Our f'd-up health care system (been on the phone an hour and counting)-- LONG

[Rebel Jew]

i have sleep apnea, and about six weeks ago i went to my ENT and, among other things, got a prescription for a new mask for my CPAP.  so as of yesterday i still hadn't received the mask, and so i called my doctor yesterday to find out if there's some problem.  now, before you wonder why i waited so long before calling, keep in mind that the place that gives the CPAP equipment is Apria Healthcare, and a month wait is par for the course.  for example, a year or so ago my machine broke and i couldn't even get them to call me back to give me maintenance advice, much less get me a new machine.  sleepless and near insanity, i had to take the day off work and go there personally with my machine and demand to speak to somebody (which worked, but only after going through the many gates of bs).

so fast forward to this morning, and someone from my ENT's office calls me back to tell me that the prescription for my new mask was cancelled a month ago because my healthnet hmo insurance isn't valid.  "healthnet?"  i said, "but i have blue shield."  "it says here you have healthnet."  "i had healthnet two years and jobs ago," i say.  "simple mistake probably," and they then explain to me that all i would have to do is call the hospital's registration line and give them my insurance info again.  so i do that, and after reading the info from my card the person tells me that my information is wrong.  "wrong?"  i say, "but i'm reading this directly from my card that says VALID MARCH 2009-2010 in big letters."  the person tells me that he's looking at blue shield's website and i have a different ID number listed than the one i gave him.  plus, a different primary care physician is listed on the website, one that's not even in the same city as my doctor (my doctor is in palo alto, and this stranger doctor is in san francisco).  i explain that my palo alto doctor's name is on the back of my card, so how can that be?  they suggest that i call blue shield and find out what's going on, get them to change my primary care doctor back the way it was retroactively to march 1st.  

so i call blue shield and apparently, due to no good goddamned reason in the world, in april they decided to change my ID number, and when they did, they, again for no good goddamned reason, decided to change my primary physician to some dude in san francisco.  and oh yeah, THEY DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER TO TELL ME ABOUT IT.  "alright fine," i say, "that sucks, but can you just change my primary care doctor back to my old guy?  retroactive to march 1st?"  "no," they say.  "why the fuck not?" i ask.  "because he's not in your area."  "i called you on the phone a year ago when i got my new job explicitly requesting that i get my primary coverage to be in palo alto, and for this guy to be my doctor.  you said yes.  i know you said yes because MY DOCTOR'S NAME IS ON THE BACK OF THE CARD I'M HOLDING IN MY HAND!"  the lady then tells me that she's going to send an e-mail to some such person asking for authorization to change my shit.  i'm on hold for 20 minutes, then she comes back and tells me that she can't do it because i don't live in palo alto.  "who the fuck cares?"  i ask,  "this doctor accepts your insurance.  you told me it was okay.  i've seen this doctor numerous times and you've paid for it.  why is this such a problem now?"  "it might affect your ability to receive urgent care or emergency room care in san francisco."  "I DON'T FUCKING CARE!!!  I'm supposed to have throat surgery in one month with this specific doctor and so i could give a shit about anything else.  i have to see this doctor!"  The lady then puts me on hold for another 20 minutes and that's where I'm at right now.  Jesus fucking christ!!!@

[Rebel Jew]

so the lady comes back after thirty minutes and tells me that she sent the e-mail to the some such person requesting authorization to do yada yada yada.  she should hear back from them tomorrow, and then she'll know if she can do it.  she then starts to give me a number i can call to check on it.  "i got a great idea," i suggest to her, "why don't YOU fucking call ME since you're the pieces of shits who're playing fucking monkey games with my health???"

so then finally, after 90 minutes and a dying cellphone, we bid each other goodbye.  she tells me that if i agreed to do the brief customer satisfaction survey (the one that i was asked to agree to 90 minutes ago when i first called) then i should stay on the line.  meanwhile, i'm going on a three-week roadtrip starting on friday and my old mask is a disgusting velcro-less mess.

oh, and did i mention that i'm a school teacher and this is the insurance that i'm given, and that i even have to pay $55 dollars a month for (which would be $350 if it also covered my one year-old)

[matadorph]

Yeh but just imagine how bad it would be if you were dying of cancer....in CANADA!

[Alkie]

You'd see outstanding doctors in a timely fashion for free?

The.  Horror.

[Arky Vaughan]

You'd see outstanding doctors in a timely fashion for free?

The.  Horror.

Which is why so many Americans flock to Canada to get healthcare, but Canadians rarely if ever need to come to the United States for procedures due to long wait times north of the border.

Did you car run out of gas until you could get 250 miles further north to live in Nirvana?

[Lurch]

You'd see outstanding doctors in a timely fashion for free?

Wow.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

Wow.

Don't stop him, he's on a roll....

[Limey]

Which is why so many Americans flock to Canada to get healthcare, but Canadians rarely if ever need to come to the United States for procedures due to long wait times north of the border.

The U.S. has the best treatment money can buy.  But if you have no money...

Here's an article from BusinessWeek that's quite revealing.  In 2007, 62% of those filing for personal bankruptcy, did so because of medical bills they couldn't handle.  78% of those filers had health insurance.  By contrast, in 1981, only 8% of bankruptcy filings were because of medical bills.

Not included in that 62% of bankruptcy filers, presumably, are the 100,000 Americans who die because of lack of timely, effective healthcare.  That's the highest among 19 industrialised nations.

[Alkie]

Did you car run out of gas until you could get 250 miles further north to live in Nirvana?

Oh let me be clear.   You couldn't PAY me to move to Canada.  They may have socialized health care, but it's still fucking Canada.

I've been there for a month once.   

No thanks.

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

Not included in that 62% of bankruptcy filers, presumably, are the 100,000 Americans who die because of lack of timely, effective healthcare. 

Wouldn't that be 62,000?

[Limey]

Wouldn't that be 62,000?

Nope.  Don't know how many bankruptcy filings in 2007, so don't know the hard number that represents 62% of them.  100,000 preventable deaths is a hard (cold?) number.

[Rebel Jew]

Which is why so many Americans flock to Canada to get healthcare, but Canadians rarely if ever need to come to the United States for procedures due to long wait times north of the border.

Did you car run out of gas until you could get 250 miles further north to live in Nirvana?

i don't know what canada is like, or europe or cuba or zanzabar (is that still/was it ever a country?), but our system is f'ed up for a lot of the same reasons that you're criticizing other places for.  i can say personally that the two best doctors i've ever had are the two doctors i've ever had that had nothing to do with insurance companies or hospitals-- my current pediatrician, who makes housecalls, takes a reasonable flat yearly fee for all her services, has zero waiting-room time, and will personally e-mail you or call you back pretty much any time of any day with answers to your questions; also, the midwife (okay, not a doctor) that delievered our baby also took a reasonable flat fee, made repeated home visits and examinations before the delivery and afterward, stayed with us well after the procedure, seemed to genuinely care, seemed more competent that the original doctor that we fired and the others we checked out, etc.

[Andyzipp]

There are so many problems with health care in the US.  Frivolous lawsuits, insurance companies and their practices, the cost of medical schools, the infrastructure surrounding hospitals, hmos, et al.

As the federal government, regardless of which party has been in power, has been largely ineffectual since LBJ left office at getting ANYTHING substantive done, I'm at a loss as to why anyone thinks the government would be successful with health care.

Didn't they already screw up medicare/medicade to the point that it's almost unusable?

Tort reform makes sense to me.  Insurance reform makes even more sense to me.  Giving the govt any say or access to all of us in a medical way seems like a failure of proportions we haven't imagined as a country.

[Lurch]

The U.S. has the best treatment money can buy.  But if you have no money...

Should everyone have the best treatment money can buy?

Here's an article from BusinessWeek that's quite revealing.  In 2007, 62% of those filing for personal bankruptcy, did so because of medical bills they couldn't handle.  78% of those filers had health insurance.  By contrast, in 1981, only 8% of bankruptcy filings were because of medical bills.

What does this reveal to you?

