Let me do this again, because you still don't get it. I am not attacking you. I am commenting on your inability to understand what I posted.
How am I supposed to know what you MEANT to say? How much more of a breakdown do you need other than for individual band-aids? Wear and tear on the carpet? I did say what I MEANT (from original post): If a hospital charged for parts and labor, similar to any mechanical repair shop...
What this means is that overhead for the service department (hospital) is rolled into the labor cost, not the charge for the parts. The profit on the parts goes directly to the parts department - whatever they call that in the hospital. You see a standardization hostpial charges could allow customers to properly decide where they should go. Does your local hospital have a $500/hour labor rate? What about the one in the city? It may even be a good idea to break out how much the doctor gets paid out of the labor rate so you see exactly what is going on. This last is certainly questionable to me, however, as this cuts into privacy issues.
Well, yes. When I questioned the $1,100 charge for a tetanus shot I was told that if I had not had insurance the bill would have been about $200. So yes, I do think my bill from the hospital would have been a lot less. Hmmm, ugly fact getting in your way? Traditionally companies don't give up a profit like that until competition drives it down, which in precedents like cable companies (even in the same area) doesn't always happen. So, to answer your question: no, the fact that you purport to be there is not a fact, instead being a comparison of charges that says nothing about how things would be without the uninsured and more about how things would be without the insurance companies.
Because I felt like it? Also, it wasn't YOUR comment I was writing, it was MY comment and I'll put anything in it I feel like. Plus I didn't "attack" the other person, I diaagreed with him and pointed out that doctors are not the ones who are paying for non-insured patients - insured patients are paying for them. Let me help you to a little personal insight: You are actually upset that I said something in my post that wasn't about YOU. No, I simply think it is poor form to try to score points against someone without replying directly to them. They may wish to rebut what you said.
I understood your post perfectly well - I just don't agree with it. You seem to be having a major problem with someone having a different opinion of the situation than you. You clearly can't believe that anyone can hold a valid opinion of an issue unless it is exactly like yours. Wrongo, buddy-boy. If you read my reply to your first point at the top of this post, you will see why I say you didn't understand my first post. You only rebutted one of the opinions I posted and you didn't understand it. I am explaining it to you so you can reply with a valid opinion, however different.
I may have used too strong a rejoinder in that reply post, but I certainly did not attempt to invalidate your opinion.
With all those extra wires and solder, just imagine the size of those boards! The number of connections already there had to have been large in the first place. Doubling that could potentially be a problem for internal EMI. I wonder how many strategically placed capacitors they are going to need, especially if the traces are going to be taking different routes for better redundancy.
The question is: what if the government is telling the truth?
You can't trust the government if it hides anything.
You can't trust the government if it fully discloses everything (they must be lying).
You can't trust the government if it gives you information on a need-to-know.
How do you convince Joe Six-pack that we went to the moon?
That is the problem with Conspiracy theories. The more proof that you give, the more elaborate they perceive the conspiracy to be. Normally, I don't do corrections like this. When there are that many spelling and grammar errors, I feel obligated to make corrections.
Grammar Nazi at work. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Did you even read what I said about a breakdown? I mean a real breakdown, not the bullshit that they call a breakdown and that you obviously think is a breakdown.
Make hospitals open up a fraggin' R.O. on people where parts and labor are separated.
By the way, do you really think that your insurance company and hospitals would back off significantly on prices if the uninsured patient problem was removed? If so, then you have a serious flaw in the way you understand these people.
We need something between what Japan has (where the doctors really do get paid beans and the hospitals don't get the money they should) and what we have here.
Also, why use my comment as a vehicle for attacking another poster about the volunteer clinic doctor? Even I agree with you there.
Since you can't seem to understand my previous post, here's the summary:
Hospitals should move to a less obfuscated billing system. ER doctors are under-compensated for their duties under extreme pressure poor hours and getting stiffed for certain care situations.
Oh, please. The heart of the problem is that the hospital charges the way it charges. If a hospital charged for parts and labor, similar to any mechanical repair shop, things would be far easier to work out and individual patients would be cheated far less. You see, if things were charged that way and labor rate breakouts were put out for public consumption (i.e. How much the doctors were paid, how much went to overhead and how much was padded against the costs associated with providing care to the uninsured and those without the ability to pay), it would be easier to get the problem in front of concerned citizens for action. But as long as hospitals obfuscate their bills and emergent care customers allow it, nothing will be accomplished. Either way, the doctors are *not* adequately compensated, not with what they go through in that situation. Most don't complain loudly and often, because they feel they are doing something good. But they *all* complain on occasion.
Maybe you should learn math to figure out why it hurts him more than it does you.
Let's say that the emergency treatment an unfortunate is given costs 22,000 USD, out of which the doctor would be getting paid 2,000 USD.
Let's say only 100m taxpayers actually had to pay taxes that year. 22k/100m =.022 cents that any given taxpayer paid, on average, while the on-duty surgeon went unpaid for a $2k job.
And then you, being the asshole you are, throw a personal blow at this guy by calling him a bad doctor or unintelligent for being on the front lines and taking care of emergent situations?
I hope someone saves your life in the emergency room one day. Perhaps that would change your mind about the people that are in that line of work.
There is middle ground. In fact, the U.S. constitution says that there are certain inalienable rights and that after that, it's all up to legislation. So, essentially, our big important document takes the exact middle ground that you disavow.
Actually, the main settlers of the British Isles were Celts and Celt-Iberians. (Or Iberian Celts. Sorry, for this part of history I think in Spanish [Celt-Iberos], as that's the language I learned it in.) The Iberian people had a fairly large amount of trade and interbreeding with other Mediterranean peoples and therefore had a distinct cultural and physical set of features, different from the look of the Celts.
The Celts came through and did some bad things to the Iberians then mated with them (hence Celt-Iberians). Then the Romans came and had their city ransacked and generally got their asses handed to them by the Celts. Until they decided to party, shortly after which, the roman forces regrouped and crushed the carousers.
Anyway, Then the Romans continued with their expansion into Spain and eventually pushed a large group of Celts and Celt-Iberians to sailing off (to Brittany). A number remained and were assimilated, while some stood their ground and chose death by their own hands rather than ignominious starvation or surrender - Numantia. (The story of Numantia is actually quite interesting)
OK, um, done rambling.
You mean most/. posters. You're still wrong, but that is what you mean. Most/. posters seem to take umbrage at closed source strutting out the old we've-patented-that-already argument without any substance. They don't sue, usually. Why? It is not because they don't know if the material is infringing. It is OPEN SOURCE.
Get some coders to look into the source to check on infringement. (It pays to have a linux-proficient person or ten working for you, here.) They can pin-point the section of code and have others spot-check for accuracy and verification.
What we are really seeing is something known as FUD. They are trying to build a distrust of Linux in a manner not too different from what the MAFIAA is doing with p2p users. Unfortunately, the tactic is more effective for Microsoft, because most users don't double check the source of their data.
Anyway, what I am really getting to is that, most of the time, nothing comes from the articles of threatened legal action because they are non-substantive.
Point of contention. I believe you meant to say that the difference in weight is a factor of 12.
Either way you slice it, the weight of a container is always much greater than the weight of the compressed gas within it. In fact the best weight I've seen for a compressed hydrogen container is 6% of the container's (including the hydrogen) overall weight. This buckeyball is about 7.5% (8/108). That's a fairly significant increase in storage capacity.
Yes, this is considered a type of logical mapping and his solution is impressive. It took me a bit to slog through that 8 page set of proofs for his theorem. It's been a while since calculus and the related fields of number theory. Props to the man for pulling this off at 63!
I wish I had mod points, you'd get -1:Obfuscation.
If you should be afraid of any states having issues such as these, You should OMGUBERFUDCUZIDUNNOHOWFINANCESWORK about Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming.
What this graph is showing is a quantity over time. Presumably they used the same set of websites or whatever to run this test. What annoys me is that the "Time" on the X-axis doesn't have any values for reference.
I do it occasionally too, but that person is not going to believe you without support. However, if you researched further, you might find out that the experiment wasn't all it was cracked up to be.
It shouldn't be 'spark up' either. If I want to spark a conversation, I do so. Though I might drum up some interest when I do such a thing.
I propose that the originator of this thread and the child that sparked such debate are both kind of right.
The originator wanted to place the jokes into a queue. Thus, 'queue up' would be a correct usage. The child that spawned this crap should have removed the word 'up' to be correct. Personally, I think I would have said 'Cue the crazy ex-girlfriend jokes!'
But that's because I know/.ers don't like waiting in line.
Slashdot Mirror
Space pirates would love that solution too!
Yes, that's part of the reason TIE fighters never did very well in interplanetary travel, even in-system.
