BoatBanter.com - View Single Post - Congressional Carrion Sessions in the Midwest

nom=de=plume

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:01:55 -0600, wrote:

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:56:47 -0800, jps wrote:

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:50:52 -0600, wrote:

On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:39:33 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
news:k1tte559lva30tdd41pthro85jnvc0b163@4ax. com...

There was a recent post in this NG about a large number of vultures,
I
believe, that were seen flocking together. Here in the Midwest, one
may generally see as many as 6 buzzards loitering around roadkill
carcasses on the roadside, and that's about the most that will be
together at anyone time, as carrion birds in this area of the
country
go. This morning on the way to the office, though, I saw in a
recently harvested corn field a flock of about 60 buzzards foraging
for leftover corn. (At least I think that's what they were doing.)
I
had never in my life seen so many buzzards together at one time in a
single location. But, after giving it some thought, I concluded
that
this may not quite be the ominous portent it would seem. This may
be
what will ultimately defeat the health-care reform package in
Washington. If all the Democrat senators are gorging themselves on
scraps in the Midwest, they won't be in the Nation's Capitol present
to vote on repugnant, damnable health-care reform legislation.

As to gorging, certainly both side of the aisle have done this, but
the
majority of Americans want healthcare reform, including a strong
public
option. The Republicans are feasting at the ins. companys' trough and
refusing to do what their constituents want and need. At least the
Democrats
are doing something. It may not be enough. The bill that will come out
of
committee may not be perfect, but it's better than nothing and it can
be
fixed and updated, as most legislation is after it initially passes.
The
ins. companies need to have their special anti-trust status revoked.
They
need to be barred from excluding those with "pre-existing" conditions
(which
they sometimes make up as they go along), and they need to have real
competition.

Do you know what the individual state regulations are for pre-x, Em?
Do you know in what manner the states are influenced in the regulation
of pre-x conditions by the NAICS? Are insurance companies free to be
completely arbitrary with pre-x conditions? Insurance companies are
very heavily regulated as it is, state by state. In my state, Unicare
just pulled completely out of the health insurance market. Was this
because Unicare was unable to make obscene profits? Insurance
companies stop offering insurance when it's impossible to make a
profit, as they should.

Personally, Em, I really am not all that concerned about what the
majority of Americans allegedly want. Any law, code, regulation, or
edict that requires that I carry health insurance is repugnant and
indecent. I have no doubt that most of the founding fathers would
stand aghast at what is foisted, and proposed to be foisted, on the
citizenry of this country. It's an oppressive state of affairs in
which I firmly believe those early revolutionaries would find cause to
revolt.

How do you feel about having to carry auto insurance?

How do you feel about having to carry home owners insurance if you've
got a mortgage?

Do you find either of those government foisted mandates repugnant?

Yes, on the first. The second is a matter of business practicality,
not a mandate by government. A mortgage company or lender will assign
its own insurance to a mortgage if the homeowner fails to comply with
the terms of the mortgagee to carry homeowners insurance. Similarly,
a lender will require full coverage on a vehicle for which it provides
a loan. This constrasts with most state requirements which is for
liability only.

You find the requirement to carry auto insurance repugnant?

What I find repugnant, is a guy carrying minimum insurance or no insurance
crashes in to you, and you get very little. Your uninsured motorist
coverage pays for most of your loss. Minimum Liability in California is
less than my truck cost. But if you crash in to the same guy and you have
a million in insurance and assets, he can get all of it. Limit the
liability of the crash to the lowest insurance coverage carried.

Sounds like you're in favor an appropriate amount of insurance for everyone.
I agree!

--
Nom=de=Plume