To Drby Dad

[Markem618]

So if you felt I called you a troll, I apologize.

[DerbyDad03]

On Thursday, July 8, 2021 at 7:21:14 PM UTC-4, Markem618 wrote:
> So if you felt I called you a troll, I apologize.

The back and forth is too stupid and tedious for my feelings
to be impacted in any way. Anytime (the sooner the better)
that you two want to give it a rest, that would be just fine.

Moving on…

[k...@notreal.com]

On Thu, 08 Jul 2021 18:21:06 -0500, Markem618 <mark...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>So if you felt I called you a troll, I apologize.

Admission accepted.

[Markem618]

Your reward

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvFuUaCe8eY

[k...@notreal.com]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 10:48:38 -0500, Markem618 <mark...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:30:19 -0400, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Jul 2021 18:21:06 -0500, Markem618 <mark...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>So if you felt I called you a troll, I apologize.
>>
>>Admission accepted.
>
>Your reward

My reward is your admission of willful ignorance.

[Markem618]

Bye Bye

[k...@notreal.com]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 11:47:11 -0500, Markem618 <mark...@hotmail.com>

wrote:

>On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 12:41:17 -0400, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 10:48:38 -0500, Markem618 <mark...@hotmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 09 Jul 2021 16:30:19 -0400, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 08 Jul 2021 18:21:06 -0500, Markem618 <mark...@hotmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>So if you felt I called you a troll, I apologize.
>>>>
>>>>Admission accepted.
>>>
>>>Your reward
>>
>>My reward is your admission of willful ignorance.
>
>Bye Bye

Have a good day. Try to learn something.

[Michael Trew]

Y'all are insanely immature... I don't understand why either of you care.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 23:34:17 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>
wrote:

Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness. ...and
your lying, for that matter. More evidence of your leftism.

[Markem618]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 23:34:17 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>
wrote:

:: usenet nod ::

[Michael Trew]

On 7/11/2021 4:22 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
> Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness. ...and
> your lying, for that matter. More evidence of your leftism.

Did you mean to reply to me? I don't advertise a political lean, but if
I did, it would NOT be left..

[k...@notreal.com]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 02:02:47 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>
wrote:

Well, no, I thought I was replying to Markey. Sorry!

Sometimes threading doesn't (reaches a limit). Again, sorry.

[Leon]

LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.

[Bill]

Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"...
Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national
healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.

[J. Clarke]

Go over to the Washington Post site and read the comments on articles
related to smoking, COVID, and other such topics and you'll see why
there is opposition to government-provided medicine. Numerous people
are calling for denial of medical treatment to people with COVID who
can't prove that they always wore a mask in public, or to smokers, or
to the obese, or to any other group that doesn't adhere to their
personal view of morality. Essentially they want to use the medical
system to impose Puritanism.

Now, I know you're going to say "it can't ever happen"--I wouldn't
have expected transgender rights or gay marriage to ever get the
traction they are getting, so I don't buy the notion that "it can't
happen".

[Bill]

On 7/13/2021 9:39 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:42:31 -0400, Bill <none...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:
>>> On 7/13/2021 1:02 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>> On 7/11/2021 4:22 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>> Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness.  ...and
>>>>> your lying, for that matter.  More evidence of your leftism.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Did you mean to reply to me?  I don't advertise a political lean, but
>>>> if I did, it would NOT be left..
>>>
>>>
>>> LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
>>
>> Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"...
>> Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national
>> healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.
>
> Go over to the Washington Post site and read the comments on articles
> related to smoking, COVID, and other such topics and you'll see why
> there is opposition to government-provided medicine. Numerous people
> are calling for denial of medical treatment to people with COVID who
> can't prove that they always wore a mask in public, or to smokers, or
> to the obese, or to any other group that doesn't adhere to their
> personal view of morality. Essentially they want to use the medical
> system to impose Puritanism.

To my mind, a "national healthcare system" would try to eliminate
"discrimination". I think of it as a form of insurance so that we don't
have people with prescriptions they can't afford. For instance, this
week I heard about a new chemo-drug that costs $56,000/yr. I understand
that "opposition" you described, but I think expect that the overall
benefits outweigh the overall costs. It is clear that "successfully
defining morality" is a losing game, or at least one that would only
come at the cost of freedom (such as is engaged in by a few communist
countries that I can think of).

[J. Clarke]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 22:37:15 -0400, Bill <none...@att.net> wrote:

>On 7/13/2021 9:39 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:42:31 -0400, Bill <none...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 7/13/2021 1:02 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>>> On 7/11/2021 4:22 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>> Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness.  ...and
>>>>>> your lying, for that matter.  More evidence of your leftism.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you mean to reply to me?  I don't advertise a political lean, but
>>>>> if I did, it would NOT be left..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
>>>
>>> Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"...
>>> Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national
>>> healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.
>>
>> Go over to the Washington Post site and read the comments on articles
>> related to smoking, COVID, and other such topics and you'll see why
>> there is opposition to government-provided medicine. Numerous people
>> are calling for denial of medical treatment to people with COVID who
>> can't prove that they always wore a mask in public, or to smokers, or
>> to the obese, or to any other group that doesn't adhere to their
>> personal view of morality. Essentially they want to use the medical
>> system to impose Puritanism.
>
>To my mind, a "national healthcare system" would try to eliminate
>"discrimination".

