(lost track of who wrote what)
But if you repeal ALL government mandates, you'll wind
up with lots of policies that appear to cover everything
a consumer might want, but are actually full of loopholes
so that the insurer need not pay for standard treatments.
That seems the opposite of
Patrick said:
It's kind of like playing with that old Eliza computer program. Anyone
remember that?
From: Richard Baker r...@theculture.org
] Why do you say anyone remember that??
How do you feel when you read Why do you say anyone remember that???
-- Matt
Rob said:
A few people have been removed, a couple of them long term listees
and one was a moderator here. We definitely are not queasy when it
comes to pulling the pin.
I'm definitely queasy about it, but I guess I'm not part of we.
Rich
___
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Doug Pensingerbrig...@zo.com wrote:
On the Americans are stupid issue, I would agree somewhat, but I would use
the terms ignorant and/or intellectualy lazy rather than stupid.
I would go with lazy more than ignorant, even though ignorant may be
technically
Richard wrote:
A few people have been removed, a couple of them long term listees and one
was a moderator here. We definitely are not queasy when it comes to pulling
the pin.
I'm definitely queasy about it, but I guess I'm not part of we.
I'm queasy as well. To my knowledge the only
Doug wrote:
Has he been arrogant at times? Maybe, but that sort of thing is difficult
to judge via email. One can often sound arrogant or diffident or whiny and
not really mean to. But if arrogance was the criteria by which we judged
people for their on list fitness, how long would JDG
I am just a lurker here. I seldom post. I follow for information and
to watch debates unfold. To help me make up my mind on some of the
issues discussed.
I personally am not getting much out of the John Williams threads at
this moment. Discussing the history, legitimacy and quality of
...@mac.com
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 07:25:51 -0500
I am just a lurker here. I seldom post. I follow for information and
to watch debates unfold. To help me make up my mind on some of the
issues
Rob wrote:
We are the entertainment
Well, if it makes you happy to think so... :-p
Jim
Pithy remarks Maru
Free Learning Centers Information. Click here.
Learning Center
Doug wrote:
Has he been arrogant at times?
The arrogance doesn't fuss me; there's far too many brainy people here to
expect excessive modesty. :-)
The passive-agressive posts, though? I don't mind admitting that kind of stuff
gets under my skin.
Jim
Admitting weakness maru
John Williams wrote:
I would go with lazy more than ignorant
I think that intellectual laziness leads to stupidity, though. How can live
your whole life in this country and not know Medicare is a government program,
to cite one of Maher's examples? Let alone not know there are two senators
Jim wrote:
The passive-agressive posts, though? I don't mind admitting that kind of
stuff gets under my skin.
Jim
Admitting weakness maru
Now see, I guess I don't understand what passive-aggressive means because I
would think that his confrontational, sometimes sarcastic style has any
Doug wrote:
Now see, I guess I dont understand what passive-aggressive means because I
would think that his confrontational, sometimes sarcastic style has any
passivity to it.
I see it differently, perhaps. Passive-agressive may not be the right
clinical term here, but I find repeated
It's a put-on. And it's a put-on anyone who's been on the Internet for
more than 5 minutes has seen dozens of times. The repetitive I'm just
asking questions to try to understand, the feigned cluelessness, the
detached pose, the deliberate obtuseness ... it's all carefully
calculated to do one
Patrick said:
It's a put-on. And it's a put-on anyone who's been on the Internet for
more than 5 minutes has seen dozens of times. The repetitive I'm just
asking questions to try to understand, the feigned cluelessness, the
detached pose, the deliberate obtuseness ... it's all carefully
Yeah, Eliza and Parry could be quite entertaining if they talked to
each other.
Eliza and Racter could be too, but Eliza didn't get to say much in
those conversations ..
On Aug 18, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Patrick Sweeney wrote:
It's kind of like playing with that old Eliza computer program.
On 8/18/2009 4:22:27 PM, Bruce Bostwick (lihan161...@sbcglobal.net) wrote:
Yeah, Eliza and Parry could be quite entertaining if they talked to
each other.
Eliza and Racter could be too, but Eliza
didn't get to say much in
those conversations ..
On Aug 18, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Patrick
Rob wrote:
Bruce wrote:
(Type mismatch error: expected boolean value but found string 'cake'.
Input not parsed.)
The cake is a lie?
Apparently the cake is neither true nor false.
Doug
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Original Message:
-
From: Jo Anne evens...@hevanet.com
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 00:14:29 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
Doug wrote:
Has he been arrogant at times? Maybe, but that sort of thing is
difficult
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Either it will have a higher premium to cover pre-existing
conditions, or it only covers things not caused by the pre-existing
condition.
