"I shudder every time non-drummers name Keith Moon as one of the best drummers...man that guy was pure slop. I've been playings drums for 25 years now, and I've yet to hear another drummer praise Keith Moon."
Well, sure, he's not a drummer drummer, but, as a listener and watching them in concert....he was fun and amazing. And in his younger days (early Who) he was good, but, drugs and booze really took their toll on him by the early 70's.
We can discuss Neil Pert, or Stuart Copeland if you'd prefer?
"Queen used a fair amount of backing tape, and nobody ever said they were fake."
From what I've studied about them...about the only 'tape' Queen used was during the Bohemian Rhapsody opera section.
They played pretty much everything else live. They used delays quite a bit, but, that's an effect...not a backing tape in the sense of what is done today.
I pine for the days back when we had drummers like Keith Moon....just beat the hell out of everything, fast. No click track needed there. Man, I've seen films of him when he was young and really had his chops, those stick were a blurrrrrr.
I think I heard an interview with Pete, saying someone was asking him after listening to some recordings of a session or two of the Who, asking about overdubs, etc on the drumming, and when told it was just Keith, he said it was impossible for someone to hit the drums that fast.
Personally...I'd rather hear things a little more 'raw' than to have everything so 'perfect' so that the digital tools of today can work better.
I think in some ways, the modern recording tools, have helped kill good music in many ways, it can really mask the lack of talent in todays musicians. Some of those old classic albums were recorded practically live. There is very little in the way of overdubs on the studio version of "Since I've Been Loving You". That track was mostly recorded live in one take. Why can't the groups of today play together as a band live like that?
Regardless....I've rather FEEL the emotion in an imperfectly played tune, rather than hear a lifeless perfect rendition of a tune.
"And why is that? If everyone was covered the same, they wouldn't have to mess with verifying income or such, they'd just take your ID, put you in the system and give you care."
I've yet to see a govt. entitlement program that doesn't have some type of 'means' test to it...there is no way they will treat everyone 'the same.'
I'm also foreseeing govt. health clinics run in the same fashion as the DMV....long lines, waiting for some lame govt. employee to wait on you...etc.
It just goes to show why the populace would fight, or at least be cautious and try to restrain govt. from pretty much ANY law they want to pass, especially with regard to police needs and personal privacy.
The govt. will never stop at the originally intended intent of the law, no matter how much they promise to limit the reach of the law for the intended use that 'everyone can agree with'.
The govt. ALWAYS will later, expand upon said law to use it in new and creative ways never intended, or try to stretch it to be used to prosecute someone that might have done something, but, there currently isn't a direct law that applies (like with that lady who harrased a teen online, and said teen killed herself).
Heck...look at the new and creative ways in the past decade that they have been expanding the RICO act which was put in place only to target the mob.
We should insist that most new laws are not only VERY narrowly defined, but that they also have sunset provisions....to give the public at least a fighting chance to not only keep laws from expanding in scope, but, to also have hope that some that are downright bad...have a chance to go away.
"Have you ever tried to go to one? I've visited the one here. It's "free" with tons of paperwork. They want to make sure they charge full price to someone that they think should be able to afford health insurance."
Well, if we in the US go to nationalized healthcare....just get ready for more of the same of what you just described, just on a MAJOR scale.
"Well, you also have to consider than the big insurance companies get bargain-bin rates for services. While you might have to pay full price for a service, chances are that your insurance company is paying less than half that."
I actually have found this to be the opposite in my case so far....when the Dr. or lab or radiologist has found out I'm paying for things...they give me a cut rate right off to bat on what they'd charge insurance companies.
"Where are you working that your pre-tax medical account rolls over year-to-year!?!? The last three jobs I've had (Academia, U.S. Military, Oil field) the equvalent program was called a "flexible spending account" (FSA), and money not used at year end was LOST. If the money didn't disappear when I didn't use it I'd be all over that action, even if I couldn't roll it over to my 401K at retirement."
A HSA (Health Savings Account) is not the same thing as a flexible spending account.