Well that's another issue. Why would it try to do that? Because the
people who are pressing for it now are terminally woke? What leads
you to believe that they will stay in charge?

>I think of it as a form of insurance so that we don't
>have people with prescriptions they can't afford. For instance, this
>week I heard about a new chemo-drug that costs $56,000/yr.

What leads you to believe that that will be covered? Medicare doesn't
cover prescription meds--you have to buy your own policy for that
coverage. And don't say "Part D" until you have investigated it--you
have to pay a monthly premium for that service.

>I understand
>that "opposition" you described, but I think expect that the overall
>benefits outweigh the overall costs.

There are those who would say the same about literacy tests for
voting, to take one example. I do not favor giving the government
more tools of oppression. We already live in enough of a police
state.

>It is clear that "successfully
>defining morality" is a losing game, or at least one that would only
>come at the cost of freedom (such as is engaged in by a few communist
>countries that I can think of).

You mean at the cost of "freedumb"? That's what a lot of them are
calling it these days you know.

[Scott Lurndal]

J. Clarke <jclarke...@gmail.com> writes:
>On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:42:31 -0400, Bill <none...@att.net> wrote:

>>Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"...
>>Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national
>>healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.
>
>Go over to the Washington Post site and read the comments on articles

Why should I care about comments from idiots posting comments on
the articles?

[Michael Trew]

On 7/13/2021 6:01 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
> Well, no, I thought I was replying to Markey. Sorry!

That's what I figured, I got a chuckle. All is well.

[Michael Trew]

On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:

In the post-trump era, after the capitol insanity, I'd say I'm pretty
well firmly in the center. Both sides are nothing but greed -- it's all
about money and power. I have no political loyalty -- either party is
just moving further and further extreme. No one is for the people.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 17:19:08 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:

In this case, three lefts do *not* make a right. They make a "mostly
peaceful riot".

[k...@notreal.com]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:42:31 -0400, Bill <none...@att.net> wrote:

>On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 7/13/2021 1:02 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>>> On 7/11/2021 4:22 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>> Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness.  ...and
>>>> your lying, for that matter.  More evidence of your leftism.
>>>
>>>
>>> Did you mean to reply to me?  I don't advertise a political lean, but
>>> if I did, it would NOT be left..
>>
>>
>> LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
>
>Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"...

People aren't saints, no matter what the lefts thinks _they_ are.
That's the premise of the right. A person can be completely wrong but
as a whole they'll do the right thing (it's called "freedom" for you
lefties).

>Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national
>healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.

Nonsense. If you note what a fuckup the government's made of every
other part of our lives, we don't need any more of their help with
healthcare. After all, they've done such a good job with the VA.

No thanks!

[k...@notreal.com]

On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 22:37:15 -0400, Bill <none...@att.net> wrote:

>On 7/13/2021 9:39 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:42:31 -0400, Bill <none...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 7/13/2021 1:02 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>>> On 7/11/2021 4:22 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>> Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness.  ...and
>>>>>> your lying, for that matter.  More evidence of your leftism.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you mean to reply to me?  I don't advertise a political lean, but
>>>>> if I did, it would NOT be left..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
>>>
>>> Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"...
>>> Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national
>>> healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.
>>
>> Go over to the Washington Post site and read the comments on articles
>> related to smoking, COVID, and other such topics and you'll see why
>> there is opposition to government-provided medicine. Numerous people
>> are calling for denial of medical treatment to people with COVID who
>> can't prove that they always wore a mask in public, or to smokers, or
>> to the obese, or to any other group that doesn't adhere to their
>> personal view of morality. Essentially they want to use the medical
>> system to impose Puritanism.
>
>To my mind, a "national healthcare system" would try to eliminate
>"discrimination".

Socialism always eliminates "discrimination". The politburo members
all have their dachas with beach frontage on the Black Sea.

If you think Congress is going to get the same care as you, you're not
only blind but stupid.

[k...@notreal.com]

I keep hearing about "Medicare for All" as a lefty rallying point.
After investigating Medicare (going on it a couple of months), all I
can say is that they couldn't afford it any more than they want to
work hard enough to get a job that has health insurance.

>
>>I understand
>>that "opposition" you described, but I think expect that the overall
>>benefits outweigh the overall costs.
>
>There are those who would say the same about literacy tests for
>voting, to take one example. I do not favor giving the government
>more tools of oppression. We already live in enough of a police
>state.

And gaining more every day - the Capitol Police (not subject _any_
civilian overview) having a presence around the country - or the
spying, without court order, on US citizens inside the US.

>>It is clear that "successfully
>>defining morality" is a losing game, or at least one that would only
>>come at the cost of freedom (such as is engaged in by a few communist
>>countries that I can think of).

Utter nonsense. Each one of us does it every day. Without a common
"morality" we have nothing. Thou shalt not murder IS morality. From
there right down to the covid lockdowns, down to cigarettes. All
morality plays.

>You mean at the cost of "freedumb"? That's what a lot of them are
>calling it these days you know.
>
>>> Now, I know you're going to say "it can't ever happen"--I wouldn't
>>> have expected transgender rights or gay marriage to ever get the
>>> traction they are getting, so I don't buy the notion that "it can't
>>> happen".

That's precisely the point. Venezuela "can't happen here". "Real
communism/socialism has never been tried." Famous last words.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 15:08:25 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

True. You're here.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 11:32:28 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>
wrote:

By stating the above, you're CLEARLY not in the center. The Capitol
insanity was a minor blip compared to what happened the whole year,
all over the country, in the "mostly peaceful demonstrations".
Billions of dollars in damage and thousands (mostly minority)
businesses were burned to the ground and many killed. In the capitol
riot, only one was killed, one of the "rioters", shot in the back.

[Leon]

We need people that understand how to handle money rather than give it away.

FWIW the more you have the government do for you the more dependent you
will become on the government. That is the Democrat leadership plan.


That and give every one the right to vote, citizens and non citizens.

[Markem618]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 13:24:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:

You have to look at what the ACA has done.

More people with health care insurance, that is good.

The reduction in providers of health care insurance, is the bad.

ACA was written by the lawyers and lobbyist of the insurance
providers.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 13:33:52 -0500, Markem618 <mark...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 13:24:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>wrote:
>
>>On 7/13/2021 5:42 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 7/13/2021 1:02 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>>> On 7/11/2021 4:22 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>> Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness.  ...and
>>>>>> your lying, for that matter.  More evidence of your leftism.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you mean to reply to me?  I don't advertise a political lean, but
>>>>> if I did, it would NOT be left..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
>>>
>>> Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"...
>>> Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national
>>> healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.
>>
>>
>>We need people that understand how to handle money rather than give it away.
>>
>>FWIW the more you have the government do for you the more dependent you
>>will become on the government. That is the Democrat leadership plan.
>>
>>
>>That and give every one the right to vote, citizens and non citizens.
>
>You have to look at what the ACA has done.
>
>More people with health care insurance, that is good.

More people with unaffordable health care, that is bad. More people
spending far more with less coverage, that is bad.

>
>The reduction in providers of health care insurance, is the bad.

Loss of health care (doctors AND hospitals) in rural areas is real
bad. Corporate (hospital) takeover of private practice is real bad.
Doctors going out of business or retiring and going into other
businesses is bad.

>ACA was written by the lawyers and lobbyist of the insurance
>providers.

That's how the government works and that's how leftists want your
health care to work.

[Leon]

On 7/14/2021 1:33 PM, Markem618 wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 13:24:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 7/13/2021 5:42 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> On 7/13/2021 1:02 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>>> On 7/11/2021 4:22 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>> Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness.  ...and
>>>>>> your lying, for that matter.  More evidence of your leftism.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you mean to reply to me?  I don't advertise a political lean, but
>>>>> if I did, it would NOT be left..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
>>>
>>> Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"...
>>> Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national
>>> healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.
>>
>>
>> We need people that understand how to handle money rather than give it away.
>>
>> FWIW the more you have the government do for you the more dependent you
>> will become on the government. That is the Democrat leadership plan.
>>
>>
>> That and give every one the right to vote, citizens and non citizens.
>
> You have to look at what the ACA has done.
>
> More people with health care insurance, that is good.

Good if you can get in to actually see a doctor. I have heard that many
doctors simply do not accept insurance.

>
> The reduction in providers of health care insurance, is the bad.

Yes

[Bill]

Yes, not enough team spirit. I guess what you wrote is another of way
of expressing my thought that "neither party consists entirely of
saints!" Many of the genuinely rich don't pay their fair share of taxes
and surely there are people drawing more unemployment benefits than they
should. To be fair, not everyone starts from the same place in life, or
attends schools of the same quality. There were 3 high schools in my
hometown, and they reflected 3 socio-economic levels and 3 levels of
property taxes. Even in the 2nd one, which I attended, there were kids
boasting about family membership in the "yacht club". I was content to
come to school wearing clothes which I mostly paid for with my part time
job! : ) And I bet I learned to weld better and take care of my car
better than any of those "yacht club" kids, to say nothing of developing
some interest and knowledge about woodworking! : )

[Clare Snyder]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 19:10:33 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>

The Canadian system, is far from "perfect" but it sure beats anything
that has been implemented or proposed in the USA.

I can be guaranteed basic health care will not bankrupt me and I will
get emergency care reguardless of my ability to pay. I can buy private
insurance to enhance my basic coverage to include prescription drugs
and dental.
Drugs required for in hospital treatment are covered as are many drugs
for seniors.

[Michael Trew]

OK, more of a back story... I always leaned conservative, and I voted
for Trump. I have ZERO tolerance for the insane left push back after
the George Floyd thing was blown WAY out of proportion. I would have
taken care of those rioters very quickly after they started looting and
burning cities down... pop, pop, pop...

Now then, after how Trump has reacted since losing the election, the
whole of the Republican party with him, I rethinking my political
beliefs. I never had a tolerance for Democrats. Then, after seeing how
Republicans can just "oust" Liz Cheney, amongst other things... I've
realized that neither side is any better than the other, they are all
crooks and thieves. Political parts are a cancer to our country, and
should be abolished.

