quote:You first--you read that article I linked to? The Consumer Digest repost of the LA Times piece on rescission...
Yes, I did. Is there a particular part you want to discuss? Rescission is supposed to be an 'out' for the Insurance company when fraud is discovered. If you lie to the company and tell them that you are perfectly healthy when you know you have a lump the size of a grapefruit in your abdomen they absolutely shouldn't be on the line for your bills.
Now. If some companies are truly abusing this clause and simply using it to get out of an honestly entered into contract, then by all means run them up the flag pole and sue the crap out of them.
The only problem is under the law as it currently stands(as I understand it), they don't have to prove 'intentional' fraud. Only that you knew\should have known that the information left out of your application for insurance would have disqualified you for coverage. Right or wrong, that's the law as it exists.
Unless there is some specific part you would like my input on (which I would be happy to provide), do you disagree with my previously stated conclusion if those conditions listed ARE true?
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
so, if you have insurance and you get laid off from your job and you get sick? you are just "unlucky"?
in some cases you will never be insurable again.
if you get sick? you have no prospects of getting a better job because you can't switch insurance?never mind the chance of starting a small business.not going to happen.
what if you have insurance and you have a child that will be "unprofitable to insure" for the duration of their lives? you are stuck working at that job for life, or more precisely till the child reaches an age where medicaid will take over, and your employer knows that too...
in many cases? those children are already on medicare now, so we taxpayers pick up the tab while the insurance companies make more profit. we pay anyway again....
so how do we approach these issues?
if we are going to dump all the unprofitable ones on the taxpayers and allow the insurance co's to choose who they want to cover? aren't we really subsidizing the insurance co's already?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: Once again, Glass...
The current system needs changing...
Already stated my support for that.
that's why i am asking.
i don't know what's fair.
that "unprofitable" child born to a person on insurance could very well lead to making the parent the first one to be laid off, regardless of performance too couldn't it?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:You first--you read that article I linked to? The Consumer Digest repost of the LA Times piece on rescission...
Yes, I did. Is there a particular part you want to discuss? Rescission is supposed to be an 'out' for the Insurance company when fraud is discovered. If you lie to the company and tell them that you are perfectly healthy when you know you have a lump the size of a grapefruit in your abdomen they absolutely shouldn't be on the line for your bills.
Now. If some companies are truly abusing this clause and simply using it to get out of an honestly entered into contract, then by all means run them up the flag pole and sue the crap out of them.
The only problem is under the law as it currently stands(as I understand it), they don't have to prove 'intentional' fraud. Only that you knew\should have known that the information left out of your application for insurance would have disqualified you for coverage. Right or wrong, that's the law as it exists.
Unless there is some specific part you would like my input on (which I would be happy to provide), do you disagree with my previously stated conclusion if those conditions listed ARE true?
Ya, fraud should work both ways...but these insurance companies are rescinding folks via loopholes, for reasons that have nothing to do with the claims they're refusing, or for blaming the patient for not knowing what the doctor wrote in notes, but did not share with the patient:
quote:A Texas nurse said she lost her coverage, after she was diagnosed with aggressive breast cancer, for failing to disclose a visit to a dermatologist for acne.
The sister of an Illinois man who died of lymphoma said his policy was rescinded for the failure to report a possible aneurysm and gallstones that his physician noted in his chart but did not discuss with him.
When I see stuff like that? At that magnitude? ie, not "isolated"... Frankly, I don't care if they stay in business or make a profit or dry up and go to Hell...
