OT:Was "economic twilight zone"; what about the average death age, elderly & doctors?
Bob Nixon
zone" thread are either part or soon to become part of our countries
economic woes. I stayed out of it because if it were not for modern
medicine my only drain on the economy would be watering my grave. I
don't know the status of the other elderly folks in this NG (Brutus,
Krusty, Peter & the other over 60 crowd) but it seems like we're not
hurting all that bad if Brutus can buy a new 1098, Me two cheaper
bikes in the last year and Krusty asking about new bikes too.
My 72 year old buddy has two new top line bikes (1098 & GSXR1000) and
he finally quit his job and went into retirement. But how much of
Saddle's ecomonic woes are we responsible for? I'm prolly one of the
worst, living on disability and Social Security, Medicare/Medicade and
my 401K savings. But what about Brutus? By the looks of him in photos,
I'd say he was still making a living doing something and Peter the
music teacher must surely have a nice nestegg set aside + working bars
and such on weekends.
Finally, natural selection dictates that the medical community is
adding to the problem by extending lives and saving others that should
have died. Just look at the average age that people lived to just 100
years ago vs today. Maybe 45 old on average in 1900 vs near 80 years
today. My understanding is that Medicare is the largest drag on the
economy making defense spending pale in comparison. So what are we
going to do with the Baby Boomers that had only one or two kids and
more and more of them have opted to not have any kids of their
own.Thus leaving the future US economy even more top heavy with what
little US born youth there are supporting an increasingly elderly
based ecomnomy. Immigration is about the only thing we can depend on
to keep our capitalist economy going. And our souring ecomomy has less
& less to offer educated immigrants from wanting a piece of the
American Dream-:(
Andrew
"Bob Nixon" <bigre...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1191954606.0...@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Health insurance is killing me personally.
I pay 1K+ a month for a mediocre policy with $500.00 deductibles, and we
barely use it at all.
Whenever I take the kid to the doctor I get a bill that I have to pay -- on
top of the damn co-pay.
The kid is going to be 2 years old tomorrow, and health insurance has
already cost me over $1600.00 just for his part of the policy over his
lifetime.
Then I get to pay all the freaking doctors bills, because it somehow never
adds up to the deductible for the year.
I am all for universal health care or health care reform, or something
because it is out of control!
I've been debating on taking the whole family in for full checkups in
January just to get the majority of the deductibles out of the way for the
year.
Our system sucks!
--
Andrew
00 Daytona
00 Speed Triple
71 Kawi H1
05 Kiddo
John Smith
> ...
> Health insurance is killing me personally.
> I pay 1K+ a month for a mediocre policy with $500.00 deductibles, and we
> barely use it at all.
> Whenever I take the kid to the doctor I get a bill that I have to pay --
> on top of the damn co-pay.
> The kid is going to be 2 years old tomorrow, and health insurance has
> already cost me over $1600.00 just for his part of the policy over his
> lifetime.
> Then I get to pay all the freaking doctors bills, because it somehow
> never adds up to the deductible for the year.
> I am all for universal health care or health care reform, or something
> because it is out of control!
>
> I've been debating on taking the whole family in for full checkups in
> January just to get the majority of the deductibles out of the way for
> the year.
> Our system sucks!
Absolutely!
We needed universal health care yesterday ...
Regards,
JS
BryanUT
>
> - Show quoted text -
Socialists!
I just don't understand why healthcare should be tied to employment.
Managing and paying for healthcare is large burden on all businesses,
big and small. It just add costs and does not add value to medical
care.
I also resent the "cut" insurance companies take, again without adding
value to health care services. It is almost extortion. Not to
mention all insurance companies make more money when they deny
claims. That is criminal, or at least immoral.
I am against any plan that puts more money in the hands of insurance
companies.
Andrew
"BryanUT" <nest...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1191961621.7...@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Just an FYI, I am self employed.
>
> I also resent the "cut" insurance companies take, again without adding
> value to health care services. It is almost extortion. Not to
> mention all insurance companies make more money when they deny
> claims. That is criminal, or at least immoral.
Criminal! I have a claim from May that I am fighting with the insurance
company over because the kiddo had a sinus infection on a Sunday and I had
to take him to a walk in clinic.
I've had to pay for it already, and now they want a post dated referral from
his doctor in order for me to get MY money back.
Bob Nixon
<yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Bob Nixon" <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Medicare/Medicade + ARRP fill-in for both the Government programs I
pay ~$8K /year for heath and medicine. It's a spiraling upward
clusterf*ck with doctors living in $20Million$ houses and owning multi-
Benz's.
We've grown dependent on the medical system but in natures' big
picture they may be doing more harm than good. And I'm not just
talking heathcare but genetic manipulation that they "only know
enough" about to be VERY, VERY dangerous to the human race. A simple
example is the antiboitics than may end up killing us off because of
an organism's natural ability to eventually defeat any antibiotic. And
that's just the tip of the iceberg!
Bob Nixon.
Andrew
Didn't mean to hijack your thread Bob, I was just on the phone with the
health ins. co this am, so it was fresh on my mind.
Vaughn
>
> - Show quoted text -
I definitely forsee a health care crisis on the horizon, as do most of
my doctor friends.
There's no "sky is falling" tone to that perception either - it is
simply a matter of increasings costs and liablity and decreasing
quality and coordination of health care service silos.
And I'm one of the younger ones around here who will be paying into
that system, and watching it slowly fail people.
My fiancee works in health insurance, the notes the way the people who
really need health care are becoming decreasingly insurable - and it
is getting very expensive for those who do qualify, but to afford
their insurance they have really high deductibles and co-pays which
practically defeat the point of having private insurance in the first
place.
I would also refer you to the movie that is currently in theaters
called "Sicko" to really dramatize the problem.
A national safety net that keeps providers in check and catches all
the people in serious need really is past due.
Ron Gibson
> defense spending pale in comparison. So what are we going to do with
> the Baby Boomers that had only one or two kids and more and more of
> them have opted to not have any kids of their own.Thus leaving the
> future US economy even more top heavy with what little US born youth
> there are supporting an increasingly elderly based ecomnomy.
> Immigration is about the only thing we can depend on to keep our
> capitalist economy going. And our souring ecomomy has less & less to
> offer educated immigrants from wanting a piece of the American Dream-:(
No problem. The US will soon be a wholly owned subsidiary of China with
a Mexican CEO anyway.
--
Linux Help: http://rsgibson.com/linux.htm
Email - rsgi...@verizon.borg
Replace borg with net
Ron Gibson
> Andrew, I wasn't really talking about medical bills and INS but with
> Medicare/Medicade + ARRP fill-in for both the Government programs I pay
> ~$8K /year for heath and medicine. It's a spiraling upward clusterf*ck
> with doctors living in $20Million$ houses and owning multi- Benz's.
Doctors make a lot of money but they really aren't the bad guys and in
fact they are some of the loudest voices in the universal health care
movement.
Drug Costs: The pharm companies are this era's Pablo Escobar. They are
the largest companies in the world even dwarfing the oil industry. They
literally *own* Washington.
Hospitalization Costs: This one defies logic. In every other area
technology reduces costs per unit and turns out a better product over
time. Hospital costs turns that upside down completely.
While the average stay in a hospital has decreased, time to diagnosis
has decreased due to new diagnostic tools, costs (to the consumer)
continue to spiral upwards at an unbelievable rate.
Yet we lag behind many other countries in providing basic care in a
number of categories.
Now myself, I'll be dead before the poop really hits the fan but ya know
I have grand nieces and nephews.
Try for change. Do whatever you can if nothing other than to raise
awareness.
tomo...@erols.com
Yep. The best thing we could do is outlaw all medical insurance
except for catastrophic care coverage. Let medicaid help the indigent
elderly. Let health care consumers buy their health care from their
doctors and apply cost containment pressure at the point of purchase.
Remove the bloated, ridiculous layers of health "management"
"professionals" and let consumers be in charge.
The last thing we need is to replace the TERRIBLE insurance company
management of health care with MUCH worse, MUCH more expensive "single
provider" nationalized, socialized, government run health "care."
The only health insurance anyone should ever be able to buy is
coverage for catastrophic health occurances, like what happened to Bob
Nixon. People shouldn't lose their homes or their retirement
investments to medical calamity, but losing the cost of a car or a
boat is something people should plan for, just like other normal
living expenses.
saddlebag
<yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Bob Nixon" <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
You're wife just gave birth. My FIL showed me the bill when my wife
was born. As I recall it was like $7 and change.
