From: John B. on 3 Mar 2010 18:07 On Mar 3, 5:05 pm, Dinosaur_Sr wrote:> On Mar 2, 6:32 pm, "John B." wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 2, 2:22 pm, Dinosaur_Sr wrote: > > > > On Mar 2, 9:32 am, "John B." wrote: > > > > > On Mar 1, 9:19 pm, BAR wrote: > > > > > > In article <26455639-3205-4bf7-a0f6-760e4098a190 > > > > > @z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, johnb...(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > > > On Mar 1, 8:47 pm, BAR wrote: > > > > > > > In article , > > > > > > > bkni...(a)conramp.net says... > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 20:26:02 -0500, BAR wrote: > > > > > > > > > >In article <4b8c6809$0$30950$9a6e1...(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > > > > > > > > >nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > > > > > > > > > >> On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 17:09:19 -0700, Howard Brazee wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 11:57:20 -0800 (PST), Dinosaur_Sr > > > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> >>> Agreed, but it works both ways. If someone loses their job and needs > > > > > > > > >> >>> to buy a private insurance policy, insurance cos. shouldn't be > > > > > > > > >> >>> allowed to turn them down because of the state of their health. > > > > > > > > > >> >> No problem. The question is, who is going to pay for it? The clear > > > > > > > > >> >> consensus in the US is that ordinary working people feel they pay too > > > > > > > > >> >> much to the govt, and they don't want to pay any more, in fact, they > > > > > > > > >> >> want to pay less. > > > > > > > > > >> > Who pays for it now? > > > > > > > > > >> > (We do). > > > > > > > > > >> The ideologues seem to be ignoring this obvious fact with all their > > > > > > > > > >Everyone should pay for the services they receive. If you don't pay you > > > > > > > > >should go to jail for stealing. > > > > > > > > > >If someone walked into your house and grabbed your wife's jewelry and > > > > > > > > >your computer and other valuables so that they could eat would you call > > > > > > > > >the police? Would you just let them steal from you? > > > > > > > > > Bert, you really need to do some studying on analogies. This one was > > > > > > > > so far off it isn't even funny.....even for you. > > > > > > > > Stealing is stealing. When you got to a place of business and you have > > > > > > > have no intention of paying for the services you receive you are > > > > > > > stealing. > > > > > > > There's a difference between intent and ability. You refuse to accept > > > > > > that anyone might be unable to pay for medical care. > > > > > > Main Entry: 1in tent > > > > > Pronunciation: \in-?tent\ > > > > > Function: noun > > > > > Etymology: Middle English entente, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin > > > > > intentus, from Latin, act of stretching out, from intendere > > > > > Date: 13th century > > > > > > 1 a : the act or fact of intending : purpose; especially : the design or > > > > > purpose to commit a wrongful or criminal act > > > > intent> b : the state of mind with which an act is done : volition > > > > > 2 : a usually clearly formulated or planned intention : aim > > > > director's intent> > > > > > 3 a : meaning, significance b : connotation 3 > > > > > synonyms see intention > > > > > > Main Entry: abil i ty > > > > > Pronunciation: \?-?bi-l?-te-\ > > > > > Function: noun > > > > > Inflected Form(s): plural abil i ties > > > > > Etymology: Middle English abilite, from Anglo-French, from Latin > > > > > habilitat-, habilitas, from habilis apt, skillful ? more at able > > > > > Date: 14th century > > > > > > 1 a : the quality or state of being able > > > > water>; especially : physical, mental, or legal power to perform b : > > > > > competence in doing : skill > > > > > 2 : natural aptitude or acquired proficiency > > > > warrant higher education> > > > > > > If you don't have the ability to pay then your intent is to steal..- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > So, if you're one of the millions of people who list their jobs and > > > > their health insurance in the recession and you, say, break your leg, > > > > going to the ER with no immediate ability to pay for treatment is > > > > stealing? > > > > You get a bill, like if you need to fix your car, or you need a new > > > roof on your house.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Medical bills can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. If > > I'm not mistaken, car and roof repairs generally don't run that high. > > Really? Looking over a lifetime, what do people spend? > > Look at housing. Let's get real cheap, and say a person spends$500.00 > per month, and that's pretty cheap if they have any utilities. Over > say 50 years, that comes to $300,000.00 for housing. Of course$500.00 > per month would be cheap for a car, assuming you do repair it from > time to time, put gas in it, park it, clean it, change the oil. > > You'll pay $300,000.00 for a car, but somehow can't handle paying that > for your own health care so you have to pay someone else to pay for > your health care for you. I must admit, I don't get it. > > You want to talk housing, people pay more like$2000.00 per month for > housing.  