Thanks for the warning! I don't feel obliged if I don't read it... *deletes 152 page document and accompanying e-mail*
How am I supposed to know what you MEANT to say? How much more of a breakdown do you need other than for individual band-aids? Wear and tear on the carpet? I did say what I MEANT (from original post): If a hospital charged for parts and labor, similar to any mechanical repair shop...
What this means is that overhead for the service department (hospital) is rolled into the labor cost, not the charge for the parts. The profit on the parts goes directly to the parts department - whatever they call that in the hospital. You see a standardization hostpial charges could allow customers to properly decide where they should go. Does your local hospital have a $500/hour labor rate? What about the one in the city? It may even be a good idea to break out how much the doctor gets paid out of the labor rate so you see exactly what is going on. This last is certainly questionable to me, however, as this cuts into privacy issues.
Well, yes. When I questioned the $1,100 charge for a tetanus shot I was told that if I had not had insurance the bill would have been about $200. So yes, I do think my bill from the hospital would have been a lot less. Hmmm, ugly fact getting in your way? Traditionally companies don't give up a profit like that until competition drives it down, which in precedents like cable companies (even in the same area) doesn't always happen. So, to answer your question: no, the fact that you purport to be there is not a fact, instead being a comparison of charges that says nothing about how things would be without the uninsured and more about how things would be without the insurance companies.
Because I felt like it? Also, it wasn't YOUR comment I was writing, it was MY comment and I'll put anything in it I feel like. Plus I didn't "attack" the other person, I diaagreed with him and pointed out that doctors are not the ones who are paying for non-insured patients - insured patients are paying for them. Let me help you to a little personal insight: You are actually upset that I said something in my post that wasn't about YOU. No, I simply think it is poor form to try to score points against someone without replying directly to them. They may wish to rebut what you said.
I understood your post perfectly well - I just don't agree with it. You seem to be having a major problem with someone having a different opinion of the situation than you. You clearly can't believe that anyone can hold a valid opinion of an issue unless it is exactly like yours. Wrongo, buddy-boy. If you read my reply to your first point at the top of this post, you will see why I say you didn't understand my first post. You only rebutted one of the opinions I posted and you didn't understand it. I am explaining it to you so you can reply with a valid opinion, however different.
I may have used too strong a rejoinder in that reply post, but I certainly did not attempt to invalidate your opinion.
With all those extra wires and solder, just imagine the size of those boards! The number of connections already there had to have been large in the first place. Doubling that could potentially be a problem for internal EMI. I wonder how many strategically placed capacitors they are going to need, especially if the traces are going to be taking different routes for better redundancy.
You can't trust the government if it hides anything.
You can't trust the government if it fully discloses everything (they must be lying).
You can't trust the government if it gives you information on a need-to-know.
How do you convince Joe Six-pack that we went to the moon?
That is the problem with Conspiracy theories. The more proof that you give, the more elaborate they perceive the conspiracy to be. Normally, I don't do corrections like this. When there are that many spelling and grammar errors, I feel obligated to make corrections.
Grammar Nazi at work. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Did you even read what I said about a breakdown? I mean a real breakdown, not the bullshit that they call a breakdown and that you obviously think is a breakdown.
Make hospitals open up a fraggin' R.O. on people where parts and labor are separated.
By the way, do you really think that your insurance company and hospitals would back off significantly on prices if the uninsured patient problem was removed? If so, then you have a serious flaw in the way you understand these people.
We need something between what Japan has (where the doctors really do get paid beans and the hospitals don't get the money they should) and what we have here.
Also, why use my comment as a vehicle for attacking another poster about the volunteer clinic doctor? Even I agree with you there.
Since you can't seem to understand my previous post, here's the summary:
Hospitals should move to a less obfuscated billing system. ER doctors are under-compensated for their duties under extreme pressure poor hours and getting stiffed for certain care situations.
Oh, please. The heart of the problem is that the hospital charges the way it charges. If a hospital charged for parts and labor, similar to any mechanical repair shop, things would be far easier to work out and individual patients would be cheated far less. You see, if things were charged that way and labor rate breakouts were put out for public consumption (i.e. How much the doctors were paid, how much went to overhead and how much was padded against the costs associated with providing care to the uninsured and those without the ability to pay), it would be easier to get the problem in front of concerned citizens for action. But as long as hospitals obfuscate their bills and emergent care customers allow it, nothing will be accomplished. Either way, the doctors are *not* adequately compensated, not with what they go through in that situation. Most don't complain loudly and often, because they feel they are doing something good. But they *all* complain on occasion.
Maybe you should learn math to figure out why it hurts him more than it does you.
