OT health care
 

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:12:31 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
om...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 19:17:39 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:



yeah. it's a tragedy what wall street has done to main street


And it is a bigger tragedy what Pennsylvania Ave is doing to the future
generations.


you mean restoring jobs?

preventing 25% unemployment?

yeah, given your hatred of the middle class, i'm sure you're weeping
that the rich aren't allowed to eat the children of the poor


25%, 35% unemployment will probably have been better than stealing from
future generations to prevent the pain now. Instead of putting the
babies out in the cold on rocks, they should be putting the current
generations out to die. We have priced this country out of the world
market for most things. We now pay our people 10x what an Asian country
will pay. Used to be about 3x. So how the hell are we to do
manufacturing competitively in this country? We can not survive as a
"Service Provider" country. We are even outsourcing the call service
centers to Inida and Pakistan. Can not even be a competitive Service
Provider"!

More bs. You have no concept of what that would be like. Bread lines?
People starving to death? No medical help?

You're a moron.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Going to happen with even more dire results if the government does not
reign in their over spending.

I agree, but it's going to take a while to get back to the way a gov't
should be financed. You can't throw untold millions out of work, 25-35% as
an alternative to the gov't overspending now. One way to do that is called
PayGo, which is being opposed by Republicans. Another is to reign in the
cost that insurance companies add to the healthcare costs. This was done in
a limited way by the bill that just got signed into law. It was opposed by
Republicans and right-wing nuts. More needs to be done.. e.g., financial
regs some of which Dodd's bill address. Again, opposed by Republicans. Why
the opposition? Certainly nothing to do with the facts on the ground. It's
all about political posturing.


--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"hk" wrote in message
m...
On 4/19/10 4:03 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:11:33 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 19:09:27 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


does not cover pre existing conditions

healthcare premiums go through the roof

the free market has failed.

Most everything is covered, via Medicare or the supplemental.
Except
for
the drug donut hole. No copay etc. Seniors go to the doctor and
the
hospital for simple checkups for entertainment these days.
Especially
prevalent in Florida from what I understand.

and the free market system is on the verge of collapse



Why should an insurance company cover a pre-existing condition if the
person
did not have insurance previously?

not very bright here, are you? kinda stupid actually.

what happens when you lose your job and have to get another one? or
you have to self insure?

christ, even for a right wing pimp you're stupid. honest to christ.



If you have insurance when you lose your job, you can continue
insurance.
You are stupid. Cobra if the company is still in buiness. HIPPA if
your
Cobra runs out. And as I said before. If someone has insurance, then
the
next company should be required to grant coverage. If no insurance,
then
you are **** out of luck! I guess you think you should be able to buy
fire insurance the day after your house burns, and be covered.



If you don't, you're screwed. If you use COBRA, it's wildly expensive.
SOL
is your idea of a civil society. got it.




Right-wingers like McKee have no grounding in reality. COBRA is so
expensive, an unemployed person probably cannot afford it. Oh, it is
HIPAA, not HIPPA, and apparently McKee doesn't have any knowledge of how
that works, either.




Actually I have been on both. And you bring up the expensive COBRA. Also
points out how expensive insurance is for a company. COBRA cost can only
be 10% more than the company pays for insurance. My wife went on some
medicine just before a company went out of business. So I had to get
HIPAA as she was "uninsurable". Reason I started another company was so I
could get a group plan for affordable health insurance. And you can get
Blue Cross with group with 2 people.



Thus we shouldn't regulate insurance companies...

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

On 4/19/10 5:24 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
...
"Bill wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:12:31 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 19:17:39 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:



yeah. it's a tragedy what wall street has done to main street


And it is a bigger tragedy what Pennsylvania Ave is doing to the future
generations.


you mean restoring jobs?

preventing 25% unemployment?

yeah, given your hatred of the middle class, i'm sure you're weeping
that the rich aren't allowed to eat the children of the poor


25%, 35% unemployment will probably have been better than stealing from
future generations to prevent the pain now. Instead of putting the
babies out in the cold on rocks, they should be putting the current
generations out to die. We have priced this country out of the world
market for most things. We now pay our people 10x what an Asian country
will pay. Used to be about 3x. So how the hell are we to do
manufacturing competitively in this country? We can not survive as a
"Service Provider" country. We are even outsourcing the call service
centers to Inida and Pakistan. Can not even be a competitive Service
Provider"!