Not included in that 62% of bankruptcy filers, presumably, are the 100,000 Americans who die because of lack of timely, effective healthcare.  That's the highest among 19 industrialised nations.

Link?  Interested in seeing where the rest fall in.  Is highest a percentage or total?  By how much is there a difference top to bottom, define timely/effective, etc.

[Limey]

Should everyone have the best treatment money can buy?

Of course.  But you can't leave people out in the cold with nothing.  Well, you can, because we do, but I believe that to be morally abhorrent.

What does this reveal to you?

That people with health insurance still can't afford treatment.  Forcing people to choose between treating a sick family member, and putting an entire family in the poor house, is disgusting.  It also shows that private health insurance doesn't work, because the point of insurance is to put you back in the position you were in before the "loss".  That's the principle of indemnity, and it isn't followed in health insurance.

Link?  Interested in seeing where the rest fall in.  Is highest a percentage or total?  By how much is there a difference top to bottom, define timely/effective, etc.

Link  All defined in the article.

[Rebel Jew]

There are so many problems with health care in the US.  Frivolous lawsuits, insurance companies and their practices, the cost of medical schools, the infrastructure surrounding hospitals, hmos, et al.

As the federal government, regardless of which party has been in power, has been largely ineffectual since LBJ left office at getting ANYTHING substantive done, I'm at a loss as to why anyone thinks the government would be successful with health care.

Didn't they already screw up medicare/medicade to the point that it's almost unusable?

Tort reform makes sense to me.  Insurance reform makes even more sense to me.  Giving the govt any say or access to all of us in a medical way seems like a failure of proportions we haven't imagined as a country.

totally.  if you thought my hospital/insurance co. story was long and angry, how about the six month and counting story of me getting a ticket for driving with a suspended license that the dmv incorrectly suspended?  seems showing a piece of paper from the dmv indicating their error is not enough when you're dealing with the government.  pay it and shut the fuck up is their philosophy.  me:  "i already paid it ($1200, including the cost of the original tow), and now i'm trying to get it reimbursed."  them:  "ha ha ha!  you PAID it?  what an idiot."  me:  "but you threatened to take my license away if i didn't pay it?  you told me i couldn't contest it unless i paid it.  you towed my goddamned car for no reason and were charging $160 a day!"  them:  "well yeah!  but we're the government, we don't have to make sense.  did i mention that our state, the wealthiest state in the country, is going bankrupt?"

[subnuclear]

Did you go to BD's wedding this weekend?

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

 did i mention that our state, the wealthiest state in the country, is going bankrupt?"

how can that happen? why can't all those genius hollywood types - with all the answers, and all those billionaire genius dot-commers - with all the money, team-up to keep that from ever happening?

[Lurch]

There are so many problems with health care in the US.  Frivolous lawsuits, insurance companies and their practices, the cost of medical schools, the infrastructure surrounding hospitals, hmos, et al.

As the federal government, regardless of which party has been in power, has been largely ineffectual since LBJ left office at getting ANYTHING substantive done, I'm at a loss as to why anyone thinks the government would be successful with health care.

Didn't they already screw up medicare/medicade to the point that it's almost unusable?

Tort reform makes sense to me.  Insurance reform makes even more sense to me.  Giving the govt any say or access to all of us in a medical way seems like a failure of proportions we haven't imagined as a country.

It appears to me that our medical expectations keep increasing without a willingness to recognize the cost increase associated with that.  Premiums go up in great part because the cost of keeping our asses alive goes up as we continue to find new ways to do it.  And those research costs are real and substantial and in many cases only done because we continue to be willing to pay for it.  Yes, insurance companies make a profit, but even if you magically take that all away, premiums will still have to rise with these costs.  Also by definition of insurance, the healthy will pay more than they put in and the sick will pay less than they put in.  How long, and to what extent, does that remain fair?  At what point does government tell great-granpa Joe he can't have his 3rd artificial heart because 300M others don't want to pay for it anymore?  We really want to legislate that?

I don't yet understand that the system is broke, but rather think it is just that reality is starting to set in on many that it's not free either.  Turns out, to stay alive and healthy costs someone money and we keep finding new ways of doing it.  And the question is really, who is going to fork it over now?  

[Limey]

totally.  if you thought my hospital/insurance co. story was long and angry, how about the six month and counting story of me getting a ticket for driving with a suspended license that the dmv incorrectly suspended?  seems showing a piece of paper from the dmv indicating their error is not enough when you're dealing with the government.  pay it and shut the fuck up is their philosophy.  me:  "i already paid it ($1200, including the cost of the original tow), and now i'm trying to get it reimbursed."  them:  "ha ha ha!  you PAID it?  what an idiot."  me:  "but you threatened to take my license away if i didn't pay it?  you told me i couldn't contest it unless i paid it."  them:  "well yeah!  but we're the government, we don't have to make sense.  did i mention that our state, the wealthiest state in the country, is going bankrupt?"

I got a demand from the IRS this year for back taxes (and interest) on my 2007 return.  They wanted to charge me tax on income for which I'd already paid tax, but which E-Trade (grrrrr) who withheld the tax, said I hadn't paid.  I documented what I can (can't get anything out of E-Trade because they suck, so I took screen shots of their website), and sent it all in to the IRS.  Got a letter back a few weeks later saying that they're closing their file.  I'm thinking of having the letter framed.

[Rebel Jew]

Did you go to BD's wedding this weekend?

no, but very late saturday night i was walking home from (or to-- i can't remember) a bar with a friend of mine.  we were having an unassuming conversation and then, all of a sudden, my friend picks up an orange parking cone from the side of the street and throws it at me.  one of those giant orange cones, and the bottom part hits me right on the bone on the side of my calf.  "what the fuck is wrong with you?  why did you do that?" i yell, hobbling around.  my friend shrugs and giggles, "i don't know."  "that fucking hurts!"  i tell him, pulling up my pantleg to reveal my bleeding leg.  "pussy," he says back to me.

[Rebel Jew]

how can that happen? why can't all those genius hollywood types - with all the answers, and all those billionaire genius dot-commers - with all the money, team-up to keep that from ever happening?

'cause they're all selfish assholes who only care about getting rich and filling the holes in their egos not sated by chinese massage parlors?

[Lurch]

Of course.  But you can't leave people out in the cold with nothing.  Well, you can, because we do, but I believe that to be morally abhorrent.

So, if we should all have the best, then it should all be equal, correct?  Will we all pay equally for it, at least on the insurance premium side?  How expensive would it be for all of us to have the best money can buy?  Is reality that it would be too expensive, so we would all need to settle for a lesser quality of healthcare?  How much less?  Do you find it morally abhorrent that everyone in the world doesnt have such care, or just inside our border?  Or should we lump all of them in the program too?  Will they pay?

That people with health insurance still can't afford treatment.  Forcing people to choose between treating a sick family member, and putting an entire family in the poor house, is disgusting.

To what end must the rest of us pay for this?

It also shows that private health insurance doesn't work, because the point of insurance is to put you back in the position you were in before the "loss".  That's the principle of indemnity, and it isn't followed in health insurance.

Insurance is just a defined package of what will be paid for you in case of a certain event.  I'm not sure where it was defined as puttiing you back in the position you were in before the loss, unless you paid for that level of service, and I doubt virtually anyone does.  Who has 100% coverage?

Link  All defined in the article.

Thanks

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

'cause they're all selfish assholes who only care about getting rich and filling the holes in their egos not sated by chinese massage parlors?

then a start, might be to make the chinese massage parlors more adequate in ego satiation.

[Andyzipp]

totally.  if you thought my hospital/insurance co. story was long and angry, how about the six month and counting story of me getting a ticket for driving with a suspended license that the dmv incorrectly suspended?  seems showing a piece of paper from the dmv indicating their error is not enough when you're dealing with the government.  pay it and shut the fuck up is their philosophy.  me:  "i already paid it ($1200, including the cost of the original tow), and now i'm trying to get it reimbursed."  them:  "ha ha ha!  you PAID it?  what an idiot."  me:  "but you threatened to take my license away if i didn't pay it?  you told me i couldn't contest it unless i paid it.  you towed my goddamned car for no reason and were charging $160 a day!"  them:  "well yeah!  but we're the government, we don't have to make sense.  did i mention that our state, the wealthiest state in the country, is going bankrupt?"

The immediate (prior) issue is that your insurance sucks.  And when the economy is better, companies will differentiate themselves by offering "better" insurance. IRL, our company's benefits administrator works for me, so I set policy.  Fortunately, the company I work for believes it's their duty to provide for their employees by way of benefits.  We work with a great carrier, and have built a plan designed to minimize exposure for the employees.  Having said that, we still, because we're a business, have to watch the bottom line. So employees pay part of the premium...which ranges from $3 -13 per pay period for the "why even bother" insurance to $18 - $75 per pay period for 100% coverage.

But some (all) insurance companies are bad.  Some companies or entities either can't or won't afford good coverage.  Even with the best intentions, some employees will not be able to afford even the most basic care.  And none of this addresses the unemployed, underemployed and unincorporated.

I don't know what the answer is.  I do think that insurance and tort reform (real efforts at it) would go a long way towards fixing things.  I think the government could work to simplify Medicare/Medicade, make it more attractive for practioners to participate to provide for the folks that need it.

[Arky Vaughan]

It's insane to argue that there aren't holes in the existing system. What doesn't necessarily follow is that a government option is the most attractive or effective means of plugging those holes. For example, here are actions that would have a significant effect on expanding coverage:

1) Sunset tax deductibility for employers providing health insurance and give individuals tax deductibility for every dollar spent on healthcare costs, including health insurance premiums, copays, etc.

2) Create a national market for health insurance by striking down state restrictions on out-of-state policies. Also, encourage flexibility in crafting health insurance policies by eliminating state coverage mandates.

3) Provide vouchers or tax credits for low-income individuals to afford health insurance.

4) Create a high-risk pool to cover individuals with pre-existing conditions and conditions that exceed the limits on standard health insurance policies.

Thanks to the tax incentives provided by the government, most people have health insurance by virtue of their employers providing it, which means when they leave their jobs, they lose their insurance. This also means that health insurers cater to a market dominated by employers purchasing mass policies rather than a market for individual or family policies. The solution seems to be to revise the tax incentives rather than layering another government scheme on top of an existing government-created problem.

[Andyzipp]

So, if we should all have the best, then it should all be equal, correct?  Will we all pay equally for it, at least on the insurance premium side?  How expensive would it be for all of us to have the best money can buy?  Is reality that it would be too expensive, so we would all need to settle for a lesser quality of healthcare?  How much less?  Do you find it morally abhorrent that everyone in the world doesnt have such care, or just inside our border?  Or should we lump all of them in the program too?  Will they pay?
To what end must the rest of us pay for this?
Insurance is just a defined package of what will be paid for you in case of a certain event.  I'm not sure where it was defined as puttiing you back in the position you were in before the loss, unless you paid for that level of service, and I doubt virtually anyone does.  Who has 100% coverage?

Thanks

I have 100% coverage.

[Limey]

So, if we should all have the best, then it should all be equal, correct?  Will we all pay equally for it, at least on the insurance premium side?  How expensive would it be for all of us to have the best money can buy?  Is reality that it would be too expensive, so we would all need to settle for a lesser quality of healthcare?  How much less?  Do you find it morally abhorrent that everyone in the world doesnt have such care, or just inside our border?  Or should we lump all of them in the program too?  Will they pay?
To what end must the rest of us pay for this?
Insurance is just a defined package of what will be paid for you in case of a certain event.  I'm not sure where it was defined as puttiing you back in the position you were in before the loss, unless you paid for that level of service, and I doubt virtually anyone does.  Who has 100% coverage?

Thanks

Quality of healthcare doesn't suffer just because the government provides and insurance option.  It will actually make private insurers more competitive so everyone benefits.  The common mistake made in this debate is conflating government insured healthcare with government provided healthcare.

Yes, I feel that is is morally abhorrent that the whole world does not have access to affordable healthcare.  Especially preventative healthcare, which costs a fraction of treating actual ailments.  You do realise that those people without health insurance, who get treatment at the ER, are paid for by you and I already, no?  And that ER treatment is the most expensive treatment in a hospital?  And that people are already really, really sick when they go, so they need more and longer treatment?  An ounce of prevention...

Insurance is my biz.  Health insurance isn't insurance - it's a commoditised package of benefits that people think is insurance, but which leaves them with out of pocket expenses in the unfortunate event that they need treatment.  If that treatment is substantial, the out of pocket expenses quite often plow that person under financially, or at best saddle them with insane credit card debt.  Better in the red, than dead.  This simply doesn't happen in any other industrialised country because they all have a single-payer scheme.

Also, insurance companies run at about a 30% expense ratio, which means that 30% of your premium goes to overhead.  Medicare, I believe, has an expense ratio of about 3%, partly because it has no shareholders, no profit requirement, no advertising needs etc. etc.

[Holly]

no, but very late saturday night i was walking home from (or to-- i can't remember) a bar with a friend of mine.  we were having an unassuming conversation and then, all of a sudden, my friend picks up an orange parking cone from the side of the street and throws it at me.  one of those giant orange cones, and the bottom part hits me right on the bone on the side of my calf.  "what the fuck is wrong with you?  why did you do that?" i yell, hobbling around.  my friend shrugs and giggles, "i don't know."  "that fucking hurts!"  i tell him, pulling up my pantleg to reveal my bleeding leg.  "pussy," he says back to me.

I have no patience for that kind of retarded behavior (your friend's). That would have gotten a "fuck you" and me going somewhere else without him. Jerk.

[Andyzipp]

Quality of healthcare doesn't suffer just because the government provides and insurance option.  It will actually make private insurers more competitive so everyone benefits.  The common mistake made in this debate is conflating government insured healthcare with government provided healthcare.

Yes, I feel that is is morally abhorrent that the whole world does not have access to affordable healthcare.  Especially preventative healthcare, which costs a fraction of treating actual ailments.  You do realise that those people without health insurance, who get treatment at the ER, are paid for by you and I already, no?  And that ER treatment is the most expensive treatment in a hospital?  And that people are already really, really sick when they go, so they need more and longer treatment?  An ounce of prevention...

Insurance is my biz.  Health insurance isn't insurance - it's a commoditised package of benefits that people think is insurance, but which leaves them with out of pocket expenses in the unfortunate event that they need treatment.  If that treatment is substantial, the out of pocket expenses quite often plow that person under financially, or at best saddle them with insane credit card debt.  Better in the red, than dead.  This simply doesn't happen in any other industrialised country because they all have a single-payer scheme.

Also, insurance companies run at about a 30% expense ratio, which means that 30% of your premium goes to overhead.  Medicare, I believe, has an expense ratio of about 3%, partly because it has no shareholders, no profit requirement, no advertising needs etc. etc.

A question.  I'm not trying to be a smartass, but if the US govt was in the business of providing health care, how many millions of people would be out of work due to the lack of work at the insurance carriers.  There would be an industry for privitized insurance, but what would that industry look like?  10% of it's current size? Less?

The life or death of a particular industry isn't particurally concerning, but that level of unemployment is.

[Lurch]

I have 100% coverage.

Very nice.  No deductibles or co-pay?  I hope your business really sells that to applicants your trying to hire.  That's huge.  Would be interesting to see how much "stickiness" it creates keeping employees with you rather than bailing for other opportunities.

[Limey]

1) Sunset tax deductibility for employers providing health insurance and give individuals tax deductibility for every dollar spent on healthcare costs, including health insurance premiums, copays, etc.

Tax deductibility only works if you're paying Federal Income Tax.  I'd hazard a bet that the vast majority of the near-50 million uninsured citizens doesn't pay federal taxes.  This is why tax cuts, as a knee-jerk answer to any policy question, is flawed from the get-go.

2) Create a national market for health insurance by striking down state restrictions on out-of-state policies. Also, encourage flexibility in crafting health insurance policies by eliminating state coverage mandates.