I mean, let's face it...Insurance company execs could not care less what kind of care you or I get. There's no "level of service" quality control--there's only "products" to be sold. I think some things are so basic to human existence that operating them at break-even (or even some public subsidy) is OK, eg, water/sanitation, electric/gas, even basic transportation in some areas. Sure, the workers who make things happen should be well paid, but why should some azzhole make umpteen gillion dollars cuz you and I pay too much for health care?
posted
it seems to me, that in some ways? a person making civil service pay and collecting taxes and using them to pay the medical bills might in fact have more empathy than some insurance exec who's working on his performance bonus, so i have a hard time listening to people complain about insurance companies losing profits.
we all buy insurance cuz we are afraid we migh get sick.
our insurance costs us about 14 grand a year, we don't spend 14 grand worth, but we MIGHT...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree.. Government would make a more logical choice... Just not ours... If it passes I give it a few years before we are all used as test subjects for chem warfare or bio warfare... That and taxes will be through the roof. I lived under Canada's system for ten years and never had a problem with it...
Posts: 2965 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Relentless.: I agree.. Government would make a more logical choice... Just not ours... If it passes I give it a few years before we are all used as test subjects for chem warfare or bio warfare... That and taxes will be through the roof. I lived under Canada's system for ten years and never had a problem with it...
well that's refreshing...I thought you despised all gummint.
Seriously? I envision sumpin like the co-op utility model, but better. If there *is* profit? Share it among co-op members.
Just saying, there's some things that work great as strictly for-profit. AND, any of these co-ops I'm building should NOT have a monopoly. That way, if a for-profit can achieve a better model, thereby lowering costs and delivering equal or better quality--HIT IT.
posted
I really don't have an answer either this health care is a real problem in America.I do know one thing that has to go is having your medical care as part of your employment package. What does where I work have to do with my health care
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK...I will try and pull back a bit as well now that we are really talking about the bill and not about the spin.
So SF (and Lock), what concerns you most is the cost of the plan and the idea that government is going to put some regulations on private providers which makes you believe that the intention is not to provide basic care for all but to run private companies out of business and leave the gummint (as Tex would say) the sole health care provider in the nation is this correct?
BTW...seems the end of life care provision is being removed from the Senate version of the bill. I am of two minds on this. On the one hand most hospitals already have a nurse talk to patients about health care directives when they are checking vitals so it really isn't an important part of the bill. On the other hand it just galls me a little to think that Palin and the other "death council" fearmongerers are going to claim this as a victory. I don't think we should be rewarding dirty politics like this.
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues. Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
I honestly don't give a fig about how much it's going to cost. Really. I don't. If you want a good health care plan for ALL Americans it's going to be expensive. If all you wanted to do is give free bandaids to everyone then you can save a bundle of money.
My concern with the current projected cost is HOW it's going to be paid for. Lumping the burden of paying for the plan (or any other) onto the backs of a small groups of people (the 'rich') to pay for the benefits for the many (mostly poor\underinsured in this case) is not just in my opinion. The rich have as much right to the protection of property as the poor. The fact that they have more of it does not disqualify them from that constitutional protection.
As far as the second part of your question, whether it's the government's intent to drive private insurers out of business or not doesn't really matter. It's the inevitable outcome under the currently intended plan. Noone has provided anything to dispute my belief on this. The insurers CANNOT survive under the proposed limitations. It's just not possible imho.
Now, to finish with a tinfoil hat aside. I actually DO believe that the government WANTS to be either the main source of healthcare or the only source. Government is all about power and no administration that I know of has EVER backed done from the chance to increase the feds' reach.
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: Yesterday on "ABC-TV" (better known as the all Barrack channel) during the "network special on health care".... Obama was asked:
"Mr. President will you and your family give up your current health care program and join the new 'universal health care program' that the rest of us will be on?".....
(bet you already know the answer)...
There was a stoney silence as Obama ignored the question and chose not to answer it.... in addition, a number of Senators were asked the same question and their response was..."We will think about it." And they did.
It was announced today on the news that the "Kennedy health care bill" was written into the new health care reform initiative, ensuring that that Congress will be 100% exempt !
This should speak volumes to all of us. so, this great new health care plan that is good for you and me... is not good enough for Obama, his family or Congress...??
posted
"Mr. President will you and your family give up your current health care program and join the new 'universal health care program' that the rest of us will be on?".....
uhhh, this question is impossible to answer since the president has his own personal physician, and he said as much in New Hampshire, so the question was repeated in Boseman.
this is exaclty what they are trying to work toward.
