If I had a nickle for every time I've heard a talking head say one the following three phrases...
"The reality is..." -- #1 by the along shot "When all is said and done..." "At the end of the day..."..I'd have more money than Mitt Romney's campaign financiers.
...on Operation Flashpoint, all I can say is....LET EM GO!!!!"
Seriously, OFP was a groundbreaking game in that it was the first real attempt to simulate a real battlefield experience. Given the series' focus on realism, I have no doubt that these guys were simply doing prep work for the next version of Arma.
I see your point, though I also see that exemptions can be made to the MLR ratios in specific markets. Granting those exemptions in order to remove the bias against HSAs might make sense.
No, it just makes them unprofitable
Here lies the the crux of the problem. People like you are caught up in the axiom that profit should be made off of health care.
Excuse me. I was confusing high deductable plans with junk plans that have low yearly or lifetime limits. the AFA doesn't prohibit high deductible plans at all. What it does prohibit are junk plans that aren't actually insurance.
A high deductible plan is no more of a 'gamble' than a low deductible plan.
I think maybe high deductible plan is a misnomer. The cheapest "high deductible" plans are actually so cheap, not because of the deductible limit, but because they have very low lifetime limits on claims paid and other sneaky limitations which can leave the insured out to dry and in bankruptcy court in a heartbeat.
"The minimal, or bronze, insurance option allows out-of-pocket spending of up to $12,500 for a family of four. The actuarial value is 60 percent, which means, very roughly, that the plan only covers about 60 percent of the average person's medical bills."
To me the that seems pretty flexible when it comes to high deductible plans. Where it is not so flexible is things like lifetime limits on claims paid, which I would guess are the cause of many/most medical bankruptcies.
So, you think forcing syscodon to pay for your medical ailments is "a good thing"? I'm not saying your wrong.
My ailments? Except for a short period of time when I was young, I've always medical insurance and insurance I've had has always been the low deductible type, which means I've been subsidizing gamblers like syscodon's premiums.
I actually believe Medicare for all is the best solution in the long run, but I also think the current health care law is better than nothing.
Some high deductible plans will become illegal under the health care law and the GP will be forced to purchase a lower deductible plan which will cost more.
And it is a good thing.
These high deductible plans can be great for the individuals who choose them, but they shift cost to those who either choose lower deductible plans, or are forced to get lower deductible plans through their employers.
Now, they will probably triple because I'll have to pay for coverage for things I don't use such as OBGYN.
Good.
Insurance on universally needed services works best that way, as your high deductible plan makes it harder for others to afford insurance. By forcing gamblers like you to be more responsible, costs for more responsible people are lowered.
And please stop deluding yourself into believing that your high deductible plan won't leave the rest of the people in the insurance pool on the hook if you come down with a catastrophic illness that costs millions of dollars to treat.
The government actually *could* do something about it. Via policy, they could absorb the private debt into public debt.
The government currently has access to credit at a much lower rate than (non-banking) private entities do, so there is an argument to made that they should do this, however Republicans would never allow it as it would spur economic growth and increase the chances of Obama being re-elected.
The GPs post and your reply are reminiscent of every vinyl vs CD debate/flame war I've ever seen.
In ten years, when we all have gigapixel cameras in our phones, are we going to have film devotees going on about how uniform pixels cannot possibly convey an image in the same way that film grains can?
If getting caught with drugs results in disenfrachisment, then of course kids should be warned about it. Telling them lies or overblown horror stories about the actual substances however only leads to a breakdown of trust.
Drug education today reminds of the failed abstinence-only style sex education systems that have been larely abandoned for methods that are proven to be much more effective. They are filled with more hyperbole than fact and do nothing to arm kids with the information needed to make sound decisions.
BTW, I live in California. Marijuana possession in small amounts that a typical user would have is at most a misdemeanor and does not result in disenfranchisement. I benefited from a robust system of rehbilitation when I was a juveline and abused drugs. My record was sealed after I turned 18.
I am talking about the hard core stuff that one hit will rewire your brain and make you permanently after that high
And what drugs would those be? Growing up, I only had access to meth, coke, heroine, weed, LSD, ecstasy, and shrooms. None of those fit into that category.
Many figure ok, I will smoke some weed and will get community service and a spanking if I get caught right?
Exactly. I don't know what horrible locale you live in, but where I grew up and live, getting caught smoking weed will not ruin your life for seven years. I got caught three times. I also got caught with other stuff.
The kind of ridiculous hyperbole you are spouting is exactly why programs like D.A.R.E. have been complete failures.
This from someone who's daughter asked the hard questions in school about drug policy. Thus he was visited by the police to discuss it in detail. (Not a drug user but the mere argument was enough to get them to stop by for a chat.)
*shudder*
My wife and I do not use any illegal drugs, but are both completely against the war on drugs, and we live in an extremely conservative, authoritarian area of the country.
For the past few years when our young kids have had their "anti-drug" week in school, they've come home spouting mindless propaganda. In response, we've tried tried to explain it to them in as nuanced a way as we think they can handle.
Until they release a full API/ABI with a permissive license
Perhaps *Linux* should create a stable ABI. Then vendors like Nvidia could write a driver and not have to worry about each point release of the kernel breaking it.
I would bet that computers and the internet are more related to the decrease in study time than any "lack of rigor". The ability to find and organize information that computers give you bring massive efficiency gains. Going through the K-12 system (I never went to college) without the benefit of the internet, I can easily see the time it took me to write those little 15-20 page papers in high school being cut in half with today's technology at my disposal. Continuing on the topic of "rigor"; my mother has a master's degree from CSU Sacramento and my wife had a master's degree from CSU Fresno. For a reason that eludes me, my wife's English degree required a higher level of math than my mother's business degree.
You're right, but I think it's a price you pay for openness. I've experienced a similar problem with my Samsung. My Samsung has got Samsung's "touchwiz" interface. Several of the apps are intricately tied together. For example, their customized email client is statically linked to the file manager. If you decide to root your phone and remove the file manager then you can no longer attach files to an email from the email client. I can't remember them off-hand, but I've run into a few other static links between customized apps which cause issues if you remove stock apps.
My next Android is going to be a Google phone with stock Android. I ran AOSP on my Touch Pro 2 before getting my first native Android phone. I much prefer the AOSP experience to the customized ones.
Slashdot Mirror
or certain buzzwords are used
If I had a nickle for every time I've heard a talking head say one the following three phrases...
"The reality is..." -- #1 by the along shot ..I'd have more money than Mitt Romney's campaign financiers.
"When all is said and done..."
"At the end of the day..."
...on Operation Flashpoint, all I can say is....LET EM GO!!!!"
Seriously, OFP was a groundbreaking game in that it was the first real attempt to simulate a real battlefield experience. Given the series' focus on realism, I have no doubt that these guys were simply doing prep work for the next version of Arma.
Perhaps they should have called ahead...
The poverty line is adjusted every year. It is measured against inflation.
The novelty hasn't worn off. We'll know the Mac has reached the big time as a platform when new pieces of malware are not covered.
"Virus" is the new "hacker". Get over it.
You had no idea what you were talking about....
I see your point, though I also see that exemptions can be made to the MLR ratios in specific markets. Granting those exemptions in order to remove the bias against HSAs might make sense.
No, it just makes them unprofitable
Here lies the the crux of the problem. People like you are caught up in the axiom that profit should be made off of health care.
Single payer can't come soon enough.
Excuse me. I was confusing high deductable plans with junk plans that have low yearly or lifetime limits. the AFA doesn't prohibit high deductible plans at all. What it does prohibit are junk plans that aren't actually insurance.
A high deductible plan is no more of a 'gamble' than a low deductible plan.
I think maybe high deductible plan is a misnomer. The cheapest "high deductible" plans are actually so cheap, not because of the deductible limit, but because they have very low lifetime limits on claims paid and other sneaky limitations which can leave the insured out to dry and in bankruptcy court in a heartbeat.
An an article on the ACA talks about high deductible plans allowed by the act...
"The minimal, or bronze, insurance option allows out-of-pocket spending of up to $12,500 for a family of four. The actuarial value is 60 percent, which means, very roughly, that the plan only covers about 60 percent of the average person's medical bills."
To me the that seems pretty flexible when it comes to high deductible plans. Where it is not so flexible is things like lifetime limits on claims paid, which I would guess are the cause of many/most medical bankruptcies.
So, you think forcing syscodon to pay for your medical ailments is "a good thing"? I'm not saying your wrong.
My ailments? Except for a short period of time when I was young, I've always medical insurance and insurance I've had has always been the low deductible type, which means I've been subsidizing gamblers like syscodon's premiums.
I actually believe Medicare for all is the best solution in the long run, but I also think the current health care law is better than nothing.
Actually, food stamps and section 8 housing are public subsidies for private enterprise...just like the Affordable Health Care Act.
20% of medicare and medicaid claims are _fraud_.
[citation needed]
And the only provision that the public is opposed to is the mandate, which of course is the lynchpin to the whole thing.
People want to have their cake and eat it to.
Some high deductible plans will become illegal under the health care law and the GP will be forced to purchase a lower deductible plan which will cost more.