I just took her up to Chicago to have a medical procedure that was
considered experimental (and not covered). After much persuasion I
was able to convince my company to cover it (one of our divisions
makes one of the high dollar machines used in the procedure). And she
holds the distinction of being the first person they have ever
covered. I just saw the bill. They charged the insurance $25k and
the insurance got them to discount it by half and footed the entire
bill. Whew, I had expected to have to pay at least a few k out of
pocket.
> Whenever I take the kid to the doctor I get a bill that I have to pay -- on
> top of the damn co-pay.
> The kid is going to be 2 years old tomorrow, and health insurance has
> already cost me over $1600.00 just for his part of the policy over his
> lifetime.
> Then I get to pay all the freaking doctors bills, because it somehow never
> adds up to the deductible for the year.
> I am all for universal health care or health care reform, or something
> because it is out of control!
>
> I've been debating on taking the whole family in for full checkups in
> January just to get the majority of the deductibles out of the way for the
> year.
> Our system sucks!
Open an FSA. At least then money you know will be going for medically
related stuff will be spent pre-tax.
saddlebag
That was a great movie, but as a documentary it was pretty pathetic.
Anyone could just as easily find horror stories in any of the
countries he visited and heroic care here at home. But as a film it
did take one for an emotional rollercoaster ride.
BryanUT
<tomo...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:1191969984.4...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>
> The last thing we need is to replace the TERRIBLE insurance company
> management of health care with MUCH worse, MUCH more expensive "single
> provider" nationalized, socialized, government run health "care."
>
But is it really "much more" expensive? Every other industrialized nation
from Canada to Japan to the EU seems to have a much more cost effective
system.
Perhaps there is some creative American way to resolve the issue?
At least we agree that the insurance companies are not the answer and I
think we agree that insurance should not be tied to employment and the
burden placed on employers?
And back to Bob's point, the baby boomer generation, myself included, is
going to feel much more resentment and out right hostility from the younger
generations as time goes by. The retired folk may just have to accept a
"means" test, as unpalatable as that sounds (and it is "unfair" to an
extent).
Sometimes when you vote, you need to think beyond your own self interest, I
know it is hard to do and sounds counter intuitive.
BrianNZ
You're just going to have to 'legalise' all the illegals and get them
paying tax.....their breeding program will create the tax base you need
for your old age.
saddlebag
Timsey, I think you're onto something, but I think you have it
backwards. There ought to be a system whereby being an American
citizen entitles you to low cost primary/preventitive care. This
would include things like pain medicine, short hospital stays, low
cost generic medicine for chronic conditions and maybe even low cost
high volume surgeries and Hospice style terminal care. People should
pay for additional coverage. Those policies could range from higher
cost elective surgeries to organ transplants. Sad that not everyone
could get this service, but resources are limited and those who can
pay should be able to purchase more life extending services if they
wish.
> The last thing we need is to replace the TERRIBLE insurance company
> management of health care with MUCH worse, MUCH more expensive "single
> provider" nationalized, socialized, government run health "care."
I don't know that it'd be MUCH worse, because there is no real "free
market" in healthcare now. You have no metrics for shopping for a
doctor or hospital now besides word of mouth. But a little
competition is better than none at all I suppose. Still, compared to
the huge amounts we lose by letting the poor go without medical care
until they have a catastrophy, I have to believe we could save a
fortune. BTW, don't kid yourself, we have socialized medicine today.
I worked in a not for profit hospital for a decade and by law we are
obliged to treat everyone who wonders in, insured or not. The costs
get passed on to those who can pay.
BryanUT
"BrianNZ" <br...@itnz.co.nz> wrote in message
news:feh3a0$krc$2...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
> You're just going to have to 'legalise' all the illegals and get them
> paying tax.....their breeding program will create the tax base you need
> for your old age.
Hehe, you are such an ass.
tomo...@erols.com
> And back to Bob's point, the baby boomer generation, myself included, is
> going to feel much more resentment and out right hostility from the younger
> generations as time goes by. The retired folk may just have to accept a
> "means" test, as unpalatable as that sounds (and it is "unfair" to an
> extent).
>
> Sometimes when you vote, you need to think beyond your own self interest, I
> know it is hard to do and sounds counter intuitive.
Well, I have "contributed" a quarter of a million dollars to the
social security system during my 30 years of working, to date. I
will "contribute" another $150~200,000 during the next (minimum) 10
years that I must work. Another ~$25,000 if I continue working to
minimum SS eligibility age, and another ~75,000 to $80,000 if I work
to the age at which I am eligible for maximum "benifits."
However, in the early 1980's I read about the coming social security
actuarial nightmare, and I decided right then and there that I would
never put myself in a position to depend on those "benefits" from my
"contributions" for my retirement income. I started putting the
maximum allowable by law into my 401(k), eating spaghetti and tuna six
nights a week, eschewing movies, cancelled cable TV for 18 years,
drove cheap, beater used cars, and rode cheap, beater, used
motorcycles, while my wife stayed home and raised kids and we
scrounged for every nickel we could get. I worked three jobs at once
from the late 70's to the early 80's, and worked two jobs right up
until 2002, to provide for my family AND to be able to save. As soon
as the kids were in school, my wife went back to work. She too,
contributes the max allowable by law into her 401(k).
Our investments have been prudent, we have reinvested every penny of
return, and we have stayed out of debt. We have well over a million
dollars set aside, and project that we will need $2.8 to $3.2 million
total in order to fund retirement for my wife and myself. If I work
straight through to age 62 AND our investments earn a slightly lower
than market average rate of return, we should make it.
I expect the fact that we have saved and scrimped and invested and
'done without' my entire working career, never getting any assistance
from the government, while having 13% of our joint salary siphoned off
year after year after year to provide benefits for other retirees, to
be used against us when we retire, in order to deny me ANY return on
the $350,000 to $500,000 of "contributions" I will have made. (My
wife's total is more modest, due to time off to care for the children
and part-time work at a lower salary when she returned to the
workforce, but it, too, will surely be set aside at our joint
retirement age.)
Rather than the negative rate of return that current high income
"contributors" are collecting, I expect means-testing to be
implemented sometime in the next ten years, and I expect the means-
testing will be structured to ensure that I won't get a penny from the
SSA. I do, however, expect that all the other wage earners in my
income bracket who bought powerboats and $875,000 homes and Jaguar
sedans and home theater systems and went out to dinner every night,
while setting aside little to nothing for their own retirement, will
collect handsomely since they will not have the "means" to support
themselves in their dodderage.
Now, THAT is the new American way.
(BTW, I did a rough calculation on what the total amount of my
retirement savings would've been if I had been allowed to invest my
contributions rather than have the government spend them, and my wife
and I could retire TODAY if those contributions had merely reflected
the same roi as my other retirements accounts have over my lifetime.)
So, pardon me if this member of the baby boomer generation doesn't
really give a flying fuck if the next generation resents me or is
hostile, or not!
tomo...@erols.com
> I don't know that it'd be MUCH worse, because there is no real "free
> market" in healthcare now. You have no metrics for shopping for a
> doctor or hospital now besides word of mouth. But a little
> competition is better than none at all I suppose. Still, compared to
> the huge amounts we lose by letting the poor go without medical care
> until they have a catastrophy, I have to believe we could save a
> fortune. BTW, don't kid yourself, we have socialized medicine today.
> I worked in a not for profit hospital for a decade and by law we are
> obliged to treat everyone who wonders in, insured or not. The costs
> get passed on to those who can pay.
Amazed to find that I agree with you. I currently pay $14,400 per
year (13.2% annual increase this month) for each employee's family
medical insurance, and I can guarantee you that in four years of
company operation, not one employee has come CLOSE to their benefit
equalling the premium. Of course, if one employee gets a chronic
surgical/onocological ailment, ALL the company's premiums could be
used (and a whole lot more) to cover that treatment.
I just don't kid myself for a second that I could or would get the
same quality health care as I buy now, if the government takes over
the health care system. Cheaper? I doubt it. Better? Absolutely
and categorically not.
BryanUT
<tomo...@erols.com> wrote in message >
> I expect the fact that we have saved and scrimped and invested and
> 'done without' my entire working career, never getting any assistance
Hehe, sometimes you make me laugh. Done without? I feel your pain.
BWWWAAAA!