[Michael Trew]

My high school was in a very small town - only one school. We were all
poor :)

Yes, I'd agree with you about "saints". I'll take it a step further
though -- I think that political parties are a menace, and should be
done away with. Vote people in based on their beliefs... they shouldn't
have to sell their soul and morals to one of the big two parties...
least they be silenced by their party after stepping out of line.

[Bill]

Do away with lobbyists and "payola" and get rid of the marketplace upon
which politicians can sell their souls, and maybe that will help. I
merely described a strategy to help to solve the problem that some of us
have observed.

There has been a lot of effort to give corporations the same rights of
people, except corporations don't go to jail. For instance, if a
corporation pollutes a river, they may pay a fine, but they basically
may get away with it. If an individual (as recklessly) caused the same
"damage", they would be in jail. One can think of numerous examples like
this, with some involving the mistreatment of people as well.

[Scott Lurndal]

Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> writes:
>On 7/14/2021 1:33 PM, Markem618 wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 13:24:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>

>>

>> You have to look at what the ACA has done.
>>
>> More people with health care insurance, that is good.
>
>Good if you can get in to actually see a doctor. I have heard that many
>doctors simply do not accept insurance.

I haven't heard that, nor have I ever experienced it.

[Leon]

My doctor considered not taking me as a patient unless I paid cash. My
father was already a patient so he made an exception.

There are several groups of doctors that refuse insurance and offer you
a more realistic cost but only accept cash/credit card. They team up
with specific pharmacies and labs and some hospitals that work together.
That has been going on since the mid 90's that I know of.

Insurance introduces a middle man that is making a large sum of the
money. Doctors, pay a lot for personnel to process insurance claims so
that they actually get paid.

So basically medical costs are expensive BECAUSE they have to make up
for the discounts that they have to give to the insurance company.
Typically the insurance company gets a discount from the cost that a
medical provider charges. Because most people have insurance the
medical provider has to increase what they charge to the uninsured to be
able get what they need, to stay in business, from the insurance company.

My insurance provider gives me a break down of all medical costs and
drug costs. They show what they were billed and they show what they
actually paid. Most often the medical provider gets about 30~40% of
what they billed the insurance company for.

The groups of doctors I mentioned above don't accept insurance because
they charge their cash/credit card customers the amount that they would
have been paid by the insurance company. And in turn they don't need
staff to process insurance claims.

Many years ago most people could afford medical costs because insurance
companies were not involved. And eventually the company you worked for
provided free medical insurance and that all went out the door.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:13:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:

>On 7/15/2021 9:19 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> writes:
>>> On 7/14/2021 1:33 PM, Markem618 wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 13:24:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>
>>>>
>>>> You have to look at what the ACA has done.
>>>>
>>>> More people with health care insurance, that is good.
>>>
>>> Good if you can get in to actually see a doctor. I have heard that many
>>> doctors simply do not accept insurance.
>>
>> I haven't heard that, nor have I ever experienced it.
>>
>
>
>My doctor considered not taking me as a patient unless I paid cash. My
>father was already a patient so he made an exception.

My PCP would not take on any new Medicare or Medicaid patients unless
they'd been patients before going on government programs. When
Obamacare came along, he closed is doors and went into a concierge
practice. He couldn't afford to keep his office open. Independent
doctors only got paid half what hospitals got paid for the same thing.
That's why so many practices have been gobbled up by hospitals. It's
not an accident.

>
>There are several groups of doctors that refuse insurance and offer you
>a more realistic cost but only accept cash/credit card. They team up
>with specific pharmacies and labs and some hospitals that work together.
> That has been going on since the mid 90's that I know of.

Yes, concierge medicine isn't anything new. The normal mode is that
an annual fee is charged (in the case above, $2400/person) and that
covered everything a PCP would get into. Of course it didn't cover
surgery (PCPs don't do surgery).

>Insurance introduces a middle man that is making a large sum of the
>money. Doctors, pay a lot for personnel to process insurance claims so
>that they actually get paid.

The government adds a *lot* more. The whole "coding" nightmare caused
more doctors to sell out.

>So basically medical costs are expensive BECAUSE they have to make up
>for the discounts that they have to give to the insurance company.
>Typically the insurance company gets a discount from the cost that a
>medical provider charges. Because most people have insurance the
>medical provider has to increase what they charge to the uninsured to be
>able get what they need, to stay in business, from the insurance company.

I have some numbers for that. It's >50%. Government also imposes
rules that make insurance (as opposed to medicine) far more expensive,
like insurance across state lines.

>My insurance provider gives me a break down of all medical costs and
>drug costs. They show what they were billed and they show what they
>actually paid. Most often the medical provider gets about 30~40% of
>what they billed the insurance company for.

That's about right.

>The groups of doctors I mentioned above don't accept insurance because
>they charge their cash/credit card customers the amount that they would
>have been paid by the insurance company. And in turn they don't need
>staff to process insurance claims.
>
>Many years ago most people could afford medical costs because insurance
>companies were not involved. And eventually the company you worked for
>provided free medical insurance and that all went out the door.

