Charlie Rose

laddiebuck  08/06/2008 02:43 AM Report

In reply to "Comment by Uncle Ron on Monday, Apr 28 at 11:13 PM"

"Also 2/23/08 issue of "The Economist" on Castro's legacy - health care was better when the Soviet Union was sending aid but has deteriorated since then."

This is not true; health indicators have risen steadily after a brief and temporary dip after the collapse of the Soviet Union. This increase defies the steadily decreasing GDP, by the way.

I don't see how anyone can knock Cuba's system; even the US praised it in a congressional report in the 90s. For three-hundredth of the cost of what the US pays, it delivers virtually the same performance.

Uncle Ron  04/30/2008 09:10 PM Report

For Chris' comment of 4/17 - ran out of time in last comment. Few more points: The referenced "Economist" article quoted one Cuban lady as saying "medicines are very scarce." The "Epoch Times" article pointed out "some 11 million Cubans attend run down facilities, receive dated prescription drugs,

and are required to bring their own sheets, food and soap to the hospital." "When Fidel Castro had to go under the knife, he flew in a specialist from Spain." As for Canada, the same article discussed a patient who needed hip surgery but couldn't wait in the government health care line for 2-4 YEARS and wanted to pay for "private surgery" - the government wouldn't let him do so. Further, in 2005 the Canadian Supreme Court issued an opinion that the government's monopoly on health care violated basic human rights. Moore's film ignored this plus the problems with the U.S. "Medicaid" system.

Uncle Ron  04/28/2008 11:13 PM Report

For Chris' comment of 4/17:

-check out "therealcuba.com" for pictures

and comments about conditions of Cuban health

care. Also 2/23/08 issue of "The Economist" on

Castro's legacy - health care was better when

the Soviet Union was sending aid but has deteriorated since then. See "Epoch Times" article (7/26/07 on web) on "Sicko" film and real conditions in Cuba. Also "Oregon Catalyst.com" on the WHO health study.

Chris  04/17/2008 07:32 AM Report

This is to Ron, author of the first comment; Cuba is a small third world country with very meager means living under a sixty years long trade embargo.

Of the 190 countries the WHO measures, Cuba's healthcare system ranks number 39. The United States ranks number 37.

Uncle Ron  04/16/2008 11:50 PM Report

First, Michael Moore is a propagandist, his films are not documentaries because that implies they espouse the "truth" and they don't. His films are highly edited "clips" to

distort the truth to fit his views. Cuban health care is a disaster except for rich tourists and the Communists in power. Cuban doctors sent to Venezuela try to escape to nearby countries to get out of Cuba. Health care in Britain and other government run systems are not FREE - the population is heavily taxed. I watched Tony Blair for ten years answer questions from the politicians as to why the health care system had so many problems. Think Canada is so great? Read Canadian doctor David Gratzert's award winning books "Code Blue" and "The Cure" - he says the problem with Canada "is getting anything done" and Canada is way behind in medical technology.

Women with "preemies" come to Washington State from Canada because they can't wait to be taken care of there. Canadian doctors are moving to America to work. Dr. Gratzert covers a number of myths about American health care such as "47 million uninsured" - its not true! For example, a lot of 20-40 year olds could afford health care but figure they don't need it yet. If everyone had to buy health insurance that might help the overall situation but to have the "govenment" run it would be a disaster - people will rue what they wish for. America has the best and most timely health care on the planet. To compare America and Switzerland on just about anything is silly - they are completely different in size and complexity. In America, even illegal aliens get health care for free just by going to the emergency center or county hospital. I question Mr. Reid's research and thoroughness.

Allan Ramesh  04/16/2008 09:37 PM Report

Wonderful piece. I worry about the future of health care with aging population. My insurance company dropped me despite the fact that I was paying a monthly premium of $970. They did so because I submitted a claim which they must have determined raised my risk level. No one is safe in this country. The system is heading for utter and complete collapse. However, the political opposition is going to be so great against reform that I wonder if any politician can withstand the pressure. Remember the Harry and Louise advertisements back in the early 1990s. Health care must be reformed or risk crumbling under its own weight. Without meaningful reform, the entitlement budgets will implode government. Can we do it? With Limbaugh, Colter, Oâ??Reilly, the American Enterprise and Cato Institute lobbying hard against anything that smacks of European or Japanese government involvement, the jury is out.

