kapkomet

1:30 AM and 86 degrees outside. Summertime!

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 17, 2009 -> 07:54 PM) Post what you post, being in heated arguments is fine, nobody in here should be taking anything personally. We're all friends in here even when we fight. That statement is intended for people who post things on purpose only to make another poster mad. Well s***, neither BigSqwert nor I could ever post to one another. Of course, 99% of the time I laugh when I read his posts... except when I'm in a bad mood, which does happen very occasionally.

I do want to give Obama credit for one thing, if this is true: Supposedly, he called Twitter, who had scheduled a maintenance window during all this Iran stuff, and asked them to postpone their server work so that the Iranian people could continue to communicate. I guess this is one of the main ways that the Iranians have been able to communicate and their government can't shut down as easily. If he did this, yep, that's "meddling", and I approve. And I'm posting it here so you Dems see this.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 17, 2009 -> 07:13 AM) Why don't you just admit that this is one of those scenarios that no matter what the Obama administration does or does not do, you and the GOP pundits have an excuse to rip him to shreds. No one else dares question Comrade Obama... *clicks heels three times and goosesteps to 'Hail to the Chief'* all while saying "there's no place like Washington" over and over.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 17, 2009 -> 07:07 AM) Coming from the guy who's been in lock step with every GOP talking point since 1975. Then you clearly don't know how to read. I disagree with the GOP quite a bit, actually.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 09:34 PM) You're capable of rational thought, obviously. I'm just spoon-fed. I'm unable to interpret on my own whether or not the U.S. government saying it actively supports Iran would be a good thing or a bad thing. The problem is, Balta, that Obama already did, sort of, on Friday - he was pretty damn quick on the trigger when he thought he could take credit for Imanutjob possibly being defeated (of course, it all had to do with his Cairo speech - arrogane piece of s***, but that's another post somewhere else. You can make a nice, generic statement, which is pretty much exactly what Mike Pence did, saying that the US does not support violence or repression - and let's be fair about it - which we all know won't happen anyway. That's it. You don't "pick sides" by saying that. Saying NOTHING does pick a side, because honestly, Obama has something to say about everything in the world to any camera that moves but he can't talk about this? He's already got skin in the game by promoting the fact that he will engage the (current) regime no matter what, even if they brutally kill people who dare oppose them in their own country.

QUOTE (BearSox @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 07:17 PM) Why is no one reporting this: http://www.infowars.com/service-inspector-...-kevin-johnson/ Because he's going to funnel s***loads of money through AmeriCorps to get community organizers in place, this had to be done to get his own guy in.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 10:44 PM) Yes of course, opponents of a central health care policy will look for 'support' anywhere they can find it. I'm just saying from my point of view, I can support a plan but it NEEDS to have cost cutting measures in the forefront. A hybrid plan of super high prices with the tax payers fitting the bill is the worst scenerio. Imagine the gouging we will see, everyone can go to the doc for free, yet the doctor may charge anything they please. The costs will spiral out of control, even worse than they are now! Just saying. The only way to cut costs by bringing in 16-20 million more people (this is the real number, not the bulls*** 46.6 or 50 million number) is to DRASTICALLY reduce services provided. There is NO other way. I still say that there can be cost controls put in place without a government takeover.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 10:27 PM) The current difference is the person gets treatment and it eventually gets paid for. The insurance companies will fight it out but someone will pay. Usually there is a settlement and they both will incur some of the cost. It's not the sickest and the weakest that aren't unisured it's the poor. So the group btyou are talking about is smaller than just sick and weak. They are currenly being treated because if they go to an emergency room by law they get treatment for emergancy procedures. The government alonmg with you and I already foot the bill for that. Insurance companies do deny treament but it will get much much worse under a universal health care sytem where one person will decide on treatment for everyone not just the group in the insurance plan. I'm not for any plan that universally does anything. There is too much power and too much decision making in too few hands. This is usually a recipe for disaster. I don't have the final answer but I think it should somehow revolve around health care savings accounts. Instead of insurance (except catastrophic), the money that goes to insurance should go into a tax free account. Much of the high cost of insurance goes to operation and lag time costs. This would be greatly reduced with cash payments. Current users of this system usually get a 60%-70% discount on thier medical bills for the reasons I've stated. Being in the medical field and seeing it daily, it makes the most practical sense. For people below the poverty line maybe the government could use some of the welfare or such money and deposit it an account for the person and earmark it ofr healthcare. Just some ideas for change, the system, just like the law sytem does suck but it still the best and markedly better than auniversal healthcare sytem. Good post. Clearly, what we have is not perfect but it is far better then anything else in the world, no matter what propaganda the left wants to spoon feed people with.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 08:24 PM) Didn't we just finish spelling out why that was a bad idea? It doesn't or wouldn't change your reaction. It's all in how you're spoon fed.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 06:36 PM) Lost, I think Congressman Pence deserves our smiley. Yep - and if Obama said this, you would be slurping it up. This doesn't say a damn thing that means anything except to say we hope for an accurate vote over there. *gasp* a "Conservative" said this, let's put the figurative gun to our head!!

