health care
in [Golf]
|
From: gray asphalt on 12 Feb 2010 12:42 "Howard Brazee" <howard(a)brazee.net> wrote in message news:uc2bn5lvljq8baef1ch09l5ua42jgpr3vs(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:49:54 GMT, assimilate(a)borg.org wrote: > >>One major difference Kenn is that employers fund these benefits from >>operating revenue and have profit left over after that. As such these >>benefits are sustainable. The Government must tax or borrow to pay for >>these >>benefits. I would rather all insurance de-coupled from employers, >>including >>the public sector. > > I'd rather see insurance used to pay for disasters, not maintenance. > > There is a certain amount of health care most everybody wants to see > paid for by the state - mainly that involved in preventing epidemics. > > But the option doesn't seem to be between paying for the poor or not > paying for the poor. It seems to be between pretending we aren't > paying for the poor and acknowledging that we are paying for the poor. > > Also - the medical industry is making sure that all of the "reform" > proposals that can be passed will make it more money. .... snip Dr. Brazee, you are correct. And President Obama is pretending that this isn't happening. Makes choosing between Rebubs and Dems like choosing between Exxon and Union Carbide. Names different. Motives the same.
From: BAR on 12 Feb 2010 12:45 In article <ilgdn.19620$4p5.1063(a)newsfe22.iad>, dontwrite(a)gmail.com says... > > "BAR" <screw(a)you.com> wrote in message > news:MPG.25df131f2ce10960989b97(a)news.giganews.com... > > In article <oy0dn.144819$kQ5.41489(a)newsfe08.iad>, dontwrite(a)gmail.com > > says... > >> > >> I said give me the same options ... can you read? > >> Feds have to pay for their insurance but the profit > >> of the insurance is restricted and they have a bunch > >> of options. I guess this issues isn't important to you. > >> Tell me why please. > > > > You can have all of the health care you pay for, just like you can have > > all of the food you can pay for, just like you can have all of the house > > you can pay for, and just like you can have all of the car you can pay > > for. > > > > Nobody is stopping you, now, from obtaining any type, kind or amount of > > health care except yourself. > > Is the part where health care insurers are making a 15% - 20% > profit on the general public and 1% on federal - is that relevant > or just another liberal talking point? 8-\ Show me the SEC filings of the Health Insurance companies that are making 15 to 20 percent profits. I would like to invest in those companies.
From: gray asphalt on 12 Feb 2010 13:00 The whistleblower who testified before congress said so. That hasn't been disputed. So if you see the stats in undeniable form what difference would it make ... oh yeah You'd invest. Says it all. "BAR" <screw(a)you.com> wrote in message news:MPG.25df5dbd711bf092989ba2(a)news.giganews.com... > In article <ilgdn.19620$4p5.1063(a)newsfe22.iad>, dontwrite(a)gmail.com > says... >> >> "BAR" <screw(a)you.com> wrote in message >> news:MPG.25df131f2ce10960989b97(a)news.giganews.com... >> > In article <oy0dn.144819$kQ5.41489(a)newsfe08.iad>, dontwrite(a)gmail.com >> > says... >> >> >> >> I said give me the same options ... can you read? >> >> Feds have to pay for their insurance but the profit >> >> of the insurance is restricted and they have a bunch >> >> of options. I guess this issues isn't important to you. >> >> Tell me why please. >> > >> > You can have all of the health care you pay for, just like you can have >> > all of the food you can pay for, just like you can have all of the >> > house >> > you can pay for, and just like you can have all of the car you can pay >> > for. >> > >> > Nobody is stopping you, now, from obtaining any type, kind or amount of >> > health care except yourself. >> >> Is the part where health care insurers are making a 15% - 20% >> profit on the general public and 1% on federal - is that relevant >> or just another liberal talking point? 8-\ > > Show me the SEC filings of the Health Insurance companies that are > making 15 to 20 percent profits. I would like to invest in those > companies.
From: gray asphalt on 12 Feb 2010 13:01 If it's $32k, that's an important point. My friend didn't say anything about that. "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote in message news:hl3l92$4qa$1(a)speranza.aioe.org... > > "gray asphalt" <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:IX%cn.114833$fu3.56340(a)newsfe12.iad... >> Just one quesion - ask your elected officials if >> they have any reason for not giving the American >> people, me for instance, the same health care >> options as senators, representatives and federal >> employees. Harry Reid stubled around and >> couldn't answer. I bet John Bohner has the same >> problem. If you are a veteran then nevermind, >> apparently you already have an excellent program. > > Veterans health care is wage based. If your income is above $32,000 you > get nothing. That is not the deal that many of us signed up for, but > simply another sacrifice veterans have to make. >
From: Howard Brazee on 12 Feb 2010 13:21
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:42:00 -0800, "gray asphalt" <dontwrite(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Also - the medical industry is making sure that all of the "reform" >> proposals that can be passed will make it more money. >... snip > >Dr. Brazee, you are correct. And President Obama is >pretending that this isn't happening. Makes choosing >between Rebubs and Dems like choosing between >Exxon and Union Carbide. Names different. Motives >the same. I don't know what either party is likely to do to get the votes of those who voted last time for change. -- "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 |