OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
#166
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
dgk wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>> obligated to treat you.
>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>
>
> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to the
> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and told
> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
> not urgent.
>
> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>
> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
> available model, Medicare.
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>
> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>> obligated to treat you.
>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>
>
> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to the
> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and told
> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
> not urgent.
>
> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>
> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
> available model, Medicare.
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>
> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
#167
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:19:27 -0500, Peaceful Bill
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>dgk wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
>> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>>> obligated to treat you.
>>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>>
>>
>> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to the
>> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
>> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and told
>> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
>> not urgent.
>>
>> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
>> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>>
>> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
>> available model, Medicare.
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>>
>> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
>
>I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>dgk wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
>> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>>> obligated to treat you.
>>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>>
>>
>> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to the
>> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
>> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and told
>> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
>> not urgent.
>>
>> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
>> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>>
>> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
>> available model, Medicare.
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>>
>> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
>
>I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
#168
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
dgk <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in
news:r08f54loptuq5mi8n1817582hedo5udupd@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:19:27 -0500, Peaceful Bill
> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>>dgk wrote:
>>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
>>> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in
most
>>>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they
are
>>>>> obligated to treat you.
>>>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>>>
>>>
>>> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to
the
>>> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
>>> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and
told
>>> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
>>> not urgent.
>>>
>>> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
>>> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>>>
>>> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
>>> available model, Medicare.
>>>
>>>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>>>
>>> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
>>
>>I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
>
>
> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
>
The only thing the gov ever did as good or at least not a giant waste of
money as the private sector is the post office!!!!!!!!!!!! KB
--
THUNDERSNAKE #9
Protect your rights or "Lose" them
The 2nd Admendment guarantees the others
news:r08f54loptuq5mi8n1817582hedo5udupd@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:19:27 -0500, Peaceful Bill
> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>>dgk wrote:
>>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
>>> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in
most
>>>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they
are
>>>>> obligated to treat you.
>>>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>>>
>>>
>>> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to
the
>>> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
>>> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and
told
>>> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
>>> not urgent.
>>>
>>> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
>>> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>>>
>>> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
>>> available model, Medicare.
>>>
>>>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>>>
>>> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
>>
>>I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
>
>
> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
>
The only thing the gov ever did as good or at least not a giant waste of
money as the private sector is the post office!!!!!!!!!!!! KB
--
THUNDERSNAKE #9
Protect your rights or "Lose" them
The 2nd Admendment guarantees the others
#169
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
Ok. Show me one person in the 15% tax bracket that pays 15%. Just
one.
On Jun 12, 11:27 pm, "rantonr...@mail.com" <rantonr...@mail.com>
wrote:
> SMS wrote:
> >Peaceful Bill wrote:
>
> >>It makes sense to eliminate as much taxation as possible, then to start
> >>cutting the entitlement programs to match the tax cuts. Then start
> >>cutting again and eliminating programs again. Repeat. Tax revenues
> >>will actually increase due to the economic stimulii tax cuts produce.
>
> >You've fallen for the big con.
>
> >The cut of the top rate from 70% down to 28%, by Reagan, did stimulate
> >the economy, but it was too far of a cut and Reagan eventually raised
> >taxes, as did Bush Sr, and Clinton. The result was an eventual balancing
> >of the budget during the Clinton administration. Bush Sr. can blame his
> >very minor tax increase on his loss in 1992.
>
> The Reagan tax cut dropped the top rate to 50%, but in reality few of
> the wealthy paid even that much when the top was 70%, or even 90%, as
> it was in the 1950s, thanks to wasteful tax shelters. The top rate
> was cut to 28% during the second Reagan term, as part of a tax reform
> plan that also eliminated any tax advantages for capital gains. On a
> percentage basis, Reagan raised taxes as much as Clinton did.- Hide quotedtext -
>
> - Show quoted text -
one.
On Jun 12, 11:27 pm, "rantonr...@mail.com" <rantonr...@mail.com>
wrote:
> SMS wrote:
> >Peaceful Bill wrote:
>
> >>It makes sense to eliminate as much taxation as possible, then to start
> >>cutting the entitlement programs to match the tax cuts. Then start
> >>cutting again and eliminating programs again. Repeat. Tax revenues
> >>will actually increase due to the economic stimulii tax cuts produce.
>
> >You've fallen for the big con.