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 07:04 PM) Look, when you buy a service normally, what do you do? You shop, possibly compare or research, and then you buy. You can choose a product, choose a seller, work the price and quality... these key aspects to any market product are GONE with the insurance companies between you (the patient/consumer) and the providers. That pretty much ruins the whole thing. But of course, we can't just get rid of insurance of some kind, because most people can't afford the huge, unexpected and uneven expenses. One POSSIBLE solution is government provided healthcare via taxes, as you support. But that is NOT the only possible solution. Thank you. Again, (again and again and again) - the government is also the major problem in the CURRENT system. I'll wait for a bit longer to see if anyone sniffs it out. Probably not, because it would admit that the current hurry up and run for this, get it passed, and we'll pay for it somehow f***ed up government of ours is wrong. Very wrong.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 01:33 PM) i have very limited doctor interaction, thank goodness, but here is a recent experience my wife and I went through. we went to a "family planning" doctor. The visit lasted about 45 minutes where we sat down with the doctor to discuss issues and potential remedies. My wife had a quick 5 minute "women visit" and we left on our marry way. The doctor charged her insurance company $1,200 for the visit. Just remember: the current system was created by the government in the first place. So, "universal health care" is going to solve it all and "reduce costs". Riiiiiiiight. Let's see if some of you libs know your health care history.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 11:07 AM) Let's review. El Paso and McAllen are roughly equal when it comes to demographics, including non-English speakers, and illegal immigrants. They offer roughly the same services, and have tort reform legislation in place. So straw man #1: Blood sucking Lawyers - not an issue. Straw Man #2: Illegal "They took our jooobbbssss" immigrants - not an issue. McAllen ranks below El Paso in quality of service across the board. Yet charges twice as much to Medicare. Is it a lack of regulation keeping costs reasonable in McAllen? Is it that El Paso just hasn't caught up in charging as much? Or should health care just be this expensive? It's probably because McAllen docs found dx codes they could charge more for using the same services. Hence, my arguement made in the first post of this thread: diagnosis codes need to be consistent, not cherry picked for higher reimbursement - although I made my living off of it for a while, it's not right.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Jun 16, 2009 -> 07:52 AM) If you wanna match anecdote for anecdote, explain why McAllen, Texas is among the most expensive cities in the country for healthcare - and yet Texas has the very same malpractice reform that people who whine about malpractice reform want? I'll type this slow so no one misses is. I-L-L-E-G-A-L-S. Boy, that was a hard answer.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jun 15, 2009 -> 02:26 PM) If you decided to move to Paris would you only want to learn French if they declared it the official language? I don't see how something like this will determine whether you decide to learn the predominant language of a country. We agree on something. Is it cold in the flamethrower today?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 15, 2009 -> 10:34 AM) If I didn't like having pointless arguments with you, baiting you, or chasing you in circles, I wouldn't do it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 15, 2009 -> 11:27 AM) Efficiency = providing coverage for everyone. Think about this...how much time and money is spent in this country figuring out whether or not a person is covered at all or is covered for a specific treatment? Or how much is spent by insurance companies figuring out creative ways to not pay for treatments? Administrative costs, especially for private insurance, are through the roof, even compared to Medicare (Which is why a public system is such a necessity). One of the biggest advantages to a public system, and to a universal system is; everyone is covered. There's no profit to be made spending large sums of money on finding ways to deny treatment. There's no profit to be made spending large sums of money trying to make sure that you don't cover anyone who is actually sick. There's no time wasted filling out forms to determine if a treatment is covered. There's no money spent on the thousands of people who's job it is to find reasons for you to deny coverage. There's only profit to be made by being more efficient overall than