From: dene on 24 Jan 2010 00:34
"Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 09:59:03 -0800, dene wrote:
> > No....he's a captalist. You're a socialist.
> There's more to it than mere capitalism. If it was just about money, I
> think it would be fairly obvious to everyone that it would be much less
> expensive to 1) that have everybody pay into a common pool, and 2) get
> rid of the corporations skimming 30%+ profit off the top. The US the
> most inefficient in the world, and by a wide margin too. So it can't be
> about money.
Where are you getting 30% profits from? Everything I've read says that the
health insurers are making 3%. They have to submit rates for approval to a
State insurance department each time they change them. Unless you believe
50 state ins. departments are being bribed, you should consider that their
profit margins, i.e. claims/loss ratio, are pretty skinny.
You are correct about the need for everyone to pay into a common pool, which
is precisely why the individual mandate is essential.
Met a nice couple from Victoria who may buy my boat. He's an
anthesiologist, she works for a private agency, contracted by the government
to evaluate medical procedures, i.e. to determine if they truly are needed.
IOW, rationing. Americans will never accept this and she agreed. It's a
contrast of two cultures. You are wasting text discussing single payor in
the US, Carbs.
It was also interesting to hear them talk about this 12% "Harmony" (sales)
tax that is forthcoming. Want to buy a home in B.C.? Just add an extra
12% to the price. Good Lord!
From: assimilate on 24 Jan 2010 01:08
On 24-Jan-2010, "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote:
> > After the medical industry spent enough money buying Congress
> > Critters, we the health care bill turns out to be same old insurance,
> > except with more customers. The proposal was different from what
> > Bush would do, but the result is more corporate welfare.
> ....and exactly what is wrong with big corporations. Who employs the
> Howard? You're just spouting cliches.
Sometimes I think Howard thinks in them only
From: assimilate on 24 Jan 2010 01:10
On 23-Jan-2010, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> > IOW, rationing. Americans will never accept this and she agreed.
> > It's a contrast of two cultures. You are wasting text discussing
> > single payor in the US, Carbs.
> Greg, be serious. More rationing happens in the US than in any other
> first world country.
please explain yourself, as this is absurd on it's face.
From: dene on 24 Jan 2010 02:42
"Howard Brazee" <howard(a)brazee.net> wrote in message
> On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 03:35:46 GMT, assimilate(a)borg.org wrote:
> I suspect a lot of people are against this plan because they don't
> want to acknowledge that they are paying for the poor.
People are against it because they perceive it will do nothing to reduce
their own premiums.
From: BAR on 24 Jan 2010 08:09
In article <wclark2-38BD28.15204023012010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says...
> In article <MPG.25c4f87bb230d53989a90(a)news.giganews.com>,
> BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:
> > In article <cq9ml5127hejfuftu8c85v5t4p4jr0d5ek(a)4ax.com>,
> > howard(a)brazee.net says...
> > >
> > > On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 07:56:19 -0500, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >> That's how insurance works.
> > > >> That's how hospitals work when they bill you to pay for their
> > > >> treatment of those without money.
> > > >>
> > > >> What do you propose to change this?
> > > >
> > > >I am not compelled, at the point of a gun, to buy health insurance.
> > >
> > > True. But if you choose not to buy health insurance, and get into a
> > > serious accident, they won't verify this before calling for flight to
> > > life, getting you to a hospital, and saving your life. (They also
> > > won't check to see if you have the means to pay). They will save
> > > your life, and we will pay.
> > I should be billed for the services I received. Everyone receiving
> > services in from any business should pay for those services and if the
> > do not pay for the services they receive they should be arrested for
> > theft or sued.
> So health is just a business, is it? Why isn't education "just a
> business", then? You are not being billed for the services you receive
> there, you are being subsidized by the entire community, including those
> that will never take advantage of the education system.
Does OSU make a profit off of their students? Does OSU charge more than
the actual expenses? If yes, then they are a business. In the business
of selling education.
> > Again, why are medical services different from all other services when
> > it comes to paying for the services you receive.
> Are you paying for your children's education? Oh, yes, by taxes.
I'm not paying yet. I am saving and I am saving quite a bit. I figure I
will need about $30,000 a year saved up for each kid and then there will
be about $1,500 a month out of pocket costs to me. Damn kids want to go
to Ivy league schools.