You have to have a qualifying high deductible medical insurance policy...mine was $1200. I do this when I'm working through my own company, but, if you have qualifying one as a direct employee somewhere..I think you can still do it.
I wish they'd expand the HSA and make it easier to get and use....it is a great concept. Do a little googling on HSA's. I got mine set up at Chase Bank. You can read up on them at the IRS's website.
"If there is no hope of knowing who did it, then the question is moot. The issue here is that in many cases there is an entity that can identify the anonymous poster, such as an ISP or the operator of the website on which the comment was posted. The court has the power to compel that entity to reveal the anonymous poster's identity. This decision sets out rules for when it is appropriate for the court to do that."
Well, if a posting can be made via email, you can make yourself virtually untraceable. YOu can set up a few mixmaster/nym remailer accounts to bounce things around the world with a few times. No real way to tell who sent it, etc. unless maybe you're on a NSA watch list or something, and even then, that would have to be tough.
Most of the examples you're talking about...are ones happening to very poor people.
There is medicare/medicade to help the poor and elderly.....I'm talking about people that have jobs, etc, in my examples.
Re:Why is govt-provided health care worse?
on
Why Doctors Hate Science
·
· Score: 2, Informative
"Having said all that, I'd much rather have the UK system - imperfect though it may be - than the US system where nobody seems to think it's so bad for a family to have to take their child home to die simply because they can't afford the procedure necessary to save the child's life."
Yeah...like that happens ALL the time here in the US.
If your kid is in trouble...no ER in the country will refuse you service. The kid will get tx, and you don't take them home to die.
"I'm sure that all the people who need, say, and appendectomy in the next couple of hours so they don't die from peritonitis are really, really inclined to do some shopping around for the best price. Especially when they're feverish, in pain, and vomiting once in a while."
Well, insurance should be ONLY for catastrophic events like you described.
But for routine, annual medical tx....not a problem to pay for it yourself, which is what it used to be like, and there WAS competition. See my other posts..where I advocate doing this...and opening up even further the HSA program for people to sock away money pre-tax for the annual normal medical costs.
"The existence of competition is a myth. Would you, as an employee, accept your company changing health care programs every year in order to get the best deal?"
Accept it? I thought that was the norm. Every company I've worked with (when not on my own)...changed health plans annually to get the best price.
"We have measurably higher infant mortality rates than most highly developed nations, but most people will dismiss that as a poverty related problem that doesn't affect them. However the mortality rates for diabetes and heart disease, and IIRC cancer are also higher."
I think the diabetes and other problems can also be attributed to poverty. People don't take care of themselves, eating too much of the wrong foods,, not taking meds, etc.
Can you site the studies for these horrible mortality rates? I keep hearing this, but, never really see figures on how we compare to the rest of the western world.
""fare" is right! What kind of negotiating position does someone who needs life-saving care have versus an insurance company? A poor one. The only people who would be able to afford health insurance in that plan are people who don't need it. You'll note that McCain himself didn't seem to eager to buy his own insurance rather than take his employers."
Well, not so much...IF we went back to thinking of medical insurance as INSURANCE. Something to only be there as a safety net, in case of catastrophic medical emergency (ie heart attack, serious injury, cancer...etc).
But for day to day things....routine office visits, and meds....that needs to be planned out in your budget as another part of living within your means.
As a self employed person, I do the high deductible policy ($1200)...and couple that with a Health Savings Account, which for a single person last year...you could load up with $2900 pre-tax. I pay my routine medical needs (including dental and eyesight and supplies) out of this pre-tax money. The HSA earns interest, and when the market is better, can also be invested to grow. The monies remaining in the HSA after retirement can be transfered as retirement $$ to you, much like and IRA.
I find when the Dr. knows I am paying....I generally get about a 15% discount off visits and procedures over what they'd charge insurance.
I wisht they'd expand the HSA program and let you sock a lot more money into it. I'd rather keep this type deal even when I sometimes go back to W2 hourly, or something closer to being an employee some place. But this bastardization we've come to..where you have 'insurance' pay for everything, and co-pays and the like is a bunch of bunk.
Why not let the Feds let US put money away (like we do for rainy days and any other needs) pre-tax....and loosen up insurance for coverage for catastrophic needs.
"Which if done based on evidence based results is a good thing. Doctors in general fail to keep up on advances and routinely prescribe tests that aren't needed."
Well, my experience is ancecdotal at best, but, all the Dr's that I've known and worked with were generally very much up on the latest literature. Many I worked with not only read the journals regularly, but were often publishers to them.
That is exactly correct. I have insurance ONLY to use in case of a catastrophic event like cancer, heart attack...etc.
For routine maintenance, routine meds..etc....I pay it myself out of the money I save in the HSA. I only need insurance for a major event like you described.
I agree largely. I've been doing the indie contracting thing, and have been happy with my healthcare I provide myself. I have a high deductible ($1200) insurance policy, that I use AS insurance against catastrophic emergencies. Otherwise, I sock away the max each year in a Health Savings Account, which I can earn money on, and is not like the use it or lose it things w2 employees get.
I pay for my office vists and tests out of the HSA with pre-tax dollars. When I tell the clinic I am paying, I generally get an immediate 15% discount off what they'd pay insurance companies.
I figured that saving for medical care, is much like anything else when it comes to living within your means.
And,with the HSA's....in the long run, I can save more money that you do paying deductibles and co pays for everything....
I wish they'd expand this type of thing...make much higher limits to HSA's annually...etc.
Hell, it isn't so much the Dr's making the decisions now...for the past decades, we've had the beancounters in HMO's and like dictating what tx the physicians, clinics and hospitals can give.
Couple that with having to do unnecessary tests many times just to CYA to fight off bloodsucking lawyers and malpractice cases....well, that explains a lot of it away.
"adding that someone from the company most likely downloaded a file-sharing program, typically used to exchange music, without realizing the potential problems. 'I'm sure that person is embarrassed and may even lose their job, but we know where it came from and we know where it went.'"
Hell....lose his/her job?
If they're lucky that will be all they lose. When you're doing DoD work for the Feds....you sign some pretty heavy forms about your responsibilities and the ramifications if you break them....accident or not.
If this asshole did this with what I would have to guess was secure information....putting these plans on a non-secure computer, that alone can get you some heavy legal problems, and possibly jail time.
If you read that carefully...it says it completed the C2 evaluation...not that it passed it on all phases of the evaluation.
And also in the article...you see that only NT 3.5 completed the US C2 evaluation...3.51 and 4.0 were subjected to the "UK Government's ITSEC regime at a roughly equivalent level of E3/F-C2."
Again, this was years back when I looked at this for building a system for the DoD. And we found that NT passed SOME of the C2 stuff, but not all of it, and from my weak memory, I could swear it did not pass things if hooked to a network. This again, is purely off the top of my head, but, I do seem to remember meetings and discussions on exactly then when we were looking at NT vs flavors of Unix.
"I'm not sure that you really understand what 'cash' is. It has been many years since 'cash' has been anything more than casino chips. Heck, one could resonably argue that since the inception of 'cash', it hasn't been anything more than casino chips, but certainly since we left the gold standard."
Semantically...I understand what you're saying.
But realistically..today's 'cash' is what gold was in previous days. And..unlike casino chips, everyone takes them as real money.
"Personally, I also use only my debit card because it's simple and easy for me to track."
I've always refused to have a debit card. I've actually had to return new ATM cards...'cause they were also debit cards.
At least with a credit card, if someone steals and uses it, you report it and your only liable for like $50....you can contest the money.
With a debit card...if stolen and used...that money is gone then....and you don't get it back till YOU can prove it wasn't you. I don't like the idea of that latter situation, kinda like being guilty till proven innocent.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, sure, he's not a drummer drummer, but, as a listener and watching them in concert....he was fun and amazing. And in his younger days (early Who) he was good, but, drugs and booze really took their toll on him by the early 70's.
