I don't know which is more bizarre; that you think these guys are somehow part of the big "they" along with drug companies and they're all sharing the cash; that vaccines are routinely being withheld from the market, as if you can't get vaccinated against anything these days; or that insulin is a "useless drug".
That is a good point. Given that the infected cells are going to be full of the proteins the immune system is looking for; you better nail all the virus before any cells get infected. Another thing I've idly wondered about in this matter is that the rest of the pancreas outside the isles is busily cranking out digestive enzymes; maybe a little degradation in the structure of the isles can lead to them being digested.
There's been this big scale diabetes epidemiology study going on in Finland for a while so their work has a certain stamp of mainstream medical approval.
If you do look up insurance company's financials you will see that a 3% profit margin is pretty good right now; it's rising because it was hovering around zero for your few years as the actuarial projections failed to catch the steep rise in medical costs a priori. The overall margin for insurers is around 25%, profit and overhead included, but that is balanced by the over 50% discounts the insurers wrest from providers, versus the declared fees individuals get charged. Even if you're paying out of pocket because of the giant deductible, as a customer of the insurer you get the discount charge.
Except for the part where the law now requires that at least 80% of the premiums be the actual medical costs, and if not the member gets a rebate of the difference, as happened in some plans this year, unlike the previous paradigm where pushing medical costs to lower percentages of the premium was the game.
That's kind of the way insurance works, you know; you buy something that you probably won't collect on. Except that at some point in your life you probably will collect on your health insurance, deductible or not, whereas you probably won't collect on your home insurance.
I wonder how you'd come down on the question of buying a firearm for home defense, vis a vis the probability of using it.
Looking at the exchange, Fidelis bronze in NY is $308 a month, and NY doesn't allow them to increase the premium by age, so that's not a factor. The $800 per month sounds like the premium for a family, which usually runs around 2.5 times an individual premium. (Great if you have 10 kids). This is something that sheds a different light on the costs cited. In addition, the big deductible doesn't apply to preventive services; the yearly checkup, vaccines, etc. Not that that still doesn't leave a big cost out of pocket if you do get sick, but that's been state of the insurance for a while now, Obamacare didn't add it. My deductible on an individual plan is $1800, with the traditional employer based insurance, and that's the premium plan we are offered. That's $1800 deductible for in network doctors, and a completely separate $1800 for out of network. So $3000 deductible for a family sounds pretty good, actually.
Of course a lot of malpractice suits come from people who have a problem which is going to completely wipe them out financially in the future, so there's a lot of incentive to sue, even if the doctor is not responsible at all. When you're faced with having your family lose the house and all your retirement funds and all the kids' college money, it's easy to convince yourself the doctor did something wrong, or that the malpractice insurance will pay not the doctor. Imagine a family faced with a lifetime of costs for a baby with a serious birth defect. That baby is never going to get insurance, obviously. That's why malpractice insurance for obstreticians is the most expensive.
Of course, with universal coverage, no matter what the details, that motivation goes away. In Canada; for example, malpractice suits are rare, small, and pretty clear cut, so the malpractice insurance is no big deal.
1. Pharmaceuticals are sold for whatever the traffic will bear; for instance Medicare part D (the drug coverage instituted by Bush Jr.) is forbidden from bargaining with manufacturers. Individual insurance companies can bargain, but their bargaining power is less since their membership is less. Result, much higher expense. 2. Same for medical hardware; MRI machines, etc. 3. Physician bills are much higher in the US; this is particularly true for fancier specialties. Exacerbated by the number of uninsured who do not get cheap preventive care and end up needing that expensive care when their condition gets out of control. 4. Since hospitals were prohibited by the Reagan administration from turning away people who can't pay they are stuck with considerable unpaid costs. Government reimbursement for them is not even close to adequate, so the expense is passed on to other patients, generally with insurance, and of course the insurers pass it on to all their insured. Of course, that further raises insurance costs, causing more people to not get it, raising the ratio of nonpaid to paying patients, raising the insurance rates etc ad infinitum. The current estimate floating around the industry is every paid hospital admission has an extra $1400 to cover the unreimbursed unpaid treatments.
Gosh a giant complicated software project that falls behind schedule. Could only happen under Obama. God knows every private/for profit organization's projects end up on time and under budget, every time. And certainly anything a Republican administration has developed, except for the occasional war.
