virgil

I never said it was the same thing. But, it's not that far off. What do you see as the big differences?

The entire world recognizes the German system as a model of quality and efficiency. How can you see such a thing as an assault on your freedom? This is the part that I don't understand. I'm amazed at the way people can be influenced to vote against their own best interests with fear tactics and buzz words like 'freedom'.

From my own experience, pavers are usually not set in thinset or any other mortar. They're usually laid over a layer of gravel or road base and then a layer of sand. They can be laid over concrete, but you'd still use the layer of sand.

Just ckecked back in. Sits in Trees answered it for me. thanks.

It sounds like your former employer made a cost cutting decision. How is that the government's fault and not the company's?

You believe that the government will take care of you and has nothing but your best interest at heart and will give you the best care no matter what isn't that so? And I don't blieve that for a second, I choose to look at their track record and have no choice but to believe that countless American people will be denied health care while costs skyrocket. Under Obama care we will all lose excepting maybe a few poor soles or lazy individuals who might see a moderate increase in health care so long as they don't have a major illness. No, i never said that. What you're forgetting is that 'obamacare' does not imply that there will be only one option for coverage. it just assures that everyone will have coverage. private health insurance is not being eliminated. if you currently have coverage, noone is going to take it away.

You misunderstood. After you're discharged from the hospital, you receive a survey in the mail that asks you to answer questions and rate your care. The scores are compared with other hospitals(hospitals that perform best receive full reimbursement, hospitals that underperform are paid less)- it's intended to measure the patient's perception of the care he/she received. Think of it as a customer satisfaction survey. As far as who determines medical protocols- the AMA and various medical specialty boards will continue to do that.

the policy holder makes the payment. what is your point?

either from insurance premiums or the medicare/medicaid program.

Why don't you actually learn about it before you trash it and accuse anyone of being gullible. I didn't accuse you of being ignorant- so don't accuse me of being gullible. I'm actually quite familiar with it. 'Waste' is defined according to medical protocols for specific diagnoses. Actually, patient surveys play a huge role in determining 'quality' under the new system. And as far as the 'kick 'em out of the hospital to save money' statement- i know this is a popular one from people who are unhappy with the healthcare industry- but, premature discharges from hospitals leads to re-admissions; and re-admissions have a drastic negative impact on hospital reimbursement. It's a popular rant, but not really accurate.

You guys do make a good point- there is a lot of waste. I work in healthcare and I'd be the first to admit it. The other side of the 'waste' issue is that our country is so litigious that doctors overprescribe tests and meds just to minimize their exposure to lawsuits- they're in a no-win situation. But, if you look into 'obamacare', you'll see that the industry is going to be re-focused on what they're calling 'pay for performance', which requires hospitals and clinicians to decrease waste and improve performance in order to be fully reimbursed for services. The idea is that costs will be lowered due to a combination of reducing reimbursement and improving efficiency and quality. It puts a lot of pressure on hospitals.

I think you said at the beginning of this thread that the ledger board was going to be set on the concrete. If it's not actually attached to the house, you may not need a permit. If I misunderstood, my apologies.

the word 'free' should have been in quotes. that's all. other than that, i stand by the statement. your inability to distinguish the difference between 'government funded' and 'government run' is not my problem.

What is a "third party payor"? Is that a code word for the "working slob that pays taxes so people like Virgil can sit around and benefit from it?" Examples of a third party payor are private insurance companies, HMO's, Medicare/Medicaid, etc. My guess is that your description of yourelf as a slob is accurate. But, what makes you think that I personally would 'sit around and benefit from it'? Or, is that just another stupid insult or accusation?

Don't worry about 'the Obamacare side of the audience'- I have a feeling that they don't need things explained to them the way you seem to. Doctors and hospitals get paid directly by the third party payor- the patient receives an EOB(explanation of benefits) in the mail, not a bill.

Woofer, you're intentionally playing dumb (maybe, maybe not). I did use the word 'free'- as in, there'd be no payment required. You knew what I meant and you're just trying to twist it into something else.

Again, stupid assumptions and accusations.

You make a lot of assumptions and stupid accusations. You've hijacked and ruined another thread on this site. Congratulations.

The biggest problem now is simply the number of people working for the government. They are a voting block that can start to sway elections. Right, you guys would never support the idea of voting blocks who can influence elections according to their own interests- unless, of course you were a proud member of that organization.

What part of the constitution are you referring to?

Taxes have always been used to fund government programs for the common good. It is your opinion that this program is unconstitutional. It's your oppinion that it's for the common good. Yes. I do believe that we will be a better country if everyone has health insurance.

Taxes have always been used to fund government programs for the common good. It is your opinion that this program is unconstitutional.

Dave, I sight references from objective sources in some of my posts to show that there is fact behind the statement, not just my personal opinion. It's common practice in any journalistic or professional context. Ask anyone who went to college.

Nice job Dave. When you are once again found to be spouting off without any fact or logic behind your statements, you can always respond with childish insults and accusations. Stick with your stengths.

The point is that, even though you haven't read it, you still don't hesitate to post something that is inaccurate and misleading. Would you have still made that post if you knew that in fact this 'tax' was only on capital gains of over $500k and only applied to individuals who earn over $200k or married couples who earn over $250k? I just think that you should actually know what you're talking about before posting something. People are easily mislead, obviously.