Born in Germany  04/16/2008 04:18 PM Report

In Germany everything is private and insurance companies can make a profit, too, as far as I know. I know they are heavily regulated, but they are allowed to make a profit, unless I am very wrong on this.

Anyway, the difference in Germany is that there is private insurance if you want that and in addition there is a government subsidized insurance, if you choose to that instead.

Why would you choose private over state insurance or vice versa ? Well it depends on you ! The government one is very solid and good but it doesn't provide as much choice and luxuries as some of the private plans. So people who really want to customize their plans go for the private ones. The government plan is available to anyone who wants good, basic healthcare for a modest price. The private plans can raise their prices on an annual basis. They can also add any number of services. The government plan pretty much stays at the same monthly price and doesn't vary services very much.

The government plan is basically insurance "for the rest of us", while the private plans are used by self-employed people and other folks who want more flexibility. I have a private plan at the moment, just because I wanted the flexibility, but I do gnash my teeth every time my plan raises its premiums for no apparent reason. That wouldn't happen would I switch to the government plan.

I think its a good two-tier system.

Judi Romaine  04/16/2008 04:05 PM Report

I was happy to see Tom Reid working on such large issues as health care. I went to high schooll with Tom and graduated from the same school, Dearborn High School. He's very much broadened his world view from the tiny one we were faced with in Dearborn, Michigan. Great story and I appreciate his quest and his exploration of the world -

Judi romaine (Murrill)

George Snodgrass  04/16/2008 10:46 AM Report

In a word - "GREED"!!! It's what drives America and healthcare is no different to any other "opportunity" to scam and steal from your fellow man. There is no humanity left in USA and it's what is bringing the country to its knees.

Webmaster  04/15/2008 11:32 PM Report

<a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld">http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front line/sickaroundtheworld</a> linked.

Scott Blake  04/15/2008 11:30 PM Report

"Sick Around the World" Watch the Full Program Online.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

Peter Gold  04/15/2008 11:18 PM Report

Charlie,

I wish you would've asked him about the quality of health care in these other countries he visited. I gather this is yet another concern of going to a universal health care system.

Thank you as always,

Peter

Peter Gold  04/15/2008 11:18 PM Report

Charlie,

I wish you would've asked him about the quality of health care in these other countries he visited. I gather this is yet another concern of going to a universal health care system.

Thank you as always,

Peter

Christopher Bouchard  04/15/2008 10:29 PM Report

Single payer is the way to go. Every one is covered, the people who make money pay. That is the best. I really hate the private sector in the health care industry. And in Canada, there are public hospitals. The US fundamentaly does not get this... even the intelligencia. Charlie does not get it, lots of smart Americans don't get this. Americans don't care about their fellow Americans, period. Even if it meant socialized medicine. Who cares?

Harsha  04/15/2008 08:30 PM Report

I was shocked to see ho closely T.R. Reid's piece resembled "Sicko" (Michael Moore).

While I am thrilled that the topic is getting attention, I was utterly disappointed that Charlie never once asked T.R. about "Sicko" and the similarities.

In fact it was one of the few times I have seen Charlie miss the one question on nearly everyone's mind.

So now I am left to wonder is T.R. a friend of Charlie's? is Moore persona non grata? How could such an obvious question not get asked?

Henry Sanchez  04/15/2008 07:23 PM Report

T R Reid Health Solns

You have time for a snapshot only, and do a great job. You're my favorite show, Mr Rose. Now for the other shoe drop.

With a govt too weak to enforce its borders, this would draw millions more illegals. Some estimate 6 million a year [up from 1 million in 2001\ are coming in.

There's no patient accountability. Example: 2nd liver transplant for a junkie, rehab after rehab for the obese, mentally ill, alcoholics.

Japan and the Swiss are monocultural.

Why do Canadians come to the US in the thousands if Canad. Medicare is so great?

Where is the cutting edge medical ressearch being conducted? Not Japan, Switz, France, Eng or Ger.

These points and many others have been made ad nauseam. Will Mr Reid's Frontline Health program tonite be just another used car salelsman type pitch?

Thanks again for your thot-provoking shows.