And it is a good thing.
These high deductible plans can be great for the individuals who choose them, but they shift cost to those who either choose lower deductible plans, or are forced to get lower deductible plans through their employers.
Now, they will probably triple because I'll have to pay for coverage for things I don't use such as OBGYN.
Good.
Insurance on universally needed services works best that way, as your high deductible plan makes it harder for others to afford insurance. By forcing gamblers like you to be more responsible, costs for more responsible people are lowered.
And please stop deluding yourself into believing that your high deductible plan won't leave the rest of the people in the insurance pool on the hook if you come down with a catastrophic illness that costs millions of dollars to treat.
The process is called deleveraging.
The government actually *could* do something about it. Via policy, they could absorb the private debt into public debt.
The government currently has access to credit at a much lower rate than (non-banking) private entities do, so there is an argument to made that they should do this, however Republicans would never allow it as it would spur economic growth and increase the chances of Obama being re-elected.
The GPs post and your reply are reminiscent of every vinyl vs CD debate/flame war I've ever seen.
In ten years, when we all have gigapixel cameras in our phones, are we going to have film devotees going on about how uniform pixels cannot possibly convey an image in the same way that film grains can?
If getting caught with drugs results in disenfrachisment, then of course kids should be warned about it. Telling them lies or overblown horror stories about the actual substances however only leads to a breakdown of trust.
Drug education today reminds of the failed abstinence-only style sex education systems that have been larely abandoned for methods that are proven to be much more effective. They are filled with more hyperbole than fact and do nothing to arm kids with the information needed to make sound decisions.
BTW, I live in California. Marijuana possession in small amounts that a typical user would have is at most a misdemeanor and does not result in disenfranchisement. I benefited from a robust system of rehbilitation when I was a juveline and abused drugs. My record was sealed after I turned 18.
Religious people tend to have more babies
Religion does have an effect, but I think economic status is a more reliable predictor of birth rates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic-economic_paradox
Economic status or course is also tied with education level and lower education levels correlate with religious beliefs, so in a roundabout way...
I am talking about the hard core stuff that one hit will rewire your brain and make you permanently after that high
And what drugs would those be? Growing up, I only had access to meth, coke, heroine, weed, LSD, ecstasy, and shrooms. None of those fit into that category.
Many figure ok, I will smoke some weed and will get community service and a spanking if I get caught right?
Exactly. I don't know what horrible locale you live in, but where I grew up and live, getting caught smoking weed will not ruin your life for seven years. I got caught three times. I also got caught with other stuff.
The kind of ridiculous hyperbole you are spouting is exactly why programs like D.A.R.E. have been complete failures.
This from someone who's daughter asked the hard questions in school about drug policy. Thus he was visited by the police to discuss it in detail. (Not a drug user but the mere argument was enough to get them to stop by for a chat.)
*shudder*
My wife and I do not use any illegal drugs, but are both completely against the war on drugs, and we live in an extremely conservative, authoritarian area of the country.
For the past few years when our young kids have had their "anti-drug" week in school, they've come home spouting mindless propaganda. In response, we've tried tried to explain it to them in as nuanced a way as we think they can handle.
Looking forward to my "visit" one of these years.
No. It's definitely home improvement websites.
So what will you put in your next computer, now nVidia has stopped releasing drivers?
Windows 7 or OS X.
Until they release a full API/ABI with a permissive license
Perhaps *Linux* should create a stable ABI. Then vendors like Nvidia could write a driver and not have to worry about each point release of the kernel breaking it.
I would bet that computers and the internet are more related to the decrease in study time than any "lack of rigor". The ability to find and organize information that computers give you bring massive efficiency gains. Going through the K-12 system (I never went to college) without the benefit of the internet, I can easily see the time it took me to write those little 15-20 page papers in high school being cut in half with today's technology at my disposal.
Continuing on the topic of "rigor"; my mother has a master's degree from CSU Sacramento and my wife had a master's degree from CSU Fresno. For a reason that eludes me, my wife's English degree required a higher level of math than my mother's business degree.
You're right, but I think it's a price you pay for openness. I've experienced a similar problem with my Samsung. My Samsung has got Samsung's "touchwiz" interface. Several of the apps are intricately tied together. For example, their customized email client is statically linked to the file manager. If you decide to root your phone and remove the file manager then you can no longer attach files to an email from the email client. I can't remember them off-hand, but I've run into a few other static links between customized apps which cause issues if you remove stock apps.
My next Android is going to be a Google phone with stock Android. I ran AOSP on my Touch Pro 2 before getting my first native Android phone. I much prefer the AOSP experience to the customized ones.