lostfan

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 10, 2010 -> 12:14 PM) Well, I defiantly cannot argue what you said there. While I may not agree with all aspects of Healthcare reform with the users on Soxtalk, at the very least they are informed in SOME WAY. It's really amazing to me when you discuss this issue with random people how uninformed they are, about EVERYTHING to do with this subject. Most of them repeating things they've heard from either side, without ever bothering to research or read up on their own. Yeah usually within about 10 seconds I can tell whether someone actually tried to learn about it or they just skimmed TV or went to an echo chamber on the internet. Actually not just healthcare but about politics in general. People love to rant about things, but if something is complicated they don't bother to learn, that's too much work.

You said "you are all" when it was me and Balta talking, what else am I supposed to deduce from that? I mean really now. I go out and I look at these graphs on my own, I don't listen to the rabbling because it's mostly worthless. To me, by far the most depressing thing about the last 18 months or so of this debate is that it shows me how intellectually lazy people in this country are. (Y2HH this last sentence doesn't apply to you)

WTF are you talking about, no, I wasn't making a comparison, I linked a chart that said "X amount is spent on private insurance and increases at this rate and Y amount is spent on public insurance and increases at this rate" and then I explained WHY I linked it and then I said what exactly I meant when I posted it (i.e. not a comparison, I was talking about how fast public health insurance was growing) more than once and you still are making my points for me? What color is the sky where you live?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 10, 2010 -> 11:50 AM) Medicare has a forced cost control mechanism that private doesn't have, thus any comparisons between the two are null and void -- as you are comparing apples to oranges. IE, the government often just decides it's not paying what it promised to the doctors via Medicare, or pays less...and there isn't anything they can do about it. The private industry, however, doesn't get away with that. It wasn't a comparison.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 10, 2010 -> 10:53 AM) 1.35% is still very good for savings accounts, which is why I have it there -- and for convenience of it being linked to my other E*Trade accounts, I login to one account and have access to all 3, makes stock buying easier when I do it. Yeah mine is only like .60 or something like that since it's under $1k right now. I mean, you figure a CD tends to start at about 1.5 or so so 1.35 is not bad at all.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 11:08 AM) Bigger banks also tend to offer better online banking and bill payment options, too. I have a checking account for nothing but bills/spending money -- my ATM is attached to it. My savings is in my Etrade account, as well as one of my IRAs and my brokerage account. I have a Schwab account - what's your interest rate? I'm wondering if I should park my savings there instead (my regular savings has a not-too-bad rate)

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 10:57 AM) Disagree on checking accts. You want that at a big bank for more access to ATM machines with no fees. Alot of the big banks give you free checking with direct deposit, I've never had to pay fees on mine ever at Chase. I used to use Chase (First Chicago, then Bank One) but I had to pay fees all the time and plus the bank charges you again after the withdrawal so it just got retarded after a while. USAA makes me wonder what the hell I was ever doing at Chase. Just the lack of ATM fees alone makes me like it so much better, then when I look at the interest rates and rewards and such every individual thing just pwns it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 10, 2010 -> 09:32 AM) I think you and I see the graph in question and come to an opposite conclusion 1990 expenditures (all values approximate): Private insurance: $200 billion Medicare: $100 billion Out of Pocket: $130 billion Medicaid (Federal + State) $75 billion 2007 expenditures: Private Insurance; $670 billion Medicare: $400 billion Out of Pocket: $275 billion Medicare + Medicaid: $300 billion There are a few trends I get from that. Yes, the government share has gone up, but the slope of "Private insurance" is higher than the slope of Medicare by quite a bit. Private insurance has gone up by a lower percentage, but that's only because the starting values were so different. Medicare has gone up by quite a bit less than private insurance overall and per year. The thing that has really, really shot upwards other than private insurance is Medicaid. In other words, it's the cost of covering the uninsured, which is, as I keep saying, a big reason to motivate this, because there are cheaper and better ways to do that. I didn't mention the bolded but I said that the main reason the total cost of Medicare is going up is because of the aging of the population and adding numbers of uninsured, and by now it should be a pretty well-established fact that the United States spends more per capita than just about everyone else and gets less out of it. I think my point bringing that up was to ridicule the "government takeover of healthcare" being some kind of evil Obama plot to turn us into Communist Nazis when the system is already halfway socialized to begin with and nobody that says that did anything to change it when they had the chance.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 10, 2010 -> 08:44 AM) That's not a reason to agree with Pelosi, whose point in this case is vapid and obnoxious. Vote for it to see what's in it? Seriously? That's a load of crap, no matter what you think of the bill or its parts. What this is, is a reason to be frustrated with the media. Eh it came out retarded and it doesn't help that Pelosi is a lightning rod, but it has to go through a brutal amendment process and we won't see the final version of the bill until it's actually passed, basically by definition.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 12:59 AM) I found this very interesting.... BTW Clark resigned with the Steelers, not to mention they signed Randle-El and Will Allen.. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4976203 If the Steelers cut Limas Sweed, I would hope the Bears look into the 6'4 tall WR former 2nd round pick. Could be a diamond in the rough and the big WR the Bears (and Cutler) have been dying to get. Sweed sucks, hard.