Allowing insurance companies flexibility in crafting policies is going to improve coverage?  How did deregulation work out for Wall Street the World?

3) Provide vouchers or tax credits for low-income individuals to afford health insurance.

See (1).  Low-income individuals don't pay Federal taxes mostly.

4) Create a high-risk pool to cover individuals with pre-existing conditions and conditions that exceed the limits on standard health insurance policies.

Who backs the high-risk pool?  Wouldn't be the same folk who back the high-risk flood pool or the high-risk wind pool or the high-risk motor pool would it?  (Hint: that's the federal government).

Thanks to the tax incentives provided by the government, most people have health insurance by virtue of their employers providing it, which means when they leave their jobs, they lose their insurance. This also means that health insurers cater to a market dominated by employers purchasing mass policies rather than a market for individual or family policies. The solution seems to be to revise the tax incentives rather than layering another government scheme on top of an existing government-created problem.

Employer-provided healthcare is actually an impediment to individual freedom.  Many people - especially those with pre-existing conditions - are stuck in a job that they dare not change because of health insurance issues.  A government insurance scheme actually frees these people from these chains, and allows them to fully pursue life, liberty and happiness working in whatever field wherever that me be.  It also encourages small business for the same reason.

[Limey]

A question.  I'm not trying to be a smartass, but if the US govt was in the business of providing health care, how many millions of people would be out of work due to the lack of work at the insurance carriers.  There would be an industry for privitized insurance, but what would that industry look like?  10% of it's current size? Less?

The life or death of a particular industry isn't particurally concerning, but that level of unemployment is.

What's better - keeping insurance company staff in jobs or providing healthcare for all?   As I said yesterday (I think), where is it written that anyone has the right to profit from the suffering of others?

[Andyzipp]

Very nice.  No deductibles or co-pay?  I hope your business really sells that to applicants your trying to hire.  That's huge.  Would be interesting to see how much "stickiness" it creates keeping employees with you rather than bailing for other opportunities.

$20 co-pay 5/15/30 on prescription

No other out of pocket costs to employees or covered family members.  And the jobs are shitty (Call center, mostly) but people start and stay for the insurance.

[Andyzipp]

What's better - keeping insurance company staff in jobs or providing healthcare for all?   As I said yesterday (I think), where is it written that anyone has the right to profit from the suffering of others?

I don't think there is an easy answer for that.  In theory, I agree that everyone should have access to healthcare.  In practice, if there are 5m people employed by health insurance carriers and anciliary businesses, could the current economy handle an additional...say 4m jobless individuals?

[Rebel Jew]

I have no patience for that kind of retarded behavior (your friend's). That would have gotten a "fuck you" and me going somewhere else without him. Jerk.

oh my dearest holly, you're not a guy.  if that was close to the worst thing he'd ever done (or me to him) then i might have been angrier.  much earlier in the evening that same friend came over to my house.  i had earlier cooked this big pasta dish with a spicy vermouth cream sauce and squid and octopus (no really, it wasn't disgusting).  my friend asks if he could have some because he hadn't eaten dinner yet, and i had no problem with that.  so he eats this meal as we're hanging out, and then when he's done (i mean, like, the second he's done eating this big bowl of pasta), he walks over to my wife's computer desk and asks about the big box of cheddar bunnies sitting on my wife's desk (like goldfish, but organic and in bunny form).  i tell him that it's my baby's food, but half-seriously suggest that he can have some if he wants because they're out of town and the box will go stale before they get back.  before i'm even done with that sentence, he reaches his hand in this big box of cheddar bunnies and shoves a fistful in his mouth, then he takes the pasta bowl into the kitchen to clean it.  he gets back and i ask him what could have possibly compelled him to eat that fistful of cheddar bunnies, like was he going, "hmmm... i just ate this big bowl of seafood pasta.  i know what'll round out the taste-- a fistful of processed snack food!"  my friend just shugs.  "i dunno," he says.

[JackAstro]

I don't yet understand that the system is broke, but rather think it is just that reality is starting to set in on many that it's not free either.  Turns out, to stay alive and healthy costs someone money and we keep finding new ways of doing it.  And the question is really, who is going to fork it over now?  

If you don't understand that it's broken, then you just haven't been put in a position to find out. Count yourself lucky.

I don't want to get too much into this, but you need to know that it's a very real problem. When the majority of bankruptcies in this country are because of medical bills incurred by insured individuals, the system is absolutely broken. So here it is, generally...

I'm healthy, and in my early thirties. I have a good job at a small business of less than 15 people, and our household income is above average. Because of a combination of increasing premiums, copays and deductibles (owed largely to the completely arbitrary fact that I work for a small business), I typically spend more on medical in any given year than I do on my mortgage. Last year, because of ongoing medical problems with two people in my family, I very nearly became one of Limey's statistics, through absolutely no fault of my own. I made the very difficult decision for one of my family members to terminate therapy, because we were within two months of a critical financial situation. I increased my out-of-office workload to essentially be a second job, and have been a social hermit for almost a year now. I work more than is in any way rational, and while I've been able to whittle down the medical debt to a safe level, I still can't afford the care that my family needs.

I am doing everything I can do, and far beyond what is reasonable. That it nearly ruined me financially and I didn't even receive the benefit of complete care is proof enough that the system is broken.

[MusicMan]

All I will say on this issue is to quote the words of men far, far wiser than I will ever be:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

[BudGirl]

If you don't understand that it's broken, then you just haven't been put in a position to find out. Count yourself lucky.

I don't want to get too much into this, but you need to know that it's a very real problem. When the majority of bankruptcies in this country are because of medical bills incurred by insured individuals, the system is absolutely broken. So here it is, generally...

I'm healthy, and in my early thirties. I have a good job at a small business of less than 15 people, and our household income is above average. Because of a combination of increasing premiums, copays and deductibles (owed largely to the completely arbitrary fact that I work for a small business), I typically spend more on medical in any given year than I do on my mortgage. Last year, because of ongoing medical problems with two people in my family, I very nearly became one of Limey's statistics, through absolutely no fault of my own. I made the very difficult decision for one of my family members to terminate therapy, because we were within two months of a critical financial situation. I increased my out-of-office workload to essentially be a second job, and have been a social hermit for almost a year now. I work more than is in any way rational, and while I've been able to whittle down the medical debt to a safe level, I still can't afford the care that my family needs.

I am doing everything I can do, and far beyond what is reasonable. That it nearly ruined me financially and I didn't even receive the benefit of complete care is proof enough that the system is broken.

It's been broken for a long time.  I realized it in 2001 when my dad had his stroke.

[Holly]

oh my dearest holly, you're not a guy.

Yeah, had that conversation with my husband. He wants me to learn to "play" better, but honestly, I don't see a damn thing playful about that traffic cone shit. I mean, really? Come on.

[Andyzipp]

Yeah, had that conversation with my husband. He wants me to learn to "play" better, but honestly, I don't see a damn thing playful about that traffic cone shit. I mean, really? Come on.

You don't drink, so you've never passed out at a party.  You would pray for a traffic cone to the shin as opposed to what's likely going to happen in that scenario.

[BudGirl]

oh my dearest holly, you're not a guy.  if that was close to the worst thing he'd ever done (or me to him) then i might have been angrier.  much earlier in the evening that same friend came over to my house.  i had earlier cooked this big pasta dish with a spicy vermouth cream sauce and squid and octopus (no really, it wasn't disgusting).  my friend asks if he could have some because he hadn't eaten dinner yet, and i had no problem with that.  so he eats this meal as we're hanging out, and then when he's done (i mean, like, the second he's done eating this big bowl of pasta), he walks over to my wife's computer desk and asks about the big box of cheddar bunnies sitting on my wife's desk (like goldfish, but organic and in bunny form).  i tell him that it's my baby's food, but half-seriously suggest that he can have some if he wants because they're out of town and the box will go stale before they get back.  before i'm even done with that sentence, he reaches his hand in this big box of cheddar bunnies and shoves a fistful in his mouth, then he takes the pasta bowl into the kitchen to clean it.  he gets back and i ask him what could have possibly compelled him to eat that fistful of cheddar bunnies, like was he going, "hmmm... i just ate this big bowl of seafood pasta.  i know what'll round out the taste-- a fistful of processed snack food!"  my friend just shugs.  "i dunno," he says.

this sounds like some of my girlfriends.  not quite to the extent of making someone bleed, but they come over and start looking to see if I baked or cooked anything.

