the reasons I would watch Plan 9 from Outer Space, than I would for a purely educational experience.

"Real men don't back up..." (5, Funny)

dn15 (735502) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547499)

To paraphrase a certain someone.... "Real men don't stash copies of their possibly illegal movies in other countries. They leak them to BitTorrent and let the world mirror them." -Michael Moore

Clearly the US Government... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547501)

...didn't want anyone to see how those cigars were rolled.

Slightly off topic, but Michal Moore... (0, Flamebait)

Corpuscavernosa (996139) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547507)

... but I hope MM has sufficient healthcare to take care of his embarrassing gastrointestional issues.

Family guy clip [youtube.com]

About that Cuban healthcare... (1, Informative)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547511)

http://www.therealcuba.com/Page10.htm [therealcuba.com] Because it's so damn good. Can't wait to have it provided to me when I'm older.

Michael Moore, you're such a fucking blowhard!

It's pointless (0, Troll)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547555)

Michael Moore is a businessman catering to a niche market of rabid idelogues. Anyone who thinks he's anything beyond that is a bloody fool.

All his oh so controversial statements are just PR and advertising for his products. The political wonks go out and buy up his product and run home to masturbate endlessly to it.

And to be fair, same deal with Ann Coulter. Anyone who wastes a single moment arguing against her is wasting time.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (4, Informative)

cgenman (325138) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547561)

How about this one? [canadian-healthcare.org] Universal coverage for 1/2 of what we're paying.

Canada not so nice (4, Informative)

r00t (33219) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547587)

Need a fancy medical scan? (MRI, PET, etc.)

Depending on the political power your region of the country holds, you may be out of luck. It's not the market (number of sick people) which determines where these devices are installed. It's pure politics, and the resulting distribution is not even remotely fair.

That's not really an improvement.

That's just scaremongering (2, Informative)

Rix (54095) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547807)

Health care is administered by the provinces, so the number of MRI or PET machines put into service is a local decision. People who need them get them.

Re:That's just scaremongering (2, Informative)

Corbets (169101) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547851)

Not true. I've spoken with a number of Canadians who have had to travel to the US or elsewhere to get an MRI, because the only other option was to wait 6 months.

Frankly, I'd rather pay a large chunk of my salary than have to wait half a year for medical services.

Re:That's just scaremongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547907)

So at least they have an option to avoid the waiting list. In the documentary we see insured people who are denieded necessary scans and MRI's on the false ground that its not medicaly indicated.

I guess those people rather put up with a waiting period then no scan at all.

You also seem to glance over the fact that this kind of problem gets noted and discussed and afterward it gets fixed by more money, doctors, equipment, etc. Its the way most democracies fix their healtcare system and keep it affordable...

Re:That's just scaremongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547917)

and who decides who needs what?

that's right, the same fucked up decision makers that are all over the planet.

they're called people.

oh wait, were you going to tell us how canadian politicians and doctors have found a way NOT TO FUCK IT UP, unlike the rest of the inhabited world?

right right.

Re:Canada not so nice (1)

Dasher42 (514179) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547897)

Sorry, but really I say screw the fancy, expensive medicine, from personal experience. I would like to not have spent my teenage years without basic health care I needed. I'm covered now at a good job, but I haven't forgotten the setback that was.

I see rich people kvetch about keeping the most expensive health care system the way it is, when poor people could very well use the preventative, holistic, affordable medicine they practice in many places - like Cuba. We have kids dying for the lack of basic dental procedures [washingtonpost.com] - come on!

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547605)

I'm willing to bet we would be paying half the current amount for our health care too had it not be for all the frivolous litigation.

It's not are medical industry that has problems, it's our legal system. We desperately need tort reform!

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1)

humina (603463) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547671)

Considering you have to sue to get good treatment it sounds more like a chicken and egg problem.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1)

ubernostrum (219442) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547771)

I'm willing to bet we would be paying half the current amount for our health care too had it not be for all the frivolous litigation.

Amusing statistic: the size of the average malpractice award in the United States has grown pretty steadily at between one and four percent each year for the past fifteen years or so. In the same period, the average premium for malpractice insurance has often grown by double-digit percentages (in some cases as high as 25 percent in a single year). Even more amusing: malpractice premiums vary on a state-by-state basis, but tort-reform laws and malpractice damage caps in several states have had little to no effect on the rate at which premiums rise in those states.

