I upgraded from an eee 900 to the eee t91mt recently and absolutely love it. Its pretty much exactly what you are talking about. My only complaint is that they went with the 1.3 ghz atom instead of the more common 1.6ghz. They are releasing a 10in version in a few months as well, hopefully they up the processor while they are at it.
There doesn't have to be a unified opposition. I never gave any reasons for opposing it. People can oppose it for what ever reason they want, and they still oppose it. In the end, the effect is the same. Those supporting the bill FOR ANY REASON are the minority. As such, speaking for THE MAJORITY, the people oppose it.
Besides, why listen to the people when it's the right thing to do? The whole reason you don't let the general population run the country is because it's a total clusterfuck when they have direct input. Look at California. The electoral system and our politicians suck, but at least the country functions with them around. Keep in mind how many people were against the minimum wage, universal suffrage, and civil rights. Those things are the right thing to do.
Sooooo what you're saying is people are too stupid to know what is good for them and we need to copy the Soviets and tell them exactly what is good for them?
Re:A false choice, of course...
on
Health Care Reform
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
America IS voting for opposition/independent. There hasn't been a poll in months showing public support for Obama's plan. Obama's approval ratings have dropped from being the Messiah to about half. Congress has absolutely horrible approval ratings. The people HAVE spoken. We don't want this.
Do you really believe that? The only reason that everything is focusing on *insurance* reform now is because they realized how strongly America was opposed to their original plans. So they took a step back and are now trying to get a foot in the door for later expansion.
Yup. Playing videos and quotes of current political leaders as they espouse the glories of Mao Tsung and other communist leaders is very bad for us. Why is it that instead of actually responding to DISPROVE their claims, people just instead attack them directly with the "you're an idiot" approach?
Um, both of those can be disabled in about 15 seconds. I no longer have any XP boxes to give a walkthrough, but the monitoring antivirus is part of the security center and cleaning up the desktop runs by default every 60 days and can be disabled from the display properties. If you really cant find them and have actually ever tried, then its time to turn in your geek card.
That is stupid. You're not counting hardware. As already mentioned, the path from 10.0 to 10.6 (or what ever it is, I hate macs) wont even run on the same architecture, so somewhere along that line you are plopping down a grand on a brand new machine, where as it is entirely possible to run 7 AND vista on a box that is 10 years old.
You buying video games may cost you money
You eating food may cost you money
You having indoor plumbing may cost you money
You riding a bike may cost you money
You upgrading your video card may cost you money
You using toilet paper may cost you money Me getting internet may cost you money
Costs have fallen for cosmetics mostly because there aren't a whole lot of new procedures and research being done for them. A face lift today is the same as a face lift 20 years ago. There is little to no room for improvement other than what is common to all surgery procedures. Compare a laparoscopic appendectomy today to an open procedure 3 years ago and they are very different.
I agree with some of your first points, but you digress at the end.
Car insurance is much less than health insurance.
Well, sure. A nice car costs 20k. Insurance covers damage to that car, and another similar car, in the event of a crash. Some plans cover limited property damage, maybe a little medical too, but those plans are a steep step up from basic liability. Compare that to health care, I've worked in rooms where one piece of equipment the doctor is using costs more than that. Now instead of covering a 20k car, we are paying not only for some very very expensive equipment, but also the wages of a dozen people to give exclusive attention to a single person for several hours/days/weeks. Medical care costs exponentially more than a new car, hence insurance for one is much higher than the other.
You want proof? Uninsured medical procedures fall in price while insured medical procedures climb in price.
In all the operating rooms I've worked in, all the surgical procedures I've done, and in all my career, I've never known the insurance status of the guy on the bed. Nobody talks about it. What I have heard is doctors debating with themselves if they are going to need the $2000 sterile package that I have on hand and if I should open it or not. I've seen them try very very hard to avoid opening supplies because they know how much it costs, and don't want to have to charge the patient for it if they dont have too, irrespective of insurance status.
As your body ages, it responds to surgery differently and heals much slower. Its not just that insurance wont pay for them, often its the case that surgery would do more harm than good.
