|
OT health care
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? -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
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. -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m... "hk" wrote in message m... On 4/18/10 11:54 AM, wrote: On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 08:16:47 -0400, wrote: obama care will reduce costs, cover everybody, reduce mortality, How will that happen? He did absolutely nothing to reduce costs. The drug industry is unfettered, the medical conglomerates were not touched and the insurance companies just got 15 million new customers at the point of a government gun with no meaningful restriction of what they could charge them. You seem to think what was recently passed is the be-all and end-all. It isn't. And what if it takes 10 years and 20 bills and it is still screwed up? Why pass such a flawed bill? What if it takes 10 years and finally is near universal coverage and costs are lower? Oh wait, the sky is falling.... -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
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. -- The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name. |
OT health care
wrote in message
... On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:41:04 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: If lawyers were trolling the streets in 1776 advertising for victims they would have been run out of town on a rail. In those days lawyers defended people from the government, they didn't take on the powers of the government to punish people, beyond the limits of what is constitutional. If polar bears showed up in Miami, they would be captured and removed. So, your first sentence means nothing. Secondly, lawyers did much the same work they do now. They did significantly more then "defend people from the gov't." As to the rest of the sentence, that also makes no sense. Lawyers work within the laws that have been established, and sometimes, depending on the case, they cause the court to action that changes law. This is basic stuff. -- Nom=de=Plume 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. -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
"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 |
OT health care
wrote in message
... On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:44:55 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: You're wrong. "We the people" was written (primarily) by Jefferson, a lawyer. The people didn't write anything. The preamble of the constitution is usually attributed to Gouverneur Morris. Certainly not Thomas Jefferson in any case. He was in France at the time. Were you thinking that was the Declaration of Independence? That is "When in the course of human events ...yada yada" You got me... for some reason I always confuse the two... BTW, he was a lawyer also. -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
"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 m... 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. |
OT health care
"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. |
OT health care
"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. |
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? |
OT health care
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 21:25:31 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 17/04/2010 7:29 PM, bpuharic wrote: [ bpuharic nonsense clip ] You are a good little Democrat brownshirt. says the guy who believes 'arbeit macht frei' I have lived more than 10 years on each side of the US/CAN border. Even 2 years in UK. If I took my tax savings while working in the US and subtract hy health care premiums and expenses for my wife and I, I was still far better off in the USA by a long shot. no one gives a **** about you. the fact is your healthcare is more efficient than ours. i'm a scientist. i go with data. i see us spending 17% of GDP on healthcare you spend 10%. and yours is better. you? you're a sock puppet. Dumb****s like you know squat. To you crossing the state line is a big deal as your parole officer might find out. Just a 2 bit loser. when's the last time you were in korea or malaysia? |
OT health care
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:13:46 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote: "bpuharic" wrote in message .. . 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 ah. so you're gambling with the middle class. interesting. it took 15 years to end the depression. lots of kids died from inaddequate care, homeless etc but you're willing to let them take that chance, right? .. 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. BULL****. this is where the right wing train goes of the track THE MIDDLE CLASS DID NOTHING. this is like blaming californians for 3 mile island this was engineered by right wing monetarists like milton friedman, hayek, alan greenspan and all the right wing dems and republicans who believed in the unregulated free market 'we' did nothing. that's the problem the right wing cant understand. they blame main street when it's a WALL STREET problem. We now pay our people 10x what an Asian country will pay. Used to be about 3x. ever see what the ratio between the CEO of walmart and the average hourly employee wage is? about 1000:1 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"! we can't be competitive because the right glorifies money instead of hard work just like you do. |
OT health care
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:07:54 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote: "bpuharic" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:11:33 -0700, "Bill McKee" 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. ROFLMAO!! hey moron ever been unemployed? ever priced COBRA? ever looked at how much you get in unemployment benefits? ****. you know zip about anything at all 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. except, until obama came along. insurance companies could tell you to go **** yourself and to the right wing, that's the voice of god. |
OT health care
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:55:50 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote: Actually I have been on both. And you bring up the expensive COBRA. Also points out how expensive insurance is for a company. TA DA!!! even a right wing ASSHOLE finally gets it! YES, US HEALTHCARE IS EXPENSIVE!!! it's the most expensive in the WORLD. but the right wing thinks that's GREAT!! |
OT health care
|
OT health care
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:08:53 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote: "bpuharic" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 01:38:26 -0400, wrote: 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. aw, gee whiz. why the **** not just shoot the *******s when they get sick let's become spartans. put sick babies out on the rocks so they die of exposure is that your logic? You would not recognize logic if it bit your arse. why? is my name rush limballs? |
OT health care
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:05:13 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: "Bill McKee" wrote in message om... "bpuharic" wrote in message ... On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 01:38:26 -0400, wrote: 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. aw, gee whiz. why the **** not just shoot the *******s when they get sick let's become spartans. put sick babies out on the rocks so they die of exposure is that your logic? You would not recognize logic if it bit your arse. I'm guessing you use a lot of soothing cream. if he ever used preparation H he'd disappear. |
OT health care
"hk" wrote in message
... 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. And, it's all for their reelection, which I think is in doubt. What exactly do they have to run on? Some are even claiming credit for the Stim! -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
wrote in message