Again, the government had its fingers in that too.

There's Medicare/Medicaid with their rules about things like
kick-backs. With my employer-sponsored insurance one of my drugs'
street price is about $450/month (a *very* common drug). My cost,
through my employer is something like $40 (I can't remember exactly).
The drug company kicks back, to me, everything the insurance company
doesn't pay, except $10. The bottom line is that when I go to the
drug store, I pay $10. When I go on Medicare, that kickback is
illegal. There is a whole basket of similar rules that just cost up
money.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 02:53:09 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>

OK, but that's where we were and that's where we *ARE*. If you accept
that, and you are, you are left.

>Now then, after how Trump has reacted since losing the election, the
>whole of the Republican party with him, I rethinking my political
>beliefs.

Reacted? Mean twitter posts?

>I never had a tolerance for Democrats. Then, after seeing how
>Republicans can just "oust" Liz Cheney, amongst other things...

Exactly what's wrong with "ousting" Liz?

>I've
>realized that neither side is any better than the other, they are all
>crooks and thieves. Political parts are a cancer to our country, and
>should be abolished.

There is no middle in this one.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 02:55:59 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>
wrote:

So you're against free speech and assembly, too. OK, you're going
further and further left.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 04:08:37 -0400, Bill <none...@att.net> wrote:

>On 7/15/2021 2:55 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>> On 7/14/2021 9:54 PM, Bill wrote:
>
>> My high school was in a very small town - only one school.  We were all
>> poor :)
>>
>> Yes, I'd agree with you about "saints".  I'll take it a step further
>> though -- I think that political parties are a menace, and should be
>> done away with.  Vote people in based on their beliefs... they shouldn't
>> have to sell their soul and morals to one of the big two parties...
>> least they be silenced by their party after stepping out of line.
>
>Do away with lobbyists and "payola" and get rid of the marketplace upon
>which politicians can sell their souls, and maybe that will help. I
>merely described a strategy to help to solve the problem that some of us
>have observed.

More free speech, gone.

>
>There has been a lot of effort to give corporations the same rights of
>people, except corporations don't go to jail. For instance, if a
>corporation pollutes a river, they may pay a fine, but they basically
>may get away with it. If an individual (as recklessly) caused the same
>"damage", they would be in jail. One can think of numerous examples like
>this, with some involving the mistreatment of people as well.

Their "pesonhood" is a legal fiction. The people *owning* the
corporations are not.

[Clare Snyder]

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:13:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:

Good reason to get the insurance companies out of the look with a
"single payer system"

[Leon]

Precicely

[k...@notreal.com]

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 16:41:41 -0400, Clare Snyder <cl...@snyder.on.ca>
wrote:

And the US government has done *such* a good job. Politicizing
healthcare. What a *dumb* idea. "You don't believe in CRT, no
surgery for you!"

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 7/15/2021 2:19 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:

>
>> I never had a tolerance for Democrats. Then, after seeing how
>> Republicans can just "oust" Liz Cheney, amongst other things...
>
> Exactly what's wrong with "ousting" Liz?

What is wrong with her having an opinion and stating it?

>
>> I've
>> realized that neither side is any better than the other, they are all
>> crooks and thieves. Political parts are a cancer to our country, and
>> should be abolished.
>
> There is no middle in this one.
>

No, there is not. I've been a registered Independent all my adult life.
Conservative leanings, but the party of Eisenhower has gone nuts.

[Bill]

Interesting perspective. I think both parties have evolved to be
extreme. There is probably some game-theoretic explanation, like there
is for there being exactly 2 principle parties (the idea is that if you
have more than 2, say 3, then 2 of them will join forces to beat the third).

[Leon]

What has gone wrong is a great lack of pride and duty in both parties.

BUT who can blame them, they are not accountable and are fixed for life
after being elected. Who cares if the country goes to hell in a hand
basket, we are exempt!

So to join the club, lets make it to where no one has to provide any
shred of proof that they are eligible to vote. In fact, let any one
that walks up to a voting machine vote, especially those that believe
that the government is going to hand out money for doing nothing.

[Scott Lurndal]

Indeed. And "Many years ago" there was no laproscopic surgery, there
was no open heart surgery and vast numbers of diseases had no effective
treatment. Modern imaging techniques did not exist (from CAT/PET/MRI
scanning to ultransonic imaging).

And many years ago, those who could not afford it (and they were legion),
simply died.

[Scott Lurndal]

The latest presidential poll by historians was recently released.

There are only two modern republican presidents in the top 10
(DDE and RR). The next modern republican, GHWB, hits 21 (WJC is 19),
and Ford (28), Shrub (29) and Nixon (31). DJT is four from the
bottom (41).

On the other side you have JFK (8), Obama (10), Johnson (11),
Clinton (19) and Carter (26). I note that Carter, the traditional
whipping boy of foaming-at-the-mouth republicans (like KRW) beats
out all the non-top-10 republicans except for GHWB.

https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall

And personally, having voted through the 80's, RR is overrated IMO.

