O/T: What's Next?

Page 6 of 10  
snipped-for-privacy@slp53.sl.home says...

Classic Lurndal, another attempt to censor anyone who disagrees with the might Scott.
--
Keith

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

You're right, I apologize. I read through that part of that post too quickly.

Name a single lie I've uttered here. You manners are execrable. A difference of opinion is not a lie. Demonstrate a single "self delusion" I've demonstrated. A difference of opinion is not a delusion. Identify any self-indulgence on my part. A difference of opinion does not make one self-indulgent.
Face it. You have no argument to support *your* opinions. You have some vague mushy ideas propped up with your touching story of personal achievement in the face of adversity from which you leap to defend the raiding of other people's wallets. When confronted by the essence of *your* argument, you get first defensive, then vulgar, then outright rude. I'm not the one who is swinging blindly with both fists here. You are. See if you can figure out why ...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Upscale" wrote

I wish, no pray (and I'm not particularly religious), that we forge a system in this country, that, at the very least, let's us at die with dignity and without stripping our families of the fruits of a lifetime of our collective labors.
That said, there has never been a guarantee of that wish in human history ... we are destined to die.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 8/18/08
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:
snip

You've heard of Medicaid? Those in such unfortunate circumstances do and will receive needed care....as well as transportation(in most locales) to said needed medical appointments. They may indeed lose assets but that kind of follows anyone whom declines or can't afford insurance be it for their house (fire), car (wreck) or medical (health).
What I don't understand is why it is the Gov. or insurance companies or everybody but who are often treated as the villains when it is the medical providers themselves and the drug companies that have increased medical costs by at least 3X the inflation rate for the past few decades. Profiteering at the expense of the ill seems like the true problem. I have a few co-pays today exceeding the total cost of a specific medical service in the 70's........Rod
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Rod & Betty Jo wrote:

My mother went bankrupt from medical bills.
I'm not going into details here, but there are very necessary medical treatments not covered my Medicaid.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Rod & Betty Jo wrote:

If they fall into one of the eligibility categories. Just being sick, broke, and uninsured doesn't do it.

Next time you think someone is gouging you on medical costs, ask them what they pay for malpractice insurance. It's not just doctors who have to pay it by the way, nurses and just about anyone else who is likely to touch a patient generally pay it.
As for "kind of follows anyone who declines or can't afford insurance", try "had insurance from employer, got sick, company went under, group policy was cancelled due to nonpayment of premiums by employer, couldn't get coverage for his preexisting condition from another carrier".
--
--
--John
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:42:27 -0700, Rod & Betty Jo wrote:

I think we agree here. But while the greed of doctors varies by individual, the greed of stockholders in drug companies and for-profit hospitals seems to peg the meter every time.
We had two non-profit hospital groups (and four hospitals) here. One of the groups just got bought out by the one of the biggest for-profit hospital chains in the country. They swear, attest, and affirm that neither the costs or the standard of care will be affected by the sale. Wanna' bet? I'll report back in a few years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

Actually the problem goes well past industry greed......standards of care add greatly to the cost as well.....My daughter as a CNA (for several years) while working for a temp service would often be hired to sit with emotionally disturbed hospitalized individuals. The hospital would pay her $15-18 per hour and the temp service markup, simply to watch (all night) these disturbed patients(easier than hiring their own people but not cheaper). While indeed the patient was troubled and/or a suicide risk ......a dollar sleeping pill would have done as much good. Compare $300(12hr shift) for labor or $1.00 for effectively the same care. Naturally the hospital didn't care all that much since they could charge $2000 or so for the bed.
The public and medical employees as well demand new shiny buildings with marble, expensive carpets and often spacious "new" offices. Additional quasi and questionable medical services including chiropractors have crept into many health plans.
There has also been a determined effort via the schools to limit doctors and nurses entering the profession....aside from the public statements made in 1996 by some national medical association about a fear of a doctor surplus and the need to limit entry. My daughter spent 3 years trying to get into a registered nurse program with a 3.5 GPA and three other nursing certificates including a CNA, phlebotomy and ER certification....she finally made it into a program this fall 200 miles away.
Malpractice insurance as well is a serious problem and/or cost and not all that difficult to control...bad doctors get removed and reasonable standards for expected care are established.....8 years ago I was initially diagnosed with stage 4 cancer, after 4 months of extraordinary pain (morphine didn't work much) and multiple procedures they settled on Retroperitoneal fibrosis. By that time I had lost 50lbs and was very near deaths door....much of medicine is not a exact science nor should we expect it to be, incidentally I didn't sue. Rod

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

Ah, I think I see the difference of opinion here. You think that you get "free" medical care. Somebody, somewhere is paying for that care -- the money has to be coming from someone. That's the problem with socialized systems, eventually people who aren't paying for the benefits start taking more and more advantage of those benefits, forcing those who are paying taxes to provide those benefits to have to pay more. At some point, the people paying more eventually give up and either bail out from the system by emigrating somewhere else or start letting the state take care of them also.
... snip
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