... On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:29:41 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: 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. I believe everyone should have to buy insurance, I just doubt they will. I am also the guy here who has been saying everyone's taxes are too low. BP says that means I hate the middle class. Yup all of you rich people should pay more ;-) I think most people want to have health insurance if they can afford it. I think there will be some small percentage who either don't think about it at all or just don't care. At the moment, I don't think the middle class should see a tax hike. It's not a good time. Those over $250K won't really notice or care. 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. I suppose that begs the question, what is the penalty for not following that law? (I suppose I could look it up) There are a whole range of penalties for not following laws. For this, here's a link I believe is accurate. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/yo...2consumer.html I don't blame actuaries, I just acknowledge what they do for a living. Would you be happier if I just said the greedy insurance company nazis are raising your rates heh... remove "nazis" and yes. -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
wrote in message
... On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:30:49 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:05:45 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: wrote in message m... 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. I only questioned, how do you think his first crash will go. It usually costs an airline about a quarter to a half billion dollars in a crash. I imagine a big part of the ticket price will be insurance. No idea. It might put them out of business. It might be anything between that and a big payout. I wonder if insurance is even an option. -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
wrote in message
... On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 14:33:32 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: 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. No, said they should all be tried in criminal court. You answered with a very high profile anomaly. How does one get to criminal court unless there's a strong supposition that the doctor is incompetent? That's up to the local DA. If you're dissatisfied with how the DA does his/her job, they can be removed at election time. You asked how many torts get filed. Feel free to look it up. I imagine those that are obviously due to negligence, especially repeated negligence do get prosecuted. There are no facts so far that support the notion it was an anomaly or a typical outcome. -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "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 Huh? |
OT health care
"bpuharic" wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:55:50 -0700, "Bill McKee" wrote: Actually I have been on both. And you bring up the expensive COBRA. Also points out how expensive insurance is for a company. TA DA!!! even a right wing ASSHOLE finally gets it! YES, US HEALTHCARE IS EXPENSIVE!!! it's the most expensive in the WORLD. but the right wing thinks that's GREAT!! Why do you think it is the most expensive in the world? You pay an extra $2-3 a gallon for gas in Europe to pay for that "free" healthcare. That gets damn expensive. Several European countries are almost bankrupt because of medical costs. What is the medical cost per person in the USA vs the next 5 most expensive countries in the world? |
OT health care
"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 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 Believe or not. I do not give a **** what you believe. |
OT health care
"bpuharic" wrote in message ... 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? Go stick your head in a toilet and flush. You are both sick and stupid. |
OT health care
"bpuharic" wrote in message ... On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:07:54 -0700, "Bill McKee" wrote: "bpuharic" wrote in message . .. On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:11:33 -0700, "Bill McKee" 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. ROFLMAO!! hey moron ever been unemployed? ever priced COBRA? ever looked at how much you get in unemployment benefits? ****. you know zip about anything at all 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. except, until obama came along. insurance companies could tell you to go **** yourself and to the right wing, that's the voice of god. I was unemployed 7 times. Happy now. I went with 6 startups. So I got to see unemployment a couple times. A couple times I was unemployed too short of a time to collect unemployment insurance. And Cobra can only cost 10% more than the company pays the insurance company. Frigging idiot. I also banked a bunch of my income for the lean times. Sure, I got paid very well for a middle class worker, but having an engineering degree and lots of talent helps. What kind of a cars does you and the wife drive? How big a boat and how much for the slip? Maybe you should consider learning economics. |
OT health care
wrote in message
... On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:52:46 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: According to the right wing crowd, you'd go to jail. More bs. Feel free to continue to blame actuaries. I suppose that begs the question, what is the penalty for not following that law? (I suppose I could look it up) There are a whole range of penalties for not following laws. For this, here's a link I believe is accurate. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/yo...2consumer.html Short answer "Although most Americans who do not obtain health insurance would face a federal penalty starting in 2014, many experts question how strict the enforcement of that penalty would actually be. The first year, consumers who did not have insurance would owe $95, or 1 percent of income, whichever is greater. But the penalty would subsequently rise, reaching $695, or 2 percent of income. " ... or basically nothing will happen to them if they don't buy insurance. Who will be the insurance cop?. Don't know... who's the car insurance cop? You get stopped and you don't have insurance, you get to talk to the DMV. I don't blame actuaries, I just acknowledge what they do for a living. Would you be happier if I just said the greedy insurance company nazis are raising your rates heh... remove "nazis" and yes. What, you think that might insult nazis? ;-) ... and it is actuaries who tell the greedy insurance companies how much they need to raise the rates to stay in business. My only point. Ok. -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
wrote in message
... On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:54:12 -0700, "nom=de=plume" wrote: I only questioned, how do you think his first crash will go. It usually costs an airline about a quarter to a half billion dollars in a crash. I imagine a big part of the ticket price will be insurance. No idea. It might put them out of business. It might be anything between that and a big payout. I wonder if insurance is even an option. That is why it might be in the national interest to give them sovereign immunity. If that is our only way into space and they get sued out of business we might be back buying a ride from the Russians. I assume, for that reason, we will still have a military space program. It will only be science that gets privatized. They could go for a "man rating" on the Atlas rocket and be flying pretty quick. Just dust off some of those 30 year old capsules and shoot. I would go... in a heartbeat. -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
"Bill McKee" 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 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 Believe or not. I do not give a **** what you believe. Yet you can't help but say something. Weren't you going to ignore me?? -- Nom=de=Plume |
OT health care
On Apr 17, 9:04*pm, "mmc" 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. All NASA does these days is administer contracts. The current shuttle design has been in service for damn near 30 years with a planned lifespan something like 20 years and a goal of a low cost delivery system to near earth orbit. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:05 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com