http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE53S92V20090429
Quoted from the linked article:
She went to several private clinics where she was given various diagnoses and various treatments. However, her condition worsened...
So how does the fact that private clinics in Mexico failed to identify and treat the virus relate to nationalized health care?
And why would we model our health care system after a third world country rather than, say, Germany or the Netherlands?
We don't need nationalized health care. We just need to make it ALL not-for-profit. No medical decision should be based on raising the bottom line for shareholders of HMO's, Insurance Companies, or Pharmaceutical Companies. They should all be forced to non-profits as no one should profit from the illness of others. And, the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies have only kept people sick in order to increase their profits.
Not a bad idea Dan. The outrageous cost of health care is caused as much by lawyers than anything else. Doctors and Institutions have to protect themselves from $50million law suits.
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 01, 2009, 11:08:14 PM
Not a bad idea Dan. The outrageous cost of health care is caused as much by lawyers than anything else. Doctors and Institutions have to protect themselves from $50million law suits.
Again with the Rush Limbaugh parroting? Dude,
learn to think for yourself!
Quote from: Exterminator on May 02, 2009, 10:11:42 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 01, 2009, 11:08:14 PM
Not a bad idea Dan. The outrageous cost of health care is caused as much by lawyers than anything else. Doctors and Institutions have to protect themselves from $50million law suits.
Again with the Rush Limbaugh parroting? Dude, learn to think for yourself!
I think it is more the financial institution take over of health care. The doctors are also to blame in that they no longer practice medicine, they only know the latest drug-rep's answer for the target of the week; high cholesterol, high blood pressure, PAD, et al.
If we went strictly not-for-profit, the health care workers would still make the same money, they could still be sued, but ALL the financial incentives for denying treatment, coverage, and bad drug policies would go away. There would also be a motivation by the pharmaceuticals to cure people, not continue to make them sick, or provide the illusion of better health from money-making drugs.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 02, 2009, 10:11:42 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 01, 2009, 11:08:14 PM
Not a bad idea Dan. The outrageous cost of health care is caused as much by lawyers than anything else. Doctors and Institutions have to protect themselves from $50million law suits.
Again with the Rush Limbaugh parroting? Dude, learn to think for yourself!
Maybe great minds think alike Ex; It is possible for more than one person to form the same conclusion without hearing the others first. Good grief! I don't listen to Limbaugh but have agreed with some of the stuff I heard he said. So shoot me!
Quote from: mcgonser on May 03, 2009, 06:21:14 PMI don't listen to Limbaugh but have agreed with some of the stuff I heard he said. So shoot me!
You really shouldn't admit that in public, however...
Quote from: Exterminator on May 02, 2009, 10:11:42 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 01, 2009, 11:08:14 PM
Not a bad idea Dan. The outrageous cost of health care is caused as much by lawyers than anything else. Doctors and Institutions have to protect themselves from $50million law suits.
Again with the Rush Limbaugh parroting? Dude, learn to think for yourself!
Can't say I've listened to Rush very much in a long time. I'm not much for fear mongering and spreading hate....unlike you EX.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 03, 2009, 06:21:14 PM
Quote from: Exterminator on May 02, 2009, 10:11:42 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 01, 2009, 11:08:14 PM
Not a bad idea Dan. The outrageous cost of health care is caused as much by lawyers than anything else. Doctors and Institutions have to protect themselves from $50million law suits.
Again with the Rush Limbaugh parroting? Dude, learn to think for yourself!
Maybe great minds think alike Ex; It is possible for more than one person to form the same conclusion without hearing the others first. Good grief! I don't listen to Limbaugh but have agreed with some of the stuff I heard he said. So shoot me!
I'm sure nothing would give me more pleasure but I've got to call bullshit on your all having come to the same conclusion because there is no viable source of information that lead you there.
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 03, 2009, 10:31:41 PM
Can't say I've listened to Rush very much in a long time. I'm not much for fear mongering and spreading hate....unlike you EX.
LMFAO! Yeah, I'm a fear-monger alright. :rolleyes:
You really don't read well; do you?
Quote from: Exterminator on May 04, 2009, 07:22:59 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 03, 2009, 10:31:41 PM
Can't say I've listened to Rush very much in a long time. I'm not much for fear mongering and spreading hate....unlike you EX.
LMFAO! Yeah, I'm a fear-monger alright. :rolleyes:
You really don't read well; do you?
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm14/mcgonser/big2454718.jpg)
Yep, when I think of health care, I think of comedian limbaugh (or is that limpball?). He epitomizes our current state; fat, stupid and addicted to prescription drugs.
For a minute there I thought you were talking about Hollywood and Media members. Just drop the fat, because they definitely keep themselves thin. But the rest fits them like a tee. :)
Quote from: Exterminator on May 04, 2009, 07:22:59 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 03, 2009, 10:31:41 PM
Can't say I've listened to Rush very much in a long time. I'm not much for fear mongering and spreading hate....unlike you EX.
LMFAO! Yeah, I'm a fear-monger alright. :rolleyes:
You really don't read well; do you?
I read well enough to know that you are a bigoted a$$hole that expresses contempt toward anyone that has a different opinion than you.
At least it keeps me somewhat amused.
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 04, 2009, 10:04:47 PM
Quote from: Exterminator on May 04, 2009, 07:22:59 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 03, 2009, 10:31:41 PM
Can't say I've listened to Rush very much in a long time. I'm not much for fear mongering and spreading hate....unlike you EX.
LMFAO! Yeah, I'm a fear-monger alright. :rolleyes:
You really don't read well; do you?
I read well enough to know that you are a bigoted a$$hole that expresses contempt toward anyone that has a different opinion than you.
At least it keeps me somewhat amused.
It might appear that way when YOU are always on the losing end of the argument. I don't see contempt from Ex, just valid, but opposing views from yours.
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 04, 2009, 10:04:47 PM
Quote from: Exterminator on May 04, 2009, 07:22:59 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 03, 2009, 10:31:41 PM
Can't say I've listened to Rush very much in a long time. I'm not much for fear mongering and spreading hate....unlike you EX.
LMFAO! Yeah, I'm a fear-monger alright. :rolleyes:
You really don't read well; do you?
I read well enough to know that you are a bigoted a$$hole that expresses contempt toward anyone that has a different opinion than you.
Do you know what a bigot is you illiterate twit? And you have opinions all right; they just aren't yours. Now go brush your mullet.
How did we get from the assertion that the inability of private Mexican clinics to diagnose swine flu should serve as the model for nationalized health care, to EX and DB hurling multi-syllable ad hominem attacks at each other? Don't get me wrong -- I'm not complaining. I love a good bash-fest (so long as you cite your sources.) I just think I missed a step.
He started it. :biggrin:
Come to think of it how many talented actors have we lost to drugs???????????
I was refering to the quote that Rush was a prescription addict. I find it funny that anyone from hollywood even ever throw sticks on someone with a drug problem. I also find it funny that any politician throws stones at every thing but drinking, when alcohol is a major problem with them. Isn't it interesting they are'nt putting taxes on booze?
Afraid that they will have to pay it I guess.
A better question is...why should anyone care?. People seem to be more concerned with the latest Hollywood gossip and actions of the self-abosrbed than important issues that actually effect them.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 08:18:17 AM
Come to think of it how many talented actors have we lost to drugs???????????
I was refering to the quote that Rush was a prescription addict. I find it funny that anyone from hollywood even ever throw sticks on someone with a drug problem.
That's because, being so fond of it yourself, you fail to understand the hypocrisy of Rush saying on his show that all drug addicts should be sent to prison for life then having himself exposed as one. How many of the actors who've died criticized others for that same activity beforehand? Sort of like the republican poiticians who are caught in their gay activities...the issue isn't so much what they're doing but that they've spoken out critically previously about others doing the same thing.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 05, 2009, 09:47:56 AM
A better question is...why should anyone care?. People seem to be more concerned with the latest Hollywood gossip and actions of the self-abosrbed than important issues that actually effect them.
At least those people who swear by Fox News.
Today's front page news ....
Jealous Gisele
Supermodel digs claws into hubby Tom Brady, doesn't let him out of her sight at NYC event
Jessica's in Big Trouble
EXCLUSIVE: Jessica Simpson opens up about her future after failed stabs at movies and country music | NEW VANITY FAIR PICS
Secret Oprah Tapes?
Author James Frey, famous for his embellished memoirs, claims to have embarrassing audiotapes of talk queen
Oedipus LaBeouf?
Report: Shia LaBeouf tells Playboy magazine that his nudist mother is the 'sexiest woman I know'
Courteney a Backstabber?
Cox, supposedly best pals with former 'Friends' co-star Jennifer Aniston, spotted chatting with Brad Pitt
Plastic Surgery Disasters
PHOTOS: What have celebrities like Lisa Rinna, Mickey Rourke, and Donatella Versace done to themselves?
Quote from: Exterminator on May 05, 2009, 10:02:36 AM
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 08:18:17 AM
Come to think of it how many talented actors have we lost to drugs???????????
I was refering to the quote that Rush was a prescription addict. I find it funny that anyone from hollywood even ever throw sticks on someone with a drug problem.
That's because, being so fond of it yourself, you fail to understand the hypocrisy of Rush saying on his show that all drug addicts should be sent to prison for life then having himself exposed as one. How many of the actors who've died criticized others for that same activity beforehand? Sort of like the republican poiticians who are caught in their gay activities...the issue isn't so much what they're doing but that they've spoken out critically previously about others doing the same thing.
I see, no democrats have gone to rehab for drugs or alcohol?? No demo's have ever been outed for being Gay? Definitely none have been exposed, in more ways than one, as skirt chasers????? God bless the pure and good Democrat politicians, may they live long and prosper. Amen (sic)
Quote from: Exterminator on May 05, 2009, 10:02:36 AM
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 08:18:17 AM
Come to think of it how many talented actors have we lost to drugs???????????