[Ed Pawlowski]

A quick way to improve things it to get rid on any politician that made
the national news in the past six months. That would include Chuck and
Nancy, McConnell, Cruz, Graham, AOC and a few others.

Note that I said "improve" rather than fix. Not sure Congress is truly
fixable.

[k...@notreal.com]

Yeah, and the party of AOC is perfectly sane. That tells us all we
need to know about you!

[k...@notreal.com]

The extreme of saving personal rights and
the extreme of the collective - Maoism.

[Leon]

No doubt. Those trying to right the wrongs hurt feelings.

Those the simply print more money to pay for those that want to be
supported by the government naturally gain popularity.

[Leon]

Until our government leaders have to live by the standards that they
impose on their subjects nothing will get better.

[Leon]

Every one dies. And one day "our times" will look barbaric because we
all did not live to be 150 years old. Life simply is not seemingly fair
to every one.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Yes, it show you are dumb making such conclusions.

[Scott Lurndal]

Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> writes:
>On 7/16/2021 9:40 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Bill <none...@att.net> writes:
>>> On 7/15/2021 9:06 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> On 7/15/2021 2:19 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>
>>> Interesting perspective. I think both parties have evolved to be
>>> extreme. There is probably some game-theoretic explanation, like there
>>> is for there being exactly 2 principle parties (the idea is that if you
>>> have more than 2, say 3, then 2 of them will join forces to beat the third).
>>
>> The latest presidential poll by historians was recently released.
>>
>> There are only two modern republican presidents in the top 10
>> (DDE and RR). The next modern republican, GHWB, hits 21 (WJC is 19),
>> and Ford (28), Shrub (29) and Nixon (31). DJT is four from the
>> bottom (41).
>>
>> On the other side you have JFK (8), Obama (10), Johnson (11),
>> Clinton (19) and Carter (26). I note that Carter, the traditional
>> whipping boy of foaming-at-the-mouth republicans (like KRW) beats
>> out all the non-top-10 republicans except for GHWB.
>
>No doubt. Those trying to right the wrongs hurt feelings.

The presidential historians don't care about feelings, hurt or
otherwise. They look at the entire term, all aspects of the
presidency, accomplishments, failures. It's not a popularity
contest.

https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall

[Leon]

Historians typically lean to see things with a left sided point of view.
As does the media.

Trump was pretty popular with a border wall going up to regulate the
inflow of undocumented people. Lowest unemployment in modern history,
maybe ever. And then the dream come true for the Democrats, Covid.

The fact that Jimmy Carter is in the middle of the list is a certain
sign that the numbers are what some one wants them to look like. Worst
and most ineffective president ever.

These numbers come from biased stories. It will not be long before
modern day citizens will want their statues torn down. Lets burn and
destroy our history so we can repeat it again.

[Bill]

On 7/16/2021 10:40 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Bill <none...@att.net> writes:
>> On 7/15/2021 9:06 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 7/15/2021 2:19 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I never had a tolerance for Democrats.  Then, after seeing how
>>>>> Republicans can just "oust" Liz Cheney, amongst other things...
>>>>
>>>> Exactly what's wrong with "ousting" Liz?
>>>
>>> What is wrong with her having an opinion and stating it?
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I've
>>>>> realized that neither side is any better than the other, they are all
>>>>> crooks and thieves.  Political parts are a cancer to our country, and
>>>>> should be abolished.
>>>>
>>>> There is no middle in this one.
>>>>
>>> No, there is not.  I've been a registered Independent all my adult life.
>>>  Conservative leanings, but the party of Eisenhower has gone nuts.
>>>
>>
>> Interesting perspective. I think both parties have evolved to be
>> extreme. There is probably some game-theoretic explanation, like there
>> is for there being exactly 2 principle parties (the idea is that if you
>> have more than 2, say 3, then 2 of them will join forces to beat the third).
>
> The latest presidential poll by historians was recently released.
>
> There are only two modern republican presidents in the top 10
> (DDE and RR).

Well, consider that those that voted are all "academics", and that
universities seems to be hot-spots for democratic ideology.

[Scott Lurndal]

Have you ever really studied history? Or are you just parroting the
Republican party line?

Do you have any evidence at all to support your assertion?

[Scott Lurndal]

Again with this nonsense. There's no evidence that historians
lean in any particular direction as a group, nor is there any
evidence that universities lean one way or the other as a whole.

[Leon]

For the era's that I am referencing above, I not only studied but lived
and experienced that history.

Just take the Mexico to Texas illegal border crossings. That was under
much better control under Trump.

Now that Biden has resumed importing future voters the Illegal border
crossings have hit hundreds of thousands per MONTH.

That is enough people to populate a small city every month. Extend that
out a year and that populates a city that probably will fall in the
largest 10 cities in the US. Go 3 years and you have filled a city with
only New York City being larger. And all of these figures are actually
coming from the biased news coverage at the borders.

No one believes this to be untrue and no one believes that the lowest
unemployment in their life times, during Trump before Covid, was untrue.

