thunder wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:04:33 -0400, H the K wrote:


It's also true that many hospitals go beyond the requirement,
regardless of the cost. Still, I wouldn't want to be in an emergency
room without insurance. Hell, even with insurance, a major sickness is
a leading cause of personal bankruptcy.
Very few *private* hospitals go above and beyond, since profit is their
motive.

Not true, Harry. Roughly 62% of our hospitals are non-profit, an
additional 20% are government hospitals. Only 18% are for profit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_hospital


I don't see where your stat interferes with mine.

H the K wrote:
Calif Bill wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message
m...
wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 11:54:34 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 05:27:08 -0700 (PDT), Jack

wrote:

Ah... it sounded like you were complaining about the high cost of
insurance. But now I understand that you're both "retired", with
your
wife choosing to work at a basic job where the insurance cost 25% of
her pay. Nothing wrong with that.

No, my wife is 17 years younger than me and will be working for a
long
time yet, insurance or not. And she's the highest paid in her unit
except for the manager. The rest there can't afford the
insurance, so
they go to the e-room for everything. That's the problem. The high
cost of health care/insurance. There ain't no free lunch except the
one those paying for health insurance are buying for the others.
Whether I complain about it or not, you may have noticed that others
are.

I agree that the people who choose to not insure, then use the
emergency room for free health care is a problem. However, if
you're
rooting for national health care so your wife can quit work and I'll
have to pick up your health care tab... well, I have a problem with
that.

Tell me your problem with paying my SS and I'll shed a couple tears.
My problem isn't with paying, it's with a system that only *some* pay
into, and a system that locks people into jobs because health
insurance isn't universally available and portable. Stifles and puts
artificial constraints into movement in the job market, and gives
foreigners a competitive edge in trade.

--Vic
Part of our high costs are the E room. I had a toothache while in
Sorrento, Italy. A Saturday and no dentist working. I was told to
go to the local hospital and go to the "Pronto Soccorso" entrance.
Happens to be free to everyone, foreign, locals etc. Was like a
walk in doctors office. There were people there with hurting
ankle, etc. Had a Doctor, nurse & aid and clerk. No big tests, no
major equipment. If you needed more, they sent you to the
hospital, where I would have had to pay. Much cheaper setup than
our E rooms and Urgent Care clinics.
I guess if you could get it by the Doctopr/Nurse union the government
could cut a lot of this off at the pass by opening store front "Quack
in the box" operations in the places where poor people live. They
could staff it with military or ex-military medical people when they
stop the war. My niece was a navy Corpsman for 12 years. If she can
treat the aches and pains of a ship full of sailors or save a Marine
with a sucking chest wound, there is not much in the ghetto she can't
handle. Unfortunately they want her to go to another 4 year course
before she can give someone, stateside, a shot.

And I thought we were over "separate and unequal."

I wouldn't see a non-physician or nurse practitioner for a medical
issue. Why should a poor person? The nurses who draw my blood for
tests or give me a flu shot, et cetera, are college graduate nurses
who have passed board exams, are licensed, and required to continue
their educations during their professional life.





You may know about Maryland gun laws, but you know little about the
medical world. Rare is it an RN taking blood for your tests. They
are normally a phlebotomist. 4-8 months course.


Sorry, the nurses at my doctor's office are RN's or Nurse Practitioners.
Says so on their badges, on the office directories, on the diplomas
hanging on the walls of the various offices.

Ok. The last thing my sister, the Nurse Practicioner, does is draw blood
when there are RNs of any flavor or phlebotomists around. The scutt work
rolls down hill quickly.

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 11:54:34 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 05:27:08 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote:

Ah... it sounded like you were complaining about the high cost of
insurance. But now I understand that you're both "retired", with
your
wife choosing to work at a basic job where the insurance cost 25% of
her pay. Nothing wrong with that.

No, my wife is 17 years younger than me and will be working for a long
time yet, insurance or not. And she's the highest paid in her unit
except for the manager. The rest there can't afford the insurance, so
they go to the e-room for everything. That's the problem. The high
cost of health care/insurance. There ain't no free lunch except the
one those paying for health insurance are buying for the others.
Whether I complain about it or not, you may have noticed that others
are.

I agree that the people who choose to not insure, then use the
emergency room for free health care is a problem. However, if you're
rooting for national health care so your wife can quit work and I'll
have to pick up your health care tab... well, I have a problem with
that.

Tell me your problem with paying my SS and I'll shed a couple tears.
My problem isn't with paying, it's with a system that only *some* pay
into, and a system that locks people into jobs because health
insurance isn't universally available and portable. Stifles and puts
artificial constraints into movement in the job market, and gives
foreigners a competitive edge in trade.

--Vic
Part of our high costs are the E room. I had a toothache while in
Sorrento, Italy. A Saturday and no dentist working. I was told to
go to the local hospital and go to the "Pronto Soccorso" entrance.
Happens to be free to everyone, foreign, locals etc. Was like a
walk in doctors office. There were people there with hurting ankle,
etc. Had a Doctor, nurse & aid and clerk. No big tests, no major
equipment. If you needed more, they sent you to the hospital, where
I would have had to pay. Much cheaper setup than our E rooms and
Urgent Care clinics.

I guess if you could get it by the Doctopr/Nurse union the government
could cut a lot of this off at the pass by opening store front "Quack
in the box" operations in the places where poor people live. They
could staff it with military or ex-military medical people when they
stop the war. My niece was a navy Corpsman for 12 years. If she can
treat the aches and pains of a ship full of sailors or save a Marine
with a sucking chest wound, there is not much in the ghetto she can't
handle. Unfortunately they want her to go to another 4 year course
before she can give someone, stateside, a shot.


And I thought we were over "separate and unequal."

Is it equality of opportunity or equality of outcomes that drives you
Harry?

I wouldn't see a non-physician or nurse practitioner for a medical
issue. Why should a poor person? The nurses who draw my blood for
tests or give me a flu shot, et cetera, are college graduate nurses
who have passed board exams, are licensed, and required to continue
their educations during their professional life.

RN's are not required to have a college degree. Medical corpsman do not
have college degrees nor do Army medics. Most EMTs and Phlebotomists do
not have college degrees either. Why are you shunning highly trained,
certified and licensed working stiffs? Hell some of them are in unions.
Nice of you to screw over the union guys you elitist snob.

I have a sister who started out as an LPN, became an RN, received her
BSN and now is an NP.


I don't "shop" for nurses. The ones I encounter at my doctor's
officesare college grads who have passed exams and are licensed. That's
who the doctors at our PPO hire.

On Jul 19, 9:30*am, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 05:27:08 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote:



Ah... it sounded like you were complaining about the high cost of
insurance. *But now I understand that you're both "retired", with your
wife choosing to work at a basic job where the insurance cost 25% of
her pay. *Nothing wrong with that.

No, my wife is 17 years younger than me and will be working for a long
time yet, insurance or not. *And she's the highest paid in her unit
except for the manager.

Sounds like she's getting the short end of the stick, in more than one
way. Good for you, though. :-)


I agree that the people who choose to not insure, then use the
emergency room for free health care is a problem. *However, if you're
rooting for national health care so your wife can quit work and I'll
have to pick up your health care tab... well, I have a problem with
that.

Tell me your problem with paying my SS and I'll shed a couple tears.
My problem isn't with paying, it's with a system that only *some* pay
into, and a system that locks people into jobs because health
insurance isn't universally available and portable. *Stifles and puts
artificial constraints into movement in the job market, and gives
foreigners a competitive edge in trade.

--Vic

But the people that can afford it are already paying into it, and you
know that when the gov gets involved, that percentage will not go
down. The care that's there will drop, will be rationed, and the
payees will pay more. Only problem is, unlike Mexico and Canada, we
have nowhere to go to get the care. Screwed again. Movement in the
job market is a non-starter... modern lack of company loyalty and
commitment is part of our problem. Few employees care about where
they work, and we wonder why the products and work ethics are crap?

Don't get me started about SS. Hope you aren't planning to pull out
more than you paid in, right? Government run ponzi scheme. Cash in
now and bankrupt our future generations... oh wait, that's already
happening, just through other means.

Tired, been boating all day. Later.

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:19:38 -0400, Gene wrote:


Also true of the outlying dozen towns or so.... a total of over 500,000
people.... one hospital.

The national average is 2 hospitals per 100,000, but you'll note the
rural states have more hospitals per capita. Presumably, the hospitals
have fewer beds.

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/hea...-health-total-
hospitals-per-capita

BAR wrote:
H the K wrote:
Calif Bill wrote:
"H the K" wrote in message
m...
wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 11:54:34 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 05:27:08 -0700 (PDT), Jack

wrote:

Ah... it sounded like you were complaining about the high cost of
insurance. But now I understand that you're both "retired",
with your
wife choosing to work at a basic job where the insurance cost
25% of
her pay. Nothing wrong with that.

No, my wife is 17 years younger than me and will be working for a
long
time yet, insurance or not. And she's the highest paid in her unit
except for the manager. The rest there can't afford the
insurance, so
they go to the e-room for everything. That's the problem. The high
cost of health care/insurance. There ain't no free lunch except the
one those paying for health insurance are buying for the others.
Whether I complain about it or not, you may have noticed that others
are.

I agree that the people who choose to not insure, then use the
emergency room for free health care is a problem. However, if
you're
rooting for national health care so your wife can quit work and
I'll
have to pick up your health care tab... well, I have a problem with
that.

Tell me your problem with paying my SS and I'll shed a couple tears.
My problem isn't with paying, it's with a system that only *some*
pay
into, and a system that locks people into jobs because health
insurance isn't universally available and portable. Stifles and
puts
artificial constraints into movement in the job market, and gives
foreigners a competitive edge in trade.

--Vic
Part of our high costs are the E room. I had a toothache while in
Sorrento, Italy. A Saturday and no dentist working. I was told
to go to the local hospital and go to the "Pronto Soccorso"
entrance. Happens to be free to everyone, foreign, locals etc.
Was like a walk in doctors office. There were people there with
hurting ankle, etc. Had a Doctor, nurse & aid and clerk. No big
tests, no major equipment. If you needed more, they sent you to
the hospital, where I would have had to pay. Much cheaper setup
than our E rooms and Urgent Care clinics.
I guess if you could get it by the Doctopr/Nurse union the government
could cut a lot of this off at the pass by opening store front "Quack
in the box" operations in the places where poor people live. They
could staff it with military or ex-military medical people when they
stop the war. My niece was a navy Corpsman for 12 years. If she can
treat the aches and pains of a ship full of sailors or save a Marine
with a sucking chest wound, there is not much in the ghetto she can't
handle. Unfortunately they want her to go to another 4 year course
before she can give someone, stateside, a shot.

And I thought we were over "separate and unequal."

I wouldn't see a non-physician or nurse practitioner for a medical
issue. Why should a poor person? The nurses who draw my blood for
tests or give me a flu shot, et cetera, are college graduate nurses
who have passed board exams, are licensed, and required to continue
their educations during their professional life.





You may know about Maryland gun laws, but you know little about the
medical world. Rare is it an RN taking blood for your tests. They
are normally a phlebotomist. 4-8 months course.


Sorry, the nurses at my doctor's office are RN's or Nurse
Practitioners. Says so on their badges, on the office directories, on
the diplomas hanging on the walls of the various offices.

Ok. The last thing my sister, the Nurse Practicioner, does is draw blood
when there are RNs of any flavor or phlebotomists around. The scutt work
rolls down hill quickly.


So?

Jack wrote:



modern lack of company loyalty and
commitment is part of our problem. Few employees care about where
they work, and we wonder why the products and work ethics are crap?


Company loyalty? Commitment to the company? Give your life to the
company so that you can be laid off two years before your retirement or
your job is shifted overseas?

The only loyalty as a worker a working person should have is to
himself/herself and the family.

It used to be different...but that was before greed became the most
important corporate goal.

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:23:05 -0400, H the K wrote:


It's only the fundies who want to control those outside of their faith
that would have to move.

There was a similar project several years ago, although I don't believe
it was fundamentalists. Might have been an anti-tax group. Anyway, they
were all going to move to a state so that there votes would control the
state. They picked New Hampshire.

Texas has to large a population to make any kind of dent in.

thunder wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:23:05 -0400, H the K wrote:


It's only the fundies who want to control those outside of their faith
that would have to move.

There was a similar project several years ago, although I don't believe
it was fundamentalists. Might have been an anti-tax group. Anyway, they
were all going to move to a state so that there votes would control the
state. They picked New Hampshire.

Texas has to large a population to make any kind of dent in.


There was also some talk about fundies moving en masse to one of the
Carolinas, I think. What is it with these religious nutcases?

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:40:14 -0500, thunder wrote:


There was a similar project several years ago, although I don't believe
it was fundamentalists. Might have been an anti-tax group. Anyway,
they were all going to move to a state so that there votes would control
the state. They picked New Hampshire.

Texas has to large a population to make any kind of dent in.

Found it:

http://www.freestateproject.org/intro