I was refering to the quote that Rush was a prescription addict. I find it funny that anyone from hollywood even ever throw sticks on someone with a drug problem.
That's because, being so fond of it yourself, you fail to understand the hypocrisy of Rush saying on his show that all drug addicts should be sent to prison for life then having himself exposed as one. How many of the actors who've died criticized others for that same activity beforehand? Sort of like the republican poiticians who are caught in their gay activities...the issue isn't so much what they're doing but that they've spoken out critically previously about others doing the same thing.
I think you are assuming Rush said such a thing....you probably NEVER even listened to Rush...you simply do as you blame others on...and don't research but ... CNN said so, or MSNBC reported...you can be JUST as guilty Ex.
you are sterotyping...and assuming.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 10:23:00 AM
I see, no democrats have gone to rehab for drugs or alcohol??
No demo's have ever been outed for being Gay?
Definitely none have been exposed, in more ways than one, as skirt chasers?????
Do you even understand the meaning of the word 'hypocrisy'?
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 10:23:00 AM
I see, no democrats have gone to rehab for drugs or alcohol??
Name the dem who went to rehab
after having publicly supported life sentences for addicts. QuoteNo demo's have ever been outed for being Gay?
Name the dem who was outed for being gay
after having built his political career on a so-called 'family values' platform and having consistently voted against issues on gay rights.Are you honestly so dumb you don't know the meaning of
hypocrisy?
Quote from: Bo D on May 05, 2009, 10:31:59 AM
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 10:23:00 AM
I see, no democrats have gone to rehab for drugs or alcohol??
No demo's have ever been outed for being Gay?
Definitely none have been exposed, in more ways than one, as skirt chasers?????
Do you even understand the meaning of the word 'hypocrisy'?
Do You?
Quote from: Exterminator on May 05, 2009, 10:35:37 AM
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 10:23:00 AM
I see, no democrats have gone to rehab for drugs or alcohol??
Name the dem who went to rehab after having publicly supported life sentences for addicts.
QuoteNo demo's have ever been outed for being Gay?
Name the dem who was outed for being gay after having built his political career on a so-called 'family values' platform and having consistently voted against issues on gay rights.
Are you honestly so dumb you don't know the meaning of hypocrisy?
Do You know the meaning of hypocrisy??Give me a break. LOL
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 05, 2009, 10:26:34 AM
I think you are assuming Rush said such a thing....you probably NEVER even listened to Rush...you simply do as you blame others on...and don't research but ... CNN said so, or MSNBC reported...you can be JUST as guilty Ex.
you are sterotyping...and assuming.
Oh, bullshit...Rush limbaugh absolutely said in 1995 that drug users ""ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up." Pull your head out of his ass and look it up.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 10:40:04 AM
Quote from: Exterminator on May 05, 2009, 10:35:37 AM
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 10:23:00 AM
I see, no democrats have gone to rehab for drugs or alcohol??
Name the dem who went to rehab after having publicly supported life sentences for addicts.
QuoteNo demo's have ever been outed for being Gay?
Name the dem who was outed for being gay after having built his political career on a so-called 'family values' platform and having consistently voted against issues on gay rights.
Are you honestly so dumb you don't know the meaning of hypocrisy?
Do You know the meaning of hypocrisy??Give me a break. LOL
Really?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 05, 2009, 10:26:34 AM
I think you are assuming Rush said such a thing....you probably NEVER even listened to Rush...you simply do as you blame others on...and don't research but ... CNN said so, or MSNBC reported...you can be JUST as guilty Ex.
you are sterotyping...and assuming.
Is Fox News good enough for you?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,99731,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,99731,00.html)
"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Limbaugh said on his short-lived television show on Oct. 5, 1995.
To get back to the subject: From what people from other countries have said, it does not look like it would be a good thing. I have never heard anything good about NHC from those that have it.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 10:38:35 AM
Quote from: Bo D on May 05, 2009, 10:31:59 AM
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 10:23:00 AM
I see, no democrats have gone to rehab for drugs or alcohol??
No demo's have ever been outed for being Gay?
Definitely none have been exposed, in more ways than one, as skirt chasers?????
Do you even understand the meaning of the word 'hypocrisy'?
Do You?
I couldn't find the definition on the front page of Fox News ... I got too busy reading ...
Secret Oprah Tapes?
Author James Frey, famous for his embellished memoirs, claims to have embarrassing audiotapes of talk queen
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 11:13:16 AM
To get back to the subject: From what people from other countries have said, it does not look like it would be a good thing. I have never heard anything good about NHC from those that have it.
Really? What people from what countries?
I would have to ask that too. Seems that Canada has some form of it, and I've talked to several Canadians that are happy with it, and can't believe that we have to go through what we do here for health care.
What was that stuff people were fed in "Brave New World"? I think it was called Soma. Well, we're being fed Soma today by the bucketful; I'm referring to reality TV, sportsbiz, Hollywood infotainment, talk radio hosts with an agenda who pass themselves off as journalists, and the nauseating list goes on and on. We are just TOO well connected, today, my friends, and if you don't want your brain to be rotted away gradually, my advice is to wean yourselves away from a steady diet of crap; be very selective of WHAT and HOW MUCH media you choose to be exposed to. Better to suffer from a little ignorance than to have your gray matter overstuffed with meaningless trivialities. :police:
"If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free."
P.J. O'Rourke
Quote from: mcgonser on May 05, 2009, 11:13:16 AM
To get back to the subject: From what people from other countries have said, it does not look like it would be a good thing. I have never heard anything good about NHC from those that have it.
Source, please.
I have only an anecdotal source at hand, but it seems to be more than has been offered so far.
Ah hem, a close friend who is a a resident of British Columbia is also a physical therapist. She tells me quality of care is excellent, the follow-up is better than she has seen offered to her friends in the U.S., and the wait for procedures is never lengthy -- except for elective surgery. In that case the patient can pay for private care and be treated immediately if he prefers. She is speaking as a provider as well as a consumer.
I showed you mine, let's see yours.
Mine was a friend going to school here from Canada (pharmacy) who said that yes their critical care was good but that all the other was long waits. Also that they might say that an obese person or smoker did not get the surgery because of their habits. He thought this was unfair. Then we had a friend from England who talked about the long waits to see a dr and the waiting lists for elective surgery. They were impressed with our health care system at the time.
Thank you, Mcgonser. I think our friends are saying the same thing. Care you MUST have is immediately available, and high quality. Other things require a wait, unless you are willing to pay the price for private care.
From a personal standpoint, this sounds good to me, because I never see a doctor unless I am bleeding from an artery. :wink:
As for denying some procedures to the obese or the nicotine addicted ... that's just the way it is when return on investment is thrown into the mix. I am assuming these people could get the procedures if they paid the private cost.
If I haven't mentioned it before, I am grateful for your direct and on-point replies. Sometimes I like the free-for-all, but I find you have views worth thinking about. Thank you for sharing them.
Thank You! I have wondered, do they get their drugs (prescriptions) as cheap in Canada as we can getting them from Canada?
Yes. That is why the pharmaceutical companies lobby for a ban on the imports.
Well, I am thankful for Wal Marts $4 list of medicines. Its not the newest and best but they work ok for me.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 05, 2009, 07:10:16 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 04, 2009, 10:04:47 PM
Quote from: Exterminator on May 04, 2009, 07:22:59 AM
Quote from: DannyBoy on May 03, 2009, 10:31:41 PM
Can't say I've listened to Rush very much in a long time. I'm not much for fear mongering and spreading hate....unlike you EX.
LMFAO! Yeah, I'm a fear-monger alright. :rolleyes:
You really don't read well; do you?
I read well enough to know that you are a bigoted a$$hole that expresses contempt toward anyone that has a different opinion than you.
Do you know what a bigot is you illiterate twit? And you have opinions all right; they just aren't yours. Now go brush your mullet.
1. (adj) bigoted
blindly and obstinately attached to some creed or opinion and intolerant toward others....
You are probably one of those guys whose actually 5' 3", 250 lbs, and balding who sits around all day surfing for porn....then gets on message boards and pretends to be a bigshot to make himself feel important.
LOL....uhm....I don't think so. Unless his height and weight has drastically changed in the last 3 years. (Dang that's a long time, but not long enough to shrink to 5'3")
Ex, everytime that someone tries to describe you, I have a near uncontrollable urge to post one of those pictures from the bowling meetup. :wink:
Quote from: LOsborne on May 05, 2009, 07:42:45 PM
Yes. That is why the pharmaceutical companies lobby for a ban on the imports.
And therein lies the rub; US pharmaceuticals run the show. They advertise constantly to SELL MORE PILLS. Their whole reason for existence is PROFIT. They have no incentive to cure anything. That won't SELL MORE PILLS. In fact, they have every incentive to make and keep people sick in order to SELL MORE PILLS. That is why they continually invent illnesses (like the good/bad cholesterol hoax) and constantly scare people into "ASK YOUR DOCTOR ABOUT...._______(insert drug/malady here)" AND LOBBY EACH AND EVERY DOCTOR in the country to PUSH THE LATEST DRUG. Drug reps hit Dr's offices EVERYDAY OF THE YEAR to push the latest malady/drug to the point that Dr's only know the latest from the drug companies and don't know anything about real health care.
The only group more motivated to MAKE A PROFIT are the financial institutions that own health care; Insurance companies and their hacks, HMO's, et al. With the Financials owning health care and the Pharmaceuticals owning the practice of medicine, please tell me how our system is better than any of those socialist bastard's form of health care where CARE is the motive and PROFIT is not.
ooh that was so good dan foster!!!