Patrick Weidhaas  04/15/2008 06:41 PM Report

Your interviews are always enlightening, informative, entertaining. I was really fascinated by T.R. Reid's comments and will be watching "Frontline". Thank you for that interview. One sad note: why was there no mention of another insightful documentary ("Sicko") on this subject by Michael Moore? Professionals like you and Mr. Reid should have given credit where credit is due. In fact, some of Mr. Reid's comments gave me a "deja vu" feeling, having encountered similar sentiments and observations from Michael Moore two years ago. The fact that Moore does not wear a suit and tie and surrounds his documentation by a veneer of humor should not cause his message to be minimized.

Consuelo Reyes  04/15/2008 12:42 PM Report

The important point to note in T.R. Reid's exploration - and I certainly hope he emphasizes this - is that even countries, like Germany or Switzerland, that base their healthcare systems on so-called "private insurance" do not allow profit in the system. These companies are tightly regulated, unlike here. Insurance companies must accept all who apply; they must cover all necessary medical needs; they cannot charge premiums based on the health status of patients. In these countries the idea of making a profit on sick people is considered totally inappropriate and morally wrong, not to mention, an unnecessary drain on finances. This is the big difference: in the U.S. health insurers make a "killing" by screening for healthy patients, raising premiums at their whim and denying care at every possible opportunity. In 2005 the CEO of the U.S.'s largest health insurer - UnitedHealth Group - received a salary of $122.7 million (3rd highest paid CEO in the country). This would never occur in any other advanced industrialized country!

Hopefully, people watching this show will come away understanding that the only way to create an equitable and affordable healthcare system is to remove the for-profit insurance companies from the table. The political candidates haven't the guts to do this unless the American people demand it.

A great proposal exists now in the Congress: Rep. John Conyer's H.R. 676 ("Expanded and Improved Medicare for All"). I don't expect T.R. Reid to talk about this, but, hopefully, this Frontline will encourage the media to discuss more ALL the available options for healthcare reform - not just the "tinkering" (as Mr. Reid said so aptly) of the Presidential candidates. If people are given all the facts, I have no doubt they would choose something along the lines of H.R. 676.

Ole Crone  04/15/2008 09:35 AM Report

Charlie:

Might be gettin' to an appropriate time to start discussions on how the public at large also abuses the healthcare system

Not reportin' over charges by physcians

Runnin' to the doc for everything to be sure to get 'their share'

Not settin' up community home folk run health co-ops for the common illnesses we should be able to manage without the medical community

Universal insurance payin' for major medical and specialists only.

Puttin' family physcians back into the community and outta the TajMaHal medical complexes

yada yada

My fear is we'll go broke in a plastic bag if we citizens don't recognize our abuse and take the right responsibility.

Glad you're there guy! How 'bout gettin' the woman physicist from Australia back again to talk more about solar power and her concerns as to nuclear power and carbon savin'? Where's the spell check?!

Average Joe  04/15/2008 08:25 AM Report

An MRI cost $98 in Japan and costs around $1000 in the USA.

why is it so?

Average Joe  04/15/2008 08:20 AM Report

We should take health insurance away from our Congress people and senators.

If they are forced to deal with health insurance like most of america does. Using thier own pocket book, they will find a way to provide universal health care.

Average Joe  04/15/2008 08:18 AM Report

If they are forced to deal with health insurance like most of america does. Using thier own pocket book, they will find a way to provide universal health care.

Amy  04/15/2008 04:38 AM Report

Why don't we have universal health care, in this country? Because, as Stephen Colbert might say, the zeitgeist has shifted from We the People, to Me the People... During an extended stay in Paris, I became ill and needed an operation. Not only was the health care system first rate, but the doctors themselves were absolutely lovely. My GP made house calls and even gave me his home phone number, in case my condition worsened over Bastille Day weekend..... The John Wayne attitude, that one is better off dead, than getting help from the government is slowly dissolving at a glacial pace. If the media, were to spend a little more time on the issue and would stop using buzz words, such as "socialized" and "big government" we might even get to a sane, sensible system that rivals the best in Europe. But the first thing we need to do in this country is to decide to support each other, instead of treating health care like a zero sum game.