[Ebby Calvin]

I mean, really? Come on.

Really.  It cracked me up, and I don't know Joey (or his friend) one bit.  Typical guy behavior.
Every once and awhile you just need a random "Fuck You" from a friend for no apparent reason.  Keeps things in order.

[BudGirl]

You don't drink, so you've never passed out at a party.  You would pray for a traffic cone to the shin as opposed to what's likely going to happen in that scenario.

I was lucky that my guardian angel woke me up before they could do anything.

[Holly]

You don't drink, so you've never passed out at a party.  You would pray for a traffic cone to the shin as opposed to what's likely going to happen in that scenario.

Maybe I missed something there. Sounded like a random smack in the middle of a walk somewhere. What was avoided?

[Holly]

Really.  It cracked me up, and I don't know Joey (or his friend) one bit.  Typical guy behavior.
Every once and awhile you just need a random "Fuck You" from a friend for no apparent reason.  Keeps things in order.

I think this crosses that same Three Stooges line which was discussed awhile back. A big ol "wtf good does THAT do?" from me. Clearly, I don't get it.

[Rebel Jew]

I think this crosses that same Three Stooges line which was discussed awhile back. A big ol "wtf good does THAT do?" from me. Clearly, I don't get it.

there's nothing to get, i think.  guys are assholes, that's about all. 

[Holly]

Oh, and to keep more on topic about healthcare being fucked up in this country... in 1984 my dad had cancer. It took his life from a first misdiagnoses of prostatitis in April to death in mid-August of that year. He went through chemo twice, and was confined to a hospital bed towards the end because the cancer had spread to pinch the nerves in his back and he couldn't walk.

Mom had to take him to the emergency room for I don't even remember what, but it had to have been a sudden onset BAD event, and they REFUSED to admit him because they could not reach the insurance company on the phone. This is a man who had been in and out of the hospital for WEEKS at that point. He was 6' 2", probably 230 before getting sick, and here he was being hauled around by my mom who is all of 5' 5", maybe 140, and he probably weighed the same as she did at that point. It still really gets me terribly upset to think about it.

There is far more C.M.A. than CARE going on, and it's nothing new.

More recently (though certainly less dramatic), I went to my GP yesterday for, I was told, an appointment to follow up on an echocardiogram I had in May. I made my $20 copay, and was told the SAME thing they told me when I had the echo done. No new info at all about that. Oh, except that the cardiologist wants to look at the echo in conjunction with a stress test, which was scheduled for the end of July... and has been scheduled since my first visit with the echo, a month ago. I left there thinking "I just paid $20 to see a repeat of May's visit." Now it's not the $20 I was objecting to entirely, but to me, that seems to count as a completely unnecessary visit, and now my insurance will cover whatever rest of the bill is, and absolutely positively NOTHING was gained from that time.

The waste is tremendous.

[Ty in Tampa]

You mean to tell me girls don't get a running kick to the ass from one of their friends every few hours?

[Holly]

You mean to tell me girls don't get a running kick to the ass from one of their friends every few hours?

No, not really.

[BudGirl]

You mean to tell me girls don't get a running kick to the ass from one of their friends every few hours?

no we grab each other's boobs.

[Rebel Jew]

there's a great sam kinison comedy bit this reminds me of, about him coming home to his hotel room late one night and him being so drunk that, in front of all his friends, he opens the top of his suitcase thinking it was the toilet lid and begins peeing all over his clothes.  the next morning we wakes up, goes to put on some clothes and finds to his horror that somebody peed on his clothes.  he yells at his friends to find out who did it, and they start laughing.  "you did, don't you remember?"  sam kinison says the obvious, "don't you think if i remembered THEN I WOULDN'T HAVE FUCKING DONE IT?  Why would you let me pee on my clothes?"  but those are your friends, your buddies, your bros.

[Rebel Jew]

no we grab each other's boobs.

i knew it!

[Astroholic]

Who has 100% coverage?

Congress.

[Lurch]

If you don't understand that it's broken, then you just haven't been put in a position to find out. Count yourself lucky.

I don't want to get too much into this, but you need to know that it's a very real problem. When the majority of bankruptcies in this country are because of medical bills incurred by insured individuals, the system is absolutely broken. So here it is, generally...

I'm healthy, and in my early thirties. I have a good job at a small business of less than 15 people, and our household income is above average. Because of a combination of increasing premiums, copays and deductibles (owed largely to the completely arbitrary fact that I work for a small business), I typically spend more on medical in any given year than I do on my mortgage. Last year, because of ongoing medical problems with two people in my family, I very nearly became one of Limey's statistics, through absolutely no fault of my own. I made the very difficult decision for one of my family members to terminate therapy, because we were within two months of a critical financial situation. I increased my out-of-office workload to essentially be a second job, and have been a social hermit for almost a year now. I work more than is in any way rational, and while I've been able to whittle down the medical debt to a safe level, I still can't afford the care that my family needs.

I am doing everything I can do, and far beyond what is reasonable. That it nearly ruined me financially and I didn't even receive the benefit of complete care is proof enough that the system is broken.

No disrespect to you for the hardships, but why do we assume improving one's health should be free of financial risk?  Of course the costs are real and substantial, especially as we demand more from our healthcare providers.  Yes, it sucks that it almost drove you to financial ruin, but why is it the rest of our responsiblities to keep you whole, just because it wasnt your fault?  Tragedy happens all of the time to people when it is not their fault and there are not always safty nets to keep them from hitting rock bottom.  Isn't the right answer to recognize that medical care is a regular life expense and to each be more responsible for preparing for it, or dealing with the consiquences of not? Savings, suplimental insurance if nessisary, etc?  You made a very difficult decision to the detrament of your family, whereas someone else might not have done the same in an identical situation yet you're paying for their decision indirectly through numerous channels (higher premiums, taxes, cost of goods, etc).  Is that right?

[Col. Sphinx Drummond]

Oh, and to keep more on topic about healthcare being fucked up in this country... in 1984 my dad had cancer. It took his life from a first misdiagnoses of prostatitis in April to death in mid-August of that year. He went through chemo twice, and was confined to a hospital bed towards the end because the cancer had spread to pinch the nerves in his back and he couldn't walk.

Mom had to take him to the emergency room for I don't even remember what, but it had to have been a sudden onset BAD event, and they REFUSED to admit him because they could not reach the insurance company on the phone. This is a man who had been in and out of the hospital for WEEKS at that point. He was 6' 2", probably 230 before getting sick, and here he was being hauled around by my mom who is all of 5' 5", maybe 140, and he probably weighed the same as she did at that point. It still really gets me terribly upset to think about it.

There is far more C.M.A. than CARE going on, and it's nothing new.

More recently (though certainly less dramatic), I went to my GP yesterday for, I was told, an appointment to follow up on an echocardiogram I had in May. I made my $20 copay, and was told the SAME thing they told me when I had the echo done. No new info at all about that. Oh, except that the cardiologist wants to look at the echo in conjunction with a stress test, which was scheduled for the end of July... and has been scheduled since my first visit with the echo, a month ago. I left there thinking "I just paid $20 to see a repeat of May's visit." Now it's not the $20 I was objecting to entirely, but to me, that seems to count as a completely unnecessary visit, and now my insurance will cover whatever rest of the bill is, and absolutely positively NOTHING was gained from that time.

The waste is tremendous.

Shows you how some things have evolved over the years. Maybe if they were as thorough with your dad as they have been with you, things might have been different. The diagnostic process is based on evaluations of test results, physical examinations, and patient input, often impeded by bureaucracy.