Quote from: dan foster on May 05, 2009, 10:37:11 PM
And therein lies the rub; US pharmaceuticals run the show. They advertise constantly to SELL MORE PILLS. Their whole reason for existence is PROFIT. They have no incentive to cure anything. That won't SELL MORE PILLS. In fact, they have every incentive to make and keep people sick in order to SELL MORE PILLS. That is why they continually invent illnesses (like the good/bad cholesterol hoax) and constantly scare people into "ASK YOUR DOCTOR ABOUT...._______(insert drug/malady here)" AND LOBBY EACH AND EVERY DOCTOR in the country to PUSH THE LATEST DRUG. Drug reps hit Dr's offices EVERYDAY OF THE YEAR to push the latest malady/drug to the point that Dr's only know the latest from the drug companies and don't know anything about real health care.
The only group more motivated to MAKE A PROFIT are the financial institutions that own health care; Insurance companies and their hacks, HMO's, et al. With the Financials owning health care and the Pharmaceuticals owning the practice of medicine, please tell me how our system is better than any of those socialist bastard's form of health care where CARE is the motive and PROFIT is not.
Quote from: dan foster on May 05, 2009, 10:37:11 PM
And therein lies the rub; US pharmaceuticals run the show. They advertise constantly to SELL MORE PILLS. Their whole reason for existence is PROFIT. They have no incentive to cure anything. That won't SELL MORE PILLS. In fact, they have every incentive to make and keep people sick in order to SELL MORE PILLS. That is why they continually invent illnesses (like the good/bad cholesterol hoax) and constantly scare people into "ASK YOUR DOCTOR ABOUT...._______(insert drug/malady here)" AND LOBBY EACH AND EVERY DOCTOR in the country to PUSH THE LATEST DRUG. Drug reps hit Dr's offices EVERYDAY OF THE YEAR to push the latest malady/drug to the point that Dr's only know the latest from the drug companies and don't know anything about real health care.
The only group more motivated to MAKE A PROFIT are the financial institutions that own health care; Insurance companies and their hacks, HMO's, et al. With the Financials owning health care and the Pharmaceuticals owning the practice of medicine, please tell me how our system is better than any of those socialist bastard's form of health care where CARE is the motive and PROFIT is not.
Okay, Dan, believe it or not I somewhat agree with you on this....and hold on....as much as I detest government involvement on such issues.....I think this IS a case where serious action HAS to take place....I think somehow, ALL lobbyist have GOT to be stopped....ALL GOV money needs to be stopped to all pharmaceutical companies....
I STILL believe that Free Enterprise is the best option to restore our Healthcare system...but we have GOT to rid the fraudulent and criminal activities..in the pharmaceutical industry, the insurance industry...and our Government, which IS a HUGE part of that part of equation....we need some congressmen with integrity (if that is even possible)...
I am very much against government regulations....but somehow, the BUCK has GOT to stop with the corruption in this industry....
Quote from: pariann on May 05, 2009, 09:17:28 PM
LOL....uhm....I don't think so. Unless his height and weight has drastically changed in the last 3 years. (Dang that's a long time, but not long enough to shrink to 5'3")
Ex, everytime that someone tries to describe you, I have a near uncontrollable urge to post one of those pictures from the bowling meetup. :wink:
Gee, they'd hate seeing that; huh?
Probably not really. But out of respect for another posters possible desires...I keep my urges to myself. :wink:
Desires? :eek:
Desires, wishes, wants, yada yada yada
Needs? You know I'm all about the needy! :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 12, 2009, 09:04:27 AM
Okay, Dan, believe it or not I somewhat agree with you on this....and hold on....as much as I detest government involvement on such issues.....I think this IS a case where serious action HAS to take place....I think somehow, ALL lobbyist have GOT to be stopped....ALL GOV money needs to be stopped to all pharmaceutical companies....
I STILL believe that Free Enterprise is the best option to restore our Healthcare system...but we have GOT to rid the fraudulent and criminal activities..in the pharmaceutical industry, the insurance industry...and our Government, which IS a HUGE part of that part of equation....we need some congressmen with integrity (if that is even possible)...
I am very much against government regulations....but somehow, the BUCK has GOT to stop with the corruption in this industry....
Free enterprise might well be the answer, but it has to be a not-for-profit endeavor and take all profit motives out of the business, period.
Dan, our whole economic structure is built upon the free enterprise, or capitallist, system. You can look at other countries and see that without this there is no motivation to succeed. That is what America is about and what has gotten us here. The trouble now is that Goverment wants to run everything, what part of socialism do you hear, and it will ruin us. We have had a good system in the past and need to relook and re-evaluate it. The first thing we need to do is get the greed out of it. Lobbyist and congress ho's who have corrupted it. That is my opinion.
Greed is the impetus that fuels a capitalist system and isn't the problem. Willingness to lie, cheat and steal is. As a society, we have at some point decided that since money is good then anything done to accumulate it is good as well and that is where the problem lies.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 18, 2009, 10:06:59 AM
Greed is the impetus that fuels a capitalist system and isn't the problem. Willingness to lie, cheat and steal is. As a society, we have at some point decided that since money is good then anything done to accumulate it is good as well and that is where the problem lies.
Willingness to lie, cheat and steal are the results of greed...I don't think our society as a whole believes that lying, cheating and stealing are acceptable to get ahead in this world.....I think all people want is the ability to achieve wealth and dreams, without government making it MORE difficult.......i.e.....Tax Parties.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 18, 2009, 10:18:51 AM
Willingness to lie, cheat and steal are the results of greed...I don't think our society as a whole believes that lying, cheating and stealing are acceptable to get ahead in this world...
And yet it keeps happening over and over again...Enron, WorldCom, the banking industry, et.al.; these people absolutely knew that they were screwing people to make themselves wealthy. The trend seems to be that the end justifies the means.
Quote..I think all people want is the ability to achieve wealth and dreams, without government making it MORE difficult.......i.e.....Tax Parties.
Tea parties do nothing to help anyone achieve wealth or the realization of his/her dreams; they are nothing but bitch sessions and are a colossal waste of time and energy.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 18, 2009, 10:29:55 AM
And yet it keeps happening over and over again...Enron, WorldCom, the banking industry, et.al.; these people absolutely knew that they were screwing people to make themselves wealthy. The trend seems to be that the end justifies the means.
I agree there will ALWAYS be those who put self interest and greed, ahead of everyone else..for power and money...always has been and always will be.....We need to hold these guys accountable and punish them to the full extent when the break the laws...also, people who want something for nothing are to blame....those who put their trust into companies like Enron and sunk their retirement and future into places like that so they can get BIG returns can only be help partially accountable...EVERYBODY want's the quick buck and an easy ride....
Quote from: Exterminator on May 18, 2009, 10:29:55 AM
Tea parties do nothing to help anyone achieve wealth or the realization of his/her dreams; they are nothing but bitch sessions and are a colossal waste of time and energy.
Ex, I can tell you for me, it is NOT just a bitch session....It is an invigorating experience and a motivational movement of like-minded people who WANT, with all of their hearts, for our Government to get back to the basics of what they are there for...and that is represent the people.....I know that I am sick to death of fraudulent activities that our gov has been doing for the last several years....you are going to see more and more of these in the upcoming months.....for me, it was NOT a bitch session against Obama, but it was more of a pep rally for restoring America......Cheesy?...to some....but not to me it wasn't at all.
Who decides what is a waste of time for someone else?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 18, 2009, 10:45:32 AM
I agree there will ALWAYS be those who put self interest and greed, ahead of everyone else..for power and money...always has been and always will be...
Lots of them.
Quote..We need to hold these guys accountable and punish them to the full extent when the break the laws...
And when what they are doing is technically not illegal?
Quote...also, people who want something for nothing are to blame....those who put their trust into companies like Enron and sunk their retirement and future into places like that so they can get BIG returns can only be help partially accountable...EVERYBODY want's the quick buck and an easy ride....
This is such a crock of horse-shit I don't even know where to start. Investing in Enron was no different than investing in any other publicly held company. Holding the investors even remotely responsible for their fraud is assinine.
QuoteEx, I can tell you for me, it is NOT just a bitch session....It is an invigorating experience and a motivational movement of like-minded people who WANT, with all of their hearts, for our Government to get back to the basics of what they are there for...and that is represent the people.....I know that I am sick to death of fraudulent activities that our gov has been doing for the last several years....you are going to see more and more of these in the upcoming months.....for me, it was NOT a bitch session against Obama, but it was more of a pep rally for restoring America......Cheesy?...to some....but not to me it wasn't at all.
And what did you accomplish?
Quote from: Exterminator on May 18, 2009, 11:27:05 AM
And when what they are doing is technically not illegal?
either make it a law or live with it....
Quote from: Exterminator on May 18, 2009, 11:27:05 AM
This is such a crock of horse-shit I don't even know where to start. Investing in Enron was no different than investing in any other publicly held company. Holding the investors even remotely responsible for their fraud is assinine.
I'm kind of thinking outloud here, but it has always seemed to me, that the stock market has gotten away from people who may have believed in a particular stock and chose to invest in it....and has simply become a way to get money for nothing...It has become nothing more than Vegas, rolling the dice and hoping for 7. ...day traders are highly skilled .... gamblers.....I know it is the way things work, but the bottom line is....trying to get rich, by doing nothing more than risking your hard earned money...and bitchng when things go south.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 18, 2009, 11:27:05 AM
And what did you accomplish?
by being apart of something that could eventually turn into something big.....part of a voice from some hardworking Americans...
Quote from: pariann on May 18, 2009, 11:22:36 AM
Who decides what is a waste of time for someone else?
Ex does!...apparently... :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 18, 2009, 11:49:21 AM
either make it a law or live with it....
There you go again expecting the government to intervene in your 'free market' economy. The problem with this strategy is that too many politicians owe too many favors to business and the laws that get passed enable business rather than protect the people.
QuoteI'm kind of thinking outloud here, but it has always seemed to me, that the stock market has gotten away from people who may have believed in a particular stock and chose to invest in it....and has simply become a way to get money for nothing...It has become nothing more than Vegas, rolling the dice and hoping for 7. ...day traders are highly skilled .... gamblers.....I know it is the way things work, but the bottom line is....trying to get rich, by doing nothing more than risking your hard earned money...and bitchng when things go south.