I'm actually not that surprised about 31% administrative overhead. There are a LOT of people employed in healthcare besides doctors (I'm one of them). There is an immense amount of paperwork done for everything that has been implemented for several reasons, such as quality control, liability, and research. It's not just bureaucracy for the sake of bureaucracy (most of the time). If you want to cut those costs then you are going to have to accept either more frequent errors, less malpractice lawsuits (yes please!), or slower research.
A terminally ill patient should not impose such medical bills that chase the surviving family for the rest of their life. You got the means to pay for last ditch treatment that has a 1% chance of doing anything? That's your money, go ahead. Make 20k a year and you have lung cancer from smoking 2 packs since you were 16? Sorry. (Extreme example i know) The simple fact of the matter is that we cannot support everyone like that. Its not a matter of charity or benevolence or cruelty to strangers. There simply is not enough personnel, supplies, space, nor funding. Another way to look at. This guy took 600k to sit in a bed for two years in pain. Most of that was funded by insurance. Other people with that insurance paid for it in their premiums. That means premiums, as a whole, were just a bit higher. That made them too expensive for John Doe and Jane Doe to pay for. John Doe broke his leg and didn't have insurance, so the tax payers covered his emergency room visit. Jane Doe got sit with strep throat but couldnt afford to see a doctor. She died of rheumatic fever. You really want to make insurance accessible for everyone, then people need to realize that terminally ill patients are probably going to die soon no matter what you do.
Very good points, but you're skipping one important factor. Often times terminally ill patients do not have the mental capabilities to speak for themselves, such as with Alzheimer's or coma patients. Remember Terry from Florida a few years ago?
Actually there is, and typically religious people are more likely to end treatment and let themselves die. I don't remember the reference, but we talked about it in my "Ethics for Healthcare Workers" class.
Stop spouting off numbers you have no idea about. I work in the medical field. There is NOT a gross markup. It is expensive to the manufacturers, it is expensive to the practitioners, it is expensive to you.
Slashdot Mirror
I upgraded from an eee 900 to the eee t91mt recently and absolutely love it. Its pretty much exactly what you are talking about. My only complaint is that they went with the 1.3 ghz atom instead of the more common 1.6ghz. They are releasing a 10in version in a few months as well, hopefully they up the processor while they are at it.
Does it matter why someone disapproves of the current bill? If the majority disapproves (which it does) then it should not be passed and Obama should accept defeat.
Why even give that link when admitting it is old data? How about something new?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/53_remain_opposed_to_health_care_plan
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/55_say_congress_should_start_over_on_health_care
There doesn't have to be a unified opposition. I never gave any reasons for opposing it. People can oppose it for what ever reason they want, and they still oppose it. In the end, the effect is the same. Those supporting the bill FOR ANY REASON are the minority. As such, speaking for THE MAJORITY, the people oppose it.
As opposed to the uproar now not to try it? They aren't paying any attention to that now, so what makes you think that in 2 years they would?
We The People have no place in our government anymore. That makes sense now.
Besides, why listen to the people when it's the right thing to do? The whole reason you don't let the general population run the country is because it's a total clusterfuck when they have direct input. Look at California. The electoral system and our politicians suck, but at least the country functions with them around. Keep in mind how many people were against the minimum wage, universal suffrage, and civil rights. Those things are the right thing to do.
Sooooo what you're saying is people are too stupid to know what is good for them and we need to copy the Soviets and tell them exactly what is good for them?
America IS voting for opposition/independent. There hasn't been a poll in months showing public support for Obama's plan. Obama's approval ratings have dropped from being the Messiah to about half. Congress has absolutely horrible approval ratings. The people HAVE spoken. We don't want this.
Do you really believe that? The only reason that everything is focusing on *insurance* reform now is because they realized how strongly America was opposed to their original plans. So they took a step back and are now trying to get a foot in the door for later expansion.
Cheers for you to have the guts to say it. People don't like to hear the truth like that very often.
Yup. Playing videos and quotes of current political leaders as they espouse the glories of Mao Tsung and other communist leaders is very bad for us.
Why is it that instead of actually responding to DISPROVE their claims, people just instead attack them directly with the "you're an idiot" approach?
Um, both of those can be disabled in about 15 seconds. I no longer have any XP boxes to give a walkthrough, but the monitoring antivirus is part of the security center and cleaning up the desktop runs by default every 60 days and can be disabled from the display properties. If you really cant find them and have actually ever tried, then its time to turn in your geek card.