>
> >The cut of the top rate from 70% down to 28%, by Reagan, did stimulate
> >the economy, but it was too far of a cut and Reagan eventually raised
> >taxes, as did Bush Sr, and Clinton. The result was an eventual balancing
> >of the budget during the Clinton administration. Bush Sr. can blame his
> >very minor tax increase on his loss in 1992.
>
> The Reagan tax cut dropped the top rate to 50%, but in reality few of
> the wealthy paid even that much when the top was 70%, or even 90%, as
> it was in the 1950s, thanks to wasteful tax shelters. The top rate
> was cut to 28% during the second Reagan term, as part of a tax reform
> plan that also eliminated any tax advantages for capital gains. On a
> percentage basis, Reagan raised taxes as much as Clinton did.- Hide quotedtext -
>
> - Show quoted text -
#170
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
> Some sort of program for commercial vehicles to exempt them.
Nope.
Naive. If everyone quit driving today, the Gov't would get it's money
elsewhere.
How about a $5.00 per pound (per week) tax on fat people. That will
keep them from eating, right? If that seems high, one can always lose
30 pounds a month, at least that's what they say on TV.
On Jun 5, 3:41 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote:
>
> > Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower
> > the price.
>
> > What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then
> > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers
> > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those
> > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least
> > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of
> > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the
> > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax
> > monthly until they cry uncle.
>
> Actually, we should raise the gas tax with an offsetting tax credit up
> to a certain limit.
>
> I would NOT limit the tax credit by income or filing status. You want to
> get buy-in from the general public, and encourage them to buy smaller
> vehicles, at least for commuting (keep the SUV or minivan for times when
> it's really appropriate). $50K is still pretty low income.
>
> Every licensed non-commercial driver with a vehicle registered in their
> name gets the credit for one vehicle. Maybe a $5/gallon tax, with a
> $5/gallon tax credit for 365 gallons a year, i.e. an $1825 tax credit.
> Use less than 365 gallons a year and you're ahead of the game. Use more,
> well it's up to you to commute solo in an SUV, or to drive the kids
> around in a minivan, or to live 50 miles from work.
>
> No tax credit for unlicensed drivers.
> No tax credit for those that don't file income taxes.
> Some sort of program for commercial vehicles to exempt them.
Nope.
Naive. If everyone quit driving today, the Gov't would get it's money
elsewhere.
How about a $5.00 per pound (per week) tax on fat people. That will
keep them from eating, right? If that seems high, one can always lose
30 pounds a month, at least that's what they say on TV.
On Jun 5, 3:41 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote:
>
> > Cheny is a wad, but he is right. Increasing demand does not lower
> > the price.
>
> > What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then
> > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers
> > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those
> > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least
> > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of
> > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the
> > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax
> > monthly until they cry uncle.
>
> Actually, we should raise the gas tax with an offsetting tax credit up
> to a certain limit.
>
> I would NOT limit the tax credit by income or filing status. You want to
> get buy-in from the general public, and encourage them to buy smaller
> vehicles, at least for commuting (keep the SUV or minivan for times when
> it's really appropriate). $50K is still pretty low income.
>
> Every licensed non-commercial driver with a vehicle registered in their
> name gets the credit for one vehicle. Maybe a $5/gallon tax, with a
> $5/gallon tax credit for 365 gallons a year, i.e. an $1825 tax credit.
> Use less than 365 gallons a year and you're ahead of the game. Use more,
> well it's up to you to commute solo in an SUV, or to drive the kids
> around in a minivan, or to live 50 miles from work.
>
> No tax credit for unlicensed drivers.
> No tax credit for those that don't file income taxes.
> Some sort of program for commercial vehicles to exempt them.
#171
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
> I'd give the credit quarterly to every working adult under a certain
> income level, the same dollar amount to each person, no matter how
> much or little hydrocarbon fuel they consumed or even if they didn't
> drive at all.
Nope. I can deliver Pizza, consume gas, and not report the income
from tips.
On Jun 6, 4:03 am, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com>
wrote:
> SMS wrote:
> > Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote:
> > > What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then
> > > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers
> > > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those
> > > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least
> > > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of
> > > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the
> > > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax
> > > monthly until they cry uncle.
>
> > Actually, we should raise the gas tax with an offsetting tax credit up
> > to a certain limit.
