On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 17:55:38 -0400, hk
wrote:

On 3/31/10 5:46 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:28:52 -0400,
wrote:


wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...


I won't bore you again with the tale or details, but I did a survey once
that proved that it would have been less costly for my (former) company
and for the employees if I had simply paid for or re-impursed the cost of
the services that you described to the employees and had a Major Medical
insurance plan to cover serious, catasrophic or life threatening injuries
or illness.

Unfortunately, the state of MA nor the Insurance companies would allow
such a thing.

Eisboch


You once did a survey that proved something. Sure. In one specific case.
But, I guess Mitt didn't like your plan. The one he pushed is much
stronger than the one that just passed. Of course, he's against it after
he was for it.

--
Nom=de=Plume


My company was representative of a typical small business who collectively
employ about 80% of the population. It may have been a specific case, but
it was representative of what happened when HMO type health plans became
popular.

BTW ... the one Mitt signed .... (under a heavily Democratic state populous)
isn't exactly working out very well, particularly for small business. It
has advantages to the insured, but is causing small business to cut back or
avoid growth. Again, since small business is the major employer, it has
ramifications that aren't so good overall.

Maybe small businesses are just going to have to account for the real
cost of doing business, including taking care of the folks who
generate the income.

I'm burdened because I choose to be, no matter the state law. It may
indeed limit my growth but I know whomever is in my employ has a
medical safety net that they can rely on.

Walmart wouldn't be nearly as successful if they accounted for the
true cost of maintaining a human being.

Socialism for the rich.


The easy answer and the one used by most modern nations is to lift the
direct burden of providing health care coverage from individuals and
businesses and lay it against society as a whole. That way, individuals
and businesses pay their fair share of a societal cost.

That's why the reaction from the right is so astounding. This is the
Republican's wet dream of a health care bill. Protect the monied scum
who make a profit by providing nothing but administrative process.

The public option is the only way we're going to see competitive rates
in this country. That'd be a good first step towards the ultimate
goal of single payer.

On 3/31/10 9:25 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 17:55:38 -0400,
wrote:

On 3/31/10 5:46 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:28:52 -0400,
wrote:


wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...


I won't bore you again with the tale or details, but I did a survey once
that proved that it would have been less costly for my (former) company
and for the employees if I had simply paid for or re-impursed the cost of
the services that you described to the employees and had a Major Medical
insurance plan to cover serious, catasrophic or life threatening injuries
or illness.

Unfortunately, the state of MA nor the Insurance companies would allow
such a thing.

Eisboch


You once did a survey that proved something. Sure. In one specific case.
But, I guess Mitt didn't like your plan. The one he pushed is much
stronger than the one that just passed. Of course, he's against it after
he was for it.

--
Nom=de=Plume


My company was representative of a typical small business who collectively
employ about 80% of the population. It may have been a specific case, but
it was representative of what happened when HMO type health plans became
popular.

BTW ... the one Mitt signed .... (under a heavily Democratic state populous)
isn't exactly working out very well, particularly for small business. It
has advantages to the insured, but is causing small business to cut back or
avoid growth. Again, since small business is the major employer, it has
ramifications that aren't so good overall.

Maybe small businesses are just going to have to account for the real
cost of doing business, including taking care of the folks who
generate the income.

I'm burdened because I choose to be, no matter the state law. It may
indeed limit my growth but I know whomever is in my employ has a
medical safety net that they can rely on.

Walmart wouldn't be nearly as successful if they accounted for the
true cost of maintaining a human being.

Socialism for the rich.


The easy answer and the one used by most modern nations is to lift the
direct burden of providing health care coverage from individuals and
businesses and lay it against society as a whole. That way, individuals
and businesses pay their fair share of a societal cost.

That's why the reaction from the right is so astounding. This is the
Republican's wet dream of a health care bill. Protect the monied scum
who make a profit by providing nothing but administrative process.

The public option is the only way we're going to see competitive rates
in this country. That'd be a good first step towards the ultimate
goal of single payer.



The GOP doesn't know or care about reform...what is driving the GOP is
its desire to try to stymie Obama wherever and whenever possible, for
purely political reasons. Remember, the GOP is populated by morons like
Ingersoll and Herring who believe the simple-minded nonsense the party
chieftains and elected officials spew. Look at the teabaggers - a
movement of absolute morons.
--
http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:39:49 -0400, hk
wrote:

On 3/31/10 9:25 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 17:55:38 -0400,
wrote:

On 3/31/10 5:46 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:28:52 -0400,
wrote:


wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...


I won't bore you again with the tale or details, but I did a survey once
that proved that it would have been less costly for my (former) company
and for the employees if I had simply paid for or re-impursed the cost of
the services that you described to the employees and had a Major Medical
insurance plan to cover serious, catasrophic or life threatening injuries
or illness.

Unfortunately, the state of MA nor the Insurance companies would allow
such a thing.

Eisboch


You once did a survey that proved something. Sure. In one specific case.
But, I guess Mitt didn't like your plan. The one he pushed is much
stronger than the one that just passed. Of course, he's against it after
he was for it.

--
Nom=de=Plume


My company was representative of a typical small business who collectively
employ about 80% of the population. It may have been a specific case, but
it was representative of what happened when HMO type health plans became
popular.

BTW ... the one Mitt signed .... (under a heavily Democratic state populous)
isn't exactly working out very well, particularly for small business. It
has advantages to the insured, but is causing small business to cut back or
avoid growth. Again, since small business is the major employer, it has
ramifications that aren't so good overall.

Maybe small businesses are just going to have to account for the real
cost of doing business, including taking care of the folks who
generate the income.

I'm burdened because I choose to be, no matter the state law. It may
indeed limit my growth but I know whomever is in my employ has a
medical safety net that they can rely on.

Walmart wouldn't be nearly as successful if they accounted for the
true cost of maintaining a human being.

Socialism for the rich.


The easy answer and the one used by most modern nations is to lift the
direct burden of providing health care coverage from individuals and
businesses and lay it against society as a whole. That way, individuals
and businesses pay their fair share of a societal cost.

That's why the reaction from the right is so astounding. This is the
Republican's wet dream of a health care bill. Protect the monied scum
who make a profit by providing nothing but administrative process.

The public option is the only way we're going to see competitive rates
in this country. That'd be a good first step towards the ultimate
goal of single payer.



The GOP doesn't know or care about reform...what is driving the GOP is
its desire to try to stymie Obama wherever and whenever possible, for
purely political reasons. Remember, the GOP is populated by morons like
Ingersoll and Herring who believe the simple-minded nonsense the party
chieftains and elected officials spew. Look at the teabaggers - a
movement of absolute morons.

They're not who concern me. We've shifted so far to the right that a
health care bill based on a Republcan wet dream is considered a
leftist government plot.

We're easily as far to the right as we were to the left when Nixon
founded the EPA.

I sure as **** hope the pendulum has come to rest and ready to move
back to the left.