[Leon]

+50,000

[Leon]

How long has it been since you were in college? My son graduated with
his Masters about 11 years ago. He did well, 3 professors perused
trying to have him to change his major, one of those wanted him to go
for his doctorate and teach at that university/college. He very often
commented that most of his professors leaned left with their comparisons
and comments during their lectures. I am guessing I am saying he was
smart enough to notice that as opposed to many of the left persuasion
students thinking that the lectures were what they normally hear in
their circles.

[Scott Lurndal]

What era is referred to above? And unless you formally studied history at the post
secondary level, you're not an historian, nor have you any idea
what an historian does.

[Leon]

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.
Experience trumps, no pun intended, any thing that is written.

[k...@notreal.com]

Today, there ARE only two choices. Yours is clear.

[Michael Trew]

On 7/15/2021 2:19 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 02:53:09 -0400, Michael Trew<mt99...@ymail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 7/14/2021 12:45 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 11:32:28 -0400, Michael Trew<mt99...@ymail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>> On 7/13/2021 1:02 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/11/2021 4:22 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
>>>>>>> Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness. ...and
>>>>>>> your lying, for that matter. More evidence of your leftism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you mean to reply to me? I don't advertise a political lean, but
>>>>>> if I did, it would NOT be left..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
>>>>
>>>> In the post-trump era, after the capitol insanity, I'd say I'm pretty
>>>> well firmly in the center. Both sides are nothing but greed -- it's all
>>>> about money and power. I have no political loyalty -- either party is
>>>> just moving further and further extreme. No one is for the people.
>>>
>>>
>>> By stating the above, you're CLEARLY not in the center. The Capitol
>>> insanity was a minor blip compared to what happened the whole year,
>>> all over the country, in the "mostly peaceful demonstrations".
>>> Billions of dollars in damage and thousands (mostly minority)
>>> businesses were burned to the ground and many killed. In the capitol
>>> riot, only one was killed, one of the "rioters", shot in the back.
>>
>>
>> OK, more of a back story... I always leaned conservative, and I voted
>> for Trump. I have ZERO tolerance for the insane left push back after
>> the George Floyd thing was blown WAY out of proportion. I would have
>> taken care of those rioters very quickly after they started looting and
>> burning cities down... pop, pop, pop...
>
> OK, but that's where we were and that's where we *ARE*. If you accept
> that, and you are, you are left.
>
>> Now then, after how Trump has reacted since losing the election, the
>> whole of the Republican party with him, I rethinking my political
>> beliefs.
>
> Reacted? Mean twitter posts?

>
>> I never had a tolerance for Democrats. Then, after seeing how
>> Republicans can just "oust" Liz Cheney, amongst other things...
>
> Exactly what's wrong with "ousting" Liz?
>

>> I've
>> realized that neither side is any better than the other, they are all
>> crooks and thieves. Political parts are a cancer to our country, and
>> should be abolished.
>
> There is no middle in this one.

You clearly have your beliefs, and I have mine. I don't have to justify
my beliefs to someone on Usenet, nor do I have to accept your beliefs.

You have a certain way about posting that you antagonize and very much
attempt to coax a response out of the other party. You are an
instigator, and LOVE to argue. I'll have to pass on that, thanks.

[Michael Trew]

On 7/15/2021 2:20 PM, k...@notreal.com wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 02:55:59 -0400, Michael Trew<mt99...@ymail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 7/14/2021 9:54 PM, Bill wrote:

>>> On 7/14/2021 11:32 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>> On 7/13/2021 6:19 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>>> LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
>>>>
>>>> In the post-trump era, after the capitol insanity, I'd say I'm pretty
>>>> well firmly in the center. Both sides are nothing but greed -- it's
>>>> all about money and power. I have no political loyalty -- either
>>>> party is just moving further and further extreme. No one is for the
>>>> people.
>>>

>>> Yes, not enough team spirit. I guess what you wrote is another of way of
>>> expressing my thought that "neither party consists entirely of saints!"
>>> Many of the genuinely rich don't pay their fair share of taxes and
>>> surely there are people drawing more unemployment benefits than they
>>> should. To be fair, not everyone starts from the same place in life, or
>>> attends schools of the same quality. There were 3 high schools in my
>>> hometown, and they reflected 3 socio-economic levels and 3 levels of
>>> property taxes. Even in the 2nd one, which I attended, there were kids
>>> boasting about family membership in the "yacht club". I was content to
>>> come to school wearing clothes which I mostly paid for with my part time
>>> job! : ) And I bet I learned to weld better and take care of my car
>>> better than any of those "yacht club" kids, to say nothing of developing
>>> some interest and knowledge about woodworking! : )
>>
>>
>> My high school was in a very small town - only one school. We were all
>> poor :)
>>
>> Yes, I'd agree with you about "saints". I'll take it a step further
>> though -- I think that political parties are a menace, and should be
>> done away with. Vote people in based on their beliefs... they shouldn't
>> have to sell their soul and morals to one of the big two parties...
>> least they be silenced by their party after stepping out of line.
>
> So you're against free speech and assembly, too. OK, you're going
> further and further left.


