Agrreed OCCOM BILL! (Damn! I never though I'd say that!)
I'm all for people not making stupid decisions about anything -- picking a partner, buying a TV, hiring a contractor, but I'm don't often find empathy for that sort of blind spot. However, when it comes to medical care, it's simply because you can't let people suffer and die because they made a stupid (or bad) decision. Likewise, if they are just in a position that they can't afford the inflated insurance cost, especially small business owners. The HMO's have failed badly in their so-called free enterprise endeavor because their plot under scrutiny is not to the benefit of the patient, hospitals or doctors but to pay their hierarchy big bucks. The drug companies have bled out all the rationalization that they have to get their money back on research with the threat that research will stop. This after selling people bad drugs as well as good drugs (sometimes the physician or the medical group, but especially the HMO's are to blame here). Actually they've stepped up to bat to an extent with Medicare and the HMO's administrations handling Medicare but it's not much more than tokenism.
From MM's site (no, that's not Marilyn Monroe):
Today, Michael Moore will be live on Countdown with Keith Olbermann on MSNBC at 8:00 PM (EST). If you forget to set your alarm clock, it will be on again at midnight (also EST).
I'm not surprised by Occom Bill's position on this. I've noticed in many threads he is willing to changing his mind when presented with some ideas that make sense to him and fit his values. As Conservatives on this forum go, I find Bill is one of the few who actually reads what other people write and keeps an open mind in the process. I may not always agree with his opinions, but they are not the knee jerk conservative dogma so many others around here succumb to.
Oh I know, and I agree. Bill's a cool guy, I like him a lot. That's still quite a reversal.
I'm not even sure if I'm for single-payer health care. That is, if I could snap my fingers and make it so I might be -- but in terms of politicians I support, I think a more measured approach might be necessary for anything to really happen.
I'm not sure yet, still learning about this issue.
Might give the Moore movie a look-see. The problem is that while I think he usually chooses worthwhile topics, I often dislike his tactics. I'm worried that enough problems will turn up with this movie that it can easily be dismissed as just more propaganda, when I think the core issue is very serious and valid. We'll see.
We've certainly locked horns in the past but sometimes only because I get a kick out of needling him (except I'm sure he always knew that). I don't think this is a right or left issue and Moore tried his best to keep politics out of his polemic, including his own. He's never been an innocent bystander and he has bothered me with some of his more blunt approaches that seemed to me ill-conceived. I didn't find that with this film. The ending of the movie seems like a stunt until you see his interviews or read about his motives and what happened behind the scenes. Actually some of it extremely funny in itself.
Green Witch wrote:I'm not surprised by Occom Bill's position on this. I've noticed in many threads he is willing to changing his mind when presented with some ideas that make sense to him and fit his values. As Conservatives on this forum go, I find Bill is one of the few who actually reads what other people write and keeps an open mind in the process. I may not always agree with his opinions, but they are not the knee jerk conservative dogma so many others around here succumb to.
I agree with that, Green Witch.
Bill can be rational at times and, although he is a cheesehead, he still has my respect.
Let's give Bill a big liberal hug (with a little boobing) and invite him to our next tofu BBQ...
((((oo))))
sozobe wrote:Gus has boobs? Who knew?
Those bib overalls make everyone look flat chested.
I heard in UK most of the Insurance companies dont cover or classify these as least fatal conditions ...
1. Epidemics
2. Flu brought from Asian Countries
3. Cancer treatment for smokers
Please source that if you can. "I heard" means little from an anonymous poster on a message board.
vinsan wrote:I heard in UK most of the Insurance companies dont cover or classify these as least fatal conditions ...
1. Epidemics
2. Flu brought from Asian Countries
3. Cancer treatment for smokers
There are
a) sources online
b) enough Britons here
who could tell you to do either get your ears checked and look for someone else to talk with.
On the other hand, flu originating anywhere west of the Urals gains coverage.
1. Most insurance companies -- so some insurance companies cover one, two or all three of the illnesses?
2. Not having studied the UK universal health provisions in detail, when does the government take responsibility if the insurance company won't authorize or pay for illnesses?
3. Least fatal? What does that mean? What epidemics are "least fatal?" AIDS? Allergies to British cooking? Bad teeth? Dandruff?
I know. I apologize -- could not pass it up.