[Arky Vaughan]

A question.  I'm not trying to be a smartass, but if the US govt was in the business of providing health care, how many millions of people would be out of work due to the lack of work at the insurance carriers.  There would be an industry for privitized insurance, but what would that industry look like?  10% of it's current size? Less?

The life or death of a particular industry isn't particurally concerning, but that level of unemployment is.

Since this is from a newspaper column, there is no citation, but if this is true, it's very telling:

"The British National Health Service is the biggest employer not just in the United Kingdom but in the whole of Europe. Care to estimate the size and budget of a U.S. health bureaucracy?"

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/health-care-government-2462454-life-expectancy

[Lurch]

Quality of healthcare doesn't suffer just because the government provides and insurance option.  It will actually make private insurers more competitive so everyone benefits.  The common mistake made in this debate is conflating government insured healthcare with government provided healthcare.

Fair enough.  So who is paying for your government insured healthcare option?  Just those that sign up for it, or am I paying for it with increased taxes?  

Yes, I feel that is is morally abhorrent that the whole world does not have access to affordable healthcare.  Especially preventative healthcare, which costs a fraction of treating actual ailments.  You do realise that those people without health insurance, who get treatment at the ER, are paid for by you and I already, no?  And that ER treatment is the most expensive treatment in a hospital?  And that people are already really, really sick when they go, so they need more and longer treatment?  An ounce of prevention...

So you're ready to step up and start paying for this access to affordable healthcare for the rest of the world?  Really?

Insurance is my biz.  Health insurance isn't insurance - it's a commoditised package of benefits that people think is insurance, but which leaves them with out of pocket expenses in the unfortunate event that they need treatment.  If that treatment is substantial, the out of pocket expenses quite often plow that person under financially, or at best saddle them with insane credit card debt.  Better in the red, than dead.  This simply doesn't happen in any other industrialised country because they all have a single-payer scheme.

If they're not paying these out of pocket expenses, who is?

Also, insurance companies run at about a 30% expense ratio, which means that 30% of your premium goes to overhead.  Medicare, I believe, has an expense ratio of about 3%, partly because it has no shareholders, no profit requirement, no advertising needs etc. etc.

This is interesting to me.  Agree there is a good opportunity for us to all benefit here from reduced costs if those numbers are real and sustainable.

[JackAstro]

No disrespect to you for the hardships, but why do we assume improving one's health should be free of financial risk?  Of course the costs are real and substantial, especially as we demand more from our healthcare providers.  Yes, it sucks that it almost drove you to financial ruin, but why is it the rest of our responsiblities to keep you whole, just because it wasnt your fault?  Tragedy happens all of the time to people when it is not their fault and there are not always safty nets to keep them from hitting rock bottom.  Isn't the right answer to recognize that medical care is a regular life expense and to each be more responsible for preparing for it, or dealing with the consiquences of not? Savings, suplimental insurance if nessisary, etc?  You made a very difficult decision to the detrament of your family, whereas someone else might not have done the same in an identical situation yet you're paying for their decision indirectly through numerous channels (higher premiums, taxes, cost of goods, etc).  Is that right?

I didn't say it's your responsibility to do anything, I said the system is broken. My family's health should not be reliant on the size of my employer, or any other arbitrary, unrelated factors. As I said, our household income is above average. If we can't afford it, that means it's only available to the fortunate minority, and that's wrong.

It is not an issue of preparation. Come talk to me when you can't pay for medical care for your family, and you have no capacity to earn any more money to do so.

[Arky Vaughan]

Tax deductibility only works if you're paying Federal Income Tax.  I'd hazard a bet that the vast majority of the near-50 million uninsured citizens doesn't pay federal taxes.  This is why tax cuts, as a knee-jerk answer to any policy question, is flawed from the get-go.

This is not offering tax cuts as a knee-jerk answer. It is replacing the deduction for medical expenses currently enjoyed by employers with a deduction that would instead be enjoyed by individuals. As you note below, tying insurance to employment is a problem. This is a part of addressing that problem. People who do not pay taxes are addressed below.

Allowing insurance companies flexibility in crafting policies is going to improve coverage?  How did deregulation work out for Wall Street the World?

I did not suggest completely deregulating the entire insurance industry. The proposal is both to allow insurers to sell across state lines and to offer a range of policies without mandating that every policy cover every conceivable benefit. That is not the same as eliminating all regulations.

See (1).  Low-income individuals don't pay Federal taxes mostly.

Right. Which is why providing vouchers is an alternative. Or a refundable tax credit. The point is, you provide people who cannot afford insurance a means to purchase it.

Who backs the high-risk pool?  Wouldn't be the same folk who back the high-risk flood pool or the high-risk wind pool or the high-risk motor pool would it?  (Hint: that's the federal government).

The insurers and the government fund the pool as providers of last resort. That is a much more limited approach than a full-blown single-payer plan.

Employer-provided healthcare is actually an impediment to individual freedom.  Many people - especially those with pre-existing conditions - are stuck in a job that they dare not change because of health insurance issues.  A government insurance scheme actually frees these people from these chains, and allows them to fully pursue life, liberty and happiness working in whatever field wherever that me be.  It also encourages small business for the same reason.

I am not disputing this. Indeed, my first point is to shift insurance from being procured by employers to being procured by individuals so people do not lose their insurance when they lose or leave their jobs. But this does not necessitate that the government then becomes the sole provider.

[Bench]

No disrespect to you for the hardships, but why do we assume improving one's health should be free of financial risk?  Of course the costs are real and substantial, especially as we demand more from our healthcare providers.  Yes, it sucks that it almost drove you to financial ruin, but why is it the rest of our responsiblities to keep you whole, just because it wasnt your fault?  Tragedy happens all of the time to people when it is not their fault and there are not always safty nets to keep them from hitting rock bottom.  Isn't the right answer to recognize that medical care is a regular life expense and to each be more responsible for preparing for it, or dealing with the consiquences of not? Savings, suplimental insurance if nessisary, etc?  You made a very difficult decision to the detrament of your family, whereas someone else might not have done the same in an identical situation yet you're paying for their decision indirectly through numerous channels (higher premiums, taxes, cost of goods, etc).  Is that right?

The rest of the civilized world has answered these questions.

[Arky Vaughan]

The rest of the civilized world has answered these questions.

So what? Is the United States, which is exceptional in many other ways, required to make the same choices that "the rest of the civilized world" has made? The United States is also the chief driver of medical and pharamaceutical research and development, which in effect subsidizes the treatments and cures used in the "rest of the civilized world." The United States also spends more on defense than the "rest of the civilized world" combined, which means that the "rest of the civilized world" can coast on the United States military for its safety and security and spend more of its GDP on butter rather than guns.

I find it rather comforting that the United States is not like the "rest of the civilized world," since otherwise we'd all be screwed.

[Alkie]

Ok, let's strip out all the political nature here (which I think has been done pretty well so far in this thread).   Which of the following are you proposing we do:

1) A world where there are no taxes and no government.   All services, including security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense are left to the private sector.   Whomever can provide the best service at the best price wins the job and it is their sole responsibility to regulate themselves in that endeavor.

2) A world where there is nothing but taxes and massive government.   All services, including security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, defense AND MATERIAL POSSESSIONS are entirely the role of the government, who retains every penny you "earn."   As part of your role in society, you must work a certain number of hours in a productive job and in turn, you never have to worry about food, security, money, defense, or utilities.   

3) A world where you give half and keep half and government controls social services like security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense, but NOT material possessions.   Half of your salary goes to ensure that all services above are completely provided for but you may spend the other half of your money as you see fit.   In this scenario, private business is not allowed to compete with the government services.

4) A world where you give half and keep half and government controls social services like security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense, but NOT material possessions.   Half of your salary goes to ensure that all services above are completely provided for but you may spend the other half of your money as you see fit.   In this scenario, private business IS allowed to compete with the government services such that you can choose to spend your discretionary money (your half) on doctors outside the gov't health care, security outside the police, private utilities, etc.

5) A world where there is no gov't and no money.   All possessions are the only real property.  Bartering is the only means of commerce and there is no such thing as credit nor interest.  All things (including services) must be paid for in real property (uh, not as in real estate).   There is no regulation and the people are left to self regulate everything.

