"Google were evil if they tried to pick and choose who can use them to advertise."
so if al quaida can afford recruiting ads, google should sell the ads. just as the soviets selling tanks to saddam hussein weren't evil. or republicans selling weapons to khomeini weren't evil. they're just hard-working entrepreneurs making a buck in the free-market supply and demand system. worship them!
btw, i should mention that google's anti-sicko advert initiative isn't as heinous as many other "entrepreneurial" organizations, so google isn't terribly (relatively) evil.
"They are chronically understaffed because so many institutions have become for-profit. The overhead of dealing with medical billing is insane and every clerk hired means one less nurse."
visit your primary md. ignore storage** and the waiting room. you'll notice about half the sf is devoted to admin (stuffed full of cubies and shelves of files to 8 ft high, etc).
then notice that most of the remaining sf is patient visit rooms in which fewer than 50% of patient-occupied rooms also contain medical staff.
that should give you an idea of staffing-hours ratios.
* (whatever's in there? stacked bodies of course.)
""There are lots of problems with the US medical system. Lack of government involvment, however, really isn't one of them. There are a couple of no-brainers that would greatly improve things, however like: 1) let individuals buy insurance from out of state companies and ""
the supreme court would probably find that violates interstate commerce blah blah.
""2) let individuals deduct insurance and other medical expenses from their end of year taxes (rather than, at best, the not-very-good Medical Savings Plan).""
ugh, no. get rid of all the stupid deductions. tax in relation to cost (and then ability to pay). so eg, the feds need to (reduce income tax, and) begin collecting property tax, since much of fed govt activity relates to property.
"And while we're at it, let's reform the patent system for drugs. Maybe if the taxpayers pay for it, don't give a patent, or give it for shorter terms, and certainly don't EXTEND the patent beyond the original terms (even if the taxpayers didn't pay for it, because then the taxpayers pay for it)."
by that def, universal coverage isn't "socialism" since govt is a payer, not a provider.
however the u.s. military is providing defense (sometimes) against certain types of violent attacks upon property and persons. and the us military is a heavily government organization (parts are private, such as weapons and facility contractors, and the mercenary contractors). so the military is a the most predominant socialist industry in the U.S.A. but cons like a socialist military because it's *conservative* socialism.
there are competitive pressures on every activity. but how long do you want to wait for things to improve? the advantage of limited government is that we choose to more closely monitor/direct relatively few critical activities.
we don't need someone telling someone else what color(s) they can paint their residence. but if organizations that control health care are killing an "excess" of people, then we need to step in and take care of that problem.
Slashdot Mirror
http://google-health-ads.blogspot.com/2007/07/my-o pinion-and-googles.html
yep, the income is irrelevant. the act is what may or may not be evil. http://www.google.com/search?q=+just+to+%22pay+the +mortgage%22+author+Christopher+Buckley+nazis
yep. ppl should be glad to pay for effective** healthcare.
a key question is why more ppl don't buy the catastrophic insurance. tho $5k(+?)/yr isn't affordable for lots of the ppl who aren't insured.
the fix for almost all of these issues of affordability is to fix the system of income/wealth redistribution. and the govt cannot do that.
** the usual caveats apply.
"Google were evil if they tried to pick and choose who can use them to advertise."
so if al quaida can afford recruiting ads, google should sell the ads. just as the soviets selling tanks to saddam hussein weren't evil. or republicans selling weapons to khomeini weren't evil. they're just hard-working entrepreneurs making a buck in the free-market supply and demand system. worship them!
btw, i should mention that google's anti-sicko advert initiative isn't as heinous as many other "entrepreneurial" organizations, so google isn't terribly (relatively) evil.
it's only available in bureaucracese, farsi, or arabic
"Anyone know if they have a defense industry advertising blog? I'd love to see that one."
"You can't criticize Jesus." true, though one can criticize some people's various figments** that those people label as "jesus". :/
** look boss! da toast, da toast!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptions_of_religi ous_imagery_in_natural_phenomena
http://skepdic.com/pareidol.html
http://artfiles.art.com/images/-/Fantasy-Island-Ph otograph-I10042195.jpeg, amen
"They are chronically understaffed because so many institutions have become for-profit. The overhead of dealing with medical billing is insane and every clerk hired means one less nurse."
visit your primary md. ignore storage** and the waiting room. you'll notice about half the sf is devoted to admin (stuffed full of cubies and shelves of files to 8 ft high, etc).
then notice that most of the remaining sf is patient visit rooms in which fewer than 50% of patient-occupied rooms also contain medical staff.
that should give you an idea of staffing-hours ratios.
* (whatever's in there? stacked bodies of course.)
""There are lots of problems with the US medical system. Lack of government involvment, however, really isn't one of them. There are a couple of no-brainers that would greatly improve things, however like: 1) let individuals buy insurance from out of state companies and ""
the supreme court would probably find that violates interstate commerce blah blah.
""2) let individuals deduct insurance and other medical expenses from their end of year taxes (rather than, at best, the not-very-good Medical Savings Plan).""
ugh, no. get rid of all the stupid deductions. tax in relation to cost (and then ability to pay). so eg, the feds need to (reduce income tax, and) begin collecting property tax, since much of fed govt activity relates to property.
"And while we're at it, let's reform the patent system for drugs. Maybe if the taxpayers pay for it, don't give a patent, or give it for shorter terms, and certainly don't EXTEND the patent beyond the original terms (even if the taxpayers didn't pay for it, because then the taxpayers pay for it)."
yep.
or the robin hood of jerky boys
by that def, universal coverage isn't "socialism" since govt is a payer, not a provider.
however the u.s. military is providing defense (sometimes) against certain types of violent attacks upon property and persons. and the us military is a heavily government organization (parts are private, such as weapons and facility contractors, and the mercenary contractors). so the military is a the most predominant socialist industry in the U.S.A. but cons like a socialist military because it's *conservative* socialism.
there are competitive pressures on every activity. but how long do you want to wait for things to improve? the advantage of limited government is that we choose to more closely monitor/direct relatively few critical activities.
we don't need someone telling someone else what color(s) they can paint their residence. but if organizations that control health care are killing an "excess" of people, then we need to step in and take care of that problem.
not to mention that there's no real world standard definition of "socialism". every organization has a blend of characteristics.
in the conservative form of socialism, everyone (government, etc) needs to chip in to help only those people who are ripping off everyone else.
why would I have a problem with something that doesn't exist? such as oxygen, for example? or such as something of which you are ignorant?