That is not how health status insurance works. It is insurance against
an
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Trent Shipleytship...@deru.com wrote:
The people outside the boundary are not my responsibility. They are not
my people. Furthermore, they don't participate in my moral economy.
The status of the poor in my country has an immediate effect on me. I
may be
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Trent Shipleytship...@deru.com wrote:
So insurance could charge someone with type II diabetes more, but not
someone with type I diabetes. You could charge more to people who,
smoke, are over weight, who don't exercise, or who practice un-safe sex.
You
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Lance A. Brownla...@bearcircle.net wrote:
The analogy between auto and health insurance fails in one regard: Most
of the time, a 5x increase in auto insurance premiums is a direct result
of decisions by the covered person. Many of causes for increases in
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:52 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
OK, I fear this won't work, but I'm going to try.
Work? How does it work?
So, you can decide that everyone else is crazy or you can decide that there
are areas that you can learn more about.
I choose
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:02 PM, John Williamsjwilliams4...@gmail.com wrote:
So, you consider his post to me thoughtful, constructive, and worthy of
respect?
Yes.
Martin
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Doug Pensinger wrote (in html, and it's a hell to reformat):
I do occasionally blow up. Once when I was accused of racism,
once when a private discussion I'd had with someone was forwarded
to the list, and ISTR Nick and I talking completely at
cross-purposes. I was really annoyed on Friday
Original Message:
-
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:21:45 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
Another good reason for heath status insurance
John, you realize what you are arguing, don't you
On 18/08/2009, at 12:11 AM, dsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
What you are searching for is akin to trying to find an even prime
number.
It's really easy to find one...
...but then you go looking for another...
Charlie.
But There's One, So There Must Be Another Eventually Maru
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market, it
seems to me that it would be simpler just to directly subsidize those
who cannot afford to pay health insurance premiums, and leave the
insurance market to function rationally.
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:03, John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Either it will have a higher premium to cover pre-existing
conditions, or it only covers things not caused by the pre-existing
condition.
That is not how
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market,
You call it interference, I call it participation.
Well, at least you don't try to hide your bias.
Dave
___
It is interesting what some people find rude which does not seem rude
to others. I suspect that a neutral observer would look at my posts
during the last few weeks and judge that they are not at all rude. I
have been asking some uncomfortable questions, but not making any
obviously rude remarks.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:11 AM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
There is a reason why there isn't affordable long term insurance.
Yes, government interference and people who would rather spend other
people's money for their own insurance.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Of course that's how it works. It's in the interest of insurance
companies not to pay out. Your shilling for corperations is amusing,
but not based in reality: insurance allways takes into account risks.
No,
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Dave Landdml...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market,
You call it interference, I call it participation.
I'd agree with forced participation.
Here's an example of
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market, it
seems to me that it would be simpler just to directly subsidize those
who cannot afford to pay
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:11 AM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
Original Message:
-
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:21:45 -0700
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: A Real Free Market in Health Care
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:51, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Of course that's how it works. It's in the interest of insurance
companies not to pay out. Your shilling for corperations is amusing,
but not based in reality:
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:57, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to interfere in the insurance market, it
seems to me that it would be simpler just to
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:51, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
No, considering pre-existing conditions is not how health status
insurance works. It
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:57, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 16 Aug 2009 at 23:18, John Williams wrote:
If the government is going to
Hello all --
I didn't mean to drop out of this, ummm, 'discussion', but I lost the email
I intended to respond to over the w/e. What can I say? I turned 61 and had
to put a 9 year old cat down due to cancer -- not a good day until Charlie
reminded me 61 is a prime number! Cheered me right up.
John Williams wrote:
It is interesting what some people find rude which does not seem rude
to others. I suspect that a neutral observer would look at my posts
during the last few weeks and judge that they are not at all rude. I
have been asking some uncomfortable questions, but not making any
On 17 Aug 2009 at 17:06, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
On 17 Aug 2009 at 12:51, John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
No, considering pre-existing
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:38 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
That doesn't really prove anything. For instance,
a flame war would produce a large number of posts,
but one could hardly call that communication.
Of course it does not prove anything, but it is highly suggestive.
While
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
And in most cases, the likelyhood of you developing those conditions
is dependent on pre-existing conditions!
I have not seen any evidence that suggests this. There are a large
number of conditions that can result
On 8/17/2009 8:04:00 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:38 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
That doesn't really prove anything. For instance,
a flame war would produce a large number of posts,
but one could hardly call that
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:
Your statement reads quite humorously.G
That's great! Apparently there is a fine line between humorous and
rude and sincere. Feel free to give my posts the benefit of the
doubt...
On 8/17/2009 8:48:30 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
wrote:
Your statement reads quite humorously.G
That's great! Apparently there is a fine line between humorous and
rude and sincere. Feel free to give
Do you think you're fooling anyone with this schtick?