I admire your financial success and hard work, but "done without", hardly.
tomo...@erols.com
> <tomor...@erols.com> wrote in message >
Well, I don't know what you would call shopping for three kids at
thrift stores, still using the dresser that my parents bought for me
when I was 12 up until my grandparents died and I "inherited" an adult
dresser when I was almost 40 years old, or teaching as many as 22
weekends[1] a year in order to be able to afford my first new
motorcycle in 13 years of marriage (in 1992). Perhaps that is your
idea of living high on the hog. Of course, having done stuff like
that for decades makes it painless now, when I finally *have* some
disposable income (mainly because my children have grown, moved out,
and have become "contributors" themselves!) to contemplate the fact
that the hundreds of thousands of dollars that I worked for that were
confiscated from my paychecks will never even be *partly* utilized to
fulfill the government's "contract" with me!
Painless, I tell you. Pass the tequila!
[1] Friday night from 5:15 PM to 10:15 PM, Saturday from 6AM to 5:30
PM and Sunday from 7AM to 4:30 PM.
BrianNZ
I try my hardest! :)
But the 'Me' generation have done little to help the country (any
country) by not breeding up and leaving it for the poor/uneducated
(welfare) or rich (few) to have the large families. The 'Me' people
(taxpayer majority) are stuck in the middle trying to live the life of
the rich and give their kid the best they can, hoping that 1 child will
make it big and be able to support them in their old age.
tomo...@erols.com
That's why *I* did the right thing and had THREE (count 'em) kids!!!
Two are out on their own, self-supporting, and the third just entered
college.
I've already told them to expect to support their mother and I when
the dumbocrats take office and apply confiscatory tax policies to our
lifetime savings!
(Always good to have a little 'family' insurance policy!)
BrianNZ
I've only gone so far as to replace myself and my ex on the planet. I
admire the way you have sorted your life and and done the hard work.
I've been too busy having fun (Me,me,me) to have any long term goals.
Toys NOW are more important than 'What about later'. I never thought I
would last this long.......
OK, I've put a lot of toys on the backburner while I get the boys an
education (free education here, isn't!) and I'm hoping to pay their way
through university. When I was at school, I couldn't wait to leave and
get on with life and moved from one job to another without any thought
to where I would be in 10,20,30 years.
These days, the schools have career guidance teachers to point them in
the right direction. The boys actually like going to school!!??
I've told them from the beginning that I expect them to look after
me....fingers (and toes) crossed! :)
Andrew
> dresser when I was almost 40 years old,
Is this an actual adult who dresses you, or just the place you stash your
porn?
Andrew
"saddlebag" <sadd...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1191971423....@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
...And how is that my fault?
My FIL showed me the bill when my wife
> was born. As I recall it was like $7 and change.
M$ health ins covered all that I stayed on the COBRA for the full 18months,
it was more expensive than what I have now, but it covered everything.
When we set out on our own I had to get health ins w/o being in a group.
I will look into this and do a cost/bene analysis. Thanks for the insight.
BryanUT
<tomo...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:1191975720.5...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 9, 8:06 pm, "BryanUT" <nestl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> <tomor...@erols.com> wrote in message >
>> > I expect the fact that we have saved and scrimped and invested and
>> > 'done without' my entire working career, never getting any assistance
>>
>> Hehe, sometimes you make me laugh. Done without? I feel your pain.
>> BWWWAAAA!
>>
>> I admire your financial success and hard work, but "done without",
>> hardly.
>
> Well, I don't know what you would call shopping for three kids at
> thrift stores, still using the dresser that my parents bought for me
> when I was 12 up until my grandparents died and I "inherited" an adult
> dresser when I was almost 40 years old, or teaching as many as 22
> weekends[1] a year in order to be able to afford my first new
> motorcycle in 13 years of marriage (in 1992). Perhaps that is your
> idea of living high on the hog.
"done without". Dressers? Cry me a river. Get fucking real Tim.
saddlebag
<yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> Health insurance is killing me personally.
> >> I pay 1K+ a month for a mediocre policy with $500.00 deductibles, and we
> >> barely use it at all.
>
> > You're wife just gave birth.
>
> ...And how is that my fault?
It's not, just pointing out that you do get some use out of it.
Babies ain't cheap these days.
> My FIL showed me the bill when my wife
>
> > was born. As I recall it was like $7 and change.
>
> M$ health ins covered all that I stayed on the COBRA for the full 18months,
> it was more expensive than what I have now, but it covered everything.
> When we set out on our own I had to get health ins w/o being in a group.
That's the part that sucks. Corps get high volume discounts and
special tax priviledges from the feds. Poor bastards outside the
circle make up for the discounts and keep the Cardiologists in
Carreras.
> > Open an FSA. At least then money you know will be going for medically
> > related stuff will be spent pre-tax.
>
> I will look into this and do a cost/bene analysis. Thanks for the insight.
There is no cost unless you fail to spend the amount you budget. It
is a use it or lose it proposition.
tomo...@erols.com
Well, I must admit that fathering my children was quite rewarding, as
far as that goes!
tomo...@erols.com
<yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I "inherited" an adult
> > dresser when I was almost 40 years old,
>
> Is this an actual adult who dresses you, or just the place you stash your
> porn?
The latter, natch!
tomo...@erols.com
> <tomor...@erols.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1191975720.5...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 9, 8:06 pm, "BryanUT" <nestl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> <tomor...@erols.com> wrote in message >
> >> > I expect the fact that we have saved and scrimped and invested and
> >> > 'done without' my entire working career, never getting any assistance
>
> >> Hehe, sometimes you make me laugh. Done without? I feel your pain.
> >> BWWWAAAA!
>
> >> I admire your financial success and hard work, but "done without",
> >> hardly.
>
> > Well, I don't know what you would call shopping for three kids at
> > thrift stores, still using the dresser that my parents bought for me
> > when I was 12 up until my grandparents died and I "inherited" an adult
> > dresser when I was almost 40 years old, or teaching as many as 22
> > weekends[1] a year in order to be able to afford my first new
> > motorcycle in 13 years of marriage (in 1992). Perhaps that is your
> > idea of living high on the hog.
>
> "done without". Dressers? Cry me a river. Get fucking real Tim.
Okay, so I did without extras. Satisfied? It was my mother who
didn't have running water until she left home for junior college, not
me.
I wasn't comparing myself to Biafrans of the 1970's, Bryan. I was
comparing myself to my contemporaries who spent every dime they earned
on BMWs and multi-story foyered 5-bedroom houses with 10-foot ceilings
and premium cable TV packages on their professionally installed home
theatre audio/video systems, and then told me (and continue to tell me
to this day) that they couldn't "afford" to contribute the minimum
employee contribution required to get the company matching funds in
their 401(k), and now are frantically looking around, in their 50's,
wondering who their retirement fund of $125,000 is going to support
them in the style to which they have accustomed themselves.
Luckily [for them], they will pass any "means" test the government
invents and will collect my children's "contributions" to SSA. At
least, they will until the system goes bankrupt anyway.
Sadly, I'm sure that 18 years without cable TV didn't exactly prepare
my children to deal with THEIR children. Damn, I should've at least
popped for that. At least with that example, maybe my children would
have at least considered killing the little fucking bastards!
BryanUT
<tomo...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:1191984861.3...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
Well, fuck them.
> and premium cable TV packages on their professionally installed home
> theatre audio/video systems, and then told me (and continue to tell me
> to this day) that they couldn't "afford" to contribute the minimum
> employee contribution required to get the company matching funds in
> their 401(k), and now are frantically looking around, in their 50's,
> wondering who their retirement fund of $125,000 is going to support
> them in the style to which they have accustomed themselves.
>
As bad as my financial skills are, and despite my divorce, and in inspite of
the risks I took, I still am doing
better than some. Dumb fucking luck I guess.
> Luckily [for them], they will pass any "means" test the government
> invents and will collect my children's "contributions" to SSA. At
> least, they will until the system goes bankrupt anyway.
> i
I get it. The "me" generation. Always voting what is best for themselves
and not thinking about the future. Sometimes the true sacrifice is giving
up personal wants and needs so that others can have theirs.
> Sadly, I'm sure that 18 years without cable TV didn't exactly prepare
> my children to deal with THEIR children. Damn, I should've at least
> popped for that. At least with that example, maybe my children would
> have at least considered killing the little fucking bastards!
>
WTF? Cable TV? Goddam Tim. Sometimes you say the weirdest things.