Intel 8008 series was never intended to be a general purpose processor. Embedded systems in a dishwasher or something, maybe. Motorola chips were much better suited for developing a PC. First conceptual victory for Apple.
http://thebilzerianreport.com/ Yeah, there's an objective, unbiased, reliable source. The first two articles now are how Jewish bankers destroyed the economy and how you need to claim to be Jewish to get into an Ivy League school.
More of that "antizionism is not antisemitism" we keep hearing about, I guess. The fact that you would quote this bucket of turds automatically disqualifies your posts from serious consideration. Hell, the fact that you know it exists doesn't help your credibility any. I plan to take several showers in hopes of forgetting I ever saw it.
But hey, all you antizionists check it out, I wouldn't want to spoil your peculiar fun.
All the aggressiveness over the past 60 years? I'm coming up blank with examples of Israelis aggressively grabbing prime agriculture land at their borders during the 50s, for instance. I won't bring up the 67 war because I know defending against attack is way aggressive (Israel having publicly told Jordan that if they stayed out they would not be attacked; Jordan attacks anyway and loses the West Bank) except to point out that the general principle after a war is to sign a peace treaty which involves returning seized territory and it wasn't the Israelis who refused. When Egypt finally signed they got Sinai back, no problem. Trouble is that Jordan doesn't want the West Bank any more. The Palestinians are still trying to decide whether they will settle for the West Bank or do they want Palestine. Sounds like the same thing to the layman, but see the enlightening post somewhat above regarding the more optimistic borders assigned to Palestine by some.
Fer Crissake.. The USB flash drive, that familiar to you at all? Solar power applications Wind turbines Drip irrigation Desalinization Grape tomatoes LZW compression algorithm Capsule endoscopy Numerous pharmaceuticals and medical technologies Theoretical and academic research in pretty much every field And of course, military stuff ad infinitum, from the Uzi to the Iron Dome.
If Israel was the US' proxy in the middle east, which it was, and the Arab "republics" (as distinct from the feudal states) were the Soviet's proxies, which they were, and the stakes were dominance in the world's oil patch; and the secondary purpose was live fire war games between the two to test/rank the two superpowers' weapons without the risk of accidentally escalating into a nuclear conflict, then yeah, the US would be expected to arm the Israelis just as much as they would arm their own troops (or just as much as the USSR would arm Egypt, Syria, Iraq, et al.) Take a look at the map and the statistics; wealthy and well armed as Israel is, the combined resources of their adversaries greatly overmatched them. Israel is pretty damn small; Hell, even just New York city has more resources and possibly more weapons. Looking backwards we cast Israel in the role of military invincibity, but that sure wasn't obvious a priori (or the neighbors might have been less prone to attempt regime change) The US didn't have any military interest in Israel until it displayed some competence in the Suez crisis, it was after that that the American military tap got turned on in exchange for services rendered.
The entire nature of military hardware is that goods flow out of the country and the citizens don't get any tangible benefit. It doesn't matter whether the tank is deployed by the US in Europe, blown up inAfghanistan, declared obsolete and scrapped, or donated to Israel, other than the salaries, shareholder income, etc from its manufacture, once it's built it doesn't make the same contribution to the general welfare as, for instance, an automobile does. That's why military hardware is so profitable, there's not a specific demand that gets filled by a specific quantity, it's something that people buy as much as they can afford. Yeah, you can argue that it contributes to our security, but the same argument can be made for tanks sent to Israel (which is why they are sent the tanks rather than Luxembourg or Nepal), and anyway you said "tangible" .
Right... the fact that this is another feed of cash to the military industrial complex, and can be disguised as foreign aid rather than even more military expenditure has nothing to do with it.
You may not have noticed but all those $billions don't actually leave the US, they go straight to the military hardware folks, and that's what gets sent. So unless you can convince scholars to get paid with a share in a warplane, they're going to be thinking about greener pastures.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know which is more bizarre; that you think these guys are somehow part of the big "they" along with drug companies and they're all sharing the cash; that vaccines are routinely being withheld from the market, as if you can't get vaccinated against anything these days; or that insulin is a "useless drug".
That is a good point. Given that the infected cells are going to be full of the proteins the immune system is looking for; you better nail all the virus before any cells get infected.