Correct but it is also where our retirement accounts are invested.
Quoteby being apart of something that could eventually turn into something big.....part of a voice from some hardworking Americans...
So really nothing.
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm14/mcgonser/deadhorse.gif)
Quote from: mcgonser on May 18, 2009, 09:54:53 AM
Dan, our whole economic structure is built upon the free enterprise, or capitallist, system. You can look at other countries and see that without this there is no motivation to succeed. That is what America is about and what has gotten us here. The trouble now is that Goverment wants to run everything, what part of socialism do you hear, and it will ruin us. We have had a good system in the past and need to relook and re-evaluate it. The first thing we need to do is get the greed out of it. Lobbyist and congress ho's who have corrupted it. That is my opinion.
Not-for-profit businesses are an inherent part of our free enterprise system. I've worked for some. Remove the profit from health care (why should anyone profit from the pain of others?) and the greed will disappear (at least from that segment). There is nothing socialist about not-for-profit, so take the right-wing talking point to another discussion. BTW - unchecked capitalism is just as bad as any other 'ism. Take your pick. To put it another way; unchecked greed is just as bad as any other vice.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 18, 2009, 10:45:32 AM..also, people who want something for nothing are to blame....those who put their trust into companies like Enron and sunk their retirement and future into places like that so they can get BIG returns can only be help partially accountable...
Whoa, Henry. The Enron employees' 401(k) funds were invested entirely in Enron stock, and the employees themselves
could not! make changes to that investment.
Those 11,000 employees whose 401(k) funds were invested exclusively in Enron -- and who were forbidden by Enron's own rules from diversifying -- today have no retirement plan at all.http://www.reason.com/news/show/34293.html
Now you want to blame the employees? That seems judgmental on your part, with very little evidence to find these employees guilty. Once again, check your facts before you use an example to support your point.
Well, if ya ask me, and no one did, I think nationalized health care is the way to go. The weak die faster, smokers get the shaft on a national level (effectively removing that responsibility from the states), fat people will pay skinny people for black market cholesterol pills, heart pills and fluid pills (thus keeping the law of supply and demand current), and NO MORE VIAGRA ADS!
Such a perfect plan.
but you do have to ask yourself, if the govt has made such a grand mess of governing itself, what kind of mess are we really going to have when they govern your medical treatments and access to hospital services?? I can tell you, i plan to run for congress and get myself out of that loop.
Quote from: Elaine on May 18, 2009, 10:30:50 PM
....but you do have to ask yourself, if the govt has made such a grand mess of governing itself, what kind of mess are we really going to have when they govern your medical treatments and access to hospital services?? ...
You mean, as opposed to the way it is now, where insurance companies govern your medical treatments and access to hospital services?
Quote from: LOsborne on May 19, 2009, 12:31:43 AM
You mean, as opposed to the way it is now, where insurance companies govern your medical treatments and access to hospital services?
At least most people have a choice and under the government no one would. Well, except for those higher up in government like the ones wanting to put us on government ran insurance.
I think that many of you are jumping the gun. The Faux rightwingdings have twisted the idea of the propsal. Wasn't the initial plan for healthcare coverage similar to what Federal employees have now? If so, it's my understanding they do have a choice. Maybe you should ask a federal employee to see how they like their health benefits.
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 19, 2009, 07:13:18 AM
I think that many of you are jumping the gun. The Faux rightwingdings have twisted the idea of the propsal. Wasn't the initial plan for healthcare coverage similar to what Federal employees have now? If so, it's my understanding they do have a choice. Maybe you should ask a federal employee to see how they like their health benefits.
Come on now, do you really think we'll end up with the kind of care congress gets? If that happens our taxes will have to go up so much it would cost more than buying private health insurance which a lot of us can't afford in the first place. How much is this "
free" health care
really going to cost us?
Quote from: me on May 19, 2009, 12:50:13 AM
At least most people have a choice and under the government no one would.
You've been listening to Bill-O again, haven't you. I spent the past weekend in Dayton with a girlfriend who needs a heart doctor. She called the four who were recommended by her GP. None of them will accept her insurance. Her insurance is Blue Cross/Blue Shield. So just for shiggles, we asked about my insurance. Mine is CIGNA. They wouldn't take that either. The reason the doctors won't take the insurance, is the discount that insurance companies insist on for "reasonable and customary" charges. Now, what was that about choice, again?
Quote from: LOsborne on May 19, 2009, 07:47:19 AM
You've been listening to Bill-O again, haven't you. I spent the past weekend in Dayton with a girlfriend who needs a heart doctor. She called the four who were recommended by her GP. None of them will accept her insurance. Her insurance is Blue Cross/Blue Shield. So just for shiggles, we asked about my insurance. Mine is CIGNA. They wouldn't take that either. The reason the doctors won't take the insurance, is the discount that insurance companies insist on for "reasonable and customary" charges. Now, what was that about choice, again?
She is also blissfully unaware of how health care systems work in other countries where national health care exists and they have every bit as much choice about their health caer providers as we have here if, as you have illustrated, not more.
Since when is Congress the only branch of civillian federal service who enjoys federal benefits? I don't know what Congress gets but what about ALL of the other Federal employees? Maybe it's important to note that the government is one of our nation's top employers...if not the top.
My mother is a civilian Federal employee, and at an age where health care is much more needed, I haven't heard her complain about the care she is getting. Though I do understand that she is putting out a lot more in out of pocket expenses than I would be able to afford. (She's been dealing with colon cancer treatments.)
Quote from: Exterminator on May 19, 2009, 08:11:18 AM
She is also blissfully unaware of how health care systems work in other countries where national health care exists and they have every bit as much choice about their health caer providers as we have here if, as you have illustrated, not more.
I have a cousin who lives in Cal and her husband just went through cancer treatments including a stem cell transplant which he would not have been able to get in Canada. He was born in Canada and they lived in Canada until about 15yrs ago, he is in his early 70's. They are both glad they had the health care available here.
My nephew's wife, also married to a Canadian living in Seattle, Washington now who was glad when she had her heart attack last year and needed bypass surgery she was in the States now and not in Canada because she would not have been treated as quickly and would not be here now to talk about it.
I could give you other examples of health care in other countries which I heard straight from the people who put up with it but you're gonna call me a liar anyway so why bother.
Quote from: me on May 19, 2009, 09:12:39 AM
I have a cousin who lives in Cal and her husband just went through cancer treatments including a stem cell transplant which he would not have been able to get in Canada. He was born in Canada and they lived in Canada until about 15yrs ago, he is in his early 70's. They are both glad they had the health care available here.
You keep saying this as though stem cell treatment isn't done in Canada when nothing could be further from the truth. Why don't you tell us the real reason they wouldn't treat him?
Quote from: me on May 19, 2009, 09:12:39 AM
I could give you other examples of health care in other countries which I heard straight from the people who put up with it but you're gonna call me a liar anyway so why bother.
Your anecdotal evidence doesn't add up to a hill of beans. I lived in Germany for several years and the availability and quality of their health care is far superior to ours and it's cheaper!
Quote from: Exterminator on May 19, 2009, 09:51:12 AM
You keep saying this as though stem cell treatment isn't done in Canada when nothing could be further from the truth. Why don't you tell us the real reason they wouldn't treat him?
They would not have treated him because of his age and the cost.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 19, 2009, 09:58:10 AM
Your anecdotal evidence doesn't add up to a hill of beans. I lived in Germany for several years and the availability and quality of their health care is far superior to ours and it's cheaper!
If you were in the military how would you know?
Quote from: me on May 19, 2009, 02:29:27 PM
If you were in the military how would you know?
You're making inaccurate assumptions. I was only in the military the first time I was in Germany. I've lived there since as a civilian and speak, read and write German fluently.
Quote from: me on May 19, 2009, 02:28:40 PM
They would not have treated him because of his age and the cost.
So it isn't a case where that treatment isn't available in Canada but for one reason or another, he didn't qualify for it...sort of like our not putting alcoholics high on our list of liver transplant recipients.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 19, 2009, 03:07:05 PM
So it isn't a case where that treatment isn't available in Canada but for one reason or another, he didn't qualify for it...sort of like our not putting alcoholics high on our list of liver transplant recipients.
He does not smoke or drink it is his age, 70's. He is now back to work, he owns his own business, and doing well. He has always been active and was in good health before the cancer struck.
In case you want to come back with you usual sure business owner ya right probably a local nothing little business here is a link to his corporation: http://www.mklemme.com/pole/contact.html
Quote from: me on May 19, 2009, 03:47:48 PM
He does not smoke or drink it is his age, 70's. He is now back to work, he owns his own business, and doing well. He has always been active and was in good health before the cancer struck.
That notwithstanding and assuming what you are telling us is true, there was some reason why they refused to give him this specific treatment because it is not at all uncommon in Canada. Your argument about his inability to get a specific treatment because Canada has universal health care doesn't hold water.
QuoteIn case you want to come back with you usual sure business owner ya right probably a local nothing little business here is a link to his corporation: http://www.mklemme.com/pole/contact.html
I'm not sure in what language that sentence is supposed to be written but it looks like a nice little company.
If you had clicked around you would have seen this
Quote
ASK MR. K
M. Klemme Technology, Corp. was incorporated in 1996 by its founder Manfred Klemme with the intent to manufacture, in the USA, a superior boom pole for motion picture production sound mixers. This was recognized by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences with a Technical Achievement award in 1998. Manfred Klemme, also known as Mr. K, has been involved in motion picture sound for decades. For many years he was the top man at Nagra in Hollywood and has always been involved in the technical aspects of sound recording.
