thunder wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:06:00 -0400, H the K wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 14:03:02 -0400, BAR wrote:


I thought they weren't allowed to deny you care if you couldn't or
wouldn't pay for it.
Yeah, but what is care? It may vary by state, but I believe they only
have to stabilize you.

That is correct...if that.

It's also true that many hospitals go beyond the requirement, regardless
of the cost. Still, I wouldn't want to be in an emergency room without
insurance. Hell, even with insurance, a major sickness is a leading
cause of personal bankruptcy.

Very few *private* hospitals go above and beyond, since profit is their
motive.

wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:01:31 -0400, H the K
wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 19:34:54 -0400, H K
wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 16:59:01 -0400, Lil' John
wrote:

You won't miss the government run alcohol stores in New Hampshire if
you're on I-95. Both exits have the Alcohol Store right on the Exit
signs. It's unreal.
--
I know about NH. Last year we were looking for THE package store on
Conway.
I am used to Florida where they sell liquor at Walgreens and southern
Md where they will STILL sell you a mixed drink at the drive through.
(a fountain drink with ice and a miniature). If they know you they
will mix it in the window.
I was astonished when we lived to florida to see drive through windows
at the larger liquor stores. These and the "gentlemen's clubs" in Jax
were the constant targets of the religious nutcases. There was a
successfully titty bar on Blanding Boulevard and there were almost
always "church people" across the street carrying picket signs
protesting it. They brought their kids with them. By now, those kids
probably are patronizing the titty bar, if it is still there.
The drive thrus are gone in SW Florida. They still have one right up
the road from my niece in Ridge Md.

Once you get to the end of Three Notch Road, you've gone back in time.
Way back. It's very country...even for southern southern Maryland.

Except for that three mile strip mall between California and Lex Park.

The end of Three Notch to which I was referring "ends" in the area where
your niece lives. The "other end" goes by the strip malls and beyond, on
the way to Waldorf.

wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:22:06 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"H the K" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 19:06:58 -0400, H the K
wrote:

"Stabilization" nonsense is especially true for poor people suffering
from serious mental health issues or drug addiction. A hospital with
facilities for treating either (and not all hospitals do), might take a
suicidal person in for a couple of days and then, if that person says he
is not feeling like killing himself at that moment, he is discharged. Of
course, the next day he might feel suicidal again, and kill himself.
Statistically Truly "suicidal" people end up killing themselves at about
the same
rate, no matter how much "treatment" they get. About all "treatment"
does is separate "gestures" from "attempts" and treat those who make
gestures, with no intent of actually killing themselves.

I had no idea you were an accomplished mental health researcher. So what's
your point...just leave the potential suicides by the side of the road?
Put a diving board on the high bridge. So they land in a designated area.


I only know what I have heard from professionals who know and what
they said to my sister's family that had two suicides. (one nephew and
one nieces hubby).
That reality does define "gestures" vs "attempts" to anyone paying
attention.


That was sort of comforting advice, sort of.

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 10:38:58 -0700, jps wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 07:21:55 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 21:37:40 -0700, jps wrote:

snipped for brevity

There's a ton of small businesses like mine that are already stressed
by the cost of providing health care. Expect there are a lots having
to drop coverage because of cost. Ours has been going up at more than
10% a year and we've had to opt for inferior coverage to what we had
originally to keep it within our means.

I suppose if you're not currently operating a business, you might be
unaware how challenging the situation is...

If the business is stressed by providing health care, why provide it?
There is no governmental mandate that you do so. The only mandate in
most states is for the provisioin of Workman's Comp.

It's standard in our industry where I'm a small player. Large
employers provide and I compete in the same market for expert
employess.

Are your
employees incapable of providing thier own? Is the compensation given
your employees inadequate for their needs? Do you pay full cost of
their insurance? It is a common practice for businesses to help
relieve the (voluntary) stress of coverage by putting part or all of
the cost of coverage on the employee, even if their coverage is a
group.

We cover employee only and deduct for spouse and dependents. There's
no way we could cover families.

Have you explored HSA's, HRA's, FSA's?

We have an FSA in place.

Are you aware that
insurance companies compete for you business?

Yes, painfully.

Are you aware that
HDHP's are desgined to keep premiums low?

Yes, we're considering a move to one.

If your insurance is a
group, is it a PPO?

Yes, Regence.

If you are genuinely concerned about covering
your employees, have you earnestly explored all insurance options?

Abso-****ing-lutely.

(I owned a manufacturing concern for more than a decade. It wouldn't
in your best interest to complain about any naivete on my part, in
asking these questions. (And I am also a licensed insurance agent.))

When I moved my company from CA to WA we enjoyed significantly lower
premiums. CA had already started the steep climb. After double digit
hikes in rates, it has become painful.

I identified the problem to a state representative 5 years ago at a
small dinner reception. And while it was a known problem, it wasn't
the state's only problem nor high on the priority list. I expect it's
higher now.