Somebody's making a lot of money, and for once it isn't the lawyers; over the same periods that premiums have risen, the property and casualty firms which insure doctors have been reporting massive profit increases.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547895)

Interesting, but the SIZE of the average malpractice award is only HALF the story.
The other half is the number per year.

While I am quite aware that so-called "tort reform" is just another way to fuck over the little guy, it doesn't help to have half-assed arguments against it. Please add more ass next time.

Actually we'd be paying 0.46% less. (2, Informative)

Tatarize (682683) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547813)

0.46% is litigation [healthaffairs.org]

The cost of defending U.S. malpractice claims is estimated at $6.5 billion in 2001, only 0.46 percent of total health spending. The two most important reasons for higher U.S. spending appear to be higher incomes and higher medical care prices.

The medical insurance companies are making lots and lots of money, and that's not because they are giving services for the dollars they are taking in.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1)

really? (199452) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547791)

You obviously don't see the same news I see here in Beautiful British Columbia. God help you if you have anything but a life-threatening problem. I seem to be lucky, and have had most of my ailments looked at and treated in less than two years. Others have not been so lucky.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547591)

Well if you compare it to The Real Jamaica or The Real Bolivia then you have my points.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547721)

The thing about Cuban healthcare is that despite being crappy, it's free/cheap.

The point of going to cuba was to go to the US base in Guantanamo Bay, where hundreds of inmates who were wrongly captured recieve better healthcare than the 9/11 first responders and workers who worked at Ground Zero, not to highlight how good Cuban health care was.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547727)

I'm glad you hate people who try and stand up for the rights of human beings and general goodwill and decency. I suspect you would have nailed Jesus to the cross, personally.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (4, Informative)

forgotten_my_nick (802929) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547733)

Actually if you watched the movie, no wait if you even watched the promo's you would know he didn't go to Cuba to show how great Castro medical centers were. He went there as he heard that suspected terrorists got free and better health care then most Americans and tried to get to Gitmo to get health care.

I also find it funny that a lot of posts on /. pointing out anything positive on the movie get down rated, while those calling Moore fat seem to be get positive ratings.

Sure make fun of the guy. It is easier to ignore the actual message that the US private Healthcare system is a total mess.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (3, Informative)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547837)

Actually if you watched the movie, no wait if you even watched the promo's you would know he didn't go to Cuba to show how great Castro medical centers were. He went there as he heard that suspected terrorists got free and better health care then most Americans and tried to get to Gitmo to get health care

What does that mean though? If the US government didn't give free and good healthcare to people detained indefinitely at gitmo, the public would complain. Quite rightly in my opinion. Part of the vast death rate of Russian soldiers captured by the Germans (and vice versa) in WWII was caused by denying them healthcare. And the cost of providing healthcare to detainees is probably negligable anyway if you look at it as a percentage of the vast cost of keeping gitmo open.

Like everything else he does it's stunt designed to show the irony of the situation. But it only does that until you start to think about what would happen if things were the reverse of what they are. And then it doesn't seem so ironic anymore.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547843)

Yes. That was 1989. Obviously they found it inadequate for its needs, and the closed it down.

Yeah, it's quite likely that Cuba isn't the communist paradise that they claim, but anecdotal evidence isn't proof.

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (1)

qwijibrumm (559350) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547889)

You must have never worked in a legal environment, or a healthcare environment. You can see photos like those of the patients with botched surgery, and almost (albeit not quite) as bad of hospital conditions in any med-mal attorneys office.

I imagine Cuba's medical system is not the greatest in the world. But I'd be willing to bet that it is one of the best in the third-world, for those who have no money.

The hospitals for foreigners are better. Great, so I hear, but they cost money. Is that fair to the Cuban people? Foreigners get good cheap medical care, and locals get garbage. No, but don't get me wrong, my intention is not to defend Castro. I am simply making a point

Re:About that Cuban healthcare... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547913)

You fuck shit, you would be in the same situation if they embargoed your country for as long as they did with Cuba. Go bomb Iraq instead of writing bullshits on /.

Those evil cubans! (4, Insightful)

Goalie_Ca (584234) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547513)

Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind the bans on cuba. There are much nastier places that people are allowed to deal with. I always get a kick living in vancouver because anywhere there might be american tourists, there is usually a big sign saying "cuban cigars".