That is stupid. You're not counting hardware. As already mentioned, the path from 10.0 to 10.6 (or what ever it is, I hate macs) wont even run on the same architecture, so somewhere along that line you are plopping down a grand on a brand new machine, where as it is entirely possible to run 7 AND vista on a box that is 10 years old.
You buying video games may cost you money
You eating food may cost you money
You having indoor plumbing may cost you money
You riding a bike may cost you money
You upgrading your video card may cost you money
You using toilet paper may cost you money
Me getting internet may cost you money
There, fixed it for ya.
It might not be optimal cardio, but its better than nothing eh?
Costs have fallen for cosmetics mostly because there aren't a whole lot of new procedures and research being done for them. A face lift today is the same as a face lift 20 years ago. There is little to no room for improvement other than what is common to all surgery procedures. Compare a laparoscopic appendectomy today to an open procedure 3 years ago and they are very different.
Did you miss the part about setting a budget?
Car insurance is much less than health insurance.
Well, sure. A nice car costs 20k. Insurance covers damage to that car, and another similar car, in the event of a crash. Some plans cover limited property damage, maybe a little medical too, but those plans are a steep step up from basic liability. Compare that to health care, I've worked in rooms where one piece of equipment the doctor is using costs more than that. Now instead of covering a 20k car, we are paying not only for some very very expensive equipment, but also the wages of a dozen people to give exclusive attention to a single person for several hours/days/weeks. Medical care costs exponentially more than a new car, hence insurance for one is much higher than the other.
You want proof? Uninsured medical procedures fall in price while insured medical procedures climb in price.
In all the operating rooms I've worked in, all the surgical procedures I've done, and in all my career, I've never known the insurance status of the guy on the bed. Nobody talks about it. What I have heard is doctors debating with themselves if they are going to need the $2000 sterile package that I have on hand and if I should open it or not. I've seen them try very very hard to avoid opening supplies because they know how much it costs, and don't want to have to charge the patient for it if they dont have too, irrespective of insurance status.
Dude, are you are saying we should expect people to cancel cable in order to pay their bills... thats just downright un-American!
+5
As your body ages, it responds to surgery differently and heals much slower. Its not just that insurance wont pay for them, often its the case that surgery would do more harm than good.
I'm actually not that surprised about 31% administrative overhead. There are a LOT of people employed in healthcare besides doctors (I'm one of them). There is an immense amount of paperwork done for everything that has been implemented for several reasons, such as quality control, liability, and research. It's not just bureaucracy for the sake of bureaucracy (most of the time). If you want to cut those costs then you are going to have to accept either more frequent errors, less malpractice lawsuits (yes please!), or slower research.
A terminally ill patient should not impose such medical bills that chase the surviving family for the rest of their life. You got the means to pay for last ditch treatment that has a 1% chance of doing anything? That's your money, go ahead. Make 20k a year and you have lung cancer from smoking 2 packs since you were 16? Sorry. (Extreme example i know) The simple fact of the matter is that we cannot support everyone like that. Its not a matter of charity or benevolence or cruelty to strangers. There simply is not enough personnel, supplies, space, nor funding.
Another way to look at. This guy took 600k to sit in a bed for two years in pain. Most of that was funded by insurance. Other people with that insurance paid for it in their premiums. That means premiums, as a whole, were just a bit higher. That made them too expensive for John Doe and Jane Doe to pay for. John Doe broke his leg and didn't have insurance, so the tax payers covered his emergency room visit. Jane Doe got sit with strep throat but couldnt afford to see a doctor. She died of rheumatic fever. You really want to make insurance accessible for everyone, then people need to realize that terminally ill patients are probably going to die soon no matter what you do.
Very good points, but you're skipping one important factor. Often times terminally ill patients do not have the mental capabilities to speak for themselves, such as with Alzheimer's or coma patients. Remember Terry from Florida a few years ago?
Actually there is, and typically religious people are more likely to end treatment and let themselves die. I don't remember the reference, but we talked about it in my "Ethics for Healthcare Workers" class.
Stop spouting off numbers you have no idea about. I work in the medical field. There is NOT a gross markup. It is expensive to the manufacturers, it is expensive to the practitioners, it is expensive to you.