If this weren't already out for the public I would not have put it on a public forum. Please refrain from calling me a liar in the future as I don't always want to divulge my sources of information because sometimes they don't belong on a public forum. Maybe it's different in different provinces I don't know I'm just speaking for the one he is from but I'm telling you Universal health care is not all it's being said to be.
Me: I don't know about you but I fon't think I have to prove anything to Ex or the others. He calls everyone a liar and stupid and he is wrong. So let him call names, who really cares. I plan on ignoring alot of it. I will state my opinion and don 't think I have to prove anything. Ex and the others like him don't prove it to us. So what makes them so SPECIAL? Nothing that I can see. Do what you want, I just wanted to tell you what I am doing. Good luck I really enjoy your posts. ;D
Thanks mcgonser. Usually I do ignore him but today he just struck me wrong for some reason. In this case though it was kind of like he was saying something snide about my family and it don't bother me when he makes snide remarks about me but making them about my family is an entirely different matter. Think I'll take a chill pill, (not really taking anything), and go out and work in the yard for a while...... :biggrin:
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 19, 2009, 07:13:18 AM
I think that many of you are jumping the gun. The Faux rightwingdings have twisted the idea of the propsal. Wasn't the initial plan for healthcare coverage similar to what Federal employees have now? If so, it's my understanding they do have a choice. Maybe you should ask a federal employee to see how they like their health benefits.
As a military retiree, my medical plan IS a gov't plan (TRICARE) and I have better options than any HMO or other employer provided Insurance plan. I can go just about anywhere, without referrals in most cases.
Yes Dan, I have retired military in my family too and they have tricare. It seems to be a good plan. I hope that if we get insurance from the gov it will be like that. Don't know that for sure though.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 19, 2009, 10:41:35 PM
Yes Dan, I have retired military in my family too and they have tricare. It seems to be a good plan. I hope that if we get insurance from the gov it will be like that. Don't know that for sure though.
All I know is that either since the gov't owns most of AIG and the banks, now, we can get not-for-profit health care where the cost is reduced to affordable for all. Otherwise, I wish we would have let AIG, et al, fail so we could have done it without them in the way. The financial groups (and all financial incentives) need to be removed from the system so that no one (no company) truly makes a single dollar of profit from the sickness and suffering of other human beings. I think the workers in the system should be paid a good wage (including doctors), but when a hospital can charge $60,000 dollars a day for a bed, something is terribly wrong.
Quote from: dan foster on May 19, 2009, 10:47:33 PM
All I know is that either since the gov't owns most of AIG and the banks, now, we can get not-for-profit health care where the cost is reduced to affordable for all. Otherwise, I wish we would have let AIG, et al, fail so we could have done it without them in the way. The financial groups (and all financial incentives) need to be removed from the system so that no one (no company) truly makes a single dollar of profit from the sickness and suffering of other human beings. I think the workers in the system should be paid a good wage (including doctors), but when a hospital can charge $60,000 dollars a day for a bed, something is terribly wrong.
Or $5000 for a 15 min cataract operation where you are in and out in less than 45min including the recovery room.
Quote from: me on May 19, 2009, 05:12:18 PM
If you had clicked around you would have seen thisIf this weren't already out for the public I would not have put it on a public forum. Please refrain from calling me a liar in the future as I don't always want to divulge my sources of information because sometimes they don't belong on a public forum.
WTF are you talking about? Where did I call you a liar? Can you not read or is English your second language? And by the way, I did click around and read that little blurb; what is it supposed to prove? Like I said...it appears to be a nice little company.
QuoteMaybe it's different in different provinces I don't know I'm just speaking for the one he is from but I'm telling you Universal health care is not all it's being said to be.
Or maybe you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about? The original point you tried to make was that under Canada's health care system, stem cell therapy was not available and on that point, you are either ignorant or a liar. We have no way of knowing what the criteria was for his having been excluded but it could very well be that since he had been living and working in the U.S. since 1996 and wasn't treated until 2007, he wasn't eligible to use their health care system any more. Ya think?
Quote from: mcgonser on May 19, 2009, 05:55:17 PM
He calls everyone a liar...
Not true; I only call the stupid liars stupid liars.
No Ex: You call everyone a liar that disagrees with your opinion or has anything to say about it. You are the liar here. I am going to start calling you Nancy.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 20, 2009, 09:05:51 AM
No Ex: You call everyone a liar that disagrees with your opinion or has anything to say about it.
Not true; I am more than willing to disagree with anyone on matters of opinion but when someone states something as fact and continues to disseminate that information even after it is proven false, they are liars, plain and simple.
QuoteYou are the liar here.
Yeah, because I'm the dumbass who showed up here and presented myself as something I clearly am not? That would be you.
QuoteI am going to start calling you Nancy.
Call me whatever you'd like but don't whine about your bruised meat-curtains when you get worse in return.
Quote from: me on May 19, 2009, 10:52:00 PM
Or $5000 for a 15 min cataract operation where you are in and out in less than 45min including the recovery room.
such costs are not a basis of the time it takes. They are a product of the cost of the technology that allows a cataract operation to take 15 min.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 20, 2009, 07:21:42 AM
WTF are you talking about? Where did I call you a liar? Can you not read or is English your second language? And by the way, I did click around and read that little blurb; what is it supposed to prove? Like I said...it appears to be a nice little company.
Maybe I took your comment wrong. I took it as a snide remark that it was a little, (insignificant), company. I took it as a put down which I didn't appreciate. You may have meant it as a compliment but due to the way you post sometimes it is very easy to misread your words. If you had left the word "little" out I wouldn't have thought so much about it.
QuoteOr maybe you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about? The original point you tried to make was that under Canada's health care system, stem cell therapy was not available and on that point, you are either ignorant or a liar. We have no way of knowing what the criteria was for his having been excluded but it could very well be that since he had been living and working in the U.S. since 1996 and wasn't treated until 2007, he wasn't eligible to use their health care system any more. Ya think?
I said, "had the still been living there" he would not have been given the treatment because of his age. The other example I used was a relative in her early 40's who neither drinks or smokes and she would not be here because had she gone to the emergency room in Canada she would not have been treated in a timely manner and would not have been able to have the bypass surgery as quickly. This is from her own mouth not mine.
Now if my two examples were talking about being glad they were in the States at the time their medical problems arose and I am using their own words why am I being ignorant or a liar? My examples are not uninformed uneducated people and both are Canadians. My nephew's wife has only lived in the States since they were married two years ago.
I have talked to too many people who have said "yes government ran health care is great but" to be in favor of it and I'm not just talking about Canada here.
This is being rushed through congress waaaaay too fast and we are already being taxed for something that isn't even in place yet which is not right.
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 11:02:53 AM
such costs are not a basis of the time it takes. They are a product of the cost of the technology that allows a cataract operation to take 15 min.
It's still ridiculous when you consider that this Dr. does those operations once a week and does anywhere from 5 to 15 people at a time plus the other Dr's who use the same rooms for the same operation. The people who have insurance are charged even more which is not right either. The charge might be a little lower now at this particular hospital because it has been bought out by another hospital which is, fortunately, a much better hospital.
Quote from: me on May 20, 2009, 11:32:27 AM
Maybe I took your comment wrong. I took it as a snide remark that it was a little, (insignificant), company. I took it as a put down which I didn't appreciate. You may have meant it as a compliment but due to the way you post sometimes it is very easy to misread your words. If you had left the word "little" out I wouldn't have thought so much about it.
Little as in small as in not a conglomerate. It is a small company making a specialized line of products of apparently high quality judging from the accolades they've received. I would liken it to Cross Audio in Madison County if you were aware of them when Jim was still around.
QuoteI said, "had the still been living there" he would not have been given the treatment because of his age.
Pure conjecture. He did not live in Canada at the time, ergo, was not refused treatment. As far as anyone knows, the criteria for that procedure may have changed dramatically between the time he left there over a decade prior and when he needed treatment. Certainly, major advances were made in the field during that time.
QuoteThe other example I used was a relative in her early 40's who neither drinks or smokes and she would not be here because had she gone to the emergency room in Canada she would not have been treated in a timely manner and would not have been able to have the bypass surgery as quickly. This is from her own mouth not mine.
Again, conjecture. Had she gone to an emergency room in Canada and not been treated in a timely manner and had died as a result, you might have a point but none of those things happened so her assertion is without merit.
QuoteNow if my two examples were talking about being glad they were in the States at the time their medical problems arose and I am using their own words why am I being ignorant or a liar?
I would say ignorant as you are relying on anecdotal evidence rather than empirical data. If you would like to rely on empirical data, the World Health Organizations rankings of the world's health care systems (http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html) is a logical place to start. Note that the U.S. ranked 37 and Canada 30. Also note how well virtually every country in Europe, all of whom have universal health care of one ilk or another, did. Virtually all of them ranked higher than we did.
I need a shower.
Not the random comments thread? Sorry. LOL
Quote from: pariann on May 20, 2009, 12:15:47 PM
I need a shower.
I meant to talk to you about that. :razz:
Quote from: me on May 20, 2009, 11:46:36 AM
It's still ridiculous when you consider that this Dr. does those operations once a week and does anywhere from 5 to 15 people at a time plus the other Dr's who use the same rooms for the same operation. The people who have insurance are charged even more which is not right either. The charge might be a little lower now at this particular hospital because it has been bought out by another hospital which is, fortunately, a much better hospital.
Unless you know the cost of the equipment involved, the cost of its upkeep, and all related costs, I dont see how you can say its ridiculous.
Though I agree with you on different costs for different people. I got a statement from the hospital a few years back for some minor surgery. The bill was over $14,000 all told. When the insurance paid, they agreed to take about half that as payment in full. Had I been uninsured, would I have been left footing the entire 14k bill?
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 12:43:31 PM
Unless you know the cost of the equipment involved, the cost of its upkeep, and all related costs, I dont see how you can say its ridiculous.