>
> > I would NOT limit the tax credit by income or filing status. You want to
> > get buy-in from the general public, and encourage them to buy smaller
> > vehicles, at least for commuting (keep the SUV or minivan for times when
> > it's really appropriate). $50K is still pretty low income.
>
> > Every licensed non-commercial driver with a vehicle registered in their
> > name gets the credit for one vehicle. Maybe a $5/gallon tax, with a
> > $5/gallon tax credit for 365 gallons a year, i.e. an $1825 tax credit.
> > Use less than 365 gallons a year and you're ahead of the game. Use more,
> > well it's up to you to commute solo in an SUV, or to drive the kids
> > around in a minivan, or to live 50 miles from work.
>
> > No tax credit for unlicensed drivers.
> > No tax credit for those that don't file income taxes.
> > Some sort of program for commercial vehicles to exempt them.
>
> I'd give the credit quarterly to every working adult under a certain
> income level, the same dollar amount to each person, no matter how
> much or little hydrocarbon fuel they consumed or even if they didn't
> drive at all. That method would have the lowest bureaucratic
> overhead, be the least prone to fraud, and offer the greatest
> incentive to not waste energy. Government credits don't work well
> when they're complex.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
> income level, the same dollar amount to each person, no matter how
> much or little hydrocarbon fuel they consumed or even if they didn't
> drive at all.
Nope. I can deliver Pizza, consume gas, and not report the income
from tips.
On Jun 6, 4:03 am, "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencu...@my-deja.com>
wrote:
> SMS wrote:
> > Just Me (remove <nospam> to reply) wrote:
> > > What we should do is raise the tax to cut wasteful consumption. Then
> > > offset the increase by giving a limited tax credit to family tax payers
> > > with under 100k net income (single filers 50k,) $0 credit for those
> > > over. That way we keep the tax of the backs of those that can least
> > > afford it and punish the Hummer drivers. This will spur growth of
> > > Hybrid and alternative fuels. You know damn well that if it hurts the
> > > rich that they will start doing something about it. Increase the tax
> > > monthly until they cry uncle.
>
> > Actually, we should raise the gas tax with an offsetting tax credit up
> > to a certain limit.
>
> > I would NOT limit the tax credit by income or filing status. You want to
> > get buy-in from the general public, and encourage them to buy smaller
> > vehicles, at least for commuting (keep the SUV or minivan for times when
> > it's really appropriate). $50K is still pretty low income.
>
> > Every licensed non-commercial driver with a vehicle registered in their
> > name gets the credit for one vehicle. Maybe a $5/gallon tax, with a
> > $5/gallon tax credit for 365 gallons a year, i.e. an $1825 tax credit.
> > Use less than 365 gallons a year and you're ahead of the game. Use more,
> > well it's up to you to commute solo in an SUV, or to drive the kids
> > around in a minivan, or to live 50 miles from work.
>
> > No tax credit for unlicensed drivers.
> > No tax credit for those that don't file income taxes.
> > Some sort of program for commercial vehicles to exempt them.
>
> I'd give the credit quarterly to every working adult under a certain
> income level, the same dollar amount to each person, no matter how
> much or little hydrocarbon fuel they consumed or even if they didn't
> drive at all. That method would have the lowest bureaucratic
> overhead, be the least prone to fraud, and offer the greatest
> incentive to not waste energy. Government credits don't work well
> when they're complex.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
#172
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
dgk wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:19:27 -0500, Peaceful Bill
> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>> dgk wrote:
>>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
>>> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>>>> obligated to treat you.
>>>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>>>
>>> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to the
>>> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
>>> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and told
>>> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
>>> not urgent.
>>>
>>> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
>>> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>>>
>>> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
>>> available model, Medicare.
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>>>
>>> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
>> I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
>
>
> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
Better care bullshit. I'd rather have agreement with my doctor about my
healthcare rather than another lifetime bureaucrat.
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:19:27 -0500, Peaceful Bill
> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>> dgk wrote:
>>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
>>> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>>>> obligated to treat you.
>>>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>>>
>>> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to the
>>> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
>>> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and told
>>> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
>>> not urgent.
>>>
>>> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
>>> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>>>
>>> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
>>> available model, Medicare.
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>>>
>>> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
>> I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
>
>
> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
Better care bullshit. I'd rather have agreement with my doctor about my
healthcare rather than another lifetime bureaucrat.