The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) is a system of "managed competition" through which employee health benefits are provided to full-time permanent civilian employees and qualified retirees of the United States Government. The FEHBP allows insurance companies and employee associations such as labor unions to develop health, dental, and allied plans to be marketed to governmental employees.
These plans are available to employees during an "open enrollment" once probationary status has been passed by a new employee, during which time the employee, if accepting enrollment, will be covered fully in any plan he or she chooses without limitations regarding "pre-existing conditions." After the initial enrollment, changes can be made only upon a "qualifying life event" such as marriage, divorce, adoption or birth of a child, or change in employment status of a spouse, or during the annual "open season," during which employees can enroll, disenroll, or change from one plan to another. The exact dates of the open season change from year to year, but are basically from the Monday of the second full week in November through Monday, the second full week of December.
Premiums vary from plan to plan and are paid in part by the employer (the U. S. Government agency that the employee works for) and the remainder by the employee: the employer pays an amount equal to 72 percent of the average plan premium for self-only or family coverage (not to exceed 75 percent of the premium for the selected plan), and the employee pays the rest. Certain employees (such as postal workers) have a higher portion of their premiums paid as the result of collective bargaining agreements.
Some plans, particularly the one offered by some employee unions such as the National Association of Letter Carriers, and by the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association on behalf of its member insurers, are nationwide; others are regionally-available plans such as HMOs. The FEHBP is open to members of United States Congress; in the 2004 presidential campaign, Senator John Kerry proposed opening enrollment in this plan to all Americans, which would certainly have changed it drastically.
posted
Well after reading some of these posts I now know why I am a democrat and a progressive. The whole thing about health care is to make it available to everyone.
Worring about some damn insurance co that was one of many that has got us into this mess is foolishness. Let them run thier business if they want to,and if they put out a good product people will buy it if they don't they go by-by that simple.
If they keep on the same path of bigger profits all the time they only have a very few methods of making them. raise the price,give less care, and turn down claims. Insurance companies keep refining this practice until they cover very little don't cover any preexsisting and want to insure only healthy people for a certain lenght of time.
We need a public option that is government run every time the issue comes up we get closer.Truman,Nixon,Clinton, And now Obama,who if he does not get anything passed will have made the best case for health care reform and so far has got the best message out and made more awarness about the subject so the next time around we will get the prize.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
if they put out a good product people will buy it if they don't they go by-by that simple.
in the Fed Employee program that Congress has? yes, every year they can switch to another participant.
however, in many cases? you take what your employer gets for you.....
what we really need IMO? is for Doctors, who are the ones who order off the menu for us, to wake up and smell the coffee...
they brewed this mess. they know what they are doing.
when they tell you they have to order so many extra tests to protect themselves because of lack of tort reform? ask them who owns the lab that did the tests
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Right glass , Another point I would like to make is that the current system smoothers small business start ups. I remember when I was much younger in the late sventies I had a very good plsn for starting up a business and it was the issue of health care insurance that stopped me I needed at this time to keep us all insured and between preexsisting and higher payment I had to make a moral play to my family because of health coverage. See in many countries that is not even a thought health is considerd a right of birth.
I have to think how many other young people that are full of lifes energy and ideas can't make the move without the fear of loosing there health care. So they keep there 9 to 5 job. Think how much socity suffers by holding back this force of growth and enterpanure sprit
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: if they put out a good product people will buy it if they don't they go by-by that simple.
in the Fed Employee program that Congress has? yes, every year they can switch to another participant.
however, in many cases? you take what your employer gets for you.....
what we really need IMO? is for Doctors, who are the ones who order off the menu for us, to wake up and smell the coffee...
they brewed this mess. they know what they are doing.