There you go again with that whole math thing. :no:
Quote from: Exterminator on May 20, 2009, 12:07:45 PM
Pure conjecture. He did not live in Canada at the time, ergo, was not refused treatment. As far as anyone knows, the criteria for that procedure may have changed dramatically between the time he left there over a decade prior and when he needed treatment. Certainly, major advances were made in the field during that time.
He still has family there who knows about the criteria for that procedure and how the system works.
QuoteAgain, conjecture. Had she gone to an emergency room in Canada and not been treated in a timely manner and had died as a result, you might have a point but none of those things happened so her assertion is without merit.
She also still has family there including a sister who is a nurse and is familiar with how things work in the emergency room.
QuoteI would say ignorant as you are relying on anecdotal evidence rather than empirical data. If you would like to rely on empirical data, the World Health Organizations rankings of the world's health care systems (http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html) is a logical place to start. Note that the U.S. ranked 37 and Canada 30. Also note how well virtually every country in Europe, all of whom have universal health care of one ilk or another, did. Virtually all of them ranked higher than we did.
Data can be skewed one way or the other as you have said so many times when Hank used it to prove his points.
Id be interested in what "skew" was applied to put us at 37th on the list.
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 12:43:31 PM
Unless you know the cost of the equipment involved, the cost of its upkeep, and all related costs, I dont see how you can say its ridiculous.
The same reason Dan said this:
Quote from: dan foster on May 19, 2009, 10:47:33 PM
I think the workers in the system should be paid a good wage (including doctors), but when a hospital can charge $60,000 dollars a day for a bed, something is terribly wrong.
In other words, you just can't wrap your mind around WHY something should cost so much?
I can feel your pain, a couple of months ago I had a multi-slice CT scan of my abdomen done. The whole thing took ten minutes, and cost $1500. I was astounded. I have a good friend who is a radiologist who explained that the machine itself probably cost almost $1 million dollars--and technology increases mean it has a life of only a few years. Service costs (you cant get a minimum wage kid fresh out of high school to service such items) to keep the machine in proper order are tens of thousands a year. You must also factor in the space in which the machine sits (they are large) which is likely rented at a price per square foot, the utility costs of the facility, the wages, benefits, and insurance for the tech who did it and the radiologist who read it. All told, it doesnt seem so ridiculous.
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 12:59:31 PM
Id be interested in what "skew" was applied to put us at 37th on the list.
Again, we're wasting our time. She's an idiot who is only going to believe what she wants regardless of overwhelming observable evidence to the contrary.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 20, 2009, 01:19:55 PM
Again, we're wasting our time. She's an idiot who is only going to believe what she wants regardless of overwhelming observable evidence to the contrary.
A look at the list should dispel any notion that the list is attempting to push one system or another. But, there are none so blind as those who choose not to see.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 20, 2009, 01:19:55 PM
Again, we're wasting our time. She's an idiot who is only going to believe what she wants regardless of overwhelming observable evidence to the contrary.
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you are the only one who posts facts from sources that aren't skewed and don't have an agenda or stand to make more money if everyone is a part of their little group because they are so great. 'Scuse me all to hell. Guess you can't get a true picture for yourself if you actually talk to the people who are living under the systems 'cause they are biased and don't really know anything huh? Of course you do have to factor into it the people who have only known that particular system who think it's great and the ones who have known other systems who have opposing opinions and don't think it's so great after all. Then you have to compare it to the ones who have only known this system and think it sucks to the ones who have known and used the other systems that think this one is great. If that makes me an idiot so be it.
Quote from: me on May 20, 2009, 01:35:12 PM
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you are the only one who posts facts from sources that aren't skewed and don't have an agenda or stand to make more money if everyone is a part of their little group because they are so great. 'Scuse me all to hell. Guess you can't get a true picture for yourself if you actually talk to the people who are living under the systems 'cause they are biased and don't really know anything huh? Of course you do have to factor into it the people who have only known that particular system who think it's great and the ones who have known other systems who have opposing opinions and don't think it's so great after all. Then you have to compare it to the ones who have only known this system and think it sucks to the ones who have known and used the other systems that think this one is great. If that makes me an idiot so be it.
Yes, it does. You don't have any facts or evidence; you have a couple of anecdotal stories which amount to nothing more than hearsay...there's a very good reason why such tripe isn't admissible as evidence in legal proceedings. What is frustrating is that you absolutely refuse to even consider that the picture is larger than that which your little mind can grasp...nebulous stories from a couple of people you know...it's ok if your preference is to go through life ignorant but please keep it to yourself. Every time you offer it here it lowers everyone else's IQ just for having read it.
And I still need a shower.
Quote from: pariann on May 20, 2009, 01:55:49 PM
And I still need a shower.
(http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/peanuts/pigpen.gif)
Quote from: me on May 20, 2009, 01:35:12 PM
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you are the only one who posts facts from sources that aren't skewed and don't have an agenda or stand to make more money if everyone is a part of their little group because they are so great. 'Scuse me all to hell. Guess you can't get a true picture for yourself if you actually talk to the people who are living under the systems 'cause they are biased and don't really know anything huh? Of course you do have to factor into it the people who have only known that particular system who think it's great and the ones who have known other systems who have opposing opinions and don't think it's so great after all. Then you have to compare it to the ones who have only known this system and think it sucks to the ones who have known and used the other systems that think this one is great. If that makes me an idiot so be it.
what skew or agenda does the world health organization have?
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 02:21:37 PM
what skew or agenda does the world health organization have?
And why?
Quote from: Exterminator on May 20, 2009, 02:15:52 PM
(http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/peanuts/pigpen.gif)
If there wasn't so much crap being thrown around in here, I wouldn't get it on me every time I peeked in, and I wouldn't be feeling the need for a shower.
:wink:
be glad you're in America for that shower. My friend's aunt's baby sister's next door neighbor lives in Canada, and she told me that the showers up there suck big time. ;D
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 04:22:01 PM
be glad you're in America for that shower. My friend's aunt's baby sister's next door neighbor lives in Canada, and she told me that the showers up there suck big time. ;D
My neighbor's brother-in-law's nephew's friend told him they didn't have showers in Canada.
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 04:22:01 PM
be glad you're in America for that shower. My friend's aunt's baby sister's next door neighbor lives in Canada, and she told me that the showers up there suck big time. ;D
:poke: :finger2: :kissit:
are you kissing gryphon's butt, or is gryphon kissing mine?
Actually I'm telling him to kiss mine but he can kiss yours too if you'd like... :biggrin:
Well I'm not so sure I want my butt kissed.
:eek:
Im not afraid to kiss a little butt. But I do insist that all involved take that shower first. :wink:
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 05:11:19 PM
Im not afraid to kiss a little butt.
Would you kiss a BIG butt?
Id need to see pictures first. Are we talking Kim Kardashian sort of big butt or Rosie O Donell sort of big butt?
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 05:19:40 PM
Id need to see pictures first. Are we talking Kim Kardashian sort of big butt or Rosie O Donell sort of big butt?
We're talking
BIG butt....
(http://www.razzies.com/images/NorbitSTILL.jpg)
I think if ya don't kiss that one she'd probably open up a can of whoop ass on ya........ :eek:
awwww hellllllll nawwwwwwww
Quote from: Gryphon on May 20, 2009, 05:42:11 PM
awwww hellllllll nawwwwwwww
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Quote from: Bo D on May 20, 2009, 04:34:22 PM
My neighbor's brother-in-law's nephew's friend told him they didn't have showers in Canada.
But do they have the 4th of July in England? ;D
Well of course they do, there is a 4th of July everywhere. Even in places that have no idea what a calendar is!! Now if you had asked, do they CELEBRATE the 4th of July as Indiependence day...probably not, I think they were pissed at us for that. LOL
Quote from: mcgonser on May 20, 2009, 09:05:51 AM
No Ex: You call everyone a liar that disagrees with your opinion or has anything to say about it. You are the liar here. I am going to start calling you Nancy.
Sorry, but Ex is correct. I have only seen Ex call someone lying, a liar. Just because you disagree with Ex, or Ex with you doesn't mean Ex is lying.
Quote from: me on May 20, 2009, 01:02:09 PM
The same reason Dan said this:
The $60K/night was based on an ICU bill. There wasn't anything in the ICU that was anymore of a technological advance over any other hospital room, unless you want to count the video monitors so fewer nurses/nurses aids were around to actually check on the patient. The price is jacked up just because it has ICU on it. It is a scam. It was a new hospital. They had about 5 of 20 units occupied. I think they just divided the total bed potential income among the actual patients. Again, it is about profit.
Let's see, 5min in prep, 10min in the surgery room, 20min in recovery in which time he was seen by the nurses the dr brought with him, no recovery room nurses were used, a little over $5k. That times the other 15 patients the dr performed cataract surgery on that day plus whatever he paid to use the room. You don't think that's a little steep considering we got a discounted rate since we don't have insurance. How much are they charging if you have insurance? The thing is I know this hospital and given any other choice would not have gone there but that is the only one available to the eye surgeon because it is the only one in town since they kept others out for years. They were bought out by a very reputable hospital shortly after hubby had his surgery and I'm sure things will improve for the city health care wise and for that I am glad.
Quote from: dan foster on May 20, 2009, 09:29:28 PM
Sorry, but Ex is correct. I have only seen Ex call someone lying, a liar. Just because you disagree with Ex, or Ex with you doesn't mean Ex is lying.
And you know that people are lying because............you can read minds? you are gifted or because if some one says something you don't agree with you just call them a liar? Your way to narcissistic for my taste. You are both arrogant liars.That is just my opinion. Which is worth every bit as you two buffoons.
The thing is they don't know how to discuss without name calling and trying to intimidate. Guess they think calling people liars helps make their point. If you have a different opinion you're lying or stupid. If you have different data or facts yours are always wrong and theirs is right no matter what source they or you use. They have to be right all the time to boost their ego's.