#173
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:50:42 -0500, Peaceful Bill
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
>
>Better care bullshit. I'd rather have agreement with my doctor about my
>healthcare rather than another lifetime bureaucrat.
So the bureaucrat's at the Insurance Company making the decisions are
OK with you then?
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
>
>Better care bullshit. I'd rather have agreement with my doctor about my
>healthcare rather than another lifetime bureaucrat.
So the bureaucrat's at the Insurance Company making the decisions are
OK with you then?
#174
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:39:31 -0500, Peaceful Bill
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>>
>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>> obligated to treat you.
>
>What a complete imbecile.
Cite the programs, smart guy.
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>>
>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>> obligated to treat you.
>
>What a complete imbecile.
Cite the programs, smart guy.
#175
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 20:14:14 -0400, Bill Putney <bptn@kinez.net>
wrote:
>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>> obligated to treat you.
>
>You are grossly ignorant about that which you write.
Apparently you don't have much of a clue Bill. Please cite some of
those programs for the uninsured - aside from the state reimbursing
the hospital for uninsured (and uncollectable) emergency room care.
Aside from a few disjointed state programs, and a totalitarian effort
now underway in MA, there is little out there for the uninsured.
wrote:
>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>> obligated to treat you.
>
>You are grossly ignorant about that which you write.
Apparently you don't have much of a clue Bill. Please cite some of
those programs for the uninsured - aside from the state reimbursing
the hospital for uninsured (and uncollectable) emergency room care.
Aside from a few disjointed state programs, and a totalitarian effort
now underway in MA, there is little out there for the uninsured.
#176
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:36:19 -0500, Peaceful Bill
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>Children already have insurance.
Please back that up with any kind of evidence.
>Why test embryonic stem cells when it
>has been fact that older stem cells were capable of the same results.
>And the stem cell research was to be done on EMBRYONIC stem cells, not
>on unfertilized eggs.
See "In vitro fertilization".
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>Children already have insurance.
Please back that up with any kind of evidence.
>Why test embryonic stem cells when it
>has been fact that older stem cells were capable of the same results.
>And the stem cell research was to be done on EMBRYONIC stem cells, not
>on unfertilized eggs.
See "In vitro fertilization".
#177
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
still just me wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 20:14:14 -0400, Bill Putney <bptn@kinez.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>> obligated to treat you.
>> You are grossly ignorant about that which you write.
>
> Apparently you don't have much of a clue Bill. Please cite some of
> those programs for the uninsured - aside from the state reimbursing
> the hospital for uninsured (and uncollectable) emergency room care.
>
> Aside from a few disjointed state programs, and a totalitarian effort
> now underway in MA, there is little out there for the uninsured.
Medicaid. AFDC.
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 20:14:14 -0400, Bill Putney <bptn@kinez.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>> obligated to treat you.
>> You are grossly ignorant about that which you write.
>
> Apparently you don't have much of a clue Bill. Please cite some of
> those programs for the uninsured - aside from the state reimbursing
> the hospital for uninsured (and uncollectable) emergency room care.
>
> Aside from a few disjointed state programs, and a totalitarian effort
> now underway in MA, there is little out there for the uninsured.
Medicaid. AFDC.
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')
#178
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:50:42 -0500, Peaceful Bill
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>dgk wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:19:27 -0500, Peaceful Bill
>> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>>
>>> dgk wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
>>>> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>>>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>>>>> obligated to treat you.
>>>>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>>>>
>>>> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to the
>>>> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
>>>> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and told
>>>> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
>>>> not urgent.
>>>>
>>>> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
>>>> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>>>>
>>>> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
>>>> available model, Medicare.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>>>>
>>>> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
>>> I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
>>
>>
>> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
>
>Better care bullshit. I'd rather have agreement with my doctor about my
>healthcare rather than another lifetime bureaucrat.
Well yes, of course. But that is the problem with HMOs, not medicare.
Medicare doesn't make a profit by denying you service. Plus, why
should I have to change doctors (I've had the same GP for 25 years)
because my new job's healthplan doesn't include him? With single
payer, I can keep my doctor.