the next provider. There's only profit to be made by providing better care. There is enough money being spent right now on finding administrative ways to deny coverage to people to pay for covering our entire population of uninsured. You want to complain about how there's so much money being spent on ways to NOT treat people, yet you want to post that there are a bazillion tests on people that should never be done because they're running up bills. So which inefficiency do you want to talk about first? You can't have both arguements and then sit there and justify a government run health care. FIX Medicare first... they can't run that right and they want to take something that's a minimum of 10 times bigger and you think they will run that right? What is the government's motive to allow tests, etc? Oh wait, there isn't one. Their motive is to cut costs, which means deny care. Period. I would much rather have a market fix then the government denying me care because the bureaucrats haven't gotten their lobby money yet to allow XYZ treatment. You think that won't happen? It's already started.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 15, 2009 -> 08:06 AM) I really don't care if I change my mind or not. If I do, I do. I talk about what I want to talk about and when I get tired of it I stop. Quit making sense, you jackass.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 09:20 PM) I really doubt anything happens, this isn't the first time there's been civil unrest in Iran. But if anything this will probably accelerate the end of the Islamic regime there by a few more years - there's a s***-ton of under-30s in Iran, and this generation doesn't remember 1979 or American meddling in Iranian affairs. It's only a matter of time really. But goddamn, what amateurs. They couldn't even be bothered to make the voting across provinces even look real. Could you imagine if Obama won Texas and Oklahoma by large margins, or if McCain had gotten a 65% margin in San Francisco and Chicago? That would send up red flags immediately. Exactly. This is a sign that the Ayatollah panicked. Hard core panicked. (spelling sucks I know). Now the IRG will take care of the cleanup.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 13, 2009 -> 10:55 AM) Obama must be in Chicago today. Marine 1 and its escort just flew over our building, as they always do between O'Hare and whereever it is they go downtown to land. He is to be there this weekend and then Monday give the AMA speech.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 04:19 PM) Ah thanks! I wasn't going to chime in on this thread, but as a known pessimist, there's a lot that can be learned. There's a way to articulate your thoughts so that they're not a personal attack on a player, and rather more of an observation. Something that I have tried to do more of and will continue to do is make a comment so that it opens up for further discussion. Saying "Ozzie is pathetic" isn't quality posting and myself and others should improve upon that. As long as people follow the rules, I've not seen anyone get suspended/banned for stating any opinion regarding the team (and that's what separates this site from WSI). I tell this to numerous mods/admins, and that is that if they have a problem with my style of posting, please PM me and I'll be happy to do whatever I can to improve the quality of the posts. I would also add the quality of conversation in the chats is better than that of the game threads, as there's some great baseball people in there (kyyle, daa, flash, SSI, etc.). I don't get to go into chat that often, but seriously, these guys know their s*** in there. About everything... It's a really nice place to discuss baseball. In the three or four times I've gone in during the season, I've learned some stuff, even if I disagree. But, those mods and admins are assholes.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 10:49 PM) So, you'd like to explain why more nuclear plants are a good idea? Not to you, because you already "know" that they should not be an option, and no matter what I say, it won't change your mind.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 07:59 PM) The Ayatollah is already appointed until death. Why would they want to create another position, President, that could ultimately challenge them in power? And no one is "President" without the consent of the Ayatollah. Period.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 12, 2009 -> 07:16 PM) British Nuclear accident only avoided by guy deciding to do laundry at the right time. I would also like to note that the Republicans this week released their version of an energy bill - which included building 100 additional nuclear plants in the U.S. OMG, FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR.