Results 121 to 130 of 200
-
29th April 2010, 06:24 #121Senior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Posts
- 19,191
- Like
- 0
- Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
I think another difference is that Bob's hospital and insurance company try to profit from Bob. If Bob gets hurt, the hospital makes profit, if Bob doesn't get hurt, the insurance company makes profit. Either way, Bob pays.
Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa
I could really use a fish right now
-
29th April 2010, 08:06 #122Senior Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 3,189
- Like
- 0
- Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
That is why I did not carry insurance.
Originally Posted by Eki
-
29th April 2010, 12:45 #123Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2003
- Posts
- 3,845
- Like
- 0
- Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
You obviously have no clue how the health insurance industry works here. Yes, it was complicated. The new "law" did nothing to correct those complications, nor did it do anything to drive down costs.
Originally Posted by Eki
As for "skiming money", what do you think the government will do if they control the whole thing? They are all perfect angels, right? There is no waste, fraud, or abuse in a government system, right? There aren't layers upon layers of needless beurocracy in government, right? Come on.The overall technical objective in racing is the achievement of a vehicle configuration, acceptable within the practical interpretation of the rules, which can traverse a given course in a minimum time. -Milliken
-
29th April 2010, 12:48 #124Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2003
- Posts
- 3,845
- Like
- 0
- Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
In your system, you pay the government. If you get hurt the government makes money on taxes, and then they'll probably raise them too. If you don't get hurt the government makes money on taxes, and they'll probably raise them then too.
Originally Posted by Eki
Just because government doesn't make "profit", doesn't mean that you're not overpaying for services.The overall technical objective in racing is the achievement of a vehicle configuration, acceptable within the practical interpretation of the rules, which can traverse a given course in a minimum time. -Milliken
-
29th April 2010, 12:52 #125Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Tallinn, Estonia
- Posts
- 5,637
- Like
- 0
- Liked 11 Times in 11 Posts
I'm not so familiar with your new health care legislation, but wasn't the major underlying problem the fact that Americans pay way more for their health care than anyone else in the Western world?
Originally Posted by chuck34
-
29th April 2010, 16:14 #126Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2003
- Posts
- 3,845
- Like
- 0
- Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I've always been a bit skeptical of that figure. I don't know if they figure in taxes, fees, etc. that other countires pay. Are they really comparing apples and oranges?
Originally Posted by Kristjan
And even if we do pay more, so what? As long as I'm getting good quality health care I'm willing to pay for it. Is money really everything? Look at it this way. There are two ways to get your apendix taken out. One is the "old" way of slicing your gut open and pulling it out. That opens you up for infections, complecations, and has a fairly long recovery time. The other is the "new" way where they go in through your belly button with a scope and suck it out. There is little risk of infection, complecations, and the recovery is swift. Now the "old" way is cheap, and the "new" way is more expensive. And that's not the only example like this. So is cost really everything?The overall technical objective in racing is the achievement of a vehicle configuration, acceptable within the practical interpretation of the rules, which can traverse a given course in a minimum time. -Milliken
-
29th April 2010, 16:33 #127Senior Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- Posts
- 14,547
- Like
- 0
- Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Why shouldn't Bob pay? Like most Americans, he wants something, he will make money and pay for it. You think your healthcare is free? I have "free" healthcare in Canada to the extent beyond most of Europe. I have no private option short of driving to the US for it. Yet I am paying a very high level of taxes for it, and I am in the middle class.
Originally Posted by Eki
Yes, there is a role for some minimum level of healthcare in society. I think the poor and uninsured should be looked after, but those making a good living usually would be quite willing to pay for a higher quality healthcare. AS Chuck has pointed out in his posts, "Cheap" doesn't always mean better..."Water for my horses, beer for my men and mud for my turtle".
-
29th April 2010, 16:33 #128Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Tallinn, Estonia
- Posts
- 5,637
- Like
- 0
- Liked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Is health care in Canada, for example, of lower quality than in the US? I've read that Canadians spend about 10% of their GDP on health care each year, while the Americans spend about 15%. I don't know how accurate that is. But if it's true, it would strongly indicate that your existing way of administering health care was inefficient.
Originally Posted by chuck34
-
29th April 2010, 16:38 #129Senior Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- Posts
- 14,547
- Like
- 0
- Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
They pay more in a visible way, but pay less taxes. Furthermore, they have choices and can make more decisions on their care. In a gov't system, certain treatments or procedures may not be available. Americans have only their ability to pay as a restriction... Which may sound like only an option for the rich, but it does point out that one size fits all healthcare is rationed. It makes it a slave to the state, and it becomes an entitlement that chews up large amounts of the budget and makes medical care a political football. All of these things annoy Americans...because America was created to be free off but minimal state encroachment into the private lives of its citizens. It isn't that way now...and people are resenting it.
Originally Posted by Kristjan
"Water for my horses, beer for my men and mud for my turtle".
-
29th April 2010, 16:44 #130Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Tallinn, Estonia
- Posts
- 5,637
- Like
- 0
- Liked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Ok. When you put it like that, I can understand it.
Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa


Reply With Quote
George Russell laments 'one thing after another' following Suzuka disaster. George Russell was not pleased with the series of unfortunate events he endured during the Japanese Grand Prix. 30 Mar...
Formula 1: Articles & News...