Health care - thanks for reading this +++ : -) +++
in [Golf]
|
From: Carbon on 23 Sep 2009 19:38 On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:52:00 -0700, Dinosaur_Sr wrote: > On Sep 23, 5:15 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:29:07 -0500, The moderator wrote: >> >>> Chump change to a Liberal, but a lot of money to those of us who can >>> count. >> >> Back here on planet Earth, who ran a leaner government over their two >> terms, Clinton or Bush? It kind of seems like this brainless slur of >> yours is totally off base, huh? > > I'll never understand why Americans lay this on Presidents. Congress > controls spending. The president can suggest and administer. The > president cannot allocate funds. Only Congress does that. So the GOP > Congress under Clinton spent less than the GOP Congress and the Dem > congress under Bush. The Newt effect, no doubt! You're saying the President has no control over the economy or over Congress? That's an interesting fantasy.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 23 Sep 2009 20:58 On Sep 23, 6:38 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:52:00 -0700, Dinosaur_Sr wrote: > > On Sep 23, 5:15 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:29:07 -0500, The moderator wrote: > > >>> Chump change to a Liberal, but a lot of money to those of us who can > >>> count. > > >> Back here on planet Earth, who ran a leaner government over their two > >> terms, Clinton or Bush? It kind of seems like this brainless slur of > >> yours is totally off base, huh? > > > I'll never understand why Americans lay this on Presidents. Congress > > controls spending. The president can suggest and administer. The > > president cannot allocate funds. Only Congress does that. So the GOP > > Congress under Clinton spent less than the GOP Congress and the Dem > > congress under Bush. The Newt effect, no doubt! > > You're saying the President has no control over the economy or over > Congress? That's an interesting fantasy. Fantasy? can you give me an example of a situation where a President can allocate funds without any approval from Congress? Can you give me an example where under no circumstances (like a veto over ride) the President can prevent Congress from allocating funds?
From: gray asphalt on 24 Sep 2009 02:32 "Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:l7ohb5hkbsk9veeg0ap01h31hv4dmk28th(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:32:36 -0700, "gray asphalt" > <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>"Jack Hollis" <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:1g4ja5hgcmnq0v70nafmp5gftigua55pud(a)4ax.com... >>> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 12:34:25 -0700 (PDT), DenaliDuffer >>> <denaliduffer(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>Please answer just this one question. What value do insurance >>>>companies add to health care? >>> >>> They pool risk. >> >>A simple task. I wonder what percentage of your >>premiums you are willing to pay to have somone >>"pool risk". Aftermarket auto warranties do the >>same thing. Warranties on electronics do the same >>thing. The insurance on registered mail does the >>same thing. Big deal. > > If these things didn't add value why do people buy them? So answer your question by saying why people do buy them. Is it because there is no other choice? ___________
From: gray asphalt on 24 Sep 2009 02:39 "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote in message news:75c4bea9-67a8-4498-90c3-88648df0f39f(a)g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com... On Sep 22, 12:25 am, "gray asphalt" <dontwr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "DenaliDuffer" <denaliduf...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:e51916ef-c09b-4c18-9caf-29e49448618b(a)h40g2000prf.googlegroups.com... > On Aug 12, 10:18 pm, assimil...(a)borg.org wrote: > > > On 12-Aug-2009, "gray asphalt" <dontwr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I'm an Obama supporter but ... > > > > 1. Why do all of the reforms have to be contained in one huge bill? > > > Because the real purpose is not reform in the true sense of the word, > > but > > expanding gov't control? > > > -- > > bill-o > > Please answer just this one question. What value do insurance > companies add to health care? > ___________________ > > Beats me. I can't wait to read the responses. The question has been answered, so now it's your turn. What value does government offer here..so they take your health care money and tell you what your health care is going to be, and the advantage of this is? _______________________________________ I'm not in favor of government health insurance. I'd like to see some people commit to buying health insurance from a new company, maybe client owned, or an existing company that sees the handwriting on the wall, so to speak, and steps forward to meet the requirements and needs of the public. If we commit to buying health care from such a company, there will be one. And we can write the contract, within reason. This can work in banking, insurance, auto sales, and a whole lot of other things ... if we commit to purchasing a product at a certain price and stipulate the elements we are willing to spend our money on then companies will spring up or change to accomadate it. If you think this is a craze idea, look at microfinance by the Grameen Bank. Things are changing.
From: The moderator on 24 Sep 2009 08:10
"William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message news:clark-DCE9B7.16154023092009(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > In article <4aba6901$0$23758$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, > "The moderator" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > >> "William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message >> news:clark-1563F9.11265423092009(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... >> > In article <4aba2934$0$23766$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, >> > "The moderator" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "gray asphalt" <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Naeum.49208$JG1.39006(a)newsfe24.iad... >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >>> To cut to the chase ... I think it is wishful >> >> >>> thinking to believe that the current insurance >> >> >>> companies are going to treat you fairly. >> >> >>> If they wanted to be up front about what >> >> >>> they do and do not cover there would be >> >> >>> a list. >> >> >> >> >> >> Coverage is defined and exceptions listed in every insurance >> >> >> policy. >> >> > >> >> > How come there are lawsuits, won by individuals, who claim >> >> > that they should have been covered and weren't? ... broad terms >> >> > like "experimental" are used to deny common sense procedures ... >> >> > procrastinating payment until the policyholder is dead ... >> >> > Do insurance companies insist that the details of their lost >> >> > cases not be revealed? Is there a list of what cases have been >> >> > filed and the verdicts and the outcomes for the families? >> >> >> >> Do you have any examples? Specifics? >> >> >> >> What about those ads on television from lawyers looking for clients to >> >> sue >> >> for health claims? Don't you think we could reduce insurance costs if >> >> we >> >> had some tort reform to limit how these shysters make money recruiting >> >> "victims?" >> > >> > Do you know what percentage of health care spending goes on these >> > lawsuits? It is about 1-1.5%. In other words, while it is red meat to >> > the wingnuts, it is almost inconsequential in cutting health care >> > costs. >> >> Really? Does that 1%-1.5% represent actual judgments or does it also >> include additional cost of insuring against a such a judgment? Does it >> include defending against those judgments? One and one half percent of >> health care is still nearly four Billion Dollars. Chump change to a >> Liberal, but a lot of money to those of us who can count. > > That it may be, but it is still an infinitesimal amount when it comes to > fixing the bloated health care expenses of the US. The are a hundred > other places that yu should be looking first. That is, if you really > want to reduce the cost of healthcare, as opposed to making silly > politcal points. We should be looking at all ways to reduce health care. Last time I checked four Billion Dollars was not an infinitesimal amount. |