Do you think that health insurance reform legislation won't require
that employers pay for health insurance, in some measure, for all of
their employees?

So, I answered all your questions and narry a syllable retort. You
seem only to want to take pot shots.

My sincere hope is that the public option represents a competitive bid
against the scammers that currently make profit through health care.

I take it you're among the profiteers whose living comes from taxing
our access to proper health care?

Why should I waste energy and time on tired ad hominem? I've worked
my myself silly today (a Sunday, no less), and I haven't had time to
enjoy a persistent, johnny-on-the-spot debate to prove my polemical
prowess to you or anyone else. It's an unfortunate risk I take when
I engage these discussions. I've spent the day mowing a yard that has
been too long neglected. I helped my sister (who is blind by virtue
of diabetic retinopathy) apply her lettering of her windows to her law
office. I took my sister shopping, as she is handicapped. I tended
to my garden. I worked on following up on insurance inquiry leads.
And I've done some other various, sundry things that needed attention.
And do you care to know what my current commissions are? I suspect
the issue is pointless, as you are demonstrably dogmatic. My
commssions are nil. Are you empathetic (less condescending to those
that don't share your political persuasion)? Then you have no problem
expressing your empathy for those thousands and hundred of thousands
of people who are involved in providing a means to finance health care
who are facing the prospect of losing their respective livelihoods to
a failed idealogy, I take it? The actuaries, the secretaries, the
managers, the general agents, the marketing specialists, the risk
specialists, the accountants, the producers, the CE providers, et al,
should thank the heavens above that the government will be there to
help their transition to their new lives. And what is "proper health
care"? Who in this government-take-all world determines what proper
health care is? Get your damnable government out of my life. And take
your red-herring arguments with you.

I want my freedom back, the freedom the government was originally
structured to protect.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

Eisboch wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message
t...
It's also true that many hospitals go beyond the requirement, regardless
of the cost. Still, I wouldn't want to be in an emergency room without
insurance. Hell, even with insurance, a major sickness is a leading
cause of personal bankruptcy.

You've touched on the forbidden facet of health care.
At what point is someone's life worth destroying the lives of loved ones by
putting them in hopeless debt or bankrupcy?

Eisboch




Why should a family have to go into hopeless debt or bankruptcy for
medical care for a loved one, so long as there is a chance of prolonging
some sort of reasonable life for someone already here?

That's such an anti-life position...be careful or the crazies will soon
be picketing outside your store, calling you an anti-lifer.


Oh, wait...*they* only care about fetuses...once you're here, they don't
give a **** whether you live or die...


:)

H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
BAR wrote:



There is no access to health care
problem.


We've been hearing that b.s. from conservatives for decades. It
wasn't true then and it isn't true today.

Provide examples of the problem you allege people have accessing
health care in the USA?


Oh, please. Do some reading on other than reich-wing sites. Why do
you righties always try to insist that everyone else do your homework
for you?

Talking out of your ass again Harry. You can't support your assertions
again.



Wrong, Bertie. Like many non-intellectual and anti-intellectual
righties, you tend to believe what your right-wing sources and your
prejudices tell you to believe.

Prejudices, right. Receiving goods and services without the intention of
paying for them or paying for them is theft.

I see no purpose served in handing you and others like you information
you can find on your own, if you are interested.

You consistently make assertions that are tenuous at best and easy for
your to weasel out of. When you are pushed for facts and figures to
backup your assertions you hurl personal insults.

You were colossally wrong just yesterday on Maryland gun laws, but that
didn't stop you from posting your b.s, and getting defensive about it,
and you were too lazy to find the facts for yourself, even though they
are readily available.

I wasn't wrong about anything regarding Maryland's gun laws. I asked a
couple of questions.

I don't do homework for other people.

Sure you do, you've told us it is your job.

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:40:26 -0400, Eisboch wrote:

"thunder" wrote in message
t...

It's also true that many hospitals go beyond the requirement,
regardless of the cost. Still, I wouldn't want to be in an emergency
room without insurance. Hell, even with insurance, a major sickness is
a leading cause of personal bankruptcy.

You've touched on the forbidden facet of health care. At what point is
someone's life worth destroying the lives of loved ones by putting them
in hopeless debt or bankrupcy?

If someone has a terminal illness, I might balk at spending hundreds of
thousands of dollars, for a few weeks more life. Short of that, I value
life far more than dollars. I understand your point. The last few
months of a life, probably cost more, medically, than the entire rest of
that life, but ...

Both of my folks, both in their nineties, are still going *relatively*
strong. My Mom just had a carpal tunnel operation. Now, some people
might say that's excessive. Not me, I saw the pain she was in.
Fortunately, they have good insurance, but if they hadn't, I wouldn't
have hesitated to pick up the tab.

Personally, I don't want to be calling those shots. Nor do I want the
insurance companies, nor the government calling them. I'll leave those
calls in the hands of a doctor. Anything short of that, smacks of
eugenics.