Does anyone ever call you on your bullshit?
tomo...@erols.com
> Does anyone ever call you on your bullshit?
Sadly, bullshit is all I have to offer.
tomo...@erols.com
> > I wasn't comparing myself to Biafrans of the 1970's, Bryan. I was
> > comparing myself to my contemporaries who spent every dime they earned
> > on BMWs and multi-story foyered 5-bedroom houses with 10-foot ceilings
>
> Well, fuck them.
No, my point exactly is that we will REWARD them. They will not get
fucked. They will get money from working people who were disciplined
and frugal.
saddlebag
Yeah, the kind who get all indignant when Hillary says:
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common
good."
As though they didn't understand that roads, education, environmental
protection, food inspection, worker protection, and the military are
all funded by the gubament taking things away from us for the common
good.
Hell, we even fund TTT to file oil reports from Exxon! But I'm
willing to cut that Federal job and make Exxon pay him directly.
tomo...@erols.com
> Hell, we even fund TTT to file oil reports from Exxon! But I'm
> willing to cut that Federal job and make Exxon pay him directly.
Yeah, he'd have to work more hours per year, but he'd probably make
twice as much money, and Exxon would of course have to make a profit
on *him*, so gas prices would go up significantly more than taxes
would fall as a result of the switch.
I vote we leave Troy where he is!
Vaughn
>
> > "done without". Dressers? Cry me a river. Get fucking real Tim.
>
> Okay, so I did without extras. Satisfied? It was my mother who
> didn't have running water until she left home for junior college, not
> me.
>
> I wasn't comparing myself to Biafrans of the 1970's, Bryan. I was
> comparing myself to my contemporaries who spent every dime they earned
> on BMWs and multi-story foyered 5-bedroom houses with 10-foot ceilings
> and premium cable TV packages on their professionally installed home
> theatre audio/video systems, and then told me (and continue to tell me
> to this day) that they couldn't "afford" to contribute the minimum
> employee contribution required to get the company matching funds in
> their 401(k), and now are frantically looking around, in their 50's,
> wondering who their retirement fund of $125,000 is going to support
> them in the style to which they have accustomed themselves.
>
> Luckily [for them], they will pass any "means" test the government
> invents and will collect my children's "contributions" to SSA. At
> least, they will until the system goes bankrupt anyway.
>
> Sadly, I'm sure that 18 years without cable TV didn't exactly prepare
> my children to deal with THEIR children. Damn, I should've at least
> popped for that. At least with that example, maybe my children would
> have at least considered killing the little fucking bastards!
The Barbie and Ken McMansion lifestyle you point out is a big part of
the problem.
That would be a good example of a lifestyle that is not sustainable.
So when the work thins out, the costs go up, and the dollar loses
value, it will be very difficult to heat those big foyers and 10'
ceilings, not to mention putting fuel in all those SUV's.
And the attitude that most americans have about "expecting" such
comforts is going to bite us all in the arse.
And kudos to you for keeping your kids off the tube. That shit sours
consciousness, and costs entirely too much - besides - library cards
and good radio are still free.
However, it isn't the aging boomers who may have lived beyond their
means that I am really concerned about, it is the young families and
free thinkers who are getting pushed out and screwed over by riding
costs and a system that is built on an eroding foundation.
The wages today are not in keeping with the cost of living - though
the smart ones can figure out a way to get along, the masses will
suffer.
Step outside our country, and the WTO has few happy stories to share
about 3rd world citizens getting their piece of the pie. That is the
system that is set up to bend over the people, and make a simple life
less accessible and of decreased quality.
Ron Gibson
> People shouldn't lose their homes or their retirement investments to
> medical calamity, but losing the cost of a car or a boat is something
> people should plan for, just like other normal living expenses.
This happens all the time in Florida. See you are caught at the worse
possible moment, sick as hell lets say with cancer. The MD says there's
a new treatment but it costs 100K. Otherwise you'll be dead in 3 months.
What do you do?
Most people end up losing everything and dying anyway.
My Dad did the smartest (and bravest) thing I've ever seen him do. He
had throat cancer that required surgery, chemo and radiotherapy. He
lost his ability to speak and swallow but got 4 more decent years.
The it came back and they wanted to repeat it all again. He said, "Hell
no. Enough".
He died quietly in his sleep surrounded by all of us, thank God.
--
Linux Help: http://rsgibson.com/linux.htm
Email - rsgi...@verizon.borg
Replace borg with net
Ron Gibson
> than none at all I suppose. Still, compared to the huge amounts we
> lose by letting the poor go without medical care until they have a
> catastrophy,
> I have to believe we could save a fortune. BTW, don't kid yourself, we
> have socialized medicine today. I worked in a not for profit hospital for
> a decade and by law we are obliged to treat everyone who wonders in,
> insured or not. The costs get passed on to those who can pay.
And this is the fundamental flaw with the arguments against health care
that take the form "I don't want more taxes".
With no access to primary and preventative care (a proven $ saver) minor
problems escalate into crisis which require extended hospital stays and
huge bills.
See pretty much no one is denied crisis care. Various indigent care
programs cover them and guess who pays for that - The taxpayers.
An analogy is do you keep riding your bike on that bald tire because you
don't want to spend a few hundred dollars or do you wait until it blows
and wrecks the bike?
Right now we just have indigent care for wrecks.
It's a pay me now or pay me later thing.
Ron Gibson
> Yeah, the kind who get all indignant when Hillary says: "We're going to
> take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
> As though they didn't understand that roads, education, environmental
> protection, food inspection, worker protection, and the military are all
> funded by the gubament taking things away from us for the common good.
> Hell, we even fund TTT to file oil reports from Exxon! But I'm willing to
> cut that Federal job and make Exxon pay him directly.
Government is a tool that society uses to solve problems that
individuals alone can not.
The issue with government is will the King tax the peasants into
starvation taking 90% of their crops so he can have lots of jewels and
gold or will he be a benevolent dictator (best form of government
actually) and provide as best as he can for all?
This is a metaphor, of course but is a central issue with the way
society is organized. It is historical and was valid thousands of years
ago.
I just wanted to remind all of that. You fill in the blanks to get it up
to speed for the 21st century.
TroytheTroll
>> I get it. The "me" generation. Always voting what is best for
>> themselves
>> and not thinking about the future. Sometimes the true sacrifice is
>> giving
>> up personal wants and needs so that others can have theirs.
>
> Yeah, the kind who get all indignant when Hillary says:
> "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common
> good."
Sounds like what she means most of the time....
>
> As though they didn't understand that roads, education, environmental
> protection, food inspection, worker protection, and the military are
> all funded by the gubament taking things away from us for the common
> good.
>
Billary advocates more of the same...hardly the advocate for change she
claims to be.
> Hell, we even fund TTT to file oil reports from Exxon!
I wish.
> But I'm
> willing to cut that Federal job and make Exxon pay him directly.
>
Of course you are. Then, when Exxon uses my expertise to shaft the
goobermint for a odd few billion in oil and gas royalties, the money I get
paid now will seem like a bargain. Someone has to watch the store....and you
might not like the expertise or money spent in doing it, but its better than
the alternative.
TroytheTroll
>> Hell, we even fund TTT to file oil reports from Exxon! But I'm
>> willing to cut that Federal job and make Exxon pay him directly.
>
> Yeah, he'd have to work more hours per year, but he'd probably make
> twice as much money, and Exxon would of course have to make a profit
> on *him*, so gas prices would go up significantly more than taxes
> would fall as a result of the switch.
>
> I vote we leave Troy where he is!
A vote for good goobermint if there ever was one!!
TroytheTroll
>> As though they didn't understand that roads, education, environmental
>> protection, food inspection, worker protection, and the military are all
>> funded by the gubament taking things away from us for the common good.
>
>> Hell, we even fund TTT to file oil reports from Exxon! But I'm willing
>> to
>> cut that Federal job and make Exxon pay him directly.
>
> Government is a tool that society uses to solve problems that
> individuals alone can not.
Saddle doesn't believe this. Apparently he thinks he can build his own
roads, teach his own children ( specializing in sugar momma dependancy ),
defend his own household, etc etc, all in exchange for his 20% of net income
contribution.
>
> The issue with government is will the King tax the peasants into
> starvation taking 90% of their crops so he can have lots of jewels and
> gold or will he be a benevolent dictator (best form of government
> actually) and provide as best as he can for all?
>
> This is a metaphor, of course but is a central issue with the way
> society is organized. It is historical and was valid thousands of years
> ago.
>
Good thing we don't live then.
> I just wanted to remind all of that. You fill in the blanks to get it up
> to speed for the 21st century.
So...got any modern examples? I mean, without a King, peasants and
starvation, some of us who live in America might have a tough time
translating to modern times where there is...no King....or peasants....or
starvation....or much in the way of agro-culture anymore.
TroytheTroll
>> Sadly, I'm sure that 18 years without cable TV didn't exactly prepare
>> my children to deal with THEIR children. Damn, I should've at least
>> popped for that. At least with that example, maybe my children would
>> have at least considered killing the little fucking bastards!
>
> The Barbie and Ken McMansion lifestyle you point out is a big part of
> the problem.
>
> That would be a good example of a lifestyle that is not sustainable.
> So when the work thins out, the costs go up, and the dollar loses
> value, it will be very difficult to heat those big foyers and 10'
> ceilings, not to mention putting fuel in all those SUV's.
The costs always go up, and the dollar has been losing value for years, and
it isn't DIFFICULT to put fuel in an SUV, its just EXPENSIVE. Completely
different things methinks.
>
> And the attitude that most americans have about "expecting" such
> comforts is going to bite us all in the arse.
>
Again, I would say this is already happening. I assume it will get worse,
but thats just because I am a naturally pessimistic kinda guy.
>
> However, it isn't the aging boomers who may have lived beyond their
> means that I am really concerned about, it is the young families and
> free thinkers who are getting pushed out and screwed over by riding
> costs and a system that is built on an eroding foundation.
Whats a riding cost?
>
> The wages today are not in keeping with the cost of living - though
> the smart ones can figure out a way to get along, the masses will
> suffer.
>
They shouldn't suffer, they should work to the find the same determination,
nerve and work ethic which made this country great. Sitting around on one's
ass whining for a union job, cheap gasoline and low health care costs is NOT
how this country was carved from raw wilderness, many moons ago.
> Step outside our country, and the WTO has few happy stories to share
> about 3rd world citizens getting their piece of the pie. That is the
> system that is set up to bend over the people, and make a simple life
> less accessible and of decreased quality.
I wonder if the WTO even recognizes that you can't make a modern country
from a group of people who would rather butcher each other with machete's?
And when they whine that the butchering is getting in the way, of course
they won't STOP it long enough to develop themselves...of COURSE
not...someone call the WTO!! Let them figure it out!!
Vaughn
>
> > However, it isn't the aging boomers who may have lived beyond their
> > means that I am really concerned about, it is the young families and
> > free thinkers who are getting pushed out and screwed over by riding
> > costs and a system that is built on an eroding foundation.
>
> Whats a riding cost?
>
>
A typo. I meant "rising costs."
>
> > The wages today are not in keeping with the cost of living - though
> > the smart ones can figure out a way to get along, the masses will
> > suffer.
>
> They shouldn't suffer, they should work to the find the same determination,
> nerve and work ethic which made this country great. Sitting around on one's
> ass whining for a union job, cheap gasoline and low health care costs is NOT
> how this country was carved from raw wilderness, many moons ago.
>
Agreed, we could use more of that.
But the straps on these modern chinese boots keep breaking off when
you pull on them...! It is almost as if they were engineered to do
so?!?
> > Step outside our country, and the WTO has few happy stories to share
> > about 3rd world citizens getting their piece of the pie. That is the
> > system that is set up to bend over the people, and make a simple life
> > less accessible and of decreased quality.
>
> I wonder if the WTO even recognizes that you can't make a modern country
> from a group of people who would rather butcher each other with machete's?
> And when they whine that the butchering is getting in the way, of course
> they won't STOP it long enough to develop themselves...of COURSE
> not...someone call the WTO!! Let them figure it out!!
I tend to think there would be less genocide and civil unrest if Fair
Trade principles, a livng wage, and sustainable agriculture was used
to grow, mine, and harvest all their goods.
Mmm, would you like more bad karma with your folger's crystals (or
starbucks, if you are in the upper range of the middle class)? One
lump, or two?
It might take a lot sweet talking and slick marketting spin to keep it
down, but at least the price was right.
tomo...@erols.com
Agree in part. However, have you seen the bills for preventive care?
I have. They are not cheap. Screening tests, diagnosticians,
specialists, and all the lab fees... I'm not convinced that providing
that for free to all the people who don't have insurance will LOWER
costs, regardless of the occasional savings from those who are
diagnosed early.
tomo...@erols.com
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:46:24 -0700, tomor...@erols.com wrote:
> > People shouldn't lose their homes or their retirement investments to
> > medical calamity, but losing the cost of a car or a boat is something
> > people should plan for, just like other normal living expenses.
>
> This happens all the time in Florida. See you are caught at the worse
> possible moment, sick as hell lets say with cancer. The MD says there's
> a new treatment but it costs 100K. Otherwise you'll be dead in 3 months.
>
> What do you do?
>
> Most people end up losing everything and dying anyway.
I think there's a metaphor for life in there, but I'm not sure.
Seriously, that's precisely the ONLY thing that I think health
insurance should be permitted for.
Regular health care can be subsidized by the simple expedient of
making expenses deductible WITHOUT a percentage of income cap, so that
lower income people pay LESS in real dollars for their health care.
Hell, you could make medical expenses a tax CREDIT vice a deduction up
to say $5,000 for families with incomes of up to $50,000 and phase it
down or out above that, and we'd STILL be better off than we are with
insurance companies who have forgotten that the raison d' etre for
insurance in the first place is SHARED risk, not the ABSENCE of risk!
(Condolences on the loss of your father, btw.)
saddlebag
> >> As though they didn't understand that roads, education, environmental
> >> protection, food inspection, worker protection, and the military are all
> >> funded by the gubament taking things away from us for the common good.
>
> >> Hell, we even fund TTT to file oil reports from Exxon! But I'm willing
> >> to
> >> cut that Federal job and make Exxon pay him directly.
>
> > Government is a tool that society uses to solve problems that
> > individuals alone can not.
>
> Saddle doesn't believe this. Apparently he thinks he can build his own
> roads, teach his own children ( specializing in sugar momma dependancy ),
> defend his own household, etc etc, all in exchange for his 20% of net income
> contribution.
No, I believe very much in all of that, it's the commercial stuff like
you're doing and building bridges to nowhere and starting unnecessary
wars that bug me.
saddlebag
> On Oct 10, 1:22 pm, "TroytheTroll" <f4_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > However, it isn't the aging boomers who may have lived beyond their
> > > means that I am really concerned about, it is the young families and
> > > free thinkers who are getting pushed out and screwed over by riding
> > > costs and a system that is built on an eroding foundation.
>
> > Whats a riding cost?
>
> A typo. I meant "rising costs."
I thought he was gonna say "tires and oil."
Vaughn
Considering I rode close to 50,000 miles in the last three years, the
biggest part of the expense there is definitely fuel! Though filters,
tires and oil add up, too. (And none of it was commuting! I live a
mile from work and usually pedal.)
Ron Gibson
>> I just wanted to remind all of that. You fill in the blanks to get it
>> up to speed for the 21st century.
> So...got any modern examples? I mean, without a King, peasants and
> starvation, some of us who live in America might have a tough time
> translating to modern times where there is...no King....or peasants....or
> starvation....or much in the way of agro-culture anymore.
Oh too many to count. See I was a dual major in college, Mechanical
Engineering and Social Psychology with lots of anthropology in the
mix...so some of what I might quote might seem scary or unamerican but I
will refer only to hypothesis and observation. Here's two...
Social Stratification (The myth of the land of the equal): Deals with
the distribution of wealth (land, money, etc) in society. In 1969 10% of
the country held 90% of the wealth. Today it's more like a 94/6% split.
This is hard data empirically derived.
I'd rather not expound too much on concentration of wealth upward is
always a product of a government and instills the seeds of it's eventual
demise (Let them eat cake). New rulers take over and the cycle restarts.
This is not a necessity but humankind is not evolved enough to overcome
it's greed.
This may sound harsh but when you do cross cultural comparisons this is
the way it comes out. It's text book material.
Ron Gibson
> Agree in part. However, have you seen the bills for preventive care? I
> have. They are not cheap. Screening tests, diagnosticians, specialists,
> and all the lab fees... I'm not convinced that providing that for free to
> all the people who don't have insurance will LOWER costs, regardless of
> the occasional savings from those who are diagnosed early.
Oh but it will and in fact many studies have proven it so. The ideal set
up is neighborhood free clinics for basic primary care, ouchies, minor
infections, blood pressure and sugar monitoring.
When is the last time you had your blood sugar checked? What if you
don't know you are a diabetic? You go into a diabetic coma and end up
staying in the hospital 3 days = $20,000 when $10 worth of insulin
could have avoided it all.
There is universal agreement on the HUGE benefits of preventive
primary care. But no one can agree on how to implement it for all.
Andrew
"Ron Gibson" <rsgi...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.10.10....@verizon.net...
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:13:27 -0700, tomo...@erols.com wrote:
>
>> Agree in part. However, have you seen the bills for preventive care? I
>> have. They are not cheap. Screening tests, diagnosticians, specialists,
>> and all the lab fees... I'm not convinced that providing that for free to
>> all the people who don't have insurance will LOWER costs, regardless of
>> the occasional savings from those who are diagnosed early.
>
> Oh but it will and in fact many studies have proven it so. The ideal set
> up is neighborhood free clinics for basic primary care, ouchies, minor
> infections, blood pressure and sugar monitoring.
>
> When is the last time you had your blood sugar checked? What if you
> don't know you are a diabetic? You go into a diabetic coma and end up
> staying in the hospital 3 days = $20,000 when $10 worth of insulin
> could have avoided it all.
>
Wow am I getting ripped off.
My dog is diabetic (2nd dog with it.)
I spend over 150.00 a month on insulin and special food.
--
Andrew
00 Daytona
00 Speed Triple
71 Kawi H1
05 Kiddo
tomo...@erols.com
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:13:27 -0700, tomor...@erols.com wrote:
> > Agree in part. However, have you seen the bills for preventive care? I
> > have. They are not cheap. Screening tests, diagnosticians, specialists,
> > and all the lab fees... I'm not convinced that providing that for free to
> > all the people who don't have insurance will LOWER costs, regardless of
> > the occasional savings from those who are diagnosed early.
>
> Oh but it will and in fact many studies have proven it so. The ideal set
> up is neighborhood free clinics for basic primary care, ouchies, minor
> infections, blood pressure and sugar monitoring.
>
> When is the last time you had your blood sugar checked? What if you
> don't know you are a diabetic? You go into a diabetic coma and end up
> staying in the hospital 3 days = $20,000 when $10 worth of insulin
> could have avoided it all.
Therein is the fallacy of that argument. It's not $10 worth of
insulin. It's thousands of dollars worth of professional services and
medical technology to make the diagnosis, deliver the services,
maintain the new status quo, PLUS the ongoing cost of the drugs and
the medical care needed to manage diabetes. Plus, you will have
dozens, hundreds, thousands nationwide who will benefit from each
instance of this spending, whereas the $20,000 expense of the one
diabetic coma is more than offset by the thousands who simply die
without ever having been diagnosed.
I'm not arguing which scenario is better, but it is disingenuous to
say that such programs in and of themselves will pay for themselves,
or even reduce overall social healthcare spending.
tomo...@erols.com
<yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Ron Gibson" <rsgib...@verizon.net> wrote in message
Wow. I typed all that stuff, then read your response and it was both
more succinct AND made my point better than I did.
I now officially hate you.
BrianNZ
BANG!.....Puppy time....... :(
Ron Gibson
>> When is the last time you had your blood sugar checked? What if you
>> don't know you are a diabetic? You go into a diabetic coma and end up
>> staying in the hospital 3 days = $20,000 when $10 worth of insulin could
>> have avoided it all.
> Therein is the fallacy of that argument. It's not $10 worth of insulin.
> It's thousands of dollars worth of professional services and medical
No it's not. My Mom is a diabetic. The diagnosis is not that expensive
nor are the test and they are FAR cheaper than a 3 day hospital stay.
I recently spent 4 hours in the ER for back spasms - two shots and an
XRAY = $6,000
> I'm not arguing which scenario is better, but it is disingenuous to say
> that such programs in and of themselves will pay for themselves, or even
> reduce overall social healthcare spending.
You are absolutely 100% wrong. They've already been put to the test and
proven this is the case. They absolutely will reduce expenditures for
health care dramatically.
Ron Gibson
> Wow am I getting ripped off.
> My dog is diabetic (2nd dog with it.) I spend over 150.00 a month on
> insulin and special food.
Yeah you are. Costs is about $60/month for my Mom. My point was ONE
insulin shot could have prevented a diabetic coma and $10 was a high
price for that shot.
Andrew
<tomo...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:1192053555.6...@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
I promise not to take any of YOUR money for MY retirement.
Ron Gibson
>>> Wow am I getting ripped off.
>>> My dog is diabetic (2nd dog with it.) I spend over 150.00 a month on
>>> insulin and special food.
>> Wow. I typed all that stuff, then read your response and it was both
>> more succinct AND made my point better than I did.
> I promise not to take any of YOUR money for MY retirement.
Check this out. As I said Mom uses about $68 worth of Humalog Insulin a
month.
Canadian price...
http://www.medisave.ca/DrugMoreInfo2578.aspx
$33.
Feeling even more ripped off? I'm not rubbing it in. Whenever you go to
a US pharmacy walk in door and grab ankles :(
Andrew
"Ron Gibson" <rsgi...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:pan.2007.10.10....@verizon.net...
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:18:24 -0500, Andrew wrote:
>
>>>> Wow am I getting ripped off.
>>>> My dog is diabetic (2nd dog with it.) I spend over 150.00 a month on
>>>> insulin and special food.
>
>>> Wow. I typed all that stuff, then read your response and it was both
>>> more succinct AND made my point better than I did.
>
>> I promise not to take any of YOUR money for MY retirement.
>
> Check this out. As I said Mom uses about $68 worth of Humalog Insulin a
> month.
>
> Canadian price...
>
> http://www.medisave.ca/DrugMoreInfo2578.aspx
>
> $33.
>
> Feeling even more ripped off? I'm not rubbing it in. Whenever you go to
> a US pharmacy walk in door and grab ankles :(
Ah but now the Canadian Dollar is worth more than the American Dollar, so
it's a bit more expensive in that respect, though probably still a good
savings.
This isn't 5 years ago with a 65% exchange rate.
--
Andrew
00 Daytona
00 Speed Triple
71 Kawi H1
05 Kiddo
>
Ron Gibson
>> Check this out. As I said Mom uses about $68 worth of Humalog Insulin
>> a month.
>> Canadian price...
>> http://www.medisave.ca/DrugMoreInfo2578.aspx
>> $33.
>> Feeling even more ripped off? I'm not rubbing it in. Whenever you go to
>> a US pharmacy walk in door and grab ankles :(
> Ah but now the Canadian Dollar is worth more than the American Dollar, so
> it's a bit more expensive in that respect, though probably still a good
> savings.
> This isn't 5 years ago with a 65% exchange rate.
You know what? The US ripoff is even worse than I suspected. I have to
apologize to the fellow with the diabetic pups as Humalog Insulin costs
nearly $100 for the 10ml vial. Mom has Midicare D which pays part of the
cost so he is paying about right as doggies don't have medicare :-)
But here is the real insult. Not only is the price in Canada $33 it's a
over the counter med there - No prescription required and I have used
this company myself and they are 100% legit.
This is why I said that the pharm companies are this eras Pablo Escobar.
So for the poor fellow with the pups perhaps he could inquire if human
insulin would work and he could save a small fortune odering it from
Canada or maybe you could even find a site that specialized in pet meds.
I have a lot of experience with meds and pricing as I've had to deal
with a chronic illness for several years that requires about 10 pills a
day. If anyone needs help please feel free to email me and I'll be glad
to offer any assistance or assurances I can.
If you do email me mark the subject with something that will catch my
attention. I get a lot of spam unfortunately
Oh, BTW, those prices were in US dollars.
Here's the main site...
TroytheTroll
>> > Government is a tool that society uses to solve problems that
>> > individuals alone can not.
>>
>> Saddle doesn't believe this. Apparently he thinks he can build his own
>> roads, teach his own children ( specializing in sugar momma dependancy ),
>> defend his own household, etc etc, all in exchange for his 20% of net
>> income
>> contribution.
>
> No, I believe very much in all of that, it's the commercial stuff like
> you're doing and building bridges to nowhere and starting unnecessary
> wars that bug me.
I don't do "commercial" stuff. Speculating yourself into silliness again?
And that "bridge to nowhere" got cancelled, and unnecessary wars aren't,
when defined that way by the only person who matters, and the Congress which
gave him permission.
TroytheTroll
>>> up to speed for the 21st century.
>
>> So...got any modern examples? I mean, without a King, peasants and
>> starvation, some of us who live in America might have a tough time
>> translating to modern times where there is...no King....or peasants....or
>> starvation....or much in the way of agro-culture anymore.
>
> Oh too many to count. See I was a dual major in college, Mechanical
> Engineering and Social Psychology with lots of anthropology in the
> mix...so some of what I might quote might seem scary or unamerican but I
> will refer only to hypothesis and observation. Here's two...
>
> Social Stratification (The myth of the land of the equal): Deals with
> the distribution of wealth (land, money, etc) in society. In 1969 10% of
> the country held 90% of the wealth. Today it's more like a 94/6% split.
> This is hard data empirically derived.
Excellent. And it means we have a King how? And we have peasants how? And I
haven't noticed starvation being much of a cause of death listed in the
obituaries lately.....so....maybe you'd like to find some example which at
least TRIES to come up with something similar.
>
> I'd rather not expound too much on concentration of wealth upward is
> always a product of a government and instills the seeds of it's eventual
> demise (Let them eat cake). New rulers take over and the cycle restarts.
> This is not a necessity but humankind is not evolved enough to overcome
> it's greed.
But we sure outgrew Kings, peasants and starvation as a standard means of
death.
>
> This may sound harsh but when you do cross cultural comparisons this is
> the way it comes out. It's text book material.
I musta missed the textbook which confuses income stratification and the
Feudal system.
TroytheTroll
>> > The wages today are not in keeping with the cost of living - though
>> > the smart ones can figure out a way to get along, the masses will
>> > suffer.
>>
>> They shouldn't suffer, they should work to the find the same
>> determination,
>> nerve and work ethic which made this country great. Sitting around on
>> one's
>> ass whining for a union job, cheap gasoline and low health care costs is
>> NOT
>> how this country was carved from raw wilderness, many moons ago.
>>
>
> Agreed, we could use more of that.
>
> But the straps on these modern chinese boots keep breaking off when
> you pull on them...! It is almost as if they were engineered to do
> so?!?
The beauty of our free market system goes like this....if someone wanted
straps not to break, and was willing to pay for those types of straps, we
would have lots of them around to buy.
Hard to blame China for selling us exactly what we apparently want, and then
blame CHINA for giving it to us.
>> I wonder if the WTO even recognizes that you can't make a modern country
>> from a group of people who would rather butcher each other with
>> machete's?
>> And when they whine that the butchering is getting in the way, of course
>> they won't STOP it long enough to develop themselves...of COURSE
>> not...someone call the WTO!! Let them figure it out!!
>
> I tend to think there would be less genocide and civil unrest if Fair
> Trade principles, a livng wage, and sustainable agriculture was used
> to grow, mine, and harvest all their goods.
Altruism didn't work when Jimmy Carter tried it, I doubt it works any better
today than it did then. It is unfortunate that the world isn't all peace and
love and singing Koom-Bye-Yah over campfires each evening, but the places
where it IS all peace and love? Odds are, the people doing the singing got
there because they learned how to destroy, kill, murder and incinerate
others more efficiently than could be done to them.
Unfortunate, but true.
Ron Gibson
>> Social Stratification (The myth of the land of the equal): Deals with
>> the distribution of wealth (land, money, etc) in society. In 1969 10%
>> of the country held 90% of the wealth. Today it's more like a 94/6%
>> split. This is hard data empirically derived.
> Excellent. And it means we have a King how? And we have peasants how? And
OK. To help clarify read...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_stratification
>> I'd rather not expound too much on concentration of wealth upward is
>> always a product of a government and instills the seeds of it's eventual
>> demise (Let them eat cake). New rulers take over and the cycle restarts.
>> This is not a necessity but humankind is not evolved enough to overcome
>> it's greed.
> But we sure outgrew Kings, peasants and starvation as a standard means of
> death.
metaphor:
Definition 1. a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is used
to describe one thing in terms of another in a nonliteral way, such as
"drowning in work".
>> This may sound harsh but when you do cross cultural comparisons this
>> is the way it comes out. It's text book material.
> I musta missed the textbook which confuses income stratification and the
> Feudal system.
You sure did miss a lot evidenced by that statement. I'm convinced.
tomo...@erols.com
<yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> <tomor...@erols.com> wrote in message
I love you, man!
tomo...@erols.com
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:58:22 -0700, tomor...@erols.com wrote:
> >> When is the last time you had your blood sugar checked? What if you
> >> don't know you are a diabetic? You go into a diabetic coma and end up
> >> staying in the hospital 3 days = $20,000 when $10 worth of insulin could
> >> have avoided it all.
> > Therein is the fallacy of that argument. It's not $10 worth of insulin.
> > It's thousands of dollars worth of professional services and medical
>
> No it's not. My Mom is a diabetic. The diagnosis is not that expensive
> nor are the test and they are FAR cheaper than a 3 day hospital stay.
>
> I recently spent 4 hours in the ER for back spasms - two shots and an
> XRAY = $6,000
>
> > I'm not arguing which scenario is better, but it is disingenuous to say
> > that such programs in and of themselves will pay for themselves, or even
> > reduce overall social healthcare spending.
>
> You are absolutely 100% wrong. They've already been put to the test and
> proven this is the case. They absolutely will reduce expenditures for
> health care dramatically.
I don't believe you any more than I believe the results of "their"
tests.
TroytheTroll
>>> Social Stratification (The myth of the land of the equal): Deals with
>>> the distribution of wealth (land, money, etc) in society. In 1969 10%
>>> of the country held 90% of the wealth. Today it's more like a 94/6%
>>> split. This is hard data empirically derived.
>
>> Excellent. And it means we have a King how? And we have peasants how? And
>
> OK. To help clarify read...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_stratification
>
For starters, wikipedia isn't of much use, from a "accurate" perspective. I
know this because I have been absolutely stunned by inaccuracies and even
complete nonsense within subjects I am professionally familiar with.
However, I looked at the article, and while it was nice, it did not clarify
that modern day America is a feudal system containing Kings and peasants and
such, nor did it mention income straitification as a means to determine if
you have Kings and peasants and such, let alone as a definitive measure of
anything.
>>> I'd rather not expound too much on concentration of wealth upward is
>>> always a product of a government and instills the seeds of it's eventual
>>> demise (Let them eat cake). New rulers take over and the cycle restarts.
>>> This is not a necessity but humankind is not evolved enough to overcome
>>> it's greed.
>
>> But we sure outgrew Kings, peasants and starvation as a standard means of
>> death.
>
> metaphor:
>
> Definition 1. a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is used
> to describe one thing in terms of another in a nonliteral way, such as
> "drowning in work".
>
I am well aware of what a metaphor is, and that you used the term when
talking about Kings and peasants and such earlier in the conversation. I
just don't see it as an accurate metaphor at all, so I began a question
process to see if the literal intepretation was more meaningful. Neither
were.
>
>>> This may sound harsh but when you do cross cultural comparisons this
>>> is the way it comes out. It's text book material.
>
>> I musta missed the textbook which confuses income stratification and the
>> Feudal system.
>
> You sure did miss a lot evidenced by that statement. I'm convinced.
Your article didn't contain any references to income stratification as a
means to determining feudal systems from any others either. I'm sure an
educated person such as yourself is quite capable of reading anything they
wish into whatever they wish, but I'm more of a scientific bent, and when
someone tries to connect two things, and then provides an article as
reference, it would be nice if at LEAST the article mentioned the same link.
saddlebag
> This is why I said that the pharm companies are this eras Pablo Escobar.
C'mon now, Pablo provided good product at a reasonable price. It was
all the damn cops in the supply chain that drove up costs.
Ron Gibson
>> This is why I said that the pharm companies are this eras Pablo Escobar.
> C'mon now, Pablo provided good product at a reasonable price. It was all
> the damn cops in the supply chain that drove up costs.
LOL. Good one. The topic needs some levity or we'd all go bonkers.