Re:Those evil cubans! (1)

MadUndergrad (950779) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547553)

It's to please the Cuban ex-pats in Florida who dislike the current Cuban government. Given how much a few thousand votes in Florida can matter, no politician wants to risk pissing these folks off. Funny how such a small group can be so influential because they live in the right state. *shakes fist at electoral college*

inertia, saving face, not rocking our boat (1)

r00t (33219) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547619)

Cuba is run by a fairly bad dude. He once even thought it nice to offer launch sites for Soviet missles.

Compare with Libya and Pakistan. We treated them the same way, until we got a wake-up call to go deal with the situation. Only then did we reevaluate the situation, decide it was stupid, and open up to them.

Cuba has had no such defining moment. If we suddenly needed Cuba for something (not likely), then we'd rather quickly let bygones be bygones.

Re:inertia, saving face, not rocking our boat (1)

forgotten_my_nick (802929) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547785)

> Cuba is run by a fairly bad dude.
> He once even thought it nice to offer launch sites for Soviet missles.

If I recall correctly he was part of a revolution to throw out US Organized crime and prostitution in Cuba. Ironically its become what he tried to remove.

Also before the missiles were put in Cuba (as part of an Aid package to Cuba from the Russians), Castro actually went to the USA to ask for help with his country. The USA could of defused the situation long before. What did they do? Told Castro to get lost because the President was busy playing Golf.

So that is why he went to the Russians next.

Lastly the USA was doing the same thing to the Russians in placing missiles close to Russia around the same time.

Re:Those evil cubans! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547627)

Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind the bans on cuba. There are much nastier places that people are allowed to deal with.

Here is the short version.

A long time ago, cuba was very friendly with the usa. Then cuba had a (communist) revolution, and seized a lot of property belonging to americans. So the usa wasn't very happy,

In the middle of the cold war, the russians intended to put nuclear missiles in cuba. The usa didn't like that, since with nuclear missiles so close to the usa, the usa would have virtually no time to respond to a nuclear attack, and the usa would be very vulnerable to a disarming first strike. The usa & the russians had a very tense showdown, on the brink of war. So the usa wasn't very happy, and declared an embargo on dealing with cuba.

You're right, there are far worse countries the usa does business with, but they are much larger (vietnam) and more important (china) than cuba, and they also don't have a large vocal contingent in the usa dedicated to maintaining the embargo.

Re:Those evil cubans! (2, Interesting)

bjourne (1034822) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547765)

Here is the short version.

Short but also wrong.

A long time ago, cuba was very friendly with the usa. Then cuba had a (communist) revolution, and seized a lot of property belonging to americans. So the usa wasn't very happy,

They had an, at most, Socialist revolution. Major factories were confiscated and farmland redistributed to the poor. Fairly typical stuff. Compensation were offered to the American companies who previously owned most anything, but the offer was denied. It was because of that, that the US decided to embargo Cuba. Eisenhower imposed a limited embargo on Cuba in 1960 which Kennedy extended to all trade with Cuba in February 1962, eight months before the Cuban Missile crisis. An embargo that the US forced upon all other Latin American states. The Cubans had no choice but to unwillingly ally with the Soviet Union and become "Communist."

Re:Those evil cubans! (2, Informative)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547893)

They had an, at most, Socialist revolution

There was an revolution which removed the old dictator and looked like it would turn Cuba into a free country - orginally Castro promised free elections. But it turned into a communist one once they started summary executions of opposition leaders, censorship of the press, and installing Fidel as a new dictator. Incidentally, the people who disagreed with this ended up being the Cuban exile community which campaigns to keep the embargo in place until the regime goes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba#Cuba_following_r evolution [wikipedia.org]

I've heard people argue convincingly that Cuba was free from the fall of Batista to the point where Castro managed to grab power permanently.

Re:Those evil cubans! (4, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547635)

Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind the bans on cuba.

No, noone can. There is no reasoning behind the bans on Cuba. It's purely emotional.

Re:Those evil cubans! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547669)

Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind the bans on cuba.
Florida is a "swing state". If the president was elected by popular vote Cuba wouldn't be a big issue, but because of the electoral college both parties have to remain tough on Cuba or else risk losing Florida in an election. Sure places like China and Saudi Arabia are just as repressive but you have to play politics.