when they tell you they have to order so many extra tests to protect themselves because of lack of tort reform? ask them who owns the lab that did the tests
IMO Glass, I think you are getting a bit off track. So many here are defending the insurance companies. Complaining they might fail if there is a government insurance program. Seems to me these are the same people who were saying "don't bail-out the auto industry! Let them fail!". Yet they wanna see these bloodsucking insurance companies survive if even if they are bleeding the populace dry?!?! Makes no sense to me. The insurance industry has never had a true viable competitor that would force them to actual put out some competitive rates. Well guess what boys and girls. If health reform legislation passes, they will be forced to compete, or go the way of the Dodo. About damn time IMO. I've had health care insurance insurance, auto insurance, homeowners insurance for many years. Never filed a major claim with any of them. Yet they continue to bleed us all dry with they're ridiculous rates and restrictions. It is time for a change.
Ok...end of rant.
-------------------- It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious. Posts: 3311 | From: St. Louis | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i think that big businesses would also like to see health care shifted off their books as it continues to become more and more expensive.
they get a tax break now, McCain was offering a tax plan that would have shifted at least part of that tax break away from employers and to the plan owner.
the idea of tax protected savings accounts would be good, until you need a 70,000$ surgery for a pacemaker
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
ya, would be good to have "separation of work and health care" so employers could hire without fear, and workers could say "eff off--I won't take abuse" without fear.
I say we all boycott them and tell them to go to hell! Next time your sick, Pagan, you show them you won't be sucked in by their scheme. You go ahead and pay full price for your doctor's visit, prescriptions and live off your ample savings account while you miss work!! That will show them!!
And don't get me started on the auto insurance. You tell them to pi$$ off too! And if you just happen to be in a 'no fault' wreck? You just go ahead and buy a new car out of your own pocket!! And if it happens to be your fault, and you hurt someone in the wreck...you just pay for their healthcare and new car out of pocket too!!
That will show those blood suckers!!!
You go boy!!
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: You tell em, Pagan!!
Screw the insurance companies!
I say we all boycott them and tell them to go to hell! Next time your sick, Pagan, you show them you won't be sucked in by their scheme. You go ahead and pay full price for your doctor's visit, prescriptions and live off your ample savings account while you miss work!! That will show them!!
And don't get me started on the auto insurance. You tell them to pi$$ off too! And if you just happen to be in a 'no fault' wreck? You just go ahead and buy a new car out of your own pocket!! And if it happens to be your fault, and you hurt someone in the wreck...you just pay for their healthcare and new car out of pocket too!!
That will show those blood suckers!!!
You go boy!!
Your such an imbecile it is astounding. Where did I ever say that crap you are spewing knucklehead. And I wasn't addressing you in that post. I try to avoid engaging idiots like you in conversation...it's pointless. I was addressing Glassman. I know you are mentally deficient...but try and keep up for a change.
-------------------- It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious. Posts: 3311 | From: St. Louis | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I've had health care insurance insurance, auto insurance, homeowners insurance for many years. Never filed a major claim with any of them. Yet they continue to bleed us all dry with they're ridiculous rates and restrictions. It is time for a change.
This is the part my sarcasm was addressing, P. This is the attitude that simply astounds me both in this debate and in others that I've read on this board.
Big Business is BAD...until you need them.
So many people that I've listened spout this same sentiment have absolutely no qualms about filing claims when their life hits the fan. No matter that the claim is many times any amount of premiums they will EVER pay into the company.
It's all good to gripe and moan about how much the EVIL insurance companies charge until you need them to pay for your children to be delivered or your car replaced or your home rebuilt after a fire. Then you fully demand they pay your what you're due.
What ingrates we are.
Do changes need to be made? Sure. Do we still need them even if it doesn't happen? Absolutely.
quote:Your such an imbecile it is astounding. Where did I ever say that crap you are spewing knucklehead. And I wasn't addressing you in that post. I try to avoid engaging idiots like you in conversation...it's pointless. I was addressing Glassman. I know you are mentally deficient...but try and keep up for a change.
Only four personal attacks in three lines?
You're slipping, Pagan. I know you can do better than that.
posted
It's all good to gripe and moan about how much the EVIL insurance companies charge until you need them to pay for your children to be delivered or your car replaced or your home rebuilt after a fire. Then you fully demand they pay your what you're due.
