On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 07:50:36 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

In the long run though, a prosperous, healthy America is best for Canada's well being.

===

Yes, but you're not going to get it with the current administration.
They are too busy trying to give away the store and make unrealistic
promises.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 07:50:36 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

In the long run though, a prosperous, healthy America is best for Canada's well being.

===

Yes, but you're not going to get it with the current administration.
They are too busy trying to give away the store and make unrealistic
promises.

Actually it has been a bunch of administrations.

In article , says...

On 10/2/2013 2:51 PM, Boating All Out wrote:


I'm kinda fond of both results, because each has its end purpose.
The ACA vastly improves health care options for the uninsured.

You do understand that this is not health care, it's health insurance
only and most projections say the "care" won't be there.....

Cite those "projections" please!

In article , says...

On 10/2/2013 1:10 PM, Boating All Out wrote:


Hehe. You teabaggers are really ****ed off, eh?
Good. That's Obams'a "secret plan."

yes, we know he is being a ****ing asshole to half the country, just to
be well, an asshole....

And the vulgar low life insanity starts!!!

wrote:
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 10:36:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...

On 10/2/2013 2:51 PM, Boating All Out wrote:


I'm kinda fond of both results, because each has its end purpose.
The ACA vastly improves health care options for the uninsured.

You do understand that this is not health care, it's health insurance
only and most projections say the "care" won't be there.....

Cite those "projections" please!
http://www.hrsa.gov/shortage/

Just because you have an ACA plan, does not mean the doctor accepts that
insurance. If the payout is too low, why accept the patient?

wrote:
On Thu, 03 Oct 2013 17:25:45 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013 10:36:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...

On 10/2/2013 2:51 PM, Boating All Out wrote:


I'm kinda fond of both results, because each has its end purpose.
The ACA vastly improves health care options for the uninsured.

You do understand that this is not health care, it's health insurance
only and most projections say the "care" won't be there.....

Cite those "projections" please!
http://www.hrsa.gov/shortage/

Just because you have an ACA plan, does not mean the doctor accepts that
insurance. If the payout is too low, why accept the patient?

That seems to be the problem with the plans I am being offered under
Medicare. My doctor is not talking the AARP/United Health care plan.

I may end up with a more expensive Humana plan. Aetna is pretty
unpopular here too.
My oncologist stopped taking that last year.

When our doctor retired, we could not get the doctor we wanted, as he did
not accept new Medicare patients. So we went with part of the Sutter
Health Group. Large PPO here abouts.

wrote:
On Tue, 01 Oct 2013 12:42:27 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:


I think I read the federal governmental shutdown classifies the Bureau
of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms a nonessential service. Does that mean
no federal background checks for a while and therefore no legitimate
firearms sales?

snerk


I assume they shut down the service on the computer although no human
intervention is actually required. I am sure the system itself is
still running .
Which demonstrates how non-essential all of these people are. It's time
to send many of them packing and looking for new jobs that *we* don't
have to pay for.