6) A world where there is about a 75/25 split.   75% of your earned money is yours to keep and spend as you see fit.   25% goes to the gov't.   The gov't is in charge of services like utilities, education, and defense, but not health care or pension (one you can actually live on).   Your 75% must pay for everything the gov't does not and anyone is free to compete for those dollars in a loosely regulated system.   Gov't motto:  If you can sell it, you can sell it.

7) A world where the church owns everything, makes all the rules, and pretends it's not having sex with your son.  You have no rights, no money, and no choices.   But at least you get to have your son mated with.

Which one did you choose to live in and why?

[Arky Vaughan]

Ok, let's strip out all the political nature here (which I think has been done pretty well so far in this thread).   Which of the following are you proposing we do:

1) A world where there are no taxes and no government.   All services, including security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense are left to the private sector.   Whomever can provide the best service at the best price wins the job and it is their sole responsibility to regulate themselves in that endeavor.

2) A world where there is nothing but taxes and massive government.   All services, including security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, defense AND MATERIAL POSSESSIONS are entirely the role of the government, who retains every penny you "earn."   As part of your role in society, you must work a certain number of hours in a productive job and in turn, you never have to worry about food, security, money, defense, or utilities.  

3) A world where you give half and keep half and government controls social services like security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense, but NOT material possessions.   Half of your salary goes to ensure that all services above are completely provided for but you may spend the other half of your money as you see fit.   In this scenario, private business is not allowed to compete with the government services.

4) A world where you give half and keep half and government controls social services like security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense, but NOT material possessions.   Half of your salary goes to ensure that all services above are completely provided for but you may spend the other half of your money as you see fit.   In this scenario, private business IS allowed to compete with the government services such that you can choose to spend your discretionary money (your half) on doctors outside the gov't health care, security outside the police, private utilities, etc.

5) A world where there is no gov't and no money.   All possessions are the only real property.  Bartering is the only means of commerce and there is no such thing as credit nor interest.  All things (including services) must be paid for in real property (uh, not as in real estate).   There is no regulation and the people are left to self regulate everything.

6) A world where there is about a 75/25 split.   75% of your earned money is yours to keep and spend as you see fit.   25% goes to the gov't.   The gov't is in charge of services like utilities, education, and defense, but not health care or pension (one you can actually live on).   Your 75% must pay for everything the gov't does not and anyone is free to compete for those dollars in a loosely regulated system.   Gov't motto:  If you can sell it, you can sell it.

7) A world where the church owns everything, makes all the rules, and pretends it's not having sex with your son.  You have no rights, no money, and no choices.   But at least you get to have your son mated with.

Which one did you choose to live in and why?

What about a world ruled by a race of super-intelligent apes where we are kept in chains for their amusement and manual labor needs?

[JimR]

What about a world ruled by a race of super-intelligent apes where we are kept in chains for their amusement and labor needs?

the hell with you guys. i'm going to Disneyworld.

[Alkie]

What about a world ruled by a race of super-intelligent apes where we are kept in chains for their amusement and manual labor needs?

I'm sorry, we're not already living in this world...how?

[Rebel Jew]

What about a world ruled by a race of super-intelligent apes where we are kept in chains for their amusement and manual labor needs?

throw in the wave and sherriff blaylock and you've described minute maid park

[MusicMan]

Ok, let's strip out all the political nature here (which I think has been done pretty well so far in this thread).   Which of the following are you proposing we do:

1) A world where there are no taxes and no government.   All services, including security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense are left to the private sector.   Whomever can provide the best service at the best price wins the job and it is their sole responsibility to regulate themselves in that endeavor.

2) A world where there is nothing but taxes and massive government.   All services, including security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, defense AND MATERIAL POSSESSIONS are entirely the role of the government, who retains every penny you "earn."   As part of your role in society, you must work a certain number of hours in a productive job and in turn, you never have to worry about food, security, money, defense, or utilities.   

3) A world where you give half and keep half and government controls social services like security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense, but NOT material possessions.   Half of your salary goes to ensure that all services above are completely provided for but you may spend the other half of your money as you see fit.   In this scenario, private business is not allowed to compete with the government services.

4) A world where you give half and keep half and government controls social services like security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense, but NOT material possessions.   Half of your salary goes to ensure that all services above are completely provided for but you may spend the other half of your money as you see fit.   In this scenario, private business IS allowed to compete with the government services such that you can choose to spend your discretionary money (your half) on doctors outside the gov't health care, security outside the police, private utilities, etc.

5) A world where there is no gov't and no money.   All possessions are the only real property.  Bartering is the only means of commerce and there is no such thing as credit nor interest.  All things (including services) must be paid for in real property (uh, not as in real estate).   There is no regulation and the people are left to self regulate everything.

6) A world where there is about a 75/25 split.   75% of your earned money is yours to keep and spend as you see fit.   25% goes to the gov't.   The gov't is in charge of services like utilities, education, and defense, but not health care or pension (one you can actually live on).   Your 75% must pay for everything the gov't does not and anyone is free to compete for those dollars in a loosely regulated system.   Gov't motto:  If you can sell it, you can sell it.

7) A world where the church owns everything, makes all the rules, and pretends it's not having sex with your son.  You have no rights, no money, and no choices.   But at least you get to have your son mated with.

Which one did you choose to live in and why?

8.  A world in which I am given the power, as wise and benevolent monarch, to take from those I deem worthy, give to those whom I deem worthy, and allocate resource in the manner I see fit.

[BudGirl]

What about a world ruled by a race of super-intelligent apes where we are kept in chains for their amusement and manual labor needs?

What you and your wife want to do in the privacy of your home is your business.

[Arky Vaughan]

What you and your wife want to do in the privacy of your home is your business.

Wife? Where does a wife come into this?

[Alkie]

Wife? Where does a wife come into this?

Remember......Arky is a cocksucker.

[Arky Vaughan]

8.  A world in which I am given the power, as wise and benevolent monarch, to take from those I deem worthy, give to those whom I deem worthy, and allocate resource in the manner I see fit.

Have I ever told you how enlightening and inspirational your wonderful posts are, oh great one?

[Alkie]

What you and your wife want to do in the privacy of your home is your business.

I have to say, there really are very few posts that actually make me laugh out loud, but this one did.  Mostly it was the mental image, but still.

[Arky Vaughan]

Remember......Arky is a cocksucker.

I prefer baby-eater.

[Arky Vaughan]

I have to say, there really are very few posts that actually make me laugh out loud, but this one did.  Mostly it was the mental image, but still.

I'm sure Limey has a YouTube post up his sleeve.

[Alkie]

I'm sure Limey has a YouTube post up his sleeve.

And see, right here is where I stop siding with Limey and start siding with you.

[Arky Vaughan]

throw in the wave and sherriff blaylock and you've described minute maid park

It wouldn't surpise me if the MMP hot dogs were ground-up monkey organs.

[Arky Vaughan]

And see, right here is where I stop siding with Limey and start siding with you.

Can't we all just get along?

[Andyzipp]

Can't we all just get along?

Not likely.  Everything you can discuss, you better be Tractor-pulling in giving your opinions.  No middle ground, no retreat, no surrender.  Left or Right.  If you're in the middle on anything...prepared to be mowed down.

Sunday! Sunday!! SunDAY!!!

[Alkie]

Not likely.  Everything you can discuss, you better be Tractor-pulling in giving your opinions.  No middle ground, no retreat, no surrender.  Left or Right.  If you're in the middle on anything...prepared to be mowed down.

Zipp is correct.   I'll die before sitting at a table with Arky and enjoying fried pork or buttered snails.  Die, I say.

[JimR]

Not likely.  Everything you can discuss, you better be Tractor-pulling in giving your opinions.  No middle ground, no retreat, no surrender.  Left or Right.  If you're in the middle on anything...prepared to be mowed down.

Sunday! Sunday!! SunDAY!!!

retitle this forum to Vapid Beer and Queso

[JackAstro]

Tractor pulls are fascist.