I used to work for a company that sold computer systems for clinical
laboratories. Your blood goes there, they analyze it, you get results
and someone gets a bill. I mostly wrote the interfaces between the
system and the laboratory instrumentation, but we also handled the
billing software. The instruments were fun, but the billing was a
nightmare. Each provider had different billing rules, some tests were
billed to one provider, but if you went over a certain number per year
then they were billed somewhere else. There were book after book of
rules like that. We went to conferences all the time just to figure
out how to keep the billing straight. The whole situation is stupid
and a waste of effort. I'd say duplication of services but that
grossly understates the inefficiency.
<snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>dgk wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:19:27 -0500, Peaceful Bill
>> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>>
>>> dgk wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:42:45 -0700 (PDT), Foobar
>>>> <bamberbert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>>>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>>>>> obligated to treat you.
>>>>> Which is by definition "insurance".
>>>>>
>>>> They are obligated to treat the emergency. My friend just went to the
>>>> ER for a stomach ache. They decided he wasn't about to die and
>>>> proscribed Maalox and told him that it could be Gall Bladder and told
>>>> him to go to his doctor. They do not have to treat anything that is
>>>> not urgent.
>>>>
>>>> Having insurance, he went to his doctor and found out that, yes
>>>> indeed, the GB must come out. But the ER isn't going to do it.
>>>>
>>>> Taiwan recently instituted national healthcare, based on the best
>>>> available model, Medicare.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...wangetshealthy
>>>>
>>>> If only we were advanced enough to do the same.
>>> I'm glad that we're not backward enough to do the same.
>>
>>
>> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
>
>Better care bullshit. I'd rather have agreement with my doctor about my
>healthcare rather than another lifetime bureaucrat.
Well yes, of course. But that is the problem with HMOs, not medicare.
Medicare doesn't make a profit by denying you service. Plus, why
should I have to change doctors (I've had the same GP for 25 years)
because my new job's healthplan doesn't include him? With single
payer, I can keep my doctor.
I used to work for a company that sold computer systems for clinical
laboratories. Your blood goes there, they analyze it, you get results
and someone gets a bill. I mostly wrote the interfaces between the
system and the laboratory instrumentation, but we also handled the
billing software. The instruments were fun, but the billing was a
nightmare. Each provider had different billing rules, some tests were
billed to one provider, but if you went over a certain number per year
then they were billed somewhere else. There were book after book of
rules like that. We went to conferences all the time just to figure
out how to keep the billing straight. The whole situation is stupid
and a waste of effort. I'd say duplication of services but that
grossly understates the inefficiency.
#179
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
still just me wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:50:42 -0500, Peaceful Bill
> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>>> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
>> Better care bullshit. I'd rather have agreement with my doctor about my
>> healthcare rather than another lifetime bureaucrat.
>
> So the bureaucrat's at the Insurance Company making the decisions are
> OK with you then?
>
I can change insurance companies. I can't change some lifetime
bureaucrat. They are locked into their job.
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:50:42 -0500, Peaceful Bill
> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>>> Did you read the stats? Better care and cheaper.
>> Better care bullshit. I'd rather have agreement with my doctor about my
>> healthcare rather than another lifetime bureaucrat.
>
> So the bureaucrat's at the Insurance Company making the decisions are
> OK with you then?
>
I can change insurance companies. I can't change some lifetime
bureaucrat. They are locked into their job.
#180
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Cheney - Cutting Gas Tax Stupid
still just me wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:39:31 -0500, Peaceful Bill
> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>> obligated to treat you.
>> What a complete imbecile.
>
> Cite the programs, smart guy.
>
You seem to be one of the uneducated. So read slowly so you can
understand. I'm not going to repeat this even if you just don't get it....
Medicaid, Medicare. Any hospital MUST take patients even if they can't pay.
And EVERYONE has the right to select and purchase health insurance, or
to convert existing coverage.
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:39:31 -0500, Peaceful Bill
> <snails.pace@highspeedturtles.net> wrote:
>
>>> There are few programs for the uninsured. The only "programs" in most
>>> states are the fact that if you show up in an emergency room they are
>>> obligated to treat you.
>> What a complete imbecile.
>
> Cite the programs, smart guy.
>
You seem to be one of the uneducated. So read slowly so you can
understand. I'm not going to repeat this even if you just don't get it....
Medicaid, Medicare. Any hospital MUST take patients even if they can't pay.
And EVERYONE has the right to select and purchase health insurance, or
to convert existing coverage.