What ingrates we are.
LOL...
we wouldn't need them if big brother paid for it.
it's always amusing to play games with economic theory...
people like to say that if we overtax the rich? they won't work anymore. LOL, they'll work, and they'll still be the rich. they'll just charge more.
cutting taxes didn't incentivise them to charge less now did it?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's all good to gripe and moan about how much the EVIL insurance companies charge until you need them to pay for your children to be delivered or your car replaced or your home rebuilt after a fire. Then you fully demand they pay your what you're due.
Lol, are you paying attention? The gripe is they're self-serving and too damn powerful. You can *demand* what you're due all you want and still not get it. My auto insurance paid off on a bogus claim and raised *my* rates for being involved in a wreck that was clearly not my fault. My homeowner's paid...but not the full amount, on either my contents or my structural--and the mortgage company shorted me about $6 grand that they should have refunded. As I read your post, I'm supposed to be happy about all that.
To repeat from that repost of the LA Times article, bold my emphasis:
quote:An investigation by the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations showed that health insurers WellPoint Inc., UnitedHealth Group and Assurant Inc. canceled the coverage of more than 20,000 people, allowing the companies to avoid paying more than $300 million in medical claims over a five-year period.
It also found that policyholders with breast cancer, lymphoma and more than 1,000 other conditions were targeted for rescission and that employees were praised in performance reviews for terminating the policies of customers with expensive illnesses.
"No one can defend, and I certainly cannot defend, the practice of canceling coverage after the fact," said Rep. Michael C. Burgess (R-Tex.), a member of the committee. "There is no acceptable minimum to denying coverage after the fact."
The executives -- Richard A. Collins, chief executive of UnitedHealth's Golden Rule Insurance Co.; Don Hamm, chief executive of Assurant Health and Brian Sassi, president of consumer business for WellPoint Inc., parent of Blue Cross of California -- were courteous and matter-of-fact in their testimony.
But they would not commit to limiting rescissions to only policyholders who intentionally lie or commit fraud to obtain coverage, a refusal that met with dismay from legislators on both sides of the political aisle.
What's there to like or be happy about in this picture?
it's always amusing to play games with economic theory...
So, are we to just sit back and let big brother pay for every ill that exists, Glass? Crash your car, Big Brother will pay for it. Lose your job, Uncle Sam can pay your bills till you get (assigned) a new one. Get sick, Nanny State can pay your medical bills...
Where does that cycle end?
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: Ok, Tex, here's a part of my previous post I would love an answer to in regarding yours...
For all the problems you listed, did you receive more money (in total) than you've paid into the insurance companies (in total)?
I'm guessing just with the house fire claim you did.
So, in all, you've received more money than you spent...and still you're not happy?
By your logic, there's no point in contracts: "they" get to decide "what you need" instead of paying out on the schedule they agreed to. There's also a hint of this: "To tell the truth, you actually were lucky to have been burnt and spent six weeks in a coma and lost your family home that your Dad built."
Why are you asking about me, personally?
How about this: We're in a card game, and you win. There's supposed to be $10 grand in the pot, but I'm light $2 grand. Oh, well, you still won more than you had....
the insurance agent came by, was real nice, gave us some forms to fill out.
we did.
after a month had gone by, something about the adjusters attitude was bothering me.
i called the State Insurance Commissioners office and had about a twenty minute chat with them.
the lady said to me that as long as we file form XYZX (i forget the numbers now) within 45? days, we shouldn't have anything to worry about. that deadline was just less than two weeks away.
it was good thing i did call because neither the agent nor the adjuster had given us the form we needed to actually file the claim. they had given us other forms that made us think we were filing the claim.
i looked thru the packet they had given us and it wasn't there, it turns out the form had to have every single item we were claiming on it house and items, and ours was a total loss, it was a custom home in the very middle of 27 wooded acres, so nobody saw the fire until it was higher than the trees and was seen from the highyway 1/2 mile away. we were out of town fishing.