Re:Those evil cubans! (2, Interesting)

bladesjester (774793) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547689)

The bans came about because of Cuba's dealings with the Soviet Union.

It was sort of an extension of the Monroe Doctrine, trying to prevent a European power from establishing control in the region. In this case, they especially didn't want a *communist* power to establish itself.

To that end, they built Cuba into a boogey man of a magnitude that, even after the threat was gone, the public would have reacted badly to resuming trade relations. Now it's just kind of a political convention in the United States that, no matter what happens, Cuba is bad.

All in all, things would have probably gone better if Walt Disney had let Nikita Kruzchev into his park to see Mickey Mouse and if Castro had actually made the cut and gotten into major leauge baseball instead of going back home and going into politics because he wasn't good enough on the field.

Re:Those evil cubans! (0, Flamebait)

Verte (1053342) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547701)

Because they are flag-burning commies who don't respond to "bend over"?

I understand that there is more to it than that, but the Australian government bends over quite readily, and it has been treated quite well [for smallish values of 'well'] of late.

Re:Those evil cubans! (1, Insightful)

TheRealRedDeath (1116875) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547799)

It's because Cuba is a communist country. We only trade with china because we have something to gain from it. Same goes with veitnam and other places.

Re:Those evil cubans! (3, Insightful)

Tatarize (682683) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547829)

You see, the Cubans stole our casinos and overthrew our puppet government. Then they didn't let us take them back over. Fricking commies!

Re:Those evil cubans! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547879)

The actual answer is in this book(among others):

http://www.amazon.com/Overthrow-Americas-Century-R egime-Change/dp/0805078614 [amazon.com]

Countries South of the US have had to lock down their countries to keep the US from infiltrating the governments with pro-US business and military leaders. Many of the current leaders down South have a mindset of doing whatever it takes to never let the US do what it has done in the past to their countries.

Burn the village to save the village ala Vietnam or the current destruction of the US rights and liberties to save the population from terrorism are in the same spirit.

And of course nutty Floridian election politics play a role too.

more success stories (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547525)

Other movies BitTorrent has recently saved are Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Ocean's Thirteen, and Knocked Up. Thank god for BitTorrent!

Remember, guys (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547527)

Remember that the most important thing about Michael Moore isn't that he's fighting to change the health care system, it isn't that he's tried to open America's eyes about the severe gun violence problem, it isn't that he's tried to do his bit to stop George W Bush's war in Iraq, it isn't that he's tried to get capitalism to actually fulfill the promises of helping all citizens and not just the richest, it isn't any of those things. None of those things are important.

The most important thing is that he's fat and his voice is a little whiny. If you can't see that and channel your rage accordingly, I feel sorry for you dirty hippies.

Re:Remember, guys (3, Insightful)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547641)

He cherry-picks information, manipulates and molds the facts to point rather unceremoniously to a conclusion he wants you to come to (rather than showing the facts and letting the public decide)... Not unlike other documentary filmmakers, but still....

He is not the voice of reason... he is the voice of another opinion. Nothing wrong with that, but his tactics are not to provide information, insight, or raw un-spun feeds of a particular problem, but to provide you with his opinion on the matter. If you agree with him.. he's happy. If you don't... you're working for W, Haliburton, or the Illuminati.

I don't mind him making movies one bit... more power to him. But the truth is always under his expertly edited hand... and it often times is his truth. It's a delicate line he's walking... he's dangerously skirting the outer edges of propaganda... and most people are unaware because they see the term "documentary" and immediately consider it's like the hygiene films in Jr. High. "Wash up, Susie!" (Not that some of those weren't propaganda laced with horrible acting as well... heh)

Re:Remember, guys (1)

Fuzzypig (631915) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547763)

Damn right! The one thing about every documentary, it's someone or group's opinion and you should be able to pick up opinions and pick and chose the facts from those opinions to develop your own. It's called free-thinking intelligence, unfortunately a very rare commodity in this day and age. Don't let the "idiot box" dictate what you should think!

Saw it a few days ago (4, Insightful)

Attaturk (695988) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547547)

Whatever you make of MM, the point he makes in this movie is both a profound and necessary wake-up call. It's the kind of movie you don't even need to have an open mind to appreciate. If you're still dubious about state-funded healthcare then this should open your mind for you.