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:04:33 -0400, H the K wrote:


It's also true that many hospitals go beyond the requirement,
regardless of the cost. Still, I wouldn't want to be in an emergency
room without insurance. Hell, even with insurance, a major sickness is
a leading cause of personal bankruptcy.

Very few *private* hospitals go above and beyond, since profit is their
motive.

Not true, Harry. Roughly 62% of our hospitals are non-profit, an
additional 20% are government hospitals. Only 18% are for profit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_hospital

Gene wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 19:21:50 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:24:22 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:02:37 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 14:15:00 -0400, Gene
wrote:

been in a state where the government is the only one to sell alcohol?
Sure, I live in one. How do the prices compare?
http://www.ncabc.com/pricing/pricebook.aspx

That is interesting. The price for Booker (single barrel whiskey) is
about the same but Johnnie Walker Scotch (black) is almost $25 more a
1.75l bottle.
Some of that may be that you have a tax of about $6.50/gal. and I
think ours is more like $10.00/gal.
Yeah those taxes will kill you, which brings us back to the topic.

It would seem to, but those taxes were enacted when the NC General
Assembly was stuffed full of fundie Baptists who successfully imposed
socially engineered behaviors on those less "of the body."

Commercially motivated interests, compelled by their need to
successfully entertain high powered buyers "from out of town", locked
horns with the fundies and finally won the battle, but with scars of
taxes and other bizarre restrictions. Those scars are still evident,
today....


I am in favor of assigning one of our 50 states to religious
fundamentals of any stripe who want to impose their beliefs on those who
either are of other faiths or no faith.

Once the state is assigned, the fundies should relocate to that state,
and engage in whatever kind of religious nonsense they wish, with the
understanding that the residents of that state will be free to terminate
them with extreme prejudice if they step over the lines of
community-city-state acceptibility.

Naturally, I'm thinking Texas would be the appropriate state for the
fundies, perhaps a decently sized section of it.

It's only the fundies who want to control those outside of their faith
that would have to move.

H the K wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 11:54:34 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 05:27:08 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote:

Ah... it sounded like you were complaining about the high cost of
insurance. But now I understand that you're both "retired", with your
wife choosing to work at a basic job where the insurance cost 25% of
her pay. Nothing wrong with that.

No, my wife is 17 years younger than me and will be working for a long
time yet, insurance or not. And she's the highest paid in her unit
except for the manager. The rest there can't afford the insurance, so
they go to the e-room for everything. That's the problem. The high
cost of health care/insurance. There ain't no free lunch except the
one those paying for health insurance are buying for the others.
Whether I complain about it or not, you may have noticed that others
are.

I agree that the people who choose to not insure, then use the
emergency room for free health care is a problem. However, if you're
rooting for national health care so your wife can quit work and I'll
have to pick up your health care tab... well, I have a problem with
that.

Tell me your problem with paying my SS and I'll shed a couple tears.
My problem isn't with paying, it's with a system that only *some* pay
into, and a system that locks people into jobs because health
insurance isn't universally available and portable. Stifles and puts
artificial constraints into movement in the job market, and gives
foreigners a competitive edge in trade.

--Vic
Part of our high costs are the E room. I had a toothache while in
Sorrento, Italy. A Saturday and no dentist working. I was told to
go to the local hospital and go to the "Pronto Soccorso" entrance.
Happens to be free to everyone, foreign, locals etc. Was like a walk
in doctors office. There were people there with hurting ankle, etc.
Had a Doctor, nurse & aid and clerk. No big tests, no major
equipment. If you needed more, they sent you to the hospital, where
I would have had to pay. Much cheaper setup than our E rooms and
Urgent Care clinics.

I guess if you could get it by the Doctopr/Nurse union the government
could cut a lot of this off at the pass by opening store front "Quack
in the box" operations in the places where poor people live. They
could staff it with military or ex-military medical people when they
stop the war. My niece was a navy Corpsman for 12 years. If she can
treat the aches and pains of a ship full of sailors or save a Marine
with a sucking chest wound, there is not much in the ghetto she can't
handle. Unfortunately they want her to go to another 4 year course
before she can give someone, stateside, a shot.


And I thought we were over "separate and unequal."

Is it equality of opportunity or equality of outcomes that drives you
Harry?

I wouldn't see a non-physician or nurse practitioner for a medical
issue. Why should a poor person? The nurses who draw my blood for tests
or give me a flu shot, et cetera, are college graduate nurses who have
passed board exams, are licensed, and required to continue their
educations during their professional life.

RN's are not required to have a college degree. Medical corpsman do not
have college degrees nor do Army medics. Most EMTs and Phlebotomists do
not have college degrees either. Why are you shunning highly trained,
certified and licensed working stiffs? Hell some of them are in unions.
Nice of you to screw over the union guys you elitist snob.

I have a sister who started out as an LPN, became an RN, received her
BSN and now is an NP.