Neither they nor I know for sure how this nationalized health care thing is going to work out both of us are only offering opinions of what we think. What they don't realize is I don't take them anymore seriously than they take me I just have more class than to call them liars and dumb asses.
Somehow they haven't figured out that the more they do stuff like that the more it makes them look foolish and like they really have no clue.
I think it just makes you all look stubborn. Sometimes, opinions aren't fact driven. Believing something whole heartedly doesn't make someone a liar, though it may be that they are ignorant. I'm not pointing any fingers in any direction. Just an overall observation.
I think that anything can be abused to the point that it begins to lack benefit. And those things that can be good for everyone, when opposed by a large group because of ignorance, can turn sour. Take away the profit, create total equality for everyone, and just maybe, it won't be as bad as everyone who opposes it thinks it will be.
I just hope if it goes nationalized, dental is part of it, and you get more than a $600 a year limit. I'm still waiting on my dental work because I just don't have the out of pocket cash to have teeth pulled, dentures made, and then denture maintenance for the rest of my life. I'd prefer to pay 10 to 20% than spend $600 a year on office visits, antibiotic and pain prescriptions. (okay that went into left field, but people who get medicaid might know what I mean, I have had it, but never used it. Went to the clinic and paid cash instead)
My point is they are trying to rush it through too quickly without even planning where the money is going to come from to fund it and have no idea how they are going to run it. It's just pass it and then work out the details. They need to be concentrating on this bail out mess and get it straightened out before they get us into debt even further. If they would slow down and maybe pass it a bit at a time that would make more sense. They are even wanting to insure people who can afford insurance and that's insane. Start out with insuring people who can't afford it and leave the rest privatized. Congress is suddenly wanting to control every aspect of our lives and I don't see that as a good thing at all. :no:
Quote from: mcgonser on May 20, 2009, 10:48:52 PM
And you know that people are lying because............you can read minds? you are gifted or because if some one says something you don't agree with you just call them a liar?
Because it's obvious. If there were no clouds in the sky and you said it was cloudy, you'd be lying.
QuoteYour way to narcissistic for my taste.
Case in point: you claim to be educated but can't distinguish between "your" and "you're".
QuoteThat is just my opinion. Which is worth every bit as you two buffoons.
Perhaps to you but not to the rest of the world.
Quote from: me on May 21, 2009, 02:28:24 AM
My point is they are trying to rush it through too quickly without even planning where the money is going to come from to fund it and have no idea how they are going to run it.
How in the hell could you possibly know this? For all we know, this has been studied for years and they've gotten to the point where they are pretty sure they understand the issues, costs, etc. to the extent that they are reasonably certain they can implement it successfully. It isn't as though Obama thought of this two weeks ago or that there aren't many successful models from which to pick and choose best practices.
Quote from: pariann on May 21, 2009, 02:12:25 AM
I think it just makes you all look stubborn. Sometimes, opinions aren't fact driven. Believing something whole heartedly doesn't make someone a liar, though it may be that they are ignorant. I'm not pointing any fingers in any direction. Just an overall observation.
I think that anything can be abused to the point that it begins to lack benefit. And those things that can be good for everyone, when opposed by a large group because of ignorance, can turn sour. Take away the profit, create total equality for everyone, and just maybe, it won't be as bad as everyone who opposes it thinks it will be.
Nicely put, Pariann. I told you before, I like the way you think.
Once attacks become directed at the speaker (typist in this case) rather than the point, the discussion is over. Hurling insults does nothing but convince the attackee that s/he was right all along. Unless the slam-fest is part of the game, of course, and then it can be lots of fun. As a rule, though, some variety in the insults is necessary to ward off boredom.
A couple of pages back someone asked if the hospital's price to the insurance company is different from the price to those who pay privately. Yes, it is. A few years ago HSA's (that's Health Savings Accounts for those of you who aren't fluent in HR, you lucky dogs) were the hot new benefit. Employees could put money into an HSA to pay for medical expenses. The deposits were pre-tax, so the employees paid tax on a smaller part of their take-home pay. YYAYYYY!!! However, when employees paid hospital bills with the money, they discovered to their dismay that they were charged up to 50%
more for a procedure than they had been charged when turning it over to insurance. The hospital's explanation was that the insurance price included a negotiated discount, and the hospital did not discount bills for private-pay patients. We told all employees to close their HSA's and turn everything in to insurance, whether the bill would qualify or not. At least they would get the negotiated price. Now that's a racket!
Quote from: me on May 21, 2009, 02:28:24 AM
My point is they are trying to rush it through too quickly without even planning where the money is going to come from to fund it and have no idea how they are going to run it. It's just pass it and then work out the details. They need to be concentrating on this bail out mess and get it straightened out before they get us into debt even further. If they would slow down and maybe pass it a bit at a time that would make more sense. They are even wanting to insure people who can afford insurance and that's insane. Start out with insuring people who can't afford it and leave the rest privatized. Congress is suddenly wanting to control every aspect of our lives and I don't see that as a good thing at all. :no:
It would seem to me that Nationalized Health would be for everyone, even those that can afford to pay for insurance. If there were no insurance, just national, then optional health (or optional medical procedures) should be paid for by those that can afford it. In other words, there are cosmetic surgeries that insurance will cover, but if they are not life threatening then pay for it yourself. I can't sit and quote what all constitutes necessary, and I don't think the government can either. But an educated medical panel, without expectation of great profits, could.
That's what should be going on. Panels or committee's of the experts should be working out the details of these potential programs and then whoever votes on them should have to attend workshops so that they understand what is and isn't necessary for these programs to succeed before voting. So yes, I agree that some of these things should be put into place, or considered at a slower pace. BUT if there are these panels made up of experts in the field related to the bailouts, health care, blah blah blah spending, they can be worked on concurrently instead of consecutively. Maybe??
Quote from: LOsborne on May 21, 2009, 08:05:22 AM
Once attacks become directed at the speaker (typist in this case) rather than the point, the discussion is over. Hurling insults does nothing but convince the attackee that s/he was right all along. Unless the slam-fest is part of the game, of course, and then it can be lots of fun. As a rule, though, some variety in the insults is necessary to ward off boredom.
Whatever, poopy-head. :biggrin:
QuoteA couple of pages back someone asked if the hospital's price to the insurance company is different from the price to those who pay privately. Yes, it is. A few years ago HSA's (that's Health Savings Accounts for those of you who aren't fluent in HR, you lucky dogs) were the hot new benefit. Employees could put money into an HSA to pay for medical expenses. The deposits were pre-tax, so the employees paid tax on a smaller part of their take-home pay. YYAYYYY!!! However, when employees paid hospital bills with the money, they discovered to their dismay that they were charged up to 50% more for a procedure than they had been charged when turning it over to insurance. The hospital's explanation was that the insurance price included a negotiated discount, and the hospital did not discount bills for private-pay patients. We told all employees to close their HSA's and turn everything in to insurance, whether the bill would qualify or not. At least they would get the negotiated price. Now that's a racket!
Huh? I've always seen these referred to as flexible spending accounts (FSA) and mine works by reimbursing any out-of-pocket expenses I've had to pay. The source of the funds is transparent to the provider.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 20, 2009, 10:48:52 PM
you two buffoons.
Quote from: me on May 21, 2009, 01:58:50 AM
they don't know how to discuss without name calling
Need I really comment here? :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on May 21, 2009, 08:49:59 AM
Whatever, poopy-head. :biggrin:
Good one. I last heard that epithet when my two girls were hurling it at each other last Christmas. They are 22 and 24. And they
meant it! Ahhh .... memories are made of this. You get points for the creative insult, Ex. And I still adore you. Camel-breath.
QuoteHuh? I've always seen these referred to as flexible spending accounts (FSA) and mine works by reimbursing any out-of-pocket expenses I've had to pay. The source of the funds is transparent to the provider.
FSA's are the generic category of all pre-tax savings accounts. You can have them for other things than medical expenses -- like child care, and deductible transportation costs. With the HSA's, the bills didn't go to an insurance company first, so the employees paying for medical costs with the account didn't get the negotiated price.
to the topic above, I just got a statement from my insurance company. a $1750 bill for the CT scan I mentioned earlier. The insurance price? $620. Whats up with that? Why isnt it just one price for everyone?
You know why. They charge what the market will bear. Big burly insurance companies demand discounts, or they won't pay for treatment at that particular hospital. Self-insured people are the way the hospitals make up the difference, and pay for indigent care (like Rosarita giving birth to her anchor baby.)
Whatcha gonna do? Go to the competition? Oh, yeah, there isn't any competition.
it just further illustrates how broken our system is. We're all already paying for the uninsured. The problem is that too often the un-, under-, and self- insured either wait to seek care til a minor problem has become a big one. Or, conversely, you have people who turn up at the emergency room for a splinter.
Quote from: mcgonser on May 20, 2009, 10:48:52 PM
And you know that people are lying because............you can read minds? you are gifted or because if some one says something you don't agree with you just call them a liar? Your way to narcissistic for my taste. You are both arrogant liars.That is just my opinion. Which is worth every bit as you two buffoons.
Now, you said I called someone a liar, but I didn't. Now, you say I am an arrogant liar; please produce a single statement by me that is a lie. Just one.
You don't want her to show her proof of your arrogance? :wink:
I am just going to start being like Ex: Deny, call everything anyone else says a lie, tell everyone what I think is the truth without knowing it if it bit me on the butt. Never prove or answer a question I don't want to. You guys have been letting him get away with that, so suck it up and get use to it. I am doing the same. ;D
Could get mighty interesting around here if I do the same huh? :biggrin:
And if he could actu
Quote from: Gryphon on May 21, 2009, 07:26:07 PM
it just further illustrates how broken our system is. We're all already paying for the uninsured. The problem is that too often the un-, under-, and self- insured either wait to seek care til a minor problem has become a big one. Or, conversely, you have people who turn up at the emergency room for a splinter.