Another thing I've idly wondered about in this matter is that the rest of the pancreas outside the isles is busily cranking out digestive enzymes; maybe a little degradation in the structure of the isles can lead to them being digested.
Could have been hooters virus then
There's been this big scale diabetes epidemiology study going on in Finland for a while so their work has a certain stamp of mainstream medical approval.
What this all means is that you can't get laid at a virtual conference. And for a lot of the attendees, they don't have a lot of other chances.
If you do look up insurance company's financials you will see that a 3% profit margin is pretty good right now; it's rising because it was hovering around zero for your few years as the actuarial projections failed to catch the steep rise in medical costs a priori. The overall margin for insurers is around 25%, profit and overhead included, but that is balanced by the over 50% discounts the insurers wrest from providers, versus the declared fees individuals get charged. Even if you're paying out of pocket because of the giant deductible, as a customer of the insurer you get the discount charge.
Except for the part where the law now requires that at least 80% of the premiums be the actual medical costs, and if not the member gets a rebate of the difference, as happened in some plans this year, unlike the previous paradigm where pushing medical costs to lower percentages of the premium was the game.
That's kind of the way insurance works, you know; you buy something that you probably won't collect on. Except that at some point in your life you probably will collect on your health insurance, deductible or not, whereas you probably won't collect on your home insurance.
I wonder how you'd come down on the question of buying a firearm for home defense, vis a vis the probability of using it.
Looking at the exchange, Fidelis bronze in NY is $308 a month, and NY doesn't allow them to increase the premium by age, so that's not a factor. The $800 per month sounds like the premium for a family, which usually runs around 2.5 times an individual premium. (Great if you have 10 kids). This is something that sheds a different light on the costs cited. In addition, the big deductible doesn't apply to preventive services; the yearly checkup, vaccines, etc. Not that that still doesn't leave a big cost out of pocket if you do get sick, but that's been state of the insurance for a while now, Obamacare didn't add it. My deductible on an individual plan is $1800, with the traditional employer based insurance, and that's the premium plan we are offered. That's $1800 deductible for in network doctors, and a completely separate $1800 for out of network. So $3000 deductible for a family sounds pretty good, actually.
Yeah, because in the US hardly anybody ever gets sick.
Of course a lot of malpractice suits come from people who have a problem which is going to completely wipe them out financially in the future, so there's a lot of incentive to sue, even if the doctor is not responsible at all. When you're faced with having your family lose the house and all your retirement funds and all the kids' college money, it's easy to convince yourself the doctor did something wrong, or that the malpractice insurance will pay not the doctor. Imagine a family faced with a lifetime of costs for a baby with a serious birth defect. That baby is never going to get insurance, obviously. That's why malpractice insurance for obstreticians is the most expensive.
Of course, with universal coverage, no matter what the details, that motivation goes away. In Canada; for example, malpractice suits are rare, small, and pretty clear cut, so the malpractice insurance is no big deal.
1. Pharmaceuticals are sold for whatever the traffic will bear; for instance Medicare part D (the drug coverage instituted by Bush Jr.) is forbidden from bargaining with manufacturers. Individual insurance companies can bargain, but their bargaining power is less since their membership is less. Result, much higher expense.
2. Same for medical hardware; MRI machines, etc.
3. Physician bills are much higher in the US; this is particularly true for fancier specialties. Exacerbated by the number of uninsured who do not get cheap preventive care and end up needing that expensive care when their condition gets out of control.
4. Since hospitals were prohibited by the Reagan administration from turning away people who can't pay they are stuck with considerable unpaid costs. Government reimbursement for them is not even close to adequate, so the expense is passed on to other patients, generally with insurance, and of course the insurers pass it on to all their insured. Of course, that further raises insurance costs, causing more people to not get it, raising the ratio of nonpaid to paying patients, raising the insurance rates etc ad infinitum. The current estimate floating around the industry is every paid hospital admission has an extra $1400 to cover the unreimbursed unpaid treatments.
Gosh a giant complicated software project that falls behind schedule. Could only happen under Obama. God knows every private/for profit organization's projects end up on time and under budget, every time. And certainly anything a Republican administration has developed, except for the occasional war.
And how many /. commenters did they have to test before concluding this?
Either you have Native American ancestors, or your post is damn ironic.
Intel 8008 series was never intended to be a general purpose processor. Embedded systems in a dishwasher or something, maybe. Motorola chips were much better suited for developing a PC. First conceptual victory for Apple.
http://thebilzerianreport.com/
Yeah, there's an objective, unbiased, reliable source. The first two articles now are how Jewish bankers destroyed the economy and how you need to claim to be Jewish to get into an Ivy League school.
More of that "antizionism is not antisemitism" we keep hearing about, I guess. The fact that you would quote this bucket of turds automatically disqualifies your posts from serious consideration. Hell, the fact that you know it exists doesn't help your credibility any. I plan to take several showers in hopes of forgetting I ever saw it.
But hey, all you antizionists check it out, I wouldn't want to spoil your peculiar fun.
All the aggressiveness over the past 60 years? I'm coming up blank with examples of Israelis aggressively grabbing prime agriculture land at their borders during the 50s, for instance. I won't bring up the 67 war because I know defending against attack is way aggressive (Israel having publicly told Jordan that if they stayed out they would not be attacked; Jordan attacks anyway and loses the West Bank) except to point out that the general principle after a war is to sign a peace treaty which involves returning seized territory and it wasn't the Israelis who refused. When Egypt finally signed they got Sinai back, no problem. Trouble is that Jordan doesn't want the West Bank any more. The Palestinians are still trying to decide whether they will settle for the West Bank or do they want Palestine. Sounds like the same thing to the layman, but see the enlightening post somewhat above regarding the more optimistic borders assigned to Palestine by some.
And there we have it;
1) Israel must get out of Palestine
2 ) Palestine extends from the Mediterranean to Jordan and from Sinai to Syria.
See, the first part gets said before the general public because it seems reasonable, but the second one, not so much. More of a hush hush principle.
Fer Crissake..
The USB flash drive, that familiar to you at all?
Solar power applications
Wind turbines
Drip irrigation
Desalinization
Grape tomatoes
LZW compression algorithm
Capsule endoscopy
Numerous pharmaceuticals and medical technologies
Theoretical and academic research in pretty much every field
And of course, military stuff ad infinitum, from the Uzi to the Iron Dome.
If Israel was the US' proxy in the middle east, which it was, and the Arab "republics" (as distinct from the feudal states) were the Soviet's proxies, which they were, and the stakes were dominance in the world's oil patch; and the secondary purpose was live fire war games between the two to test/rank the two superpowers' weapons without the risk of accidentally escalating into a nuclear conflict, then yeah, the US would be expected to arm the Israelis just as much as they would arm their own troops (or just as much as the USSR would arm Egypt, Syria, Iraq, et al.) Take a look at the map and the statistics; wealthy and well armed as Israel is, the combined resources of their adversaries greatly overmatched them. Israel is pretty damn small; Hell, even just New York city has more resources and possibly more weapons. Looking backwards we cast Israel in the role of military invincibity, but that sure wasn't obvious a priori (or the neighbors might have been less prone to attempt regime change) The US didn't have any military interest in Israel until it displayed some competence in the Suez crisis, it was after that that the American military tap got turned on in exchange for services rendered.
The entire nature of military hardware is that goods flow out of the country and the citizens don't get any tangible benefit. It doesn't matter whether the tank is deployed by the US in Europe, blown up inAfghanistan, declared obsolete and scrapped, or donated to Israel, other than the salaries, shareholder income, etc from its manufacture, once it's built it doesn't make the same contribution to the general welfare as, for instance, an automobile does. That's why military hardware is so profitable, there's not a specific demand that gets filled by a specific quantity, it's something that people buy as much as they can afford. Yeah, you can argue that it contributes to our security, but the same argument can be made for tanks sent to Israel (which is why they are sent the tanks rather than Luxembourg or Nepal), and anyway you said "tangible" .
Right. .. the fact that this is another feed of cash to the military industrial complex, and can be disguised as foreign aid rather than even more military expenditure has nothing to do with it.
Anybody murder any KKK members? Guess they're just universally beloved.
You may not have noticed but all those $billions don't actually leave the US, they go straight to the military hardware folks, and that's what gets sent. So unless you can convince scholars to get paid with a share in a warplane, they're going to be thinking about greener pastures.