.022 cents that any given taxpayer paid, on average, while the on-duty surgeon went unpaid for a $2k job.
Let's say that the emergency treatment an unfortunate is given costs 22,000 USD, out of which the doctor would be getting paid 2,000 USD.
Let's say only 100m taxpayers actually had to pay taxes that year. 22k/100m =
And then you, being the asshole you are, throw a personal blow at this guy by calling him a bad doctor or unintelligent for being on the front lines and taking care of emergent situations?
I hope someone saves your life in the emergency room one day. Perhaps that would change your mind about the people that are in that line of work.
There is middle ground. In fact, the U.S. constitution says that there are certain inalienable rights and that after that, it's all up to legislation. So, essentially, our big important document takes the exact middle ground that you disavow.
True. Also, I finally bothered to look up your sig. I can't trust you now.
The spudcannon is awesome. http://www.spudfiles.com/
For me, though, I think a cat-gun is in order. That or a sledgehammer gun.
I was thinking Illithid
Actually, the main settlers of the British Isles were Celts and Celt-Iberians. (Or Iberian Celts. Sorry, for this part of history I think in Spanish [Celt-Iberos], as that's the language I learned it in.) The Iberian people had a fairly large amount of trade and interbreeding with other Mediterranean peoples and therefore had a distinct cultural and physical set of features, different from the look of the Celts.
The Celts came through and did some bad things to the Iberians then mated with them (hence Celt-Iberians). Then the Romans came and had their city ransacked and generally got their asses handed to them by the Celts. Until they decided to party, shortly after which, the roman forces regrouped and crushed the carousers.
Anyway, Then the Romans continued with their expansion into Spain and eventually pushed a large group of Celts and Celt-Iberians to sailing off (to Brittany). A number remained and were assimilated, while some stood their ground and chose death by their own hands rather than ignominious starvation or surrender - Numantia. (The story of Numantia is actually quite interesting) OK, um, done rambling.
"That's the idea..."
*blaster goes off*
Han shot first.
It makes sense only for case droppers imo.
You mean most /. posters. You're still wrong, but that is what you mean. Most /. posters seem to take umbrage at closed source strutting out the old we've-patented-that-already argument without any substance. They don't sue, usually. Why? It is not because they don't know if the material is infringing. It is OPEN SOURCE.
Get some coders to look into the source to check on infringement. (It pays to have a linux-proficient person or ten working for you, here.) They can pin-point the section of code and have others spot-check for accuracy and verification.
What we are really seeing is something known as FUD. They are trying to build a distrust of Linux in a manner not too different from what the MAFIAA is doing with p2p users. Unfortunately, the tactic is more effective for Microsoft, because most users don't double check the source of their data.
Anyway, what I am really getting to is that, most of the time, nothing comes from the articles of threatened legal action because they are non-substantive.
Point of contention. I believe you meant to say that the difference in weight is a factor of 12.
Either way you slice it, the weight of a container is always much greater than the weight of the compressed gas within it. In fact the best weight I've seen for a compressed hydrogen container is 6% of the container's (including the hydrogen) overall weight. This buckeyball is about 7.5% (8/108). That's a fairly significant increase in storage capacity.
Yes, this is considered a type of logical mapping and his solution is impressive. It took me a bit to slog through that 8 page set of proofs for his theorem. It's been a while since calculus and the related fields of number theory. Props to the man for pulling this off at 63!
I wish I had mod points, you'd get -1:Obfuscation.
If you should be afraid of any states having issues such as these, You should OMGUBERFUDCUZIDUNNOHOWFINANCESWORK about Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming.
What this graph is showing is a quantity over time. Presumably they used the same set of websites or whatever to run this test. What annoys me is that the "Time" on the X-axis doesn't have any values for reference.
I do it occasionally too, but that person is not going to believe you without support. However, if you researched further, you might find out that the experiment wasn't all it was cracked up to be.
No, he didn't. Think of it this way: error type versus error description. I would have said grammatical also, but he does not fail at grammar.
Any idea who this dipshit that likes to mod you down when he gets mod points happens to be? Meh.
It shouldn't be 'spark up' either. If I want to spark a conversation, I do so. Though I might drum up some interest when I do such a thing.
/.ers don't like waiting in line.
I propose that the originator of this thread and the child that sparked such debate are both kind of right. The originator wanted to place the jokes into a queue. Thus, 'queue up' would be a correct usage. The child that spawned this crap should have removed the word 'up' to be correct. Personally, I think I would have said 'Cue the crazy ex-girlfriend jokes!' But that's because I know