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

Up to a point, I agree with you. But, looking at it from Tim's extremely warped point of view, everybody who receives that paid for health care is stealing it. As far as he's concerned, they're all low level cheats, drug addicts with AIDS, or hope to live for the rest of their lives on social handouts.
Tim seems to believe everybody in that state is eminently content to stay that way. Let me tell you, nobody wants to live their life that way. Having had a disability for almost thirty years, I can tell you categorically that it stinks. Nobody in those conditions likes it. As a peer support volunteer with the Canadian Paraplegic Organization I know for sure fact that everybody I counselled and supported hated being in that state and most often, did what they could to get out of it.
I hated it so much that I used that health assistance "I stole" to stay healthy enough so I could go back to school with education assistance "I stole". Then I got a job and became a contributing, working taxpayer again. That's the final scenario. Society supported me health-wise and education-wise until I was again able to again become a contributing member of society.
Which scenario is preferable? Supported by society health-wise but also contributing back to society or just subsisting while contributing nothing. There really is only one answer and it certainly is not anything remotely close to what Tim thinks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:24:22 -0700, Mark & Juanita wrote:

If insurance companies can avoid that scenario, I see no reason why a government agency can't do the same. I frequently read of someone arrested for defrauding SS or Medicare or the IRS. Of course they don't catch them all, but neither do the insurance companies. But both should be able to hold fraud to an acceptable level.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark & Juanita wrote:

Your paranoia is showing.
Might be able to cover it if you change the way you comb your hair.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

Methinks you're missing his point. The issue is not primarily people defrauding government programs (though that is surely *a* problem, no different than in the private sector). The issue has to do with the inherent nature of tax-funded programs - they apply to everyone who "qualifies" whether they pay taxes or not.
Private companies can avoid this by not granting benefits to people who don't pay for one of their insurance policies. But government-run programs provide coverage based on "class" (age, socio-economic standing, gender, and, sometimes, even race). There are inevitably many class members who pay nothing but get program benefits. They do this entirely *legally*. In so doing, the non-contributors burden the system to the detriment of the contributors. So, the contributor is forced - at the point of the government's gun - to participate in a program (possibly against their will) AND pay for other people who contribute nothing. Somehow in the Do-Gooders Lexicon, this qualifies as a noble act. I find that alone astonishing and a searing indictment of how deeply morally corrupt the ideas of the intellectual/political left have become...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

--
> Tim Daneliuk =A0 =A0 snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
> PGP Key: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0http://www.tundraware.com/PGP /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robatoy wrote:

Yes we do (if we're decent people). What we don't do is pick up a gun and force our other neighbor who scared of heights to go out on the ledge on our behalf and then take credit for our "charity". Get the difference?

I'm not sure what you mean by "consolidate cops" but ... one of the very few things that government is *supposed* to do is interdict in matters of fraud, force, and threat. That is necessary to maintain a democratic republic designed to protect individual liberty. Cops, courts, the military and so forth are a necessary part of protecting the liberty of the citizens. Handing out other people's money taken at the point of a gun to do social engineering is not part of defending liberty. Get the difference?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Of course I get the difference because it is not the same argument. Straw man with a hint of red herring. Now I'm supposed to go chasing you curve ball? Naaa.. I'm a bit more aware of that tactic of yours.

How kind of you to allow that much. So if a plague were to sweep the country, too bad, so sad, we all die? It wouldn't be cool for medical professionals to organize and force people to get immunized, right? Do you get the difference?

But not, under any circumstances would a universal medical solution be allowed, right? The CDC, a tax funded set up, is fraudulent?

what point life and liberty are separated.
But enough of your decoy arguments, that's okay in chess, but I'm not very good at chess.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robatoy wrote:

I see. So when your position is shown to be a fraud, you shrug and refuse to defend it.

There is no difference. Your analysis is bogus. Someone with a communicable disease who does not get vaccinated or treated is committing an act of *force* upon their fellow citizens by exposing them to the disease knowingly - presumably against their will.

Sure - if it's voluntary.

To the extent that the CDC needs to exist to prevent examples like the one you cite - people knowingly infecting one another - it is legitimate. As a general matter though, there is no Constitutional authority for the Federal government to do this sort of thing.

They are the same thing. You take my money, you took my life because I spent some hours producing that money that I cannot get back.

Evidently. Wanna play for money?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There you go again, injecting parameters which weren't part of the original discussion.
About the chess game?
No, I won't play with you, which means you already lost.
r
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robatoy wrote:

Actually ... it mean you have no madd chess skillz ... you are what we call a patzer...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well I do have chess skills. Nothing professional, but a number of years in school and after with a few chess clubs. What's your rating? Are you even rated?
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.