Sunday, October 4, 2009

Sicko

I watched Michael Moore's documentary "Sicko" on our government-owned national news network, CBC Newsworld, tonight. As I watched I kept thinking, why are Americans in revolt? Moore is showing in the most shocking way how bad the US system is. Why are people up in arms?

Sadly, I didn't notice any mobs ransacking government offices when this film was released two years ago. Not a ripple. Not a whimper.

Sitting in Canada, which because of the American influence is situated halfway between the more socialistic Europe and the dog-eat-dog American system, I respond to Sicko saying "I want what they have in Europe in terms of government mandated holidays, free public education through university, etc." I'm horrified by the US system. I'm very unhappy that Canada has been infected by the US virus of private greed and public neglect.

Here's what I take to be a typical American reaction to the film:



What's obvious is that this kid knows something is wrong, but there is no obvious way forward that he can see. There is no political party in the US that has a program that fits his reaction to the film. So his outrage and unease will melt away because it has no outlet. So democracy fails because there is no mechanism that reaches down to individuals.

On the other hand, here is a famous author, one of the Freakonomics duo, Stephen J. Dubner, with a similar reaction. He hasn't watched Michael Moore's film, but he has a concern -- which apparently is discussed in the new Superfreakonomics book -- about the misdirected incentives in the American medical system, incentives to spend big bucks to get a tiny "pop" for the dollar rather than spend wisely and get the biggest bang for the buck. Here's a blog posting by Dubner:
It is fascinating to poke through history and see how often cheap and simple fixes solved problems that were routinely thought to be either unsolvable or, at best, solved by very expensive, complicated, and invasive means. Of course this is partly because a lot of people stand to profit (or at least keep their jobs) by promoting the expensive, complicated, and invasive means …

No comments: