|
Delicious...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "jps" wrote in message ... On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:24:31 -0700, "Bill McKee" wrote: "jps" wrote in message news:eb65e51msrrr45mfaoea21i9f5u5qfbpsb@4a x.com... On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:37:36 -0700, "Bill McKee" wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Jim" wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote: After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public funded not for profit? Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of the Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient than a bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we eliminate private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer public option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into a Liberal. Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit" organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than pay double for something that doesn't. Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer. Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it was Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering class. Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery... You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before you make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of the VA. There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem and will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point? -- Nom=de=Plume Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials. And they are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed is tossing at them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is bad, as those 20%+ without a job are not spending. The housing sales increase, but the price decreased, and the $8k gift from the Fed just accelerated the purchases and seems as if they are looking at $500 million if fraud with the program. Look for the Dow to pull back 10-15% shortly. Put stops on your stocks. Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said anything revealing about the recovery or lack thereof. The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are created and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and services, which of course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL work. The way your party is handling the situation is UNREAL. You should be ashamed of yourself for supporting The king and his court in their underhanded activities. You should be ashamed of your intellectual dishonestly. http://www.recovery.gov -- Nom=de=Plume Actually it is you with the intellectual dishonesty. The government spent tons of money in the wrong place for one thing. Sent it to their cronies on Wall Street. Want a better recovery, put 50% of that money spent in to SBA loans. And not spend the other 50%. Let Goldmansackus and the other "investment" banks fail. The recovery act has not created jobs. Other than a few paving and infrastucture jobs that needed to be done anyway. When that paving job is done. Where is the next job for the worker. Govenment does not creat wealth by borrowing and spending. Hank Paulson and George Bush got that ball rolling. Goldman Sachs strikes again... Hell, Bush was just continuing rolling the Clinton ball. Clinton and his administration caused the dot.com bubble, set the stage for the housing bubble and Bush just continuing the screw ups. Oh yeah, it was Clinton who caused the bubble. I don't think you want to know the reason why Bill. It was for lack of regulation and control of the greedy assholes who run Wall Street. When you give control of the economy to folks who'd have you investing in tulip bulbs, you've given them too much control. Deregulation was a Republican mantra that the Democrats bought. We also bought supply side economics. Both ideas suck and they're still trying to repackage them every time we turn around. Get a clue. Even if you have to pay for it. Clinton pushed for the easy loans, named the first black leader of Fannie Mae. Franklin Raines. Was Clinton Justice Department that made a deal to settle for 10 million and they dropped the fraud charges. He lied about FM's profits while buying all the subprime loans and pocket $100 million in bonus money. He should have had to pay back all the bonus money plus all the costs of the investigation at the minimum and at the maximum, spent time in the stony lonesome. Clinton led the subprime lending, deregulation of Delimitative. Bush did not correct the problems and kept Greenspan on as the Fed Man. Just curious, but what does the color of skin have to do with whether or not he acted inappropriately? I think I know the answer, but do tell. -- Nom=de=Plume His color was brought up when he got the job. And he was probably protected by the Executive branch for both being appointed by the branch, and because of his color. By whom? Seems to me, you just brought it up for no reason, unless you're claiming you copied and pasted your paragraph from somewhere. -- Nom=de=Plume Do some basic research on Mr. Raines. Let's just assume that he's a terrible, corrupt person. Ok, so what does the color of his skin have to do with it? You mentioned it in your paragraph, so I think you should answer the question. -- Nom=de=Plume You're going to get Kalif all worked up in a minute. Then he'll start trashing your family members. |
Delicious...
"Don White" wrote in message
... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "jps" wrote in message ... On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:24:31 -0700, "Bill McKee" wrote: "jps" wrote in message news:eb65e51msrrr45mfaoea21i9f5u5qfbpsb@4 ax.com... On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:37:36 -0700, "Bill McKee" wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Jim" wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Tosk" wrote in message ... In article , says... On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote: After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public funded not for profit? Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of the Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient than a bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we eliminate private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer public option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into a Liberal. Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit" organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than pay double for something that doesn't. Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer. Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it was Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering class. Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery... You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before you make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of the VA. There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem and will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point? -- Nom=de=Plume Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials. And they are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed is tossing at them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is bad, as those 20%+ without a job are not spending. The housing sales increase, but the price decreased, and the $8k gift from the Fed just accelerated the purchases and seems as if they are looking at $500 million if fraud with the program. Look for the Dow to pull back 10-15% shortly. Put stops on your stocks. Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said anything revealing about the recovery or lack thereof. The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are created and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and services, which of course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL work. The way your party is handling the situation is UNREAL. You should be ashamed of yourself for supporting The king and his court in their underhanded activities. You should be ashamed of your intellectual dishonestly. http://www.recovery.gov -- Nom=de=Plume Actually it is you with the intellectual dishonesty. The government spent tons of money in the wrong place for one thing. Sent it to their cronies on Wall Street. Want a better recovery, put 50% of that money spent in to SBA loans. And not spend the other 50%. Let Goldmansackus and the other "investment" banks fail. The recovery act has not created jobs. Other than a few paving and infrastucture jobs that needed to be done anyway. When that paving job is done. Where is the next job for the worker. Govenment does not creat wealth by borrowing and spending. Hank Paulson and George Bush got that ball rolling. Goldman Sachs strikes again... Hell, Bush was just continuing rolling the Clinton ball. Clinton and his administration caused the dot.com bubble, set the stage for the housing bubble and Bush just continuing the screw ups. Oh yeah, it was Clinton who caused the bubble. I don't think you want to know the reason why Bill. It was for lack of regulation and control of the greedy assholes who run Wall Street. When you give control of the economy to folks who'd have you investing in tulip bulbs, you've given them too much control. Deregulation was a Republican mantra that the Democrats bought. We also bought supply side economics. Both ideas suck and they're still trying to repackage them every time we turn around. Get a clue. Even if you have to pay for it. Clinton pushed for the easy loans, named the first black leader of Fannie Mae. Franklin Raines. Was Clinton Justice Department that made a deal to settle for 10 million and they dropped the fraud charges. He lied about FM's profits while buying all the subprime loans and pocket $100 million in bonus money. He should have had to pay back all the bonus money plus all the costs of the investigation at the minimum and at the maximum, spent time in the stony lonesome. Clinton led the subprime lending, deregulation of Delimitative. Bush did not correct the problems and kept Greenspan on as the Fed Man. Just curious, but what does the color of skin have to do with whether or not he acted inappropriately? I think I know the answer, but do tell. -- Nom=de=Plume His color was brought up when he got the job. And he was probably protected by the Executive branch for both being appointed by the branch, and because of his color. By whom? Seems to me, you just brought it up for no reason, unless you're claiming you copied and pasted your paragraph from somewhere. -- Nom=de=Plume Do some basic research on Mr. Raines. Let's just assume that he's a terrible, corrupt person. Ok, so what does the color of his skin have to do with it? You mentioned it in your paragraph, so I think you should answer the question. -- Nom=de=Plume You're going to get Kalif all worked up in a minute. Then he'll start trashing your family members. I remain a hopeful person. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Delicious...
"John H." wrote in message
... On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:44:43 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:49:43 -0400, John H. wrote: You missed the point. It's a government run system riddled with fraud. Now the government is trying to institute a *bigger* government run system, which will still be administered by individuals. You don't think the fraud will increase likewise? Perhaps we should come up with some 18th century punishment for stealing from the government or 20th century communist punishment. After all the Soviets knew what you had to do to maintain order in a socialist society. 20 years of genuine hard labor might slow down these medicare scammers. That idea wouldn't scare them. Most don't know what 'hard labor' (or any other, for that matter) means. You're right. I've never been in prison. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Delicious...
"John H." wrote in message
... On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:53:09 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:49:43 -0400, John H. wrote: On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 04:37:46 -0600, Vic Smith wrote: On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 06:28:30 -0400, H the K wrote: On 10/26/09 6:22 AM, Vic Smith wrote: On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:55:30 -0400, wrote: Besides, that article has some other gems, such as the there's no evidence the private insurers do any better with fraud than does Medicare. Did you see 60 Minutes tonight? They are talking about billions in medicare fraud. No, missed that. But see above. Maybe you missed it. Somehow the Medicare fraud doesn't bother me as much after seeing that. After all, we're paying almost 10 times more to Aetna than to Medicare. So for every buck of mine going to a crook cheating Medicare, there's nearly a sawbuck of mine going to the crook cheating Aetna. Great system. Pretty equitable for the crooks percentage wise. Lucky I can afford it. Good luck to those who can't. They'll need it. --Vic Note that the medicare fraud on display in 60 minutes last night was not being committed by the government, but by private-sector, for-profit individuals. Yep. Health care providers all. Somebody's got to pay for that Mercedes. --Vic You missed the point. It's a government run system riddled with fraud. Now the government is trying to institute a *bigger* government run system, which will still be administered by individuals. You don't think the fraud will increase likewise? Nope, you're missing it. Maybe you missed where private insurance companies are doing the Medicare billing, and that private health insurance providers are committing the fraud. BTW, I never saw anybody in the Navy caught or convicted of fraud, and I bet you didn't tolerate financially scamming the public in your Army career. Outside of letting a skater slide now and then. Interestingly enough, I witnessed a couple accountants "disappearing" while in private industry. Caught defrauding. Not prosecuted though, because it "wouldn't look good." Gets hushed up. And I wasn't even in a position to know the depth of those kind of problems. Just friendly with a couple of those who did know. Of course we know fraud happens in government. We hardly know squat about what goes on in "private enterprise." --Vic My brother, a retired cop, now works as an investigator of insurance fraud for a health insurer. So I know that the civilian firms actually do 'something' to prevent fraud. I don't think we have any idea of the scope of the fraud going on with Medicare. As a Medicare recipient, I'll say that it seems like it would be very easy to do. It's about $60B a year according to CBS. It wouldn't be easy to fix it, but it would require investigators, which means more money for them. The Obama admin. has added $200M to the effort. Not enough in my opinion. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Delicious...
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:17:34 -0400, John H.
wrote: My brother, a retired cop, now works as an investigator of insurance fraud for a health insurer. So I know that the civilian firms actually do 'something' to prevent fraud. I don't think we have any idea of the scope of the fraud going on with Medicare. As a Medicare recipient, I'll say that it seems like it would be very easy to do. Having worked for a major casualty insurer for years, I've been beating the anti-fraud drum for years. Even there I didn't feel enough was being done with anti-fraud efforts. Easier to deny the claims and raise the premiums of dumb honest customers than to go after the smart crooks. Hard to get a handle on what's really going on, except not enough resources are devoted to fighting fraud. Found this http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5109783.shtml And note this from it "The fact that the suspects had to move to other states and other avenues of Medicare - in this case, Medicare Advantage - signals an understanding on the streets that officials are on to their old tricks. And that the task forces are working, Sloman said. Medicare Advantage allows the elderly and disabled to get benefits through private health insurers. The plans receive a government subsidy and generally offer more benefits than traditional Medicare." Didn't see the 60 minutes piece so I don't know if they mentioned the private insurance company role in it all. But we need those kinds of exposes to get the folks ****ed off enough to make the pols react. But you watch all the squealing if the gov adds staff to fight fraud. "Big government! Big Government!" --Vic |
Delicious...
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:06:57 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote: On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:17:34 -0400, John H. wrote: My brother, a retired cop, now works as an investigator of insurance fraud for a health insurer. So I know that the civilian firms actually do 'something' to prevent fraud. I don't think we have any idea of the scope of the fraud going on with Medicare. As a Medicare recipient, I'll say that it seems like it would be very easy to do. Having worked for a major casualty insurer for years, I've been beating the anti-fraud drum for years. Even there I didn't feel enough was being done with anti-fraud efforts. Easier to deny the claims and raise the premiums of dumb honest customers than to go after the smart crooks. Hard to get a handle on what's really going on, except not enough resources are devoted to fighting fraud. Found this http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5109783.shtml And note this from it "The fact that the suspects had to move to other states and other avenues of Medicare - in this case, Medicare Advantage - signals an understanding on the streets that officials are on to their old tricks. And that the task forces are working, Sloman said. Medicare Advantage allows the elderly and disabled to get benefits through private health insurers. The plans receive a government subsidy and generally offer more benefits than traditional Medicare." Didn't see the 60 minutes piece so I don't know if they mentioned the private insurance company role in it all. But we need those kinds of exposes to get the folks ****ed off enough to make the pols react. But you watch all the squealing if the gov adds staff to fight fraud. "Big government! Big Government!" --Vic You've got much more of a background in it then I do, so I'll bow to your insights in this matter. But not golf. |
Delicious...
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:47:35 -0400, John H.
wrote: You've got much more of a background in it then I do, so I'll bow to your insights in this matter. Big mistake. I'm mostly talking out of my ass. But not golf. You got that right! --Vic |
Delicious...
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:50:07 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:11:59 -0400, John H. wrote: On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:44:43 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:49:43 -0400, John H. wrote: You missed the point. It's a government run system riddled with fraud. Now the government is trying to institute a *bigger* government run system, which will still be administered by individuals. You don't think the fraud will increase likewise? Perhaps we should come up with some 18th century punishment for stealing from the government or 20th century communist punishment. After all the Soviets knew what you had to do to maintain order in a socialist society. 20 years of genuine hard labor might slow down these medicare scammers. That idea wouldn't scare them. Most don't know what 'hard labor' (or any other, for that matter) means. We would have a lot of cheap labor then wouldn't we. Maybe they could work in all those battery factories we will need for all the electric cars we need ... handling the toxic waste. Speaking of which, happy belated 350 day. I can't believe we didn't pass each other the wish yesterday. http://www.350.org/about/science "350 parts per million is what many scientists, climate experts, and progressive national governments are now saying is the safe upper limit for CO2 in our atmosphere." Hell, if a 'progressive national government' says so, it must be so. |
Delicious...
On 10/26/09 7:51 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:47:35 -0400, John H. wrote: You've got much more of a background in it then I do, so I'll bow to your insights in this matter. Big mistake. I'm mostly talking out of my ass. But not golf. You got that right! --Vic Talking out of his ass is herring's rice bowl. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:01 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com