Re:Saw it a few days ago (1, Troll)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547589)

But why does it have to be state funded? The think tanks and medical professional organizations of this world have publlished a bazillion papers on how to set up a fair and effective free market health care system. A lot of thought has gone into the issue. The reasons none of them get implemented is, as usual, fucking political jackassery.

The choice between what we have now and nationalized health care is a false dichotomy. There's many, many directions to go with this.

I'll also NEVER understand those so willing to put their health care in then hands of our dumbass government. That's just plain alien thinking to me.

Re:Saw it a few days ago (4, Insightful)

jkerman (74317) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547683)

The point being made in sicko does make some sense, it is

"If the system is motivated by short term profit, there is always a benefit to denying care"

Re:Saw it a few days ago (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547697)


Thanks to fucking retards like you and millions of others, the US is stuck with an embarrassingly bad for our size/GDP health care system. All because a bunch of dimwits like you have a juvenile, almost kooky religious, need to bolt 'teh free market' onto every single thing in the world.

Grow the fuck up you mental dwarf and understand what most of the rest of the world already does, that 'teh free market' is nothing more than a tool that is useful in some cases and some cases it isn't.

"Fair and effective free market" (5, Insightful)

Flying pig (925874) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547709)

Put bluntly, when did a think tank ever have to deal with the real world? And would you trust a trade union to propose a fair and effective system that in any way ran counter to the special interests of its members?

There is no such thing as the free market, because access to every market is controlled by special interest gatekeepers. If you don't believe me, just try visiting the NYSE and buying some shares directly. Free market think tanks are as prone to special interest pleading as anybody else - unless you really believe, say, that the Cato Institute takes money from the oil and tobacco industries and is totally uninfluenced by it.

And here in the UK, we have had to move away from the medical profession being allowed to regulate itself as a result of numerous scandals. Although the great majority of physicians are doubtless more altruistic than the majority of society, it's been said that trade unions are like dishwater - the scum rises to the top.

I think that experience in Canada, the UK and most of Europe shows that you must be able to vote for the people that control the health care system, because there are too many ethical, special interest, and economic factors to be left to people acting blindly in their own interests. Adam Smith never foresaw a world of mega-corporations, and his understanding of capitalism was a long way short of that of Marx.

Re:Saw it a few days ago (4, Insightful)

cgenman (325138) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547777)

a fair and effective free market health care system

But that's the rub. You don't want health care to be fair (which, in free-market terms means ability to pay). You want a health care system which covers everyone who needs covering, and which treats humans like their lives have value.

With the extraordinary costs of health care, that's the last thing you want to have based purely upon free market principles. "I can zap you again to try to restart your heart, but it will cost you an additional 35 dollars for this service. Sign here and we will proceed."

Which is not to say that you don't have a valid point: there is a lot which is wrong with our health care system above and beyond not having a social safety net... such as relying upon employers to maintain health insurance, lawsuits every time something goes wrong, not enough investment in preventative and curative medecines, and a reliance upon the expensive and the extravagent over the effective. And that doesn't even address overburdened doctors who never know their patients.

But the free market is not going to solve this problem. This problem exists in a moral, social, and economic grey realm which the market has been particularly bad in the past at dealing with.

Do it like we do in England (1)

BestNicksRTaken (582194) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547767)

We have the National Health Service, treatment is free to residents - yeah not just citizens, hence the many European holidaymakers coming over for plastic surgery.

The Welsh and Scots get medication for free too - courtesy of the English taxpayers who just got a rise in prescription charges.

I guess it's a bit like the US paying 100m+ usd annually for Mexico and Canada's healthcare - great eh?!

Re:Saw it a few days ago (1)

Chris_Jefferson (581445) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547821)

My only problem with the film was the only bit I have personal knowledge of (the English health service), wasn't very accurate.

That often seems to be a problem with Moore's films, whenever he talks about something I'm an expert in, he turns out to be either slightly or very wrong.

'sieze' ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547571)

Maybe "Jared" should have stashed a dictionary somewhere...

i don't see how this is news, but (4, Interesting)

siddesu (698447) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547583)

here are two takes on it, one interesting, and the other bordering on the ridiculous. first, apparently michael moore himself approves of people sharing. he was quoted to have said that:

"I make these books and movies and TV shows because I want things to change, so the more people that get to see them the better, so I'm happy when that happens. I think information and art, ideas should be shared."