More bs. You have no concept of what that would be like. Bread lines?
People starving to death? No medical help?

You're a moron.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Going to happen with even more dire results if the government does not
reign in their over spending.

I agree, but it's going to take a while to get back to the way a gov't
should be financed. You can't throw untold millions out of work, 25-35% as
an alternative to the gov't overspending now. One way to do that is called
PayGo, which is being opposed by Republicans. Another is to reign in the
cost that insurance companies add to the healthcare costs. This was done in
a limited way by the bill that just got signed into law. It was opposed by
Republicans and right-wing nuts. More needs to be done.. e.g., financial
regs some of which Dodd's bill address. Again, opposed by Republicans. Why
the opposition? Certainly nothing to do with the facts on the ground. It's
all about political posturing.




The Repubs are also opposed reform measures for wall street, and
spreading lies about what is being proposed. Mitch McConnell is so
obviously lying, even he can't keep a straight face on this issue.



--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

OT health care
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:04:45 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:11:33 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

Why should an insurance company cover a pre-existing condition if the
person
did not have insurance previously?


They have to now, imagine what that will do to our premiums.

In that Frontline show I talked about the insurance company lobbyist
put her finger right on it. She said their actuaries immediately went
to work computing what the effect was going to be on premiums.
These people are bookies., They don't care which team you pick, they
just adjust the line and take your bet.
That is the wild card nobody wants to talk about.


More bs. Pre-existing conditions could be something minor and usually are.
The "actuaries" are always at work. They don't determine policy. They only
define risk.

If preexisting conditions were a minor problem we wouldn't have ever
heard about them. The actuaries were put to work to assess a dollar
value on the number of uninsured people with these conditions along
with the number of 18-25 year old kids they will have to pick up. That
cost will be spread out across everyoone else and determine what we
will all pay.

I said most preexisting conditions. Some are big deals, but not being able
to get insurance even because of minor problem means MUCH higher costs for
the individual for everything else, esp. if they have issue that requires
significant medical intervention. You're trying to separate things out that
can't be separated out.

The people they "have to pick up" are going to be paying. So, what's your
beef? I just don't understand the objection to getting everyone covered.

The real wild card for the working class will be how much that
mandatory insurance will cost if you don't qualify for government
assistance (2x the poverty rate). If you are 30 and never paid for
insurance befiore that could be a shocking number for you.
The question is, how many will blow off the requirement and hope they
don't get caught. Even if they do, the fine is a pittance.
The actuaries have to assess a price on that too.

According to the right wing crowd, you'd go to jail. More bs. Feel free to
continue to blame actuaries.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

On 4/19/10 5:25 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
m...
On 4/19/10 4:03 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:11:33 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 19:09:27 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


does not cover pre existing conditions

healthcare premiums go through the roof

the free market has failed.

Most everything is covered, via Medicare or the supplemental.
Except
for
the drug donut hole. No copay etc. Seniors go to the doctor and
the
hospital for simple checkups for entertainment these days.
Especially
prevalent in Florida from what I understand.

and the free market system is on the verge of collapse



Why should an insurance company cover a pre-existing condition if the
person
did not have insurance previously?

not very bright here, are you? kinda stupid actually.

what happens when you lose your job and have to get another one? or
you have to self insure?

christ, even for a right wing pimp you're stupid. honest to christ.



If you have insurance when you lose your job, you can continue
insurance.
You are stupid. Cobra if the company is still in buiness. HIPPA if
your
Cobra runs out. And as I said before. If someone has insurance, then
the
next company should be required to grant coverage. If no insurance,
then
you are **** out of luck! I guess you think you should be able to buy
fire insurance the day after your house burns, and be covered.



If you don't, you're screwed. If you use COBRA, it's wildly expensive.
SOL
is your idea of a civil society. got it.




Right-wingers like McKee have no grounding in reality. COBRA is so
expensive, an unemployed person probably cannot afford it. Oh, it is
HIPAA, not HIPPA, and apparently McKee doesn't have any knowledge of how
that works, either.