the agent was not the responsible party, the adjuster was, but the adjuster tried to say he thought he agent had given it to us....
then the adjuster refused to extend the time we had left to file the paperwork properly and he also gave us the wrong instructions on how to fill it out.
then he sat on the paperwork for nine months....
there's more too, but i just don't feel like gettin into it...
if i hadn't gotten a "feeling" and i mean that it was just a bad feeling off the guy one day, we would have been frozen out. the bad feeling i got was because he wasn't looking me in the eye in answering simple clerical type questions....
he surely never mentioned the claim deadline coming up, we thought we had already filed the claim, and he knew we thought that.
trust no-one, expect the worst, and you'll never be disappointed.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, this is so getting out of hand and so far from what I wrote...
First to Tex because I think you've either read something into what I wrote that I never intended or I REALLY missed my intended target.
quote:By your logic, there's no point in contracts: "they" get to decide "what you need" instead of paying out on the schedule they agreed to.
No, that not what I meant. As I stated in response to your rescission link,
Now. If some companies are truly abusing this clause and simply using it to get out of an honestly entered into contract, then by all means run them up the flag pole and sue the crap out of them.
I apply the same to your situation. If they broke contract with you...SUE THE #$#$ OUT OF THEM. I meant that when I wrote it. If they failed to live up to the contractual agreement that they entered into with you then litigate till they do.
quote: There's also a hint of this: "To tell the truth, you actually were lucky to have been burnt and spent six weeks in a coma and lost your family home that your Dad built."
If that's how it came across I apologize, Tex. That was nowhere near my intent. My intent was to show that for every (major) claim made, rarely has that same amount been paid by the applicant in premiums. I know from two children and a wife with some health issues that medical costs are astronomical. Without my insurance I wouldn't have a penny to my name. They have literally saved my wife's life and our financial situation. I don't begrudge them charging me premiums to offset that cost.
quote:Why are you asking about me, personally?
With all due respect, T, you shared personal experiences in your post. I merely asked follow up based on what you wrote.
quote:How about this: We're in a card game, and you win. There's supposed to be $10 grand in the pot, but I'm light $2 grand. Oh, well, you still won more than you had....
And that would be OK with you?
Of course not. I would hope that you would be good for the money at a later date(See my comment above about litigation).
That being said, do I regret having wagered whatever my share of the pot was because I didn't get everything? No. If I had not wagered at all, I would have won nothing.
Without ANY insurance (as I tried to show in my post to Pagan) when bad things happen, you have NO recourse at all. You're simply hosed. At least WITH insurance, you have something to fall back on when it all hits the fan.
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:i'm sorry SF, but that's about as dumb a question as i've ever heard.
Bah, I'm sure I've surpassed it sometime here.
Seriously, though, in retrospect I probably could have worded it better. Hopefully my follow up to Tex cleared up what I meant a little. (shrug)
quote:when i lost my house?...
Everyone has a horror story, Glass. That's the nature of horror stories. Yes, as I've stated several(reoccurring) times, changes need to be made in the industry. If more regulation is the answer, then regulate. If it's tort reform, then reform. If it's 'fat-trimming', then cut away.
But for the love of Heaven Above, you don't kill all privatization in an industry and simply hope that the Government Bureaucracy will happily make all bad things go away.
That's a horror story just waiting to happen.
Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
But for the love of Heaven Above, you don't kill all privatization in an industry and simply hope that the Government Bureaucracy will happily make all bad things go away.
i agree.
i'll tell ya tho, i don't really think of that as a horror story...
nobody got hurt, all of the firemen were fine, and of course we were out of town...
my first job was drawing blood at a huge hospital. that wasone horror story after another...
as they said in barterown? Right or wrong, we had a deal. And the law says: bust a deal and face the wheel!
i don't see the govt as something you hope about...
you get involved. the town hall meetings are kinfofa new thing (for this century anyway)...
i don't want to run for office, but do write letters and i am persistent.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