This graph is kind of hard to read without someone doing percentages but go to page 152 and it shows you the data of how public spending (i.e. Medicare, Medicaid, state payments) used to be about 40% in 1990 and today it's close to 50%, because the growth of public spending outpaces private spending, mostly due to an aging population. It also shows how much total healthcare spending increased in general, it's kind of staggering. This trend isn't going to stop even if no reform passes at all. Most of this is inevitable, but it's not like the people in charge during that time did anything to stop it, actually Medicare Part D (along with a tax cut of course) helped that situation along which is something to think about when you hear someone squawking about government takeover of healthcare (which is not happening as a result of this legislation no matter what anyone says). http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus09.pdf

Why does Tom Delay keep getting airtime lately? No seriously, why? I was about to make a liberal media joke but there is nothing funny about this imo - Delay has nothing to contribute to anything except dumbass partisan rants and various lies. Also, I'm not sure why Dick and Liz (especially Liz) Cheney get more coverage than the current VP. I mean I can see Gingrich since he at least actually has something to say but these other guys? WTF.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 07:44 PM) Is it worth noting here that Tom Delay was admonished by the House Ethics committee for basically trying to bribe and threaten Congressmen to get their vote for GWB's Medicare 2003 drug and insurance company bailout? Yes and you can probably write entire books on Delay being a slimeball and it wouldn't be all hysterical manufactured character accusations like the books that got written about Bill Clinton, it'd be about stuff he actually did... but he did more than just change the rules. You may as well throw in Gingrich being a scuzzbag too, to my knowledge Hastert wasn't anything like those other 2. QUOTE (bmags @ Mar 10, 2010 -> 12:19 AM) I agree with her though. As it stands now the media continues to follow the horserace, I guarantee that as soon as they pass it the media switches to "here's what's in the bill that we should have told you about months ago but continued to follow death panel threats and government takeover statements to appear balanced" This is what I mean when I say they cover the process and not the substance

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 06:47 PM) How is Brady calling someone a murderer before a trial any different than this administration saying KSM will convicted before his trial? I don't think I have ever made a comment on this topic. My point was referencing the prejudgement by both parties in the stated cases. I said that because I couldn't tell if you were actually asking my opinion or not, but for the record it's inappropriate for the preisdent to comment on court cases no matter what it is (although KSM is guilty and will be convicted if he goes to trial). But Brady just didn't sound like he knew what he was talking about.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Mar 9, 2010 -> 11:50 AM) Like the current administration saying KSM will be found guilty before his trial? Unless you (and Kap in the other thread) are finally agreeing with me that a terrorist needs to have a trial somehow, somewhere and be convicted before he can be actually punished like a terrorist then I fail to see your point.

By the way, again for s***s and giggles, the words "reconciliation" and "filibuster" don't appear in the Constitution because the Senate and House make their own rules - see all the things the Republicans changed when they took over in 1994. Was that stuff illegal or did it violate the Constitution? Some of the things they did might've been ethically questionable, but the answer is no.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Mar 8, 2010 -> 08:04 PM) There is in a way when it's being used for unprecedented purposes. But I'm sure this is business as usual for the Democrats. That is the partisan hack version in its purest form, the one where objective reality flips seamlessly and immediately when the parties switch roles. See how the parties act on things like recess appointments or meetings in secret and then how their response is different when the other side does it. Shame on anybody that falls for it and thinks it's actually sincere (double shame on anyone who manufactures a "Constitution" claim out of whole cloth in the process), although the fact that news organizations cover the process and not the substance doesn't help.

There's nothing complex about reconciliation for f***'s sake.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Mar 8, 2010 -> 12:51 PM) This is f***ing disgraceful: http://www.michaelyon-online.com/of-concern.htm Wow... he's gonna send that directly to Secretary Gates? I guess Michael Yon (don't know who he is) has some kind of journalistic access? If it's something the local Spanish base commander is responsible for that's jumping way over the chain, because it's something that can be handled via normal military channels - if it's something about the Spanish military in general, yeah, that's gonna require Gates and other diplomats get involved, tear a couple of new assholes.

Whoops

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 8, 2010 -> 01:12 PM) http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_...r-scrutiny.html wtf? Does he even understand the basic concepts of court, criminal law, etc.? For the government to be able to say you're a murderer, you kind of have to be convicted of murder... that's the whole point of accusing someone of murder (This is the same bad logic for terrorist trials too btw, but I'm not going there anymore than I already have so I don't trip kap's bat signal)

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Mar 8, 2010 -> 06:22 PM) Ashburn comes out of the closet, in response to his big gay DUI arrest last week. http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/capit...oy-ashburn.html Kind of the "no s***" story of the month so far

QUOTE (SHIPPS @ Mar 7, 2010 -> 10:03 AM) Stop trying to sell us time shares basterd. lol. if I was doing that I'd talk about all the things to do there etc. I just like to travel and the time share makes it easier. In other news, my friend's husband cursed me out in the middle of a facebook chat for no reason, hilariously. Long story short he never liked me and in his head he thinks I'm either trying to steal his wife or that she is prone to leave him for me (logical reasons this is not only not desirable, but not possible notwithstanding) and I guess he had enough. Called me all kinds of b****es, wanted my phone # so he could call me (after he deleted it from her phone) and curse me out. I was like yeah, I got better s*** to do than to give someone my number so they can curse at me and threaten me for some s*** they think I did that never happened. When I told my friend about it he said "what type of b**** n**** s*** is that from him?" lol.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Mar 7, 2010 -> 08:36 PM) Well that means it's a talent evaluation and development issue, which means that's an issue with the coaching staff and the GM. You don't want the Bears to turn into the Redskins every off-season obviously. Definitely. Especially the offensive coaches. I don't really know how to explain the failings on the defensive side of the ball (people like to say "Rivera!" but his play-calling and blitz schemes were just as lame without the pass rush, truth be told)

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Mar 7, 2010 -> 05:42 PM) who is the Dem? i haven't been paying attention to politics lately. Quinn kept the nomination, no?