Not in the slightest, further Libertarian. I'm not in the slightest
against free speech, I'm not sure where you pulled that convoluted
notion from. It isn't black and white, but it seems that you like it
that way with Dems vs. Repubs. Why have more parties and options when
it can just be two sets of assholes on opposite sides of the political
spectrum arguing with each other all day all the while getting nothing
done? That's a solid idea that you have there.

[Michael Trew]

It seems that your definition of "left" is synonymous with "bad", and
anyone that doesn't directly agree with your specific mindset is "left".
Gotcha, makes perfect sense now.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Thanks for showing your ignorance.

The ballot has many choices. In the last presidential election I chose
Not Trump. There are people on both sides I'd never vote for.

I make my own choices and don't follow the lead of Putin.

[J. Clarke]

The problem is that if a bunch of people choose different "not Trumps"
then Trump wins.

[Ed Pawlowski]

He didn't though. Both parties had better candidates in the Primary but
they didn't make it.

Both parties have been taken over by the extremists. My issue is that
because I did not vote for Trump someone made the assumption I support
AOC. An incredibly dumb assumption.

[Scott Lurndal]

Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> writes:

>> What era is referred to above? And unless you formally studied history at the post
>> secondary level, you're not an historian, nor have you any idea
>> what an historian does.
>>
>
>If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.
>Experience trumps, no pun intended, any thing that is written.

Your experience is too limited to extrapolate beyond yourself.

That's the difference between you and a real historian.

The state is far bigger than Houston.
The Country is far bigger than Texas.
The World is far bigger than the USA.
The Solar system is far bigger than the Earth.
The Galaxy is far bigger than the Solar System.
The Universe is far bigger than the Galaxy.

[DerbyDad03]

As much as I try to stay out of political discussions in a woodworking
newsgroup, I have to give you a huge +1 on that comment.

Where it gets even more tiresome is when the discussion isn't even related
to politics. Two people are going back and forth on a non-political issue, it
gets heated and someone (even in this newsgroup) comes back with "You're
an idiot, just like all leftists."

I wonder if those people do the same thing when they are sitting around the
table with family and friends. I truly believe that the anonymity of the internet
makes it too easy for people to say things that they would never say to the
same person if they were face to face. They might discuss the same topic, but
they would be a lot more civil about.

(Let's see what I get called for making these comments.)

[Markem618]

+100

[Clare Snyder]

On Sun, 18 Jul 2021 11:01:23 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<teama...@eznet.net> wrote:

Naive for thinking the idiots don't do it to their families' faces?

How's that?

[J. Clarke]

On Sun, 18 Jul 2021 15:42:37 -0400, Clare Snyder <cl...@snyder.on.ca>
wrote:

The ones that bug me go something like:
My cat has fleas--what should I do about it?
<semiproductive discussion of flea powder vs flea dip vs flea collar
vs other flea remedies ensues>
TRUMP CAUSED IT!
And that's the end of that discussion.

[Michael Trew]

Yes, this +1

[Michael Trew]

On 7/18/2021 2:01 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> I wonder if those people do the same thing when they are sitting around the
> table with family and friends. I truly believe that the anonymity of the internet
> makes it too easy for people to say things that they would never say to the
> same person if they were face to face. They might discuss the same topic, but
> they would be a lot more civil about.

Absolutely! I've been saying this for years. When there is no face to
the name, people get bold. I am who I am; I'm not much different in person.

[k...@notreal.com]

Yes, You voted FOR the totalitarian far, whacko, left. As I said,
there are only two choices. You showed how stupid one ca be.

>
>I make my own choices and don't follow the lead of Putin.

Y
WOW! What a DUMBFUCK! Y
You clearly have no clue.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Sat, 17 Jul 2021 22:39:36 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>

Facts are not "beliefs".

>You have a certain way about posting that you antagonize and very much
>attempt to coax a response out of the other party. You are an
>instigator, and LOVE to argue. I'll have to pass on that, thanks.

Don't read my posts and STFU.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Sat, 17 Jul 2021 22:46:01 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>

Then you aren't paying attention.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Sat, 17 Jul 2021 22:47:13 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>

Evidently nothing makes perfect sense to you.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Sun, 18 Jul 2021 20:57:54 -0400, Michael Trew <mt99...@ymail.com>
wrote:

Neither am I. I call a spade a fuck'in shovel when it is. It is.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Sun, 18 Jul 2021 14:59:35 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

...and the lefty's brain is smaller than an electron.

[DerbyDad03]

There - that's better. Now we're having an intelligent, fact based discussion.

Oh...wait...nevermind.

[Markem618]

I found censoring works well.

[Ed Pawlowski]

I can say the same about you. I'm guessing you voted for the wannabe
dictator.

I do understand your sentiments though, if you can't give a reasoned
argument, call people names.

Oh, you still don't know who I voted for, you are making assumptions.

[k...@notreal.com]

On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 12:50:25 -0500, Markem618 <mark...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

That's exactly what leftist's do. You should work for Facebook.

[k...@notreal.com]

Now *THAT'S* funny. We have one now.

>I do understand your sentiments though, if you can't give a reasoned
>argument, call people names.

Typing left-haned has its drawbacks but truth, is.

>Oh, you still don't know who I voted for, you are making assumptions.

And Dont give a shit but it's pretty clear.