OT health care
 

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 17/04/2010 5:20 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 17/04/2010 11:30 AM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 17/04/2010 9:38 AM, hk wrote:
On 4/17/10 11:28 AM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 17/04/2010 7:19 AM, mmc wrote:

Our problem is that our government and government contracting has
become a
huge social program, we make jobs where no one breaks a sweat and
get
little
in return.
Bingo. Which makes us tax paying producers just slaves for the
government and associated lard.


Tax paying producer? You're unemployed, remember? What the hell do
you
produce, other than poop out your exhaust pipe?

Not yet, but planning on retiring in this decade some time, maybe
sooner
than later. Depends when I have had enough of working for other
people.
Ready to drop off the producer tread mill.

That way our leaders can borrow more.

--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.


Meta message from Canuck: I'm about to be fired.

Sure more lucrative than quitting. Recent pension contributions vests
sooner too. My attitude is make my day. But unfortunately not going to
happen that way. I pretty much at least have to quit before 54 3/4 as I
don't want my pension locked in where I am at.

Plus I don't have to pay for the liberal increases in taxes a coming.
Added bonus.
--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.


Yeah, and now you'll tell us your employee of the year. You're a joke!
Why
would anyone want you around as an employee.

Said the unemployed unemployable looking for "free" healthcare on someone
elses dime.

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


Said the business owner who's finances you could only dream about while you
sit on your porch and smoke crack.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 19:04:30 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:


Said the unemployed unemployable looking for "free" healthcare on
someone elses dime.

let's see. in canada you have 'free' healthcare and everyone is
covered

in the states, our healthcare is 70% more expensive, and doesnt cover
everyone.

yet you think ours is better.




He's got it so screw everyone else. He's a great humanitarian.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:21:07 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:22:20 -0500, "Peter (Yes, that one)"
wrote:


You have not defined "defensive medicine."
Whenever I hear that phrase used I wonder what it means.
"Unnecessary tests" is often used in conjunction with "defensive
medicine."

An example of defensive medicine is when the doctor gives someone an
MRI when there is really nothing in their diagnosis that justifies an
MRI but the doctor is afraid if anything ever did go south he would
have to defend that decision.
I had that happen to me.


Why didn't you refuse? I've refused certain procedures. It's no big deal.
The patient is the one who's in charge.


The short answer, My wife's insurance was supposed to cover it.
It turns out, about half of it.
That is part of the problem with insurance. As long as something is
covered, people will do it, whether they need to or not.


You're still under no obligation to have a procedure you don't agree with.
Just because a doctor says it doesn't make it God's law.

Example: I jammed my finger a couple years ago. I went to the urgent care
because it swelled up like crazy and turned red. The PA ordered an X-ray and
put me on anti-biotics for the obvious infection. I was told to make an
appointment in a week with my regular doc just to be sure. It was quite a
bit better, but I went in anyway, since it was still a little swollen and
it's my right hand. My doc said it was possible that I had a hairline
fracture and wanted to do another X-ray, since his equipment was digital and
he'd be able to see it. I asked what the treatment would be if it was broken
vs. just tendon bruising. No difference. Thus, I said, no X-ray.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:22:17 -0700, "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.

Most bookies are honest and hard working too but that doesn't mean
they are good for the community.

It's fair disengenous to equate lawyers and bookies. Outside of a few areas
in the country, bookmaking is illegal. Lawyers are doing the work of the
courts.

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

OT health care
 

"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?


You're wrong. "We the people" was written (primarily) by Jefferson, a
lawyer. The people didn't write anything.

Also, you're an idiot.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

"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

OT health care
 

"Larry" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...

On 16/04/2010 11:16 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:

Here's my question. We all know that the present system can't go on
working. We can't have 15% of the population not have some way to pay
for health care and at the same time pass laws that force hospitals to
care for them anyway. That's like having a law that a restaurant has
to serve you even though you are obviously not going to pay. Hey, you
could be starving. Do both sides agree that what we have now isn't
going to go on working forever? If so then at the end of the day
don't we really just have 2 options.