I hope not. It is certainly not my intention to fool anyone.
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:
On 8/17/2009 8:48:30 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
wrote:
Your statement reads quite humorously.G
That's great! Apparently there
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:02 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:15 AM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
Hi. Seriously, are you trolling, or just
dense? : ) We rank respect the way most communities
do--completely informally.
Not trolling.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:25 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:
We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse. We do,
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:
We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse. We do, indeed.
We don't like straw men or trolls (which I can't help observing are at two
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:32 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:
Actually, a health insurance market without government interference
would be a lot more consumer-driven than the current system, which
is why I mentioned it. In nearly all cases, if there is to be a
Howso?
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:
Is health care so unimportant that it deserves no regulation?
We are starting from different worldviews, I think. I believe in
freedom for people to make agreements with each other as they choose
-- that is my starting
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:25 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:
We have a sense of community here, along with the usual
John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:
We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
explicit and implicit standards of behavior and discourse. We do, indeed.
We don't like straw men or trolls (which I can't help
Did someone say John's been on this list for 10 years? Did I misread
that??
I told John many of us had been. Maybe that got mangled. Maybe by me. :-)
Dan M.
myhosting.com - Premium Microsoft® Windows® and Linux web and
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:
On 8/17/2009 9:12:11 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
wrote:
On 8/17/2009 8:48:30 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:54 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Nick Arnettnick.arn...@gmail.com wrote:
We have a sense of community here, along with the usual collaterals of
explicit and implicit standards of behavior and
John Williams wrote:
...
We don't like straw men or trolls
...
There's that we several more times. How many people subscribe to this
email list, and how many of them do you speak for when you say we? How
did you determine that these people have that view?
You're not going to claim that all
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:24 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
I note you snipped the etiquette guidelines. : )
I did snip it. I did read it.
___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
- Original Message -
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Rceebergerrceeber
No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past booted
people from the list as a group in most cases. There being no one person in
particular one can suck up to in order to avoid consequences, it behooves
everyone to be generally inoffensive. A few people have been
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:48 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net wrote:
But no, I do not give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I have you pegged
as exactly the kind of intentionally obtuse person you appear to be.
My apologies for not being as perceptive as you are.
No, when I say we
- Original Message -
From: John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com
To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: The Role of Government in a Libertarian Free Market
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Rceebergerrceeber
John Williams wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:48 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net wrote:
But no, I do not give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I have you
pegged as exactly the kind of intentionally obtuse person you appear to be.
My apologies for not being as perceptive as you
On 8/17/2009 11:03:58 PM, Trent Shipley (tship...@deru.com) wrote:
No, when I say we in this context, I mean that we have in the past
booted people from the list as a group in most cases. There being no one
person in particular one can suck up to in order to avoid consequences, it
behooves
On 8/17/2009 11:04:59 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:48 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net
wrote:
But no, I do not give you the benefit of the doubt. I think I have you
pegged as exactly the kind of intentionally obtuse person you appear to
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:
On 8/17/2009 11:09:15 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Jo Anneevens...@hevanet.com wrote:
And there I rest my case on the tone thing.
I wrote that as clearly and as
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 9:15 PM, xponentrobxponent...@comcast.net wrote:
No one particular cares how many lurkers there are.
I care, that is why I asked.
It is pretty much the same as using we when speaking for Americans even
though Americans are very diverse there is still considerable
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 11:36 AM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote:
It is interesting what some people find rude which does not seem rude
to others. I suspect that a neutral observer would look at my posts
during the last few weeks and judge that they are not at all rude. I
have
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:
It is worth noting that this guy is one of the most respected members on
this list
Decide that with a vote, did you?
He seems rather a hot-head to me. I was going to ask him to explain
what set him off, but evidently he
On 8/16/2009 1:09:53 AM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net
wrote:
It is worth noting that this guy is one of the most respected members
on this list
Decide that with a vote, did you?
One would have to be
Dan wrote:
One thing to remember about experimentation: 99.99% of experiments fail;
What's the criteria for success? An experimental form of governance (or
some aspect of governance) may not yield a completely successful law or
system of laws, but I'm relatively certain that important
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:
One would have to be quite dense to not notice after over a decade on the
list.
Once again, your default position is to assume that others are stupid.