Actually I have been on both. And you bring up the expensive COBRA. Also
points out how expensive insurance is for a company. COBRA cost can only
be 10% more than the company pays for insurance. My wife went on some
medicine just before a company went out of business. So I had to get
HIPAA as she was "uninsurable". Reason I started another company was so I
could get a group plan for affordable health insurance. And you can get
Blue Cross with group with 2 people.



Thus we shouldn't regulate insurance companies...



Yeah...let's leave it all to the free market.

snerk

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

OT health care
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:05:45 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:00:47 -0400, Larry
wrote:

Odd, how the government is basically dumping NASA saying private
industry
can do it better and cheaper. But government can do healthcare better
and
cheaper. Just seems odd.



That's an interesting point.

40% of their main transport vehicles have crashed killing everyone
aboard and nobody got sued. Let's see how Rutan does with his first
crash.


You're against private enterprise? Don't you think they've consider this
in
their business model?

I don't have a problem with private enterprise but don't expect them
to do anything that does not make economic sense to them.


So, then why the comment about Rutan? He (or anyone else) will do what makes
business sense. I get no feeling he's backing away from spaceflight.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:07:28 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:41:09 -0500, "Peter (Yes, that one)"
wrote:

You seem to think what was recently passed is the be-all and end-all.
It
isn't.

I believe you are right.
As different parts of the health care bill go into effect, pricing will
change due to market forces and tax burden.
I see this in the shoe business all the time.
The marketplace at work.
It is as old as humanity.


I just think this bill is trying to shove a size 12 foot into a size 7
shoe. It was designed to fail and it will.


We'll see won't we. Perhaps you should lobby your representative to repeal
it.

We all know that will never happen. The question is, what will the
real program look like. This is just a token move so they can say they
established a framework. This patchwork of politically doable things
will fail. Let's see what they end up doing in the long run.


The bill isn't designed to fail. That's just posturing. You have to start
somewhere. They started with what's politically doable now. That's how
things get done.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:09:42 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

If lawyers are doing the job of the government, why not make the
government do it's job and try incompetent doctors in criminal court?

Reason ... there is a higher standard of proof. Civil court is an
emotional exercise with little protection for the defendant.


Incompetent docs do go to trial from time to time... e.g., Michael
Jackson's
doc for a recent example.

Yup that's one in a row.
How many malpractice torts have been filed in LA County since
February?


No idea. Feel free to report back. You claimed that incompetent docs are not
going to criminal court. I cited a recent example.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

"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
m...

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 17/04/2010 5:22 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 10:29:11 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Which has little to do with the argument that tort reform is going
to save
the healthcare system.

Tort reform would save the whole economic system. The lawyers tax
is a
drag on the whole economy, producing absolutely nothing.



?? Come on. More nonsense. Most lawyers are honest and hardworking.
Lawyers
founded this country. We have nothing to be ashamed of.

The only explaination I have is lawyers back then were more honest
and under a lot more scruteny on the issue of governance. Probably
because many of their peers were NOT lawyers and they had to get
acceptance from the people.

"We the people..." founded the USA. Otherwise the residents would
have hung the idiots as traitors to the crown, and they were traitors
to the British. But victors write the history books.

BTW, I think they did a good job. Just an observation that they were
British subjects before they were Americans.

--
Time to ask ask, is our government serving us or are we serving the
government?

To be a lawyer in those days, you did not have to indoctrinated by a
law school. Just read the books and take the bar exam.

Only partially correct. You had to apprentice with an established
lawyer, much as John Adams did. As usual, you know little about what
you write.

--
Nom=de=Plume


I read no where of Lincoln apprenticing with an established lawyer. I
think he was already a state senator when he took the bar.



So, you believe that Lincoln was one of the founders.... also, you're
unfamiliar with the concept of frontier country lawyers, which were quite
different than those on the East Coast.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Logic escapes you again. We were discussing the requirements to be an
attorney in the old days. The East was a frontier also. One of my
relatives was a signer of the Declaration of Independence. Abraham Clark.
NJ lawyer, self taught, surveyor, and attorney. Did not ever read of him
apprenticing as an attorney either.



Sure. We believe you. NOT

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:04:45 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:10:02 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:



to date theyv'e paid out 2 billion in insurance claims.

"

How many atheists have schools and hospitals?

actually, all of them. we support them with our taxes. we just dont
rape the chlidren we care for

Same reason mean teach grammar school? Are you a closet pedophile?

why? is your wife unsatisfied?