@GrreatTeacher: Now why would you say that?
MeanMrMustard
JoinedPosts by MeanMrMustard
-
55
Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.
by FlyingHighNow insign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.
if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.
that worked for me.
-
-
-
112
Supreme Court ruling- refusing to photo gay wedding is discrimination
by SadElder inaccording to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
So would you be OK with "Whites Only" shop signs, an if not what's the difference?
Personally, no. I think it is repulsive. And so does everyone else. They would go out of business. I don't like the government getting the camel's nose under the tent.
-
112
Supreme Court ruling- refusing to photo gay wedding is discrimination
by SadElder inaccording to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Tell me the difference...
So you (a black man) have a publican refuse to take serve you a beer - so what? Why not go to another bar? Sheesh.
Are there laws preventing me from entering into the bar next door - which is glad to accept black men? In relation to the photographer, this does have religious freedom issues tied to it. But let's say it did not - that the photographer just hates gay people. In other words, she is just a bad person. What policy would be the best to maximize her punishment, while NOT punishing others? If the society does not accept that behavior, then the market will soon see that her business ends (or is badly hurt).
MMM
-
112
Supreme Court ruling- refusing to photo gay wedding is discrimination
by SadElder inaccording to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
" For the same reasons Jim Crow laws bothered people."
Apples and Oranges - Jim Crow laws were laws originating with the state and local government, legislating the segregation. This is different than a personal choice. I do think these laws were a horrible choice, as they prevented the segregation from ending sooner.
MMM
-
112
Supreme Court ruling- refusing to photo gay wedding is discrimination
by SadElder inaccording to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
Good Lord.
For the life of me, I can't figure out why it bothers people. So you have a photographer refuse to take the job - so what? Why not contract with another photographer? Sheesh.
" While this case applies in New Mexico, does it mean that Joe Eldubwindowasher cannot refuse to wash windows on the Catholic church or the local military base?"
Perhaps. But the I wonder if the Catholic Church would even care to make such a fuss. This is really horrible. But, I am OK to have the Supreme Court staying out of it. At least people can move out of New Mexico.
MMM
-
55
Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.
by FlyingHighNow insign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.
if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.
that worked for me.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@EOM:
to mrmeans question, yes the healthcare industry is very wrong and corrupt. The profit is by unethical means and by hurting people than by helping people.
I agree to this. But not to the notion that profit, in and of itself, (even in the field of healthcare) is unethical. Having employer based insurance was first created by government wage and price controls, and is perpetuated by giving employers tax incentives to continue to offer it.
For example, our bodies are like machines, they require a certain amount of vitamins, amino acids, minerals, etc to function properly. A zinc deficiency can give you bad sexual side effects. A vitamin D deficiency will make you fatigue, etc. Almost all health problems are due to a deficiency or bad balance of nutrients.
Yes, I do agree to this too.
If you go to a doctor with a bunch of issues, logic would dictate that they would first run a complete nutrient panel to see if the symptoms may be due to deficiencies or overdoses in what your body needs just to function properly. But NOOO, not only will you have a hard time finding that, your insurance won't cover it either.
Right, the doctor can change larger amounts doing things that the insurance will cover. There is clear motivation for the doctor to do things he/she shouldn't be doing.
Also many people are allergic to foods and additives, etc, so logic would dictate having a food allergy test as well. Again, NO, insurance, etc, won't cover that.
Hmmm, some policies might. But that is beside the point. Again, I agree.
Why is that? Because the doctors will treat the SYMPTOMS NOT the cause. Why? Because if you identify the cause as a deficiency in a certain vitamin, you change your eating habits or get some cheap over the counter vitamins and you get better. The pharmacy companies would lose out on the pills they would prescribe for that.
Under what scenario would the doctor be more likely to do the right thing? I would say when the doctor is financially accountable to the consumer.
But it gets even better, the doctor then prescribes a pill instead of identifying the cause, and the pill has side effects, so you start off on one pill and end up on 10 pills to manage the side effects of the other pills.
I agree.
It still gets even better,,,,if you are taking psychological drugs, many of them will change your body and it will become dependent on them, trying to stop can be near impossible. Some take years to stop and suffer life long side effects.
I agree.
Why is there no cure for cancer? Because they make billions a year, they dont' want to cut off their money supply.
I agree. But I have a feeling a cure for cancer might be a hard nut to crack, so-to-speak. But the question I would ask is: what environment provides the most potential for profit while at the same time being consumer oriented?
If the healthcare industry was moral and not corrupt, then tests of vitamins and nutrients would be the starting point. If everything was checking out well there, then it would look into other matters.
Perhaps. I don't have anything against this. We agree on many things.
Also the FDA has allowed and continues to allow many foods, preservatives, additives, methods that are bad and dangerous and have bad long term side effects.
Abso-freaking-lutely. For the big government crowd - how does that make you feel?
So yes, the profit in the healthcare industry is wrong, the profit is tempting them to hinder and keep people sick to keep milking them for money. If the healthcare industry has their way, you will be reliant and live your whole life hooked on their pills.
They can only have their way with the help of legislation. A market would curtail that.
We agree on many things.
MMM
-
55
Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.
by FlyingHighNow insign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.
if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.
that worked for me.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@FlyingHighNow:
Sorry for a delay in response. I am pretty busy lately. Let me start at the end of your post and work backwards. You wrote:
Millions of Americans are upset because millions of us want everyone covered with affordable health insurance and healthcare?