So far so good, hats off to the guy for the message.

Now, onto part two. The funny thing is that there are some people in the so-called "blogosphere" (who seem to disagree with Moore), who have posted the movie for download, pasted a ton of ads on their website, and then gone to write something like so:

"Now I fully expect [...] Moore's people asking me to take this down. Which I will, because unlike Moore and most liberals I actually do respect things like copyright laws and property rights. "

Ain't that sweet, and ain't people on the internet nice -- you rip someone off while saying you "respect" copyright, you're making money off ads on it, and you have the audacity to say the movie is all bulshit. Cheers for the copyright 'lovers' on teh internet, really.

The U.S. has gone completely mad... (4, Insightful)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547599)

...and Michael Moore is one of the few people with enough influence who has the sense to keep harping on it. I just saw Sicko (via bittorrent) and it was very good.

Of course as a nation we really are insane; most people still don't see the problem with putting the richest corporations in charge of absolutely everything and calling it "freedom".

Re:The U.S. has gone completely mad... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547757)

Insanity has nothing to do with it.

We are stuck with a significant portion of the population, Red states, that when given this choice:

1) Bring universal health care up to the levels other developed countries in the world enjoy

2) Leave the US health care system in the mess it currently is and not have to admit the free market is a failure in the area of health care

Will eagerly go for option 2)

If someone's grandmother needs to die in order to avoid admitting something so fundamental to right wing dogma in the US is broken, so be it.

Re:The U.S. has gone completely mad... (2, Informative)

heretic108 (454817) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547823)

I concur with that. I saw it last night. SiCKO is a powerful documentary, in a style much matured from his earlier works.
If it isn't nominated for an Oscar, I'd be surprised - even given his rant^H^H^H^Hacceptance speech for his Bowling For Columbine oscar.

What's especially powerful is how the film touches on the psychological effects of health insecurity - a much more docile and unprovokable population, easier to keep in their place.

It was especially sickening to see how the health insurance companies regard any payout as a 'loss', even if the customer is a net cash cow, and how the companies keep M.D.s on 6-figure retainers purely for the purpose of denying people care, based on the most trivial contractual technicalities. Any system where people's incomes and careers benefit from effectively sentencing honest citizens to an early grave can only be labelled as impossibly corrupt.

What have you Yanks got against Cuba anyway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547621)

Just because you tried to invade them and they beat you in a fair fight?

I see some other countries in South America are starting to complain about your bullying now - wait til they all start to rise!

real sources of our health care problems (5, Insightful)

r00t (33219) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547649)

Where care is mandated or the patient can't shop for a good price, government funding might make sense. You're not in a position to discuss alternatives if you have a cracked skull and bleeding brain. Other than that though...

Our problems do not come from a "failure" to socialize medicine. When I was up in Canada, the news was that brain scanners were mostly going to places with powerful politicians. Quebec got an unfair share. Money was disappearing for political reasons. Over in the UK, people are being sent to France for surgery because they'd die on the waiting lists if they didn't go. Here in the USA we install brain scanners (lots of them too) where there will be patients and we don't die on waiting lists for anything other than an organ transplant -- and that only because we made it illegal to pay the dead person's estate.

Our real problems are:

  • We invent new technology, expect to use it, and expect that costs won't rise. Huh? We're expecting to get more for less. That only works for computer hardware. (in a socialist medicine system, quotas and delaying tactics are used to fight this problem)
  • The attitude is "I'll pay anything to save my dying children!". We then act all offended that the hospital bill heads toward infinity. Since death is common (100% of your children will die!) you can expect to pay until you can pay no more or until we run out of technology to sell you. (as above, socialist systems deny you this choice)
  • Simple economics is causing all service industries to be relatively more expensive. The factory worker is now more productive because he has huge machines. The high-tech worker is absurdly productive because he only produces digital data which is trivial to replicate. The hospital worker, like the college professor, is not getting such huge productivity increases. Widgets and software can be sold cheaply while still paying the workers well, but hospital services can not be made cheap while paying the workers well. Because everything is relative, hospital costs skyrocket.
  • Over in India, patients have a very limited ability to sue for malpractice and pain and suffering and... Medicine is cheap there. Over here, some doctors must pay millions of dollars per year for malpractice insurance. That means you pay. You also pay for unnessesary tests and other procedures caused by a cover-your-ass mentality that has taken hold. This is particulary true of caesarean births, which are dangerous and were once rare. Before a jury, it looks good to have done more intervention.
  • Our health insurance is too good at insulating us from the costs of various procedures. We don't shop around for a good deal. We then pay high rates because the money ultimately comes from us. When I lacked insurance, I was very careful to demand prices over the phone from multiple providers. Now I just have my $20 co-pay, so why should I care? The price is the same for me no matter where I go. I pick the fancy place on an expensive downtown lot!