Bob Nixon
<yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Bob Nixon" <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1191962153.8...@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 9, 12:36 pm, "Andrew"
> > <yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> "Bob Nixon" <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1191954606.0...@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > It occured to me that some of the folks in Saddle "economic twilight
> >> > zone" thread are either part or soon to become part of our countries
> >> > economic woes. I stayed out of it because if it were not for modern
> >> > medicine my only drain on the economy would be watering my grave. I
> >> > don't know the status of the other elderly folks in this NG (Brutus,
> >> > Krusty, Peter & the other over 60 crowd) but it seems like we're not
> >> > hurting all that bad if Brutus can buy a new 1098, Me two cheaper
> >> > bikes in the last year and Krusty asking about new bikes too.
>
> >> > My 72 year old buddy has two new top line bikes (1098 & GSXR1000) and
> >> > he finally quit his job and went into retirement. But how much of
> >> > Saddle's ecomonic woes are we responsible for? I'm prolly one of the
> >> > worst, living on disability and Social Security, Medicare/Medicade and
> >> > my 401K savings. But what about Brutus? By the looks of him in photos,
> >> > I'd say he was still making a living doing something and Peter the
> >> > music teacher must surely have a nice nestegg set aside + working bars
> >> > and such on weekends.
>
> >> > Finally, natural selection dictates that the medical community is
> >> > adding to the problem by extending lives and saving others that should
> >> > have died. Just look at the average age that people lived to just 100
> >> > years ago vs today. Maybe 45 old on average in 1900 vs near 80 years
> >> > today. My understanding is that Medicare is the largest drag on the
> >> > economy making defense spending pale in comparison. So what are we
> >> > going to do with the Baby Boomers that had only one or two kids and
> >> > more and more of them have opted to not have any kids of their
> >> > own.Thus leaving the future US economy even more top heavy with what
> >> > little US born youth there are supporting an increasingly elderly
> >> > based ecomnomy. Immigration is about the only thing we can depend on
> >> > to keep our capitalist economy going. And our souring ecomomy has less
> >> > & less to offer educated immigrants from wanting a piece of the
> >> > American Dream-:(
>
> >> Health insurance is killing me personally.
> >> I pay 1K+ a month for a mediocre policy with $500.00 deductibles, and we
> >> barely use it at all.
> >> Whenever I take the kid to the doctor I get a bill that I have to pay --
> >> on
> >> top of the damn co-pay.
> >> The kid is going to be 2 years old tomorrow, and health insurance has
> >> already cost me over $1600.00 just for his part of the policy over his
> >> lifetime.
> >> Then I get to pay all the freaking doctors bills, because it somehow
> >> never
> >> adds up to the deductible for the year.
> >> I am all for universal health care or health care reform, or something
> >> because it is out of control!
>
> >> I've been debating on taking the whole family in for full checkups in
> >> January just to get the majority of the deductibles out of the way for
> >> the
> >> year.
> >> Our system sucks!
>
> >> --
>
> > Andrew, I wasn't really talking about medical bills and INS but with
> > Medicare/Medicade + ARRP fill-in for both the Government programs I
> > pay ~$8K /year for heath and medicine. It's a spiraling upward
> > clusterf*ck with doctors living in $20Million$ houses and owning multi-
> > Benz's.
>
> > We've grown dependent on the medical system but in natures' big
> > picture they may be doing more harm than good. And I'm not just
> > talking heathcare but genetic manipulation that they "only know
> > enough" about to be VERY, VERY dangerous to the human race. A simple
> > example is the antiboitics than may end up killing us off because of
> > an organism's natural ability to eventually defeat any antibiotic. And
> > that's just the tip of the iceberg!
>
> > Bob Nixon.
>
> Didn't mean to hijack your thread Bob, I was just on the phone with the
> health ins. co this am, so it was fresh on my mind.
>
> --
>
> Andrew
> 00 Daytona
> 00 Speed Triple
> 71 Kawi H1
>
> - Show quoted text -
You know Andrew? I don't mind a jacking as long as an intelligent
discourse follows and this thread is a good example of just that. Plus
people venting thier frustrations about our FU'd healthcare/political
system.
As far as replacing myself (genes anyway) I've 2 sons & 6 grandkids,
so if there is no hereafter I've done my thing, so to speak. The
problem is, the guilt that goes along with seeding the next two
generations with such a mess of a country compared to the past 100
years, IOW, my father and his father's lifesyle and oportunities as
the world's most powerful (past tense) country. We still have the
military power to destroy any or all other world countries but where
will that leave us in the fossil record? We all eventually need to
come together as one world for the human and many other life forms to
survive this next century. Maybe we won't survive and life will start
over again with a more adaptable specie.
Then all life is based on selfish algorithms for "low level" survival.
The more knowledge we gain, the better we can understand our REAL
purpose and move on past our immature stage of development EX: just
acting out our primitive animal instincts.
It's only the above that will eventually allow us to move out to the
rest of the "universe[1]" and meet our brothers who have moved on up
life's chain to better understand the existance of ALL things.
[1] we know very little about space travel at our current stage of
development. Worm holes and other "super light speed" methods may
exist that we are just too underdeveloped to understand , presently!
Bob Nixon (preachy mode off now-:)
Ron Gibson
> other world countries but where will that leave us in the fossil
> record? We all eventually need to come together as one world for the
> human and many other life forms to survive this next century.
Absolutely right. We have a lot of growing to do to be a significant
species in the history of this planet. Right now the dinosaurs are
kicking our butts in terms of longevity and success as a species.
But anyway I saw a 2000 Honda CBR600 for sale for $2600. Looks like a
good deal to me :-)
BryanUT
> It occured to me that some of the folks in Saddle "economic twilight
> zone" thread are either part or soon to become part of our countries
> economic woes. I stayed out of it because if it were not for modern
> medicine my only drain on the economy would be watering my grave. I
> don't know the status of the other elderly folks in this NG (Brutus,
> Krusty, Peter & the other over 60 crowd) but it seems like we're not
> hurting all that bad if Brutus can buy a new 1098, Me two cheaper
> bikes in the last year and Krusty asking about new bikes too.
>
I've this interesting and information, especially the comments at the
end:
http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/10/if-you-have-never-priced-and-applied-for-private-insurance/
tomo...@erols.com
Yet another cogent argument for outlawing health insurance entirely.
I'm surprised to find that I am not, after all, alone!
Andrew
<tomo...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:1192140878.9...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
If you outlaw health insurance; only healthy people will be outlaws; is that
what you want? :-)
I prefer my outlaws to be in walkers and wheelchairs; they're easier to
catch.
tomo...@erols.com
<yogig.no.spam.mmm.sp...@n.o.sp.am....@hotmail.com> wrote:
> <tomor...@erols.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1192140878.9...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 11, 3:26 pm, BryanUT <nestl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> On Oct 9, 12:30 pm, Bob Nixon <bigrex2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > It occured to me that some of the folks in Saddle "economic twilight
> >> > zone" thread are either part or soon to become part of our countries
> >> > economic woes. I stayed out of it because if it were not for modern
> >> > medicine my only drain on the economy would be watering my grave. I
> >> > don't know the status of the other elderly folks in this NG (Brutus,
> >> > Krusty, Peter & the other over 60 crowd) but it seems like we're not
> >> > hurting all that bad if Brutus can buy a new 1098, Me two cheaper
> >> > bikes in the last year and Krusty asking about new bikes too.
>
> >> I've this interesting and information, especially the comments at the
> >> end:
>
> >>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/10/if-you-have-never-priced-and-...
>
> > Yet another cogent argument for outlawing health insurance entirely.
> > I'm surprised to find that I am not, after all, alone!
>
> If you outlaw health insurance; only healthy people will be outlaws; is that
> what you want? :-)
I espouse health insurance for catastropic medical situations ONLY.
> I prefer my outlaws to be in walkers and wheelchairs; they're easier to
> catch.
Me, too!
Ron Gibson
> If you outlaw health insurance; only healthy people will be outlaws; is
> that what you want? :-)
> I prefer my outlaws to be in walkers and wheelchairs; they're easier to
> catch.
I say we harvest the old and feed them to the hungry young poor so they
can work the fields!
Then when they collapse we can harvest their organs for the wealthy!
Soylent Green Forever!
BryanUT
>
> I say we harvest the old and feed them to the hungry young poor so they
> can work the fields!
>
Ashes to ashes. Dust to Dust. Almost Biblical.
> Then when they collapse we can harvest their organs for the wealthy!
>
I've used my organs to their fullest.
> Soylent Green Forever!
>
BWWWAAA!