Lauren McLaughlin  04/15/2008 03:23 AM Report

Thank you for airing this discussion with T.R. Reid on health care around the world. When you talked about why we in the U.S. do not insure everyone, I think you both missed the core of the reason. Unlike Japan, Switzerland, and, until relatively recently in their histories, the U.K. and France, the United States is a country of immigrants. We are not a homogeneous nation; we are a collection of people from very diverse ethnic groups, and racism continues to be a factor shaping our collective decisions. When T.R. Reid talks about the moral imperative to guarantee health care for all our fellow countrymen, he may not see that the anger about illegal immigration may be connected to the reluctance to include people of diverse ethnicities in the idea of "countrymen." Why include "the Other" in any universally granted benefit, ESPECIALLY if it's a benefit for which I will have to pay? It is easier in this multicultural society to focus on taking care of one's own. It's not morally correct, mind you--just easier.

I truly hope we can make the big change from the center about which T.R. Reid has so much optimism. Our country, ALL of us countrymen, need universal health care desperately. It erodes our compassion and morality to allow any of us to live without it.

Samuel Hyman  04/15/2008 03:16 AM Report

Mr. Rose asked T.R. Reid why every American isn't covered by health insurance. The answer is not just a question of morality as Mr. Reid asserted. Canadians and Europeans realized more than a generation ago that it is possible, and necessary, to do things collectively in one's own self interest. Many politicians, and monied interests, have convinced the majority of US voters that the notion of collective responsibility apart from national defense is un-American. They say that any other government services funded through even modest taxes-health, social security, welfare, education- endangers individual rights and imperils democracy. They invoke the doctrine of nineteenth century laissez faire to rationalize their position. They mention nothing about the enormous land grants and subsidies the US government gave Union Pacific Railroad to achieve its national policy objective of a transcontinental railroad in the 1860s. In so doing, many US politicians generate and perpetuate the American myths that laissez faire private enterprise and Americans' rugged individualism will always trump collective action by a responsive and responsible government as the only way to solve America's health care and other social issues of the Twenty-first Century. Until a majority of American electors impress on their national leaders that it is in everyone's self interest for the national government to mandate health coverage for all Americans universal health coverage will elude its rightful place in the American experience.

Samuel Hyman  04/15/2008 03:16 AM Report

Mr. Rose asked T.R. Reid why every American isn't covered by health insurance. The answer is not just a question of morality as Mr. Reid asserted. Canadians and Europeans realized more than a generation ago that it is possible, and necessary, to do things collectively in one's own self interest. Many politicians, and monied interests, have convinced the majority of US voters that the notion of collective responsibility apart from national defense is un-American. They say that any other government services funded through even modest taxes-health, social security, welfare, education- endangers individual rights and imperils democracy. They invoke the doctrine of nineteenth century laissez faire to rationalize their position. They mention nothing about the enormous land grants and subsidies the US government gave Union Pacific Railroad to achieve its national policy objective of a transcontinental railroad in the 1860s. In so doing, many US politicians generate and perpetuate the American myths that laissez faire private enterprise and Americans' rugged individualism will always trump collective action by a responsive and responsible government as the only way to solve America's health care and other social issues of the Twenty-first Century. Until a majority of American electors impress on their national leaders that it is in everyone's self interest for the national government to mandate health coverage for all Americans universal health coverage will elude its rightful place in the American experience.

Charles Delehanty  04/15/2008 12:06 AM Report

You do a great job Charlie.

I was curious as to why the US does not insure the health of an estimated 40 plus people. Your guest, T. R. Reid said that it will eventually happen. He also said that the campaign proposals of the current Presidential candidates just deal with the margins and don't get to the core issue.

I say he is wrong in his wishful claim that the poor will eventually get health insurance. They don't have health insurance, partially because, as Mr. Reid indicated, the voters don't want it.

But the main reason is that the poor do not organize and vote to force the pols to pass the laws to make it happen.

The reason the candidates proposals are marginal is because they know that if they really proposed a plan which would truly insure all Americans that they might lose votes. However they want to seem really care about the poor.

It is like being for mom and apple pie. They know full well that the only way the health insurance system changes is to yield the medical, pharmacological and insurance industrys more profits.

The President does not have the authority to make any significant changes. It's congress which controls the purse strings.

History proves that it must get much, much worse before a revolution will alter things.

Be careful how you treat the vets. What you sow ye shall reap. I believe that eventually a military coup will control this country.

Thanks for searching for the truth.