Some of these problems are not really solvable. Economics is what it is, people like new technology, and nobody wants to see their little children die. The lawyers have some mighty lobbiests, but a change would at least be theoretically possible. The same goes for the co-pay insurance system, which could be replaced by a sliding scale or percentage system. (example insurance fix: the patient's payment must increase by at least 10 cents for every dollar of the treatment cost up to "$200 for $2000", then by 1 cent per dollar thereafter)

Re:real sources of our health care problems (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547717)

God do I pray a piece of human garbage like yourself dies a slow and miserable death inside the trainwreck of a health system you and every other scumbag has help create with your disgusting 'ideology'.

Re:real sources of our health care problems (3, Insightful)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547735)

You don't need brainscanners and the latest and greatest tech to get treatment for common ailments.

In America, you do need a few thousand dollars though.

Re:real sources of our health care problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547835)

And the absolute joke moderation of +5 Insightful is all anyone needs to see why the US health care system will never be fixed and continue to slide lower and lower relative to the rest of developed nations around the world who have long since moved to universal coverage.

Propaganda works on the weak minded as the bullet points outline above show.

Back before the first Gulf War, this clown would have been writing about baby incubators:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=baby +incubators+iraq+war&btnG=Search [google.com]

It's like the entire US population is in one big rowboat and millions of dumb people like the OP are so dumb they are rowing the wrong way and thinking my god we could actually be making progress if it was for these dopes.

Re:real sources of our health care problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547873)

Points made in the documentary where:

Claims are disputed and treatments are denied. This is policy because the health insurance industry is here to make money. Some denials are rubbers stamped other companies reward MD's that turn down most claims.

Life expectancy is lower in the US then in the UK, France and even Cuba. So who has the best healthcare in the world?

Medicine in the US costs a lot more. As an example one woman found out that a medicine she used costs $100 in the US and 15 cents in Cuba. What good is shopping around for a good deal if the whole industry uses lobbying and price fixing to milk you dry.

Bottom line: the US pays a lot more but in the end the level of healthcare is lower. Sure if you have a high income, good insurance and the ability to sue when claims are falsly denied you stil have beter healthcare then the rest of the world.

Re:real sources of our health care problems (0, Offtopic)

Ironix (165274) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547911)

One of the few times I wish I had mod points to spend! I'd have modded this down from the getgo...

Hmmm.... (1)

Mystery00 (1100379) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547651)

Michael Moore may indeed use misleading tactics, but at least he misleads you in the right direction.

If his new documentary really was in trouble, then who's to say he didn't leak it to the internet himself, it's definitely safe now. I think anyone would do the same.

I blame Michael Moore for Bush's winning (1)

really? (199452) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547687)

I am not American, nor do I play one on TV; but, if I were, I would be pretty damn pissed at Moore for his rather large contribution to Bush's reelection.
Through his fact twisting, and sometimes outright lies in Fahrenheit 9/11 he provided a rallying point for the conservatives who could justly point to Moore's lies and misrepresentations and then unjustly paint all liberals with the same brush. A lot of previously neutral voters were swayed to the right by this.

(This, of course, assumes one is not happy with Bush having been reelected, which seems to be the case with most Slashdotters. If you are happy with Bush's win, go ahead thank Moore. Personally I couldn't care less who won. As far as I am concerned, most of them, dems and GOPers, are crooks.)

Old news (1)

BestNicksRTaken (582194) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547703)

The torrent has been about for at least two weeks, other news sites reported it last week.

I guess you stick a torrent on /. and can expect a few more seeds.....

Editors: I before E, except after C (3, Interesting)

patio11 (857072) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547769)

Or when sounded as A, as in neighbor or weigh.