We can discuss Neil Pert, or Stuart Copeland if you'd prefer?
I dare say they don't need a click track?
From what I've studied about them...about the only 'tape' Queen used was during the Bohemian Rhapsody opera section.
They played pretty much everything else live. They used delays quite a bit, but, that's an effect...not a backing tape in the sense of what is done today.
I think I heard an interview with Pete, saying someone was asking him after listening to some recordings of a session or two of the Who, asking about overdubs, etc on the drumming, and when told it was just Keith, he said it was impossible for someone to hit the drums that fast.
Personally...I'd rather hear things a little more 'raw' than to have everything so 'perfect' so that the digital tools of today can work better.
I think in some ways, the modern recording tools, have helped kill good music in many ways, it can really mask the lack of talent in todays musicians. Some of those old classic albums were recorded practically live. There is very little in the way of overdubs on the studio version of "Since I've Been Loving You". That track was mostly recorded live in one take. Why can't the groups of today play together as a band live like that?
Regardless....I've rather FEEL the emotion in an imperfectly played tune, rather than hear a lifeless perfect rendition of a tune.
I've yet to see a govt. entitlement program that doesn't have some type of 'means' test to it...there is no way they will treat everyone 'the same.'
I'm also foreseeing govt. health clinics run in the same fashion as the DMV....long lines, waiting for some lame govt. employee to wait on you...etc.
I think that is pretty much impossible....they have already taken your guns over there in the UK, haven't they?
So much for the threat of violence.
The govt. will never stop at the originally intended intent of the law, no matter how much they promise to limit the reach of the law for the intended use that 'everyone can agree with'.
The govt. ALWAYS will later, expand upon said law to use it in new and creative ways never intended, or try to stretch it to be used to prosecute someone that might have done something, but, there currently isn't a direct law that applies (like with that lady who harrased a teen online, and said teen killed herself).
Heck...look at the new and creative ways in the past decade that they have been expanding the RICO act which was put in place only to target the mob.
We should insist that most new laws are not only VERY narrowly defined, but that they also have sunset provisions....to give the public at least a fighting chance to not only keep laws from expanding in scope, but, to also have hope that some that are downright bad...have a chance to go away.
Well, if we in the US go to nationalized healthcare....just get ready for more of the same of what you just described, just on a MAJOR scale.
I actually have found this to be the opposite in my case so far....when the Dr. or lab or radiologist has found out I'm paying for things...they give me a cut rate right off to bat on what they'd charge insurance companies.
A HSA (Health Savings Account) is not the same thing as a flexible spending account.
You have to have a qualifying high deductible medical insurance policy...mine was $1200. I do this when I'm working through my own company, but, if you have qualifying one as a direct employee somewhere..I think you can still do it.
I wish they'd expand the HSA and make it easier to get and use....it is a great concept. Do a little googling on HSA's. I got mine set up at Chase Bank. You can read up on them at the IRS's website.
Well, if a posting can be made via email, you can make yourself virtually untraceable. YOu can set up a few mixmaster/nym remailer accounts to bounce things around the world with a few times. No real way to tell who sent it, etc. unless maybe you're on a NSA watch list or something, and even then, that would have to be tough.
There is medicare/medicade to help the poor and elderly.....I'm talking about people that have jobs, etc, in my examples.
Yeah...like that happens ALL the time here in the US.
If your kid is in trouble...no ER in the country will refuse you service. The kid will get tx, and you don't take them home to die.
Well, insurance should be ONLY for catastrophic events like you described.
But for routine, annual medical tx....not a problem to pay for it yourself, which is what it used to be like, and there WAS competition. See my other posts..where I advocate doing this...and opening up even further the HSA program for people to sock away money pre-tax for the annual normal medical costs.
Accept it? I thought that was the norm. Every company I've worked with (when not on my own)...changed health plans annually to get the best price.
Do some companies NOT do that?