Option 1, figure out some way to get those people back into the system
with some minimal benefits as the rest of us.

Option 2, no tickey, no laundry. You can't pay the the hospital is
within it's rights to turn you away.

I'm not advocating one or the other with this post. I'm just asking
at the 20,000 foot level is there a 3rd choice I'm missing?

Yes.

3) Tax everyone 25% of their gross income from all sources, it can only
be
deducted if you can show you and all of your dependants are insured to a
government minimum. Next, government will insure the rest provided they
are legal residents with a valid social security number and not in
arrears
with taxes. No more illegal care unless charity funds it. Then hike
taxes to cover the costs where the 25% does not cover it. Government
care
will be minimum care, no exotic or super expensive stuff. It may be
rrationed and cannot be used to fix stuff like botched implants or sex
changes. Revenue for health care goes to health care, it cannot be
skimed
or reallocated by corrupt congress.

Either a tough and realistic 3) or do 2). 1) Is a blankj check to screw
taxpayers.

--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.


You're proving to be more of an idiot than first meets the eye. I don't
know
about you, but I don't really want really sick people roaming the
streets.
Everyone who's sick needs to get care, as it is now, except that now it's
way too expensive.

Botched implants? Like a penile implant? Or, like a sex change operation
you'd be planning?


Right now it's free for those who can't pay - including illegal aliens.
Hospitals aren't refusing life-saving treatment.


You're looney. Please tell us what penile implants and sex change operations
for illegal aliens have to do with life-saving treatment.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 16/04/2010 10:07 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 16/04/2010 11:16 AM, jamesgangnc wrote:
Here's my question. We all know that the present system can't go on
working. We can't have 15% of the population not have some way to pay
for health care and at the same time pass laws that force hospitals to
care for them anyway. That's like having a law that a restaurant has
to serve you even though you are obviously not going to pay. Hey, you
could be starving. Do both sides agree that what we have now isn't
going to go on working forever? If so then at the end of the day
don't we really just have 2 options.

Option 1, figure out some way to get those people back into the system
with some minimal benefits as the rest of us.

Option 2, no tickey, no laundry. You can't pay the the hospital is
within it's rights to turn you away.

I'm not advocating one or the other with this post. I'm just asking
at the 20,000 foot level is there a 3rd choice I'm missing?

Yes.

3) Tax everyone 25% of their gross income from all sources, it can only
be
deducted if you can show you and all of your dependants are insured to a
government minimum. Next, government will insure the rest provided they
are legal residents with a valid social security number and not in
arrears
with taxes. No more illegal care unless charity funds it. Then hike
taxes to cover the costs where the 25% does not cover it. Government
care
will be minimum care, no exotic or super expensive stuff. It may be
rrationed and cannot be used to fix stuff like botched implants or sex
changes. Revenue for health care goes to health care, it cannot be
skimed
or reallocated by corrupt congress.

Either a tough and realistic 3) or do 2). 1) Is a blankj check to screw
taxpayers.

--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.


You're proving to be more of an idiot than first meets the eye. I don't
know
about you, but I don't really want really sick people roaming the
streets.
Everyone who's sick needs to get care, as it is now, except that now it's
way too expensive.

Botched implants? Like a penile implant? Or, like a sex change operation
you'd be planning?

Nope, just citing that some people have been known to get a $5K plastic
surgery, it goes wrong and they need $100K of publically funded health
care to fix it. Stupid abuse really.

Nope, keeping my parts and adding nothing. But it is clear you are beyond
hope, no medical cure for you exists at any price.

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


"Some people" right. From Mars maybe. Do you have parts to keep? I doubt it.
Certainly no brain to speak of.

--
Nom=de=Plume

OT health care
 

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?

OT health care
 

In article m,
says...


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

Most of the government just administers contracts. Government
contracting is a big industry in the Washington DC area. You can't walk
through Arlington, Crystal City, Tysons Corner, Reston or Herndon
without tripping over an 8A firm or other firm that is surviving on
Government contracts.