Are we a nation of cold hearted barbarians? What neighbors, friends and family members are expendible, so we can pay a few dollars less in taxes?
This makes it sound as if everyone must be favor of the ACA and more socialized medicine, otherwise they are "cold hearted barbarians". It is, in fact, just the opposite. Nobody wants people to go without healthcare. Or food, or clothing, or anything for that matter. Do you really think that those who oppose government programs have, as their motivation, a denial of a high standard of living to individuals? There are reasons why the ACA and other government programs are opposed.
The medical market is just like any other market - food, clothing, housing, or paperclips. If you separate the consumer from the cost (by offering to pay for the product), the price of the care will necessarily rise. This is because neither the consumer nor the provider is getting correct feedback from the market through prices. From the perspective of the consumer, the price = 0, and it looks like an infinite supply. From the perspective of the provider, demand is way up, so these are signals to expand and raise the price. The ACA is "affordable" only in the sense that some people aren't paying for the medical care. The price is still being paid on the provider side, and the price will still rise. This causes those that do not have insurance to pay more because they are actually still attached to the price. Their stories come out as bankruptcies, and large bills as hospitals cost shift onto them (as in your cited book). It also causes those that do not qualify for subsidies to pay more. Somebody has to pay the higher prices, and the prices ARE going to go up. The nature of markets isn't going to change, anymore than the nature of gravity.
Also, for those that get their care subsidized, where does the money come from? The rich, perhaps through high taxation? No. The rich have free will, and will simply raise their prices, or stop hiring, or actually lay off some employees, and more likely a combination of all these. So who really pays for it? Perhaps the money is borrowed? I'm sure the creditors will want to be paid back in the future. How is that sustainable since the cost of care will continue to rise? So who is really paying for it? Perhaps the money is just printed? Well, then inflation will take the value out from the poorest - since they have the least amount of assets that can act as a hedge. Inflation is hidden taxation, mostly on the poor. So who really pays?
The problem is actually greater than just the cost at the provider level. The producers are also consumers in a sense - they buy the materials needed to provide their care. The price structure for these goods and services will also inflate. Eventually, it has to stop. The cost will be too high. At some point, there will be price controls and rationing put in place. The boom can't go on forever. The bubble can't inflate forever.
Who pays when uninsured people use the emergency room for medical care and the bill is hundreds of dollars? What if they are admitted and need surgery and the bills run into the many thousands of dollars? Isn't it less expensive to use preventive care and to screen regularly, catch things early? Our republican governor fought hard to get expanded medicaid passed in our state, because as a former business man, even he could see how much more cost effective it is to insure people and give them timely medical care.
"Republican" doesn't mean anything anymore. They are for exanded government too.
Again, this is to ask: "How do we pay for this care?". I ask, "Why can't people afford the care on their own?" - or in other words, "Why is the price so high that people can't afford it on their own?" There was a time when people just went to the doctor without insurance, and paid for it. It wasn't a crippling expense. (see previous paragraph)
Markets need less regulation (so that you don't have such high entry barriers to new providers - there needs to be competition), consumers need to be attached to the cost so that they shop around, and there needs to be a stable money supply. For decades we have had none of this. We don't have a market in health care, and that is the problem.
MMM
-
46
WTBT$ will no longer support Elder's legally....
by Newly Enlightened inwe received an email and are wondering if anyone can verify this little tidbit of news.
does anyone know if this is true or not?.
maybe any elder's on here?.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
This might be good for those wanting to get out of being DFed. If the elders know that they won't be supported by the WT for legal issues, then they can be intimidated. Those up for DFing can threaten a law suit (even though it would never go anywhere legally) with the intent of bankrupting the elders. The elders will act in their best financial interests.
MMM
-
55
Don't miss the health care sign up deadline.
by FlyingHighNow insign up deadline is the 31st, in a couple of days.
if you have problems with the website and youve been there before, try cleaning out your cookies and cache, then restart your computer.
that worked for me.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
@FlyingHighNow:
Read the book. The entire book. It's a place to begin to understand how health care costs have risen to impossible heights. After that, continue to educate yourself. Everyone should understand what has happened.
I understand you don't want me to derail the thread's purpose. Fair enough. I'll have to get ahold of the book. Truthfully, I am more interested in the chapters titled "Curing the Ills" and "Crisis and Opportunity" - near the end. These chapters will most likely reveal whether the author(s) favors more governement programs to correct the wrongs that government programs caused.
It isn't just the doctors fees. There are hospitals, too. Heatlh care was allowed to become big business. Profit is the goal. You are the commodity. It isn't just the doctors getting filthy, stinkin' rich off this, not that all of the doctors are.
Do you see profit in the health care industry as wrong? How about in the food industry? Or perhaps the housing industry?
More importantly: what sort of mechanisms would bring the cost down? Would price controls work? (even though they caused the employer based insurance during WWII).
MMM
-
6
Emotional cruelty law considered in the UK.
by nicolaou in"the (uk) government is considering whether to introduce a new offence of emotional cruelty to children, it has been confirmed.
the proposed change to neglect laws in england and wales would see parents who deny their children affection face prosecution for the first time.. mr williams's bill would add a further category of harm for which the perpetrator could be punished: impairment of "physical, intellectual, emotional, social or behavioural development".
i'd like to hear from mr paul gillies or any other watchtower representative in the uk as to how they'd square this proposed new legislation with their doctrine of disfellowshipping minors.
-
-
MeanMrMustard
How is " emotional cruelty" defined? Seems very subjective, and could be abused quite easily.
MMM