Sorry, ex-English teacher, had to say something. (Sidenote: always nice to see an old spelling mistake in a new word. I see far too much of "concieve" and "beleive" and not nearly enough "siezing". Of course, that is because I don't typically teach children older than middle school, and they don't have much call to say "seizure" unless it is in the context "Spelling nearly gives me a seizure".)

Canada private backup != P2P authorization (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19547865)

This is NOT a news story. Just because Michael Moore was worried enough to store a copy in Canada, there is no relevance to P2P. EVERY movie shows up on P2P; there is no relationship here between P2P and Michael Moore/Cuba.

P2P enthusiasts seem to love hearing that Michael Moore doesn't seem to hate them, but the fact is he is an entertainer that wants to be paid. In principle he (and every other film maker out there) would prefer you pirate their film rather than not seeing it at all, but please don't forget that he'd MUCH prefer you to spend money to watch the film.

WikiMoore (2, Insightful)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547867)

Michael Moore movies are like Wikipedia articles with one editor. Tons of links to questionable articles from all over the Internet, filled with POV content and unverifiable original research, and generally achieving no community consensus on anything. But be sure to cite it early and often in every term paper you write on the subject!

That said, I haven't seen Sicko, but I do agree with Moore that health insurance is essentially legalized gambling. It's also essentially a redistribution of wealth from the healthy to the unhealthy, with lots of middle men taking their cut along the way. The big question, though, is how do you fix it without making the average quality of health care worse?

You would think that he'd find a less obvious rant (2, Insightful)

sycomonkey (666153) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547877)

Moore has made a name for himself by making documentaries holding a far leftist slant wherein he rants about the evils of conservative politics, but if you ask virtually any conservative if the current health-care system is working, they will undoubtedly say no. If they don't, their either completely out of touch, or lying. Now, if this is a documentary showcasing the benefits of a government run, full coverage tax-paid health-care system, then that would fit his style and I wouldn't have even bothered commenting, since I don't actually like him or his movies. But if all this is doing is dramatizing how bad it is currently, well, that boat already sailed and he's wasting his time and money. I don't like him, but I believe he and other political filmmakers are doing an important thing, generally, bringing political discourse to the mass market. But just making a doom and gloom movie about how bad the current health care system is, is not going to tell anyone anything they don't already know, is not going to get people to care about issues they don't normally (because everyone cares about their own health already), and is generally no better than making fiction. Which is fine, but since the movie is probably not very entertaining, pretty much demotes him from "mostly useless" to "completely useless".

Maybe he should try living somewhere else... (1)

ma3stro (1116877) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547883)

Like Cuba. Or how about India? I have lived in India for a year now on business. Medical care is amazingly cheap here, and there are some good hospitals. But you can be darn sure if anything really bad happens to my health I'm heading straight back to the States for treatment and I won't mind paying out the whazoo for it.

I live in the US, and I have 100% free health care (5, Informative)

AlphaWolf_HK (692722) | more than 6 years ago | (#19547901)

IMO these statements about there not being government funded health care in the US are all bullcrap.

Why do I say that? Well, personal experience. My income is about $12,000 a year, and about two months ago I had an operation to diagnose a kidney disease. That is, this was not life threatening, but for diagnostic purposes. I didn't have to wait two years either, rather I only waited about a month and a half.

What did I pay for it? Nothing. No co-pay, no co-insurance, no cost for anethesia, no deductable. Nothing. Nada. Even my prescription drugs are free, everything from simple pain killers to the latest and greatest name brands. Who paid for it all? The state of Arizona. One acronym: AHCCCS [google.com]. Similar programs exist in all 50 states.

If this isn't providing health care to those who can't afford it, then I don't know what is. It has all of the benefits of private health care, in fact it works into the private health care system, so you get all of the same doctors and everything you would get in most private health care plans. The particular plan I am on is called Health Choice AZ, and there are many such plans to choose from, including a few PPO plans. I am not making any of this up, google it and you shall see. The information is sitting right at your fingertips.

Why do people like Michael Moore completely omit this fact when they bash America's health care system? They act as though poor people get nothing here - its just not true. If our health care system was like Canada's, hell I could be on dialysis right about now with how long it would have taken for me to get a proper diagnosis. I don't know about anybody else, but I wouldn't trade our current health care system for anything else.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account