[Rhodes22-list] Steve's respect, and health care costs

[Hank]

Robert, 

You gave it a valiant attempt, but you shouldn't wrestle with the
pigs, you'll only get muddy and the pigs like it.

Hank


On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 13:28:08 -0800 (PST), Steve <rhodes2282 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Robert
> 
> 
> 
> --- Robert Skinner <robert at squirrelhaven.com> wrote:
> 
> > Steve wrote:
> > > Ed
> > > They are not be considerate of me.
> > -------------------------
> > Steve - your lack of care in spelling, grammar, and
> > logic, combined with your claim of expertise and a
> > responsible US government position invites far more
> > ridicule than you have been offered.
> >
> > Take a little more care in writing your messages,
> > and you will get more consideration, and more
> > respect.
> > It's not that I don't like you -- quite the
> > contrary.
> > I thought you enjoyed slugging it out, and from your
> > freedom with insults, I thought you had a pretty
> > thick
> > skin.
> >
> > Please accept my apologies if I have overstepped the
> >
> > bounds of decency and fair play.
> 
> Spelling/grammer mean nothing.  Being a conservative
> is what counts.  Your high & mighty liberalism is a
> thing of the past.  Spelled right or not!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> > ------------------------
> > >  And this country
> > > current deficit is completely manageable.
> > ------------------------
> > Steve - From your research post re the deficit:
> > "This
> > is far from a trivial sum, but it is not necessarily
> > an
> > impossible burden either."  That is not a clear
> > "completely manageable", as you claim.  It will be
> > an
> > uphill fight all the way and for a long time.
> 
> As long as the Republican are in power; it's not a
> problem.  The Republican made the first surpluss and
> we will fix the mess the Democrats made undeer
> Clinton.
> 
> 
> 
> > -------------------------
> > > Example; on the previous post of research.  Health
> > > care cost being the one thing that this country
> > must
> > > address.
> > ---------------------------
> > >From Steve's post: "The
> > assumption in this study – that private sector
> > health
> > care costs continue to explode for the next eighty
> > years – would have a devastating impact on the
> > economy
> > even if we eliminated all publicly supported health
> > care programs. If health care costs are brought
> > under
> > control, then the projected deficit would be
> > manageable, and not qualitatively different than
> > what
> > comparable projections would have indicated in prior
> > years."
> >
> > This is pretty specific - private, not public,
> > health
> > care costs are the culprit.  It sounds as if we are
> > about to move toward government control of health
> > costs -- something like socialized medicine?
> 
> Once again, you have missed the point on Health Care.
> The problem is in Tort Reform.  That will fix Health
> Care costs.  Your are trying to talk around the issue.
> You CAP settlements and all the costs related to
> liability claims will lessen health care costs.  And
> if people were smarter and research thier doctors;
> there wouldn't even be a need in all these lawsuits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > ---------------------
> > > If we inact Tort reform, Health care costs
> > > stop rising at the uncontrol level they currently
> > are.
> > >  Reason, Health care costs have to factors that do
> > not
> > > increase life span or improve health.  They are:
> > > Lawsuits
> > > Doctor & Hospital liability inssurance
> > >
> > > Enact Tort reform; eliminating the above two
> > > uncontrolable double digits increases in costs and
> > you
> > > have solved the main problem with the deficit.
> > -------------------------
> > Here is where Steve extrapolates from his data.  The
> > above-referenced post did not mention tort reform.
> > It
> > did say, "the study by Gokhale and Smetters
> > demonstrated the importance of fixing the U.S.
> > health
> > care system. If costs continue to rise out of
> > control,
> > it will have a devastating impact on the economic
> > well-being of future generations."   No argument
> > there.
> >
> 
> What I did was quote How Bush will fix the Health care
> problem.  Thereby putting a finishing touch to the
> article.
> 
> 
> > But the cost of drugs is ignored in Steve's
> > immediately
> > prior comments, as are the costs of a "competitive"
> > private hospital system, the insurance industry
> > overhead, costs of denial of preventative health
> > care
> > to children, etc.
> >
> 
> No the cost of drugs is not being ignored.  If you had
> any brains at all you would know that Bush has
> implementated a Prescription Drug plan for Medicare.
> And most states / public & private plans are
> implementating Evident Based Drug Provision in there
> packages offered to employees.  The drastic rise in PD
> is being fixed.
> 
> Your other comments are simple bullshit.  The cost of
> denial of preventative health care.  The nothinbg but
> a Liberal scare comments that means NOTHING.  If it
> got deny; then it wasn't needed.  Preventative Health
> Care is being paid and not being denied.  Just Liberal
> crap!!!!!!!!!
> 
> > Yes, we can temporarily reduce some costs by
> > preventing
> > people from being able to recover damages and
> > reducing
> > the medical establishment's incentive to act
> > responsibly,
> 
> You are totally WRONG.  Tort Reform will fix the
> problem.
> 
> but we could also accomplish results by
> >
> > enhancing the role of PA's - those with more skills
> > than nurses, but less expensive than doctors.
> >
> 
> Look who it trying to reinvent the wheel.  You are
> trying to bring on a whole new case of lawsuit.  When
> a service is order as medically necessary; it must be
> order by a Doc.  So that accountability can be
> estiblish in cases of fruad.
> 
> 
> > The answers are neither simple nor painless, and all
> > avenues need to be explored, not just those proposed
> > by the current administration.
> 
> Luckily, the Republicans are going to fix all this
> while the Dems are sitting on the sidelines.  And they
> got no one to blame but themselves.
> 
> 
> > ----------------------
> > > Of course, reducing discretionary spending will
> > help
> > > also.
> > -----------------------
> > Guess we'll have to stop buying boats...  But if the
> > movement of goods and money slows down, doesn't the
> > economy stagnate?
> >
> 
> Do you even know how government works.  That what is
> wrong with Liberal; lack of understanding & to much
> talking.  Discretionary spending by government.
> Doesn't have anything to do with the private sector.
> 
> 
> > --
> > Robert Skinner
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> 
>                
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
> http://my.yahoo.com 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>