How can there be so much traffic in this group?
Jun 16th 2003, 9:11 am
#226
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
In article , Hatunen
writes
>Just for the record, in the USA teacher hiring is done by the
>individual school districts, which have an almost astonishing
>degree of autonomy compared to schools in other parts of the
>world.
In the UK, appointing teachers is done by the school!
There is usually an interview board including the Head Teacher, the Head
of Department, a couple of governors and maybe someone from the
Education authority.
I have sat on many boards and, when we were appointing to my department,
I chose the short list and they usually appointed the candidate I
thought best for the job.
--
Marie Lewis
writes
>Just for the record, in the USA teacher hiring is done by the
>individual school districts, which have an almost astonishing
>degree of autonomy compared to schools in other parts of the
>world.
In the UK, appointing teachers is done by the school!
There is usually an interview board including the Head Teacher, the Head
of Department, a couple of governors and maybe someone from the
Education authority.
I have sat on many boards and, when we were appointing to my department,
I chose the short list and they usually appointed the candidate I
thought best for the job.
--
Marie Lewis
Jun 16th 2003, 9:12 am
#227
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
In article ,
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" writes
>Marie Lewis wrote:
>> In article , devil
>> writes
>> >
>> >Biggest program in socialist medicine in the world.
>> Socialist = good!
>Not when it's being administered by dedicated capitalists of the "big
>business = good" mindset!
Very true.
--
Marie Lewis
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" writes
>Marie Lewis wrote:
>> In article , devil
>> writes
>> >
>> >Biggest program in socialist medicine in the world.
>> Socialist = good!
>Not when it's being administered by dedicated capitalists of the "big
>business = good" mindset!
Very true.
--
Marie Lewis
Jun 16th 2003, 9:15 am
#228
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
In article ,
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" writes
>> In the U.S. it
>> would be less than a week for an individual over 65.
>Only if you have "connections" and good insurance - which many retired
>Americans cannot afford. (Again you betray your ignorance of how "the
>other half" lives.) Also, I've known a few people who fell for the
>glowing pictures painted by eager surgeons, only to find themselves
>PERMANENTLY tied to a wheelchair, where previously it was only a
>sometime thing. (True, they may have been exceptions to the rule, but
>you can't say it doesn't happen - some of us prefer "the devil we know",
>even if it involves severe pain, to elective surgery with no guarantee
>of success.)
In order to get reductions on certain things when we are in the USA, I
am a member of AARP. I get their monthly magazines.
Every issue devotes a large part of the copy to the lack of medical
facilities for older people in the USA and the cost of prescribed drugs.
Here in the UK, no-one over 60 has to pay anything at all for any
prescribed drugs. I am extremely grateful for that.
--
Marie Lewis
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" writes
>> In the U.S. it
>> would be less than a week for an individual over 65.
>Only if you have "connections" and good insurance - which many retired
>Americans cannot afford. (Again you betray your ignorance of how "the
>other half" lives.) Also, I've known a few people who fell for the
>glowing pictures painted by eager surgeons, only to find themselves
>PERMANENTLY tied to a wheelchair, where previously it was only a
>sometime thing. (True, they may have been exceptions to the rule, but
>you can't say it doesn't happen - some of us prefer "the devil we know",
>even if it involves severe pain, to elective surgery with no guarantee
>of success.)
In order to get reductions on certain things when we are in the USA, I
am a member of AARP. I get their monthly magazines.
Every issue devotes a large part of the copy to the lack of medical
facilities for older people in the USA and the cost of prescribed drugs.
Here in the UK, no-one over 60 has to pay anything at all for any
prescribed drugs. I am extremely grateful for that.
--
Marie Lewis
Jun 16th 2003, 11:23 am
#229
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 19:35:48 +0000, Go Fig wrote:
> In article ,
> "devil" wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:23:14 +0000, Go Fig wrote:
>>
>> > In article ,
>> > "devil" wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:57:22 +0100, Marie Lewis wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In article , devil
>> >> > writes
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Biggest program in socialist medicine in the world.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Socialist = good!
