Versus a faceless corporation that decides if they can make their money on you or just find some loophole to deny you? That sounds way better...Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
Printable View
Versus a faceless corporation that decides if they can make their money on you or just find some loophole to deny you? That sounds way better...Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
Oh, so now you want to dictate what services others can buy and what volume discounts they should be offered?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
And I thought you were going to post the amount of subsidy that the post office got from the taxpayers. I guess posturing is way easier than gathering facts.
Not to me. The ultimate tyranny for me is the kind arising from the Kruger and Dunning type cognitive bias.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
I don't even know what the definition of "socialized medicine" is. Wouldn't be surprised to hear that there was at least a dozen of 'em.
I've heard that any middleman, like an insurance company, always increases costs. Any way to eliminate insurance companies from health care?
No, I disagree. I recently won a fight against the insurance company. They wanted to limit my drugs. I got my doctor to phone an insurance company employed advocate. The insurance company fought itself and I won.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanjewell
Obamacare bureaucrats are already talking about limiting care. They also cut 500 million from Medicare to help pay for Obamacare. They claim they will make it up by being more efficient. Right! They are already arguing that it doesn't make sense to spend money on old people that won't contribute enough to society to make it work caring for them. Can you say, "death panels"?
Good for you...too bad for my friend with cancer who was denied because it was "pre-existing". But hey, as long as everything is ok with YOU, everyone else can fend for themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
No offense Crotalus, but I'm going to remove myself from this conversation. It is going nowhere, isn't constructive, and I'll just end up getting upset.
I may not be the most informed person in this conversation. However, I believe a few points should be made first, there is at least 100 years of oil on federal land and this being federal land means it belongs to the people, now it seems to me that a contract to drill on this land can be given to an oil company with the provision that gasoline must stay in this country and. Put a percentage cap on the prophet that they can make. This seems like a fair way to get reasonably priced gasoline and a reasonable return on the investors money while not being greedy. During this time I believe they can figure out a way to produce hydrogen which is I was taught in grade school is the most abundant element in the universe at a reasonable cost. This would solve the limited amount of oil that there is. Second, if people were allowed to buy health insurance across state lines that might help ease the price and increase the competition. Now I'm no expert on this subject, however I have had three hip replacements and the doctor that did it and let me preface this first that all he does is hip and knee replacements, owns a Bentley a Mercedes, and a Rolls-Royce. Seems to me he's making a very, very good living somehow I don't think all doctors would do what he does are making this kind of money. I'm not really sure what the fix is. But there is something very wrong with that he may be very good at what he does and I have no complaints but I imagine he cost the insurance company more than other doctors. And the last thing is career politicians. I see no way that Congressman are going to pass a law limiting their terms and making them follow the same rules we do no exemptions from anything that we are not exempt from. No free ride for life after serving one term. No free healthcare no free anything, let them pay the same as we do. I think that wouldst be a step towards getting some things fixed. Just my humble opinion.
I don't think the oil producers would be interested in such conditions. The traditional way it's done is they pay lump sum upfront for concession over the plot and then later on they look for oil there, may be develop it if it's profitable and sell it at market prices. The oil companies already have many years worth of oil in their concession portfolios, but they need more for afterwards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grizzley1
The problem isn't production, but storage. Fossil fuels are still very cheap, so as long as they remain cheap there is really no need for alternatives. How cheap you may ask they need to be? Well, the real life data is that at about $150-$160/barrel people change their behavior and start decreasing their consumption sharply and switch to alternatives, so there is an upper limit where other technology takes over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grizzley1
I know a doctor who is OBGYN. Doesn't take any insurance. Does really, really well. I mean, some doctors prioritize money to helping patients and decide they'll serve only those who can afford their services.
As far as term limits. Why are they necessary? Representatives are elected every two years, senators every 6 - if people don't want to change them, why would they want to impose limits themselves? I say american citizens ought to start pointing this particular finger at themselves, preferably on election day.
This would also not be a problem if the market was free. Corporations always act in their own best interest. If you had freedom to choose your insurance company, the ones that got a rep for bad service would lose clients and money. Right now you are stuck with the company your employer picks. I agree that some things need to be changed, like pre-existing conditions. That being said what about the person that refuses to buy any insurance at all until they are deadly ill. There has to be an answer, but giving the whole thing to the government is not it. There are too many people coming to this country to get treatment that's being refused to them by their governments at home.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanjewell
I see a common thread here. People either trust the government or they don't. I for one do not. The government stopped serving our interests a long time ago. It's main interest now is growth and power. Taking over health care is a huge power grab. If you need a heart transplant, are you going to criticize the government? They will have the power of life and death. The California water issue proves it. They shut down a key farm aqueduct in Ca because the pumps were killing a 2" fish. They put tens of thousands of people out of work and crippled the food industry in Ca over a fish. When environmentalists whackos can make the government pick fish living in a man made body of water over people it is no longer serving us.
Just my opinion, but if you trust the government more than you trust Corporate America you have truly drunk the koolaid.
Business got America where it is now, not government. The free market built America, not government regulations.
Storage is the issue. Wind and solar aren't available 24/7. Only water, fossil, and nuclear are.Quote:
Originally Posted by gugi
Interesting...although you're mostly right, the question that comes up is how do we keep companies that are less than ethical from ripping people off?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
Its precisely the lack of regulation that got your fine country into that mortgage debacle that started this downward spiral,
I'm all for free markets, but free does not mean you can cheat and steal. if a private company willfully cheats and lies, they need to be held accountable. If you or I misrepresented ourselves at a bank and managed to get a million dollar loan and then refused to pay it back I think the full weight of the law would be upon us. Not one single person or company has been charged, let alone convicted in the sub prime mortgage fiasco.
I believe government should protect its citizens...all of them, not just the ones that donate millions to re election campaigns.