Do you actually think your feeble attempts to place others in a
Charlie wrote:
I do occasionally blow up. Once when I was accused of racism, once when a
private discussion I'd had with someone was forwarded to the list, and ISTR
Nick and I talking completely at cross-purposes. I was really annoyed on
Friday night, partly 'cause I'd got home after
The Atlantic has a thoughtful article by David Goldhill on health care
and health insurance reform. It is long, but I think well worth
reading. I've also included below a few paragraphs that I thought were
particularly interesting.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200909/health-care
|
On 16/08/2009, at 5:46 PM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Charlie wrote:
I do occasionally blow up. Once when I was accused of racism, once
when a private discussion I'd had with someone was forwarded to the
list, and ISTR Nick and I talking completely at cross-purposes. I
was really annoyed on
At 02:51 AM Sunday 8/16/2009, John Williams wrote:
The Atlantic has a thoughtful article by David Goldhill on health care
and health insurance reform. It is long, but I think well worth
reading. I've also included below a few paragraphs that I thought were
particularly interesting.
Rob wrote:
LOL.I'm the cellar dweller!
Yea, that's true, but we know why. That's where all the best list wines
are kept.
Dan M.
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
At 10:15 AM Sunday 8/16/2009, David Hobby wrote:
John Williams wrote:
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Rceebergerrceeber...@comcast.net wrote:
One would have to be quite dense to not notice after over a decade
on the list.
Once again, your default position is to assume that others are
FWIW the _Atlantic_ article is well worth reading carefully. I've
already forwarded the link with my recommendation to a couple of
other lists, and got a couple of comments back.
The problems the article lists are real; I won't argue that the present
system is really messed up. However,
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 4:05 AM, Ronn!
Blankenshipronn_blankens...@bellsouth.net wrote:
I'm only a little way into the article, but I take it Semmelwies is no
longer mentioned in the medical school (or pre-med) curriculum?
I think that the guidelines Goldhill refers to are more systematic and
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:15 AM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
Hi. Seriously, are you trolling, or just
dense? : ) We rank respect the way most communities
do--completely informally.
Not trolling. Possibly dense. There is that reference to we again,
which is what led me to believe
John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 8:15 AM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
...
Yes, Charlie is someone I respect. His posts are
thoughtful, and when he argues, he does it in a fair
and constructive way.
So, you consider his post to me thoughtful, constructive, and worthy of
One thing that is often discussed in reference to health insurance is
that if someone is unexpectedly afflicted with a chronic condition,
their health insurance premiums will usually increase drastically.
Health insurance for someone diagnosed with a chronic condition might
go from $2,000 a year
When you reach a point where the suggested solution to ridiculously
overpriced health insurance is to take out an insurance policy on your
insurance ... perhaps it's a sign that you ought to consider some
other system.
Patrick
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:24 PM, John
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Patrick
Sweeneyfirefly.ga...@gmail.com wrote:
When you reach a point where the suggested solution to ridiculously
overpriced health insurance is to take out an insurance policy on your
insurance ... perhaps it's a sign that you ought to consider some
other
John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Patrick
Sweeneyfirefly.ga...@gmail.com wrote:
When you reach a point where the suggested solution to ridiculously
overpriced health insurance is to take out an insurance policy on your
insurance ... perhaps it's a sign that you ought to
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
I'd guess that Patrick is expecting health insurance
to have health status insurance already built into it.
One would think the whole point of health insurance is to provide you
with health care (more precisely, the funds
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
It does strike me as a kludge, though. To continue
your example of car insurance, I don't believe that
anybody markets insurance against having your car
insurance premiums rise dramatically.
I do not think there is a as
On 15 Aug 2009 at 20:00, John Williams wrote:
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 7:51 PM,
dsummersmi...@comcast.netdsummersmi...@comcast.net wrote:
That's a true statementbut the problem with failure with radically new
government is that the failures are horrid: (e.g. the French Revolution,
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Patrick Sweeneyfirefly.ga...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Hobbyhob...@newpaltz.edu wrote:
But if I do fall ill, for the insurer to raise my rates rather than
provide the agreed-upon care seems like dirty pool.
That is only true if
On 16 Aug 2009 at 14:08, John Williams wrote:
New ideas can be difficult to get used to. Perhaps they could be
bundled together for those who prefer it. But it would be a bundle --
the two types of insurance are fundamentally different, since one pays
a lump sum or equivalent (like life
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Many people won't go for checkups if they have to pay out of pocket,
and they will ignore dangerous conditions for too long.
Did you read the article, or just the excerpts I posted? This was
discussed in the
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
And immediately you're creating the concept that as aoon as anything
happens, your insurance will go up, because the risk to the insurer
that you'll not be paying them anymore has been pushed to another
party.
I
Obama, yesterday, was right on target when he said there was no single
silver bullet for this problem. But, we do know things can be better,
because we are paying twice as much as the average developed country per
person with worse than average results.
I have heard, but have been too lazy
On 16 Aug 2009 at 14:44, John Williams wrote:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Andrew
Crystalldawnfal...@upliftwar.com wrote:
Many people won't go for checkups if they have to pay out of pocket,
and they will ignore dangerous conditions for too long.
Did you read the article, or just
1 - 100 of 223 matches
Mail list logo