>> >>
>> >> Eh, I was talking to Jay.
>> >>
>> >> And of the RICO statutes against racketeering. Which I have long
>> >> beleived ought to be used against the monopolistic medical business in the
>> >> US.
>> >
>> >
>> > Humm, I have an almost limitless amount of individual providers to
>> > choose from.
>>
>> However they conspire to set prices.
>
> Actually, for most, it is the not the providers that set fee schedule
> but the consumers via their agents; insurance companies and the states.
> This year the State of California imposed a flat across the board 6% cut
> in fees. If you want their clients you accept the contract. Few
> medical providers can exist without the state as a client.
>
>> And to overprescribe testing to use
>> the equipment that is owned by the same businesses. (Sometimes using the
>> risk of lawsuit as an excuse.)
>
> In the U.S., it is not always an excuse.
>
> The companies that are really making cash are Siemens and G.E. In the
> U.S. if your facility does not have; PET, CAT and MRI... you can't
> compete. If you can find a way to cut the ER, you can make a good
> return.
>
>>
>> > How many providers do you have in Canada ? How many provinces are there ?
>>
>> Providers are, like in the US, independent or incorporated businesses.
>> However the prices are determined by the insurance.
>
> This differs from my personnel experience in British Columbia, for
> services rendered I (my insurance) paid the Government. In California,
> these would be paid to private individual providers.
???
Sounds odd. Doctors are independent providers in BC like elsewhere in
Canada. It's *the insurance* that's public.
Your insurance would have paid him, not another insurance. More likely,
*you* would have had to pay. Cash, Visa, MC. Then you would have filed
your claim with your insurance in the US.
>> And they do not practice insurance fraud on a large scale either.
>>
>> > My personal experience is that anywhere near 10 to 30% of insurance
>> >> claims are fraudulent or borderline fraudulent. "Computer error,"
>> >> computer make for nice scapegoats.
>> >>
>> >> Free market solution :-).
>> >
>> > And when people have a co-pay this number drops, when it's 'free' who
>> > looks at the bill ?
>>
>> Co-ay would indeed have that advantage. However it is also a trojan
>> horse. Look at any country where they started with a small amount. Where
>> they are twenty years later. Guess what, the co-pay eventually turns into
>> the lion's share.
>
> Well when Marcus Wellby MD came to your home, he didn't have a CAT scan
> in that Ford. The miracles of technology cost big bucks. The exposure
> to insurance co. has grown geometrically.
Technology that's grossly underutilized, or overprescribed (or more likely
a combination) does cost big bugs indeed.
>> I don't believe that, without a co-pay, there is massive fraud in Canada the
>> way there is in the US. For a simple reason: single payer, which cares
>> about costs. While in the US, insurance companies have in effect no way
>> to fight fraud. And it's easier to pass on the cost into premiums.
>
> If people have a direct financial stake in it, it can only bring down
> costs.
Do I disagree with that?
I think I am saying there got to be another way. In Canada there is no
such a thing, yet I don't see massive abuses.
Incidentally, most cost-effective medicine is preventive medicine. The
last thing you want is to dissuade folks to visit their family doctor for
regular check-ups.
> In article ,
> "devil" wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:23:14 +0000, Go Fig wrote:
>>
>> > In article ,
>> > "devil" wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:57:22 +0100, Marie Lewis wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In article , devil
>> >> > writes
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Biggest program in socialist medicine in the world.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Socialist = good!
>> >>
>> >> Eh, I was talking to Jay.
>> >>
>> >> And of the RICO statutes against racketeering. Which I have long
>> >> beleived ought to be used against the monopolistic medical business in the
>> >> US.
>> >
>> >
>> > Humm, I have an almost limitless amount of individual providers to
>> > choose from.
>>
>> However they