O/T: One Down

Page 1 of 14  
The House of Representatives passed Health Care Reform tonight.
Hello Senate.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Here is a 62 page "summary" of the bill http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/health_care/hr3962_Section_by_Section.pdf
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

As someone else put it, "Who would have thought that liberty would die with the sound of thunderous applause?"
--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

When Australia first nationalised medical care in 1975, I was vehemently opposed to it. Saw it as government interference, creeping socialism and denying freedom of choice. I held that view for many years. Gradually, as I saw it get through some teething troubles and changes, some of which were caused by changes of government it evolved into a workable system. Both sides of national politics now support it and have done for about the last 14 years. Insurance companies now have no involvement. Private insurance, which I carry, is via not for profit organisations which exist for the purpose of providing medical benefits for their members. Private health cover entitles me to a choice of private hospitals, choice of doctor and refunds in most cases of any additional fees not picked up by medicare. Everyone, whether privately insured or not, gets hospital treatment at no cost. Waiting times are determined by the level of urgency for treatment. Privately insured patients who have the option of treatment at private hospitals get faster treatment than those without cover, but only on non life threatening illnesses.
Standard of care? - I have, unfortunately, spent the last 12 months in and out of both the private hospital system and the government hospitals. Surprisingly, I would have to admit that the government hospitals are better equipped and the standard of care overall is higher. The financial disasters that I and others like me predicted have not occurred. The system is remarkably efficient. And everyone, regardless, gets basic care at no cost, and those of us that wish to, still get freedom of choice. Currently, Australia spends approx 9% of GDP on medical care. I believe the US currently spends something like 15% of GDP. Yet Australians reportedly live on average live 4 years longer than the average US citizen. Got to be food for thought in that.
We do not however, have a national dental care system, which puts dental treatment out of reach of many people. My insurance covers part of the cost, but disadvantaged people miss out.
diggerop
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:12:49 +0800, diggerop wrote:

Thanks. It's nice to hear from someone who lived through the conversion to government health care and changed opinions as a result of facts. That doesn't happen very often :-).
Now run and hide - the rampant right is coming after you!
--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

As opposed to the drooling left that is "right behind you" - with both hands on your shoulders...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:52:41 -0600, Tim Daneliuk

Let's hope those hands on your shoulder have enough sense to push you in front a bus. Reading your whining and complaining ad nauseam is enough to make everyone else jump in front of bus and I sure as hell don't want to be the only one left while you're around.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@teksavvy.com wrote:

Really think you need to speak for yourself. Your GENERALIZATIONS are becoming a bit much! But nice try....
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I
<snip>
No cost? Why do you not count your taxes which pay for it?

the
Many variables ae possible there. One might be American hypocondria. In some instances, staying away from doctors can be a healthier choice than being treated often. 99,000 Americans die every year from MRSA. Most catch it in hospitals and clinics during treatment for other problems.

cost,
Thanks for explaining the dental care situation.
How are optical care and glasses paid for? Giving benefit of the doubt, let's presume that eye surgery is counted like any other surgery and paid for in the publicly funded system supported by tax money. Axel
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Axel Grease wrote:

The problem with this sort of argument is that we don't know how "die" is defined. Most countries don't count stillbirths and miscarriages as "deaths" but they define "stillbirth" and "miscarriage" in different ways--in some places they'll struggle mightily to save a 20 week fetus and list it as "infant mortality" when they fail, while in other places a full term infant that dies within an hour of birth is a "stillbirth". And regardless of UN guidelines their statistics are based on reported deaths and doctors in the middle of treating patients don't give a hoot in Hell about some bureaucrat's statistical requirements.

Just a comment, but with regard to routine eye care, an eye exam in the US costs 50 bucks and anybody can get glasses for 8 bucks, so I don't see any need for medical insurance to pay for those.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"J. Clarke" wrote:

---------------------------------------------- Not in my neighborhood either here in SoCal or back in North East Ohio.
$125-$150 will get you in the neighborhood.
Last pair of Eyeglasses was $500 for a pretty basic frame and perscription trifocals.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

Try Wal-Mart for the exam.

You were robbed. Give http://www.zennioptical.com a try. If they don't work for you you haven't spent much, if they do you end up with a spare pair. No trifocals though, bifocal or progressive. If you don't have prescription sunglasses it might be an excuse to pick up a pair.
I found out about them when I sat on my old glasses, went down to the place where I used to spend what you do, said "this time I'm getting those fancy memory frames that don't break when you sit on them" and THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY IN STOCK. I said "screw this", searched for "glasses online", Zenni was the first hit, I googled them and saw good feeback, ordered a pair to my distance prescription from them for 8 bucks to see if they were for real, they were, so I dropped a hundred on readers, sunglasses, and memory-frame progressives. Takes two weeks to a month for delivery, haven't had a problem so don't know what their support is like, but so far I'm quite pleased.
I understand that the regular place might not be there later, but they weren't there for me when I needed them anyway, so screw 'em.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 05:16:00 -0500, "J. Clarke"

I used to go to the same place for years and years. Every time I replaced my glasses (about every two years), I'd see the price climb a few notches. Though, "ok that's to be expected". Then I noticed that as well as the prices increasing a little bit, the percentage of increase was getting bigger too, so I started looking around at the burgeoning proliferation of optometrists.
I'm now buying my glasses elsewhere for more than 50% less and they come with satisfaction warranties. Replaced my most recent pair that way. I'm seeing fine and starting a little more to shop around instead of just going which where I've had the best service. Best service shopping is great, but when it starts costing more than what I think is fair, then it's time to amend my shopping methods.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Went to the site and it looked real good until I saw that they only do plastic lenses. Leaves me out.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
CW wrote:

I'm curious--why does it leave you out?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Because if it isn't glass, they are near useless to me. Last pair of plastic lenses I had lasted about 6 hours.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
CW wrote:

I stuck with glass lenses until quite recently, but I've used plastic lenses the past few years and they've been fine. I clean the lenses only under running water and so far scratches haven't been a problem. I certainly like how much lighter glasses with plastic lenses are.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The DOs I've gone to have done everything but refuse to prescribe glass lenses for me. I raised objections to plastic because I don't treat glasses well, but was told not think about glass lenses as safety glasses. They've both told me that I'd be far better off with the scratch resistant coatings. The manufacturers will replace them if scratched (SWMBO has had hers replaced in the last couple of months - dropped them on the driveway). The pair I use for working around the house is two years old and is now pretty badly scratched. My every day set is OK after a year. I plan on replacing the lenses in my "work" set the next time I go in. I like the frames better anyway.
My first DO told me the best cleaning solution was water and dish detergent - the dollar store variety. Hand soaps and some ritzy dish detergents have skin conditioners in them that will smear on the lenses.
I looked at the site posted earlier but didn't see anything like what I have. My lenses are pretty large (58mmx48mm) to accommodate large computer displays (CAD) without turning my head. I use bifocals set for medium distance on top (18" or so) and reading (~12") on the bottom. I don't need glasses for distance but do work on a computer ~12 hours a day.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I had the same problem too, insisting on glass lenses every time until about two years back. The glass ones eventually started taking several weeks to be ordered in ~ that's if they were available at all. Then a plastic lens set I bought and usually cleaned with my shirtsleeve got permanently scratched within 6 months of use.
Now when I buy plastic lensed glasses, the first option I insist on is that they be the most scratch resistant possible. That usually means there's an extra option box to be checked, but at least they don't scratch when using my sleeve to clean and make it look like I'm looking at a foggy day out.
The added bonus is that they're extremely light and not subject to breaking or chipping when the get accidentally dropped to the floor.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.