I think the diabetes and other problems can also be attributed to poverty. People don't take care of themselves, eating too much of the wrong foods,, not taking meds, etc.
Can you site the studies for these horrible mortality rates? I keep hearing this, but, never really see figures on how we compare to the rest of the western world.
Well, not so much...IF we went back to thinking of medical insurance as INSURANCE. Something to only be there as a safety net, in case of catastrophic medical emergency (ie heart attack, serious injury, cancer...etc).
But for day to day things....routine office visits, and meds....that needs to be planned out in your budget as another part of living within your means.
As a self employed person, I do the high deductible policy ($1200)...and couple that with a Health Savings Account, which for a single person last year...you could load up with $2900 pre-tax. I pay my routine medical needs (including dental and eyesight and supplies) out of this pre-tax money. The HSA earns interest, and when the market is better, can also be invested to grow. The monies remaining in the HSA after retirement can be transfered as retirement $$ to you, much like and IRA.
I find when the Dr. knows I am paying....I generally get about a 15% discount off visits and procedures over what they'd charge insurance.
I wisht they'd expand the HSA program and let you sock a lot more money into it. I'd rather keep this type deal even when I sometimes go back to W2 hourly, or something closer to being an employee some place. But this bastardization we've come to..where you have 'insurance' pay for everything, and co-pays and the like is a bunch of bunk.
Why not let the Feds let US put money away (like we do for rainy days and any other needs) pre-tax....and loosen up insurance for coverage for catastrophic needs.
Well, my experience is ancecdotal at best, but, all the Dr's that I've known and worked with were generally very much up on the latest literature. Many I worked with not only read the journals regularly, but were often publishers to them.
For routine maintenance, routine meds..etc....I pay it myself out of the money I save in the HSA. I only need insurance for a major event like you described.
I pay for my office vists and tests out of the HSA with pre-tax dollars. When I tell the clinic I am paying, I generally get an immediate 15% discount off what they'd pay insurance companies.
I figured that saving for medical care, is much like anything else when it comes to living within your means.
And,with the HSA's....in the long run, I can save more money that you do paying deductibles and co pays for everything....
I wish they'd expand this type of thing...make much higher limits to HSA's annually...etc.
Couple that with having to do unnecessary tests many times just to CYA to fight off bloodsucking lawyers and malpractice cases....well, that explains a lot of it away.
Hell....lose his/her job?
If they're lucky that will be all they lose. When you're doing DoD work for the Feds....you sign some pretty heavy forms about your responsibilities and the ramifications if you break them....accident or not.
If this asshole did this with what I would have to guess was secure information....putting these plans on a non-secure computer, that alone can get you some heavy legal problems, and possibly jail time.
You get a ticket, you get your (or a friends) Uncle Boudreaux on the police force to just pull the ticket for you, and throw it out.
Of course, this sucks for the few people that don't know someone with access to the courthouse.
If you read that carefully...it says it completed the C2 evaluation...not that it passed it on all phases of the evaluation.
And also in the article...you see that only NT 3.5 completed the US C2 evaluation...3.51 and 4.0 were subjected to the "UK Government's ITSEC regime at a roughly equivalent level of E3/F-C2."
Again, this was years back when I looked at this for building a system for the DoD. And we found that NT passed SOME of the C2 stuff, but not all of it, and from my weak memory, I could swear it did not pass things if hooked to a network. This again, is purely off the top of my head, but, I do seem to remember meetings and discussions on exactly then when we were looking at NT vs flavors of Unix.
Semantically...I understand what you're saying.
But realistically..today's 'cash' is what gold was in previous days. And..unlike casino chips, everyone takes them as real money.
I've always refused to have a debit card. I've actually had to return new ATM cards...'cause they were also debit cards.
At least with a credit card, if someone steals and uses it, you report it and your only liable for like $50....you can contest the money.
With a debit card...if stolen and used...that money is gone then....and you don't get it back till YOU can prove it wasn't you. I don't like the idea of that latter situation, kinda like being guilty till proven innocent.