Over 50 years that's over a million, and very few people > spend that much on health care (compared especially to those who spend > that on housing). > > So why can't we buy our own health care? There are some real issues > here that could be solved, but we choose to go the way of paying the > government and insurance companies to pay for our health care for > us...and we are supposed to think this is cheaper? You absolutely have > to be an idiot to believe this.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - This is ridiculous. You get cancer, you get hurt in an accident, any number of other things, and you're up to your ears in medical bills in a matter of weeks or months. What is the point of comparing that to how much one might spend on housing or cars over the course of 40-50 years? From: John B. on 3 Mar 2010 18:09 On Mar 3, 5:07 pm, Dinosaur_Sr wrote:> On Mar 3, 12:22 pm, "dene" wrote: > > > > > > > "William Clark" wrote in message > > >news:clark-8D24D2.09530403032010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > > > In article , > > >  BAR wrote: > > > > > In article > > > state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says... > > > > > > > Do you know how much of your medical expenses car insurance will > > cover? > > > > > > > Thank you. But, for the benefit of the hard of thinking, let's > > call it > > > > > > > getting hit by falling masonry while walking in the street. > > > > > > > > There. Got it now? > > > > > > > Fine.  If there is no liability insurance to cover the accident > > first, > > > > > > then > > > > > > one's health insurance will take over. > > > > > > > If you don't have it, get it. > > > > > > > -Greg > > > > > > Provided you can afford it. > > > > > Provided they are willing to give up unnecessary luxuries. > > > > Indeed, I go down to the east side of Columbus and work with single > > > parent families whose homes are loaded with "unnecessary luxuries", like > > > Ramen Noodles and such. > > > > You're a bigoted idiot. > > > If true, they are on medicaid, aren't they?  They are also receiving food > > stamps and housing allowances.  So why are they *choosing* to eat Ramen > > Noodles? > > > Laziness?? > > > -Greg > > You need to follow some food stamp users into the parking lot. Many of > them drive new, (current model year) model vehicles. Not all do, mind > you, but many. People who can pay for their insurance will take the > free if they can get it, regardless.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Do you have some knowledge or experience to back this up? When I was in college in Boston, I worked in a grocery store in a poor neighborhood where lots of people were on food stamps. Not a single one of them drove a new car or had any other luxury items. From: John B. on 3 Mar 2010 18:10 On Mar 3, 5:09 pm, Dinosaur_Sr wrote:> On Mar 3, 5:00 pm, "John B." wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 3, 4:15 pm, Jack Hollis wrote: > > > > On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 21:04:35 -0600, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > > > >>Businessmen are smarter than politicians.   > > > > >George Bush was a businessman. > > > > True, but he was smart enough to get himself elected president twice. > > > He was also smart enough to know that it's businessmen who made the US > > > the richest and most powerful nation on earth and it's best to leave > > > them alone. > > > If we had left "businessmen" alone, we would not have clean air to > > breathe, clean water to drink, safe cars to drive, safe food to eat, > > safe working conditions, building codes, truth in advertising, anti- > > trust protection, equal opportunity in employment and housing....jeez, > > I could go on all day. > > That is simply not true. Mining companies I know of have, on their > own, reclaimed the land after they left. Some leave a scarred earth, > some don't. To say that all businessmen are bad like that is akin to > saying all politicians are corrupt.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - On their own? How do you know they did it on their own? From: Howard Brazee on 3 Mar 2010 18:59 On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 20:40:50 -0500, Jack Hollis wrote: >>> The companies know that guaranteed issue will mainly effect the >>> individual market. The smart companies will get out of the market >>> entirely. >> >>And they will..... > >Businessmen are smarter than politicians. Yeah, "The Smartest Men In the Room". It is ego, not intelligence that is the downfall of politicians and of businessmen. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison From: Howard Brazee on 3 Mar 2010 19:01 On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 16:15:38 -0500, Jack Hollis wrote: >True, but he was smart enough to get himself elected president twice. >He was also smart enough to know that it's businessmen who made the US >the richest and most powerful nation on earth and it's best to leave >them alone. It's small business that is hurting, why did he bail out the big guys? And expand the deficit (which is a huge tax)? Sure, we didn't get any change with Obama, but that doesn't make Bush right. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last