[Alkie]

retitle this forum to Vapid Beer and Queso

Ooh, have you tried Vapid Beer?  Their brown ale is awesome, but their IPA sucks.

[Ron Brand]

Ooh, have you tried Vapid Beer?  Their brown ale is awesome, but their IPA sucks.

It's less filling.

[Lurch]

Ok, let's strip out all the political nature here (which I think has been done pretty well so far in this thread).   Which of the following are you proposing we do:

1) A world where there are no taxes and no government.   All services, including security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense are left to the private sector.   Whomever can provide the best service at the best price wins the job and it is their sole responsibility to regulate themselves in that endeavor.

2) A world where there is nothing but taxes and massive government.   All services, including security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, defense AND MATERIAL POSSESSIONS are entirely the role of the government, who retains every penny you "earn."   As part of your role in society, you must work a certain number of hours in a productive job and in turn, you never have to worry about food, security, money, defense, or utilities.   

3) A world where you give half and keep half and government controls social services like security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense, but NOT material possessions.   Half of your salary goes to ensure that all services above are completely provided for but you may spend the other half of your money as you see fit.   In this scenario, private business is not allowed to compete with the government services.

4) A world where you give half and keep half and government controls social services like security, utilities, roads, education, health, traffic, fire, and defense, but NOT material possessions.   Half of your salary goes to ensure that all services above are completely provided for but you may spend the other half of your money as you see fit.   In this scenario, private business IS allowed to compete with the government services such that you can choose to spend your discretionary money (your half) on doctors outside the gov't health care, security outside the police, private utilities, etc.

5) A world where there is no gov't and no money.   All possessions are the only real property.  Bartering is the only means of commerce and there is no such thing as credit nor interest.  All things (including services) must be paid for in real property (uh, not as in real estate).   There is no regulation and the people are left to self regulate everything.

6) A world where there is about a 75/25 split.   75% of your earned money is yours to keep and spend as you see fit.   25% goes to the gov't.   The gov't is in charge of services like utilities, education, and defense, but not health care or pension (one you can actually live on).   Your 75% must pay for everything the gov't does not and anyone is free to compete for those dollars in a loosely regulated system.   Gov't motto:  If you can sell it, you can sell it.

7) A world where the church owns everything, makes all the rules, and pretends it's not having sex with your son.  You have no rights, no money, and no choices.   But at least you get to have your son mated with.

Which one did you choose to live in and why?

6 works for me.  I imagine the third of US workers that pay no income tax currently would have a serious problem with it and our government in general would have to shrink drastically from the loss of tax revenue from those in the top bracket.  Overall quality of life in the US would drop as a result initially, but who is to say if/how the positive impacts might offset these changes for the better.

[MRaup]

What about a world ruled by a race of super-intelligent apes where we are kept in chains for their amusement and manual labor needs?

I, for one, welcome our evil ant overlords!

[JimR]

6 works for me.  I imagine the third of US workers that pay no income tax currently would have a serious problem with it and our government in general would have to shrink drastically from the loss of tax revenue from those in the top bracket.  Overall quality of life in the US would drop as a result initially, but who is to say if/how the positive impacts might offset these changes for the better.

look at Lurch. he found something highly intelligent to discuss.

[Arky Vaughan]

retitle this forum to Vapid Beer and Queso

I like that but think it already may be inherent in the title.

[Lurch]

look at Lurch. he found something highly intelligent to discuss.

"highly intelligent group"

Good discussion, regardless.

[JimR]

"highly intelligent group"

Good discussion, regardless.

see Zipp response above

you're easily pleased

[Lurch]

see Zipp response above

you're easily pleased

Not sure why you insist on making this personal, considering your stance on why you don't like such conversations.

[Limey]

I'm sure Limey has a YouTube post up his sleeve.

I have many, many YouTube clips up my sleeve.  But, trust me, you don't want to see any of them.

[Limey]

And see, right here is where I stop siding with Limey and start siding with you.

Fascist!

[MusicMan]

It wouldn't surpise me if the MMP hot dogs were ground-up monkey organs.

"It's PEOPLE!! Sherriff Blaylock is PEOPLE!!!"

[Alkie]

"It's PEOPLE!! Sherriff Blaylock is PEOPLE!!!"

I've told this story before, but when my daughter was 4 and we started taking her to Astros games, I taught her to walk past the hot dog lines and scream in innocent horror (sans smile) "SUPER STAR DOG IS PEOPLE!!!!!"

I've never been prouder.

[Rebel Jew]

so mary from blue shield just called me.  "good news," she says, "we've approved your doctor!"  "you mean the doctor i've had for the last four years up until two months ago when you changed my shit for no real reason without telling me and then tried to dissuade me from switching back to?"  "yes!" she says, "isn't that great?"  so she then explains to me that she'll put a note on my file to check up on it periodically to make sure nobody fucks with it again.  "cool," i say.  i expected the call to end right here, but then mary asks me, "so do you work near this doctor?"  i think about my answer for a moment, and stupidly give a truthful one, "no, but my wife does.  in a month i'm scheduled to have throat surgery with an ENT at this hospital who i really like and trust."  i can tell right away that this isn't the answer mary wanted to hear.  "are you sure you want this doctor?  we want to make certain that you'll get the local care you need.  how often do you visit your wife's workplace?"  "LOOK YOU FUCKHEADS!  this doctor is in PALO ALTO, not fucking Zanzibar!  it's 30 miles away!  30 MILES!  this is not some trek to the fucking mountains of fucking India to see some fucking guru who's gonna rub panda sperm on my jowels."  surprisingly enough, this last statement of mine reached Mary, though not in the way i intended.  "oh 30 miles, that must be it.  the networks used to span 30 miles i think, but now they span 15."  "oh, how about that?"  i say.  "yes, isn't that crazy."  "yeah, crazy as a french fox's jizz."  "well you have a wonderful day, and do not hesitate to call if you need any further assistance.  it has been my pleasure to assist you today."  "my pleasure too mary."

necessary medical procedure, here i come!

[chandler44]

this is not some trek to the fucking mountains of fucking India to see some fucking guru who's gonna rub panda sperm on my jowels."

NTTAWWT

[Limey]

 this is not some trek to the fucking mountains of fucking India to see some fucking guru who's gonna rub panda sperm on my jowels."  

That's not covered.

[JaneDoe]

so mary from blue shield just called me.  "good news," she says, "we've approved your doctor!"  "you mean the doctor i've had for the last four years up until two months ago when you changed my shit for no real reason without telling me and then tried to dissuade me from switching back to?"  "yes!" she says, "isn't that great?"  so she then explains to me that she'll put a note on my file to check up on it periodically to make sure nobody fucks with it again.  "cool," i say.  i expected the call to end right here, but then mary asks me, "so do you work near this doctor?"  i think about my answer for a moment, and stupidly give a truthful one, "no, but my wife does.  in a month i'm scheduled to have throat surgery with an ENT at this hospital who i really like and trust."  i can tell right away that this isn't the answer mary wanted to hear.  "are you sure you want this doctor?  we want to make certain that you'll get the local care you need.  how often do you visit your wife's workplace?"  "LOOK YOU FUCKHEADS!  this doctor is in PALO ALTO, not fucking Zanzibar!  it's 30 miles away!  30 MILES!  this is not some trek to the fucking mountains of fucking India to see some fucking guru who's gonna rub panda sperm on my jowels."  surprisingly enough, this last statement of mine reached Mary, though not in the way i intended.  "oh 30 miles, that must be it.  the networks used to span 30 miles i think, but now they span 15."  "oh, how about that?"  i say.  "yes, isn't that crazy."  "yeah, crazy as a french fox's jizz."  "well you have a wonderful day, and do not hesitate to call if you need any further assistance.  it has been my pleasure to assist you today."  "my pleasure too mary."

necessary medical procedure, here i come!

Elephant...check
Mule Deer....check
Duck-Billed Platypus.....check
Panda......
Panda......
Sorry sir, Panda sperm is not covered.
How about Yellow-Bellied Marmot?