Not only that, but you have working people who can't afford insurance who only go to the emergency room because it's "care now, pay later".
As an example, the corporation where I previously worked offered health care coverage which was relatively inexpensive for me. However, to cover the children I would have had to pay over a 1/3 of my pay. I couldn't have afforded that. To add insult to injury, I made too much money to be eligible for the state funded children's health care plan. Not much more, but too much to been considered. I was fortunate, in that the owner of the company included my children in my healthcare coverage as a "perk". Not everyone received the same opportunity. I now work for a company, much larger than the previous employer and I have the same health plan, however it's a 1/3 of what I paid before and it includes both children. Obviously it's because having more employees who are able to participate causes the cost to decrease.
I think that's the concept with the national healthcare. I may have to pay a couple dollars and a few cents more for those who can't pay at all, but to think that people won't need to rely on emergency services to get needed healthcare, which should decrease overall costs and to know that people won't avoid seeking medical assistance until it become more serious/costly, and even more importantly, people won't avoid taking their children to the Dr. because of the cost...makes it very worth that extra few cents.
Quote from: Bo D on May 21, 2009, 09:13:41 AM
Need I really comment here? :biggrin:
:biggrin:
Nope, point taken.
Quote from: Bo D on May 20, 2009, 04:34:22 PM
My neighbor's brother-in-law's nephew's friend told him they didn't have showers in Canada.
Yeah, but didn't you get that information from his third cousin's other brother who lived next door to the trollop?
Try again! :biggrin:
Quote from: dan foster on May 19, 2009, 10:37:22 PM
As a military retiree, my medical plan IS a gov't plan (TRICARE) and I have better options than any HMO or other employer provided Insurance plan. I can go just about anywhere, without referrals in most cases.
Does every retiree retain TRICARE or is only available in absence of other coverage? or can it be used jointly with other insurance?
Also, I'm curious how VA hospitals fit in. Are those services primarily for those who have served in the military, but didn't retire and aren't eligible for continued TRICARE coverage?
MY father was just grumbling last night that the cost to cover his employees was now $1700 a MONTH (for a family plan). Four years running of double digit percentage increases. The cost to cover just the employee is now right at $800 a month. They pay 60 percent, and the employees pay 40, but he was wondering how his secretaries (a couple of whom are single moms) can even make it.
It's funny when topics like this come up and immediately people start ranting about "freeloaders" while no one considers "the working poor". How do people who need every penny to simply survive get coverage? Preventative healthcare is completelt unaffordable, so by the time they are forced to go to the Dr. for something that has become serious and more costly to treat, which they can't pay for either, then what?
Our system is broken. People are afraid that national healthcare will cost them more and I'm not convinced that it will.
I'm just jumping in here....I have not read what has been posted recently...but the biggest concerns that Canada has from what I have read are the waiting times to see specialists and for diagnostic tests....... according to a study by the Fraser Institute, waiting times have increased from 13.1 weeks in 1999, to 17.7 weeks in 2003, to 17.9 in 2004. Long waits to undergo elective surgery have also become an issue in recent years, as have crowded emergency rooms in the country's largest cities.....(I am getting this information from a news letter I get every month....)
The problems with Socialized Health Care (i.e., trusting politicians and bureaucrats with your health care)
(http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman/issues/healthcare/socialized.html)....an interesting source that backs up my thoughts....
This would more than likely be a problem that we would have to face...would it be worth it?....I don't know the solution, but I am NOT all excited about duplicating what they have.
(http://images9.cafepress.com/product/222648489v17_350x350_Front.jpg)
Quote from: Sandy Eggo on May 22, 2009, 01:46:01 AM
Does every retiree retain TRICARE or is only available in absence of other coverage? or can it be used jointly with other insurance?
Also, I'm curious how VA hospitals fit in. Are those services primarily for those who have served in the military, but didn't retire and aren't eligible for continued TRICARE coverage?
Retirees are offered a choice of;
TRICARE Standard (no cost) which covers about 80% of everything and can be used as a supplement to a primary insurance or can be supplemented with inexpensive secondary for no out of pocket, except a $4 copay on prescriptions until a family max is reached, then free.
This one was great until the Republicans (Warner, VA) required employers to stop offering the supplements to TRICARE for free to employees (much cheaper than employee sponsored primary care) because the big insurance companies were losing customers.
TRICARE Prime which has an annual fee, but no out of pocket and covers 100%. No need for a supplement or for it to be used as one.
Only drawback to these; required to convert to Medicare at the proper age. VA hospitals are there for all retirees and service connected/combat wounded veterans. It can be used as a Tertiary for service disabled vets.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 22, 2009, 11:35:09 AM
(http://images9.cafepress.com/product/222648489v17_350x350_Front.jpg)
Free health care isn't the goal. Health Care with zero profit incentives to all the insurance companies, providers and pharmaceuticals should be the goal. When the huge fortunes are removed from the equation, health care will be affordable, for all.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on May 22, 2009, 11:16:43 AM
I'm just jumping in here....I have not read what has been posted recently...
Well, maybe you should. You see, the problem we are facing is that most working people wait when they have a health problem. They wait for it to go away -- or to develop into an emergency condition. Wellness visits to family doctors are uncommon. Consequently, these people are not diagnosed until emergency intervention is required to save their health or their lives. Emergency intervention is expensive. But so is a routine doctor visit. Without Medicare, Medicaid or VA benefits, how many regular folks can blow $175 bucks to see a doctor --
before he prescribes medication or schedules a therapy? Stop looking at extraordinary conditions, and start thinking about tummy aches that turn into appendicitis, or sore throats that turn into strep. The people most at risk for heart disease, or cancer, or emphysema are already receiving some kind of government subsidized care -- Medicare or Medicaid. It's ordinary working folks on a budget that delay routine care, preferring to take an aspirin and hope, rather than blowing the family's dream of a long weekend at the lake. Y'all take great glee in talking about stem cell transplants and heart valve replacements under nationalized medicine. As the state of medical financing stands in this country
right now! a feller of 45 facing one of these catastrophic medical conditions would have the choice of resigning himself to bankrupting his family, or to dying. There has to be a better solution than allowing the insurance industry to grow fat on the misery of the rest of us.
Quote from: dan foster on May 22, 2009, 07:59:57 PM
Retirees are offered a choice of;
TRICARE Standard (no cost) which covers about 80% of everything and can be used as a supplement to a primary insurance or can be supplemented with inexpensive secondary for no out of pocket, except a $4 copay on prescriptions until a family max is reached, then free.
This one was great until the Republicans (Warner, VA) required employers to stop offering the supplements to TRICARE for free to employees (much cheaper than employee sponsored primary care) because the big insurance companies were losing customers.
TRICARE Prime which has an annual fee, but no out of pocket and covers 100%. No need for a supplement or for it to be used as one.
Only drawback to these; required to convert to Medicare at the proper age. VA hospitals are there for all retirees and service connected/combat wounded veterans. It can be used as a Tertiary for service disabled vets.
Thanks for the info. Do you know if military personnel who discharge rather than retire are able to opt to continue their benefits?
TRICARE sounds like a great plan, but having had some experience with a few VA hospitals during the care process of family members, I think the care there could be better. If I'm understanding correctly TRICARE gives a veteran the option to use the VA Hospitals or medical care of their choice. That's a good thing.
I don't believe a non-retiring member of the military can continue TRICARE. Health care for life is part of the retirement package. As to the details on TRICARE and choice of VA, I am not certain. I have service connected disabilities, so I only know for certain what my options are. I waited over a year to get an appointment at the VA clinic, locally, and the quality of service was sub-par. So, I wouldn't recommend them, either, although there are many great people working the programs, it is a pretty good example of what a poorly funded gov't program would be like. I think not-for-profit coverage is what we need (so you go where you want), with all the profit removed from the providers (but they still compete for your business) and pharmaceuticals (where there is an incentive to help people instead of inventing phony illnesses and keeping people sick).
Quote from: me on May 21, 2009, 10:28:58 PM
Could get mighty interesting around here if I do the same huh? :biggrin:
Everybody wants to be like me. :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on May 26, 2009, 10:09:59 AM
Everybody wants to be like me. :biggrin:
That's a scary thought..... :eek:
Quote from: me on May 26, 2009, 10:40:15 AM
That's a scary thought..... :eek:
I don't think you have anything to worry about.
Quote from: Exterminator on May 26, 2009, 10:42:24 AM
I don't think you have anything to worry about.
Thank goodness.... :razz:
Quote from: me on May 26, 2009, 10:57:33 AM
Thank goodness.... :razz:
You'd have to be younger, better looking and a whole hell of a lot smarter. :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on May 26, 2009, 11:13:02 AM
You'd have to be younger, better looking and a whole hell of a lot smarter. :biggrin:
That is a matter of opinion. The big difference I can tell is the equipment.... :razz:
LOL!!!!!!!
I passed the health clinic yesterday and the lot was full as usual and it dawned on me that should this nationalized health care bill get passed that will become the norm for all health care. :spooked:
It shouldn't be surprising. People who need health care are not going out to get it, because they just can't afford it. Especially if they don't have any health insurance, and don't qualify for medicaid. Even the Healthy Indiana Plan has stipulations on who can get it. If you've been on any insurance within 6 months, you don't yet qualify.
I haven't been to the doctor in 7 years, not since itty bitty was born. I've never had a mammogram, I don't get yearly pap smears done....etc., because I can't afford it. I've managed to get to the dentist a couple of times, at that clinic you mentioned, because it only costs me $35 to be seen, but I've not had any of the work done I need, just gotten prescriptions for antibiotics for abcesses. My eyes are failing miserably, and I can't afford new glasses, but I can afford that office visit ($25), at the clinic, the only thing is, they only do eye exams once a month.
There are organizations that will help with all of that you just need to know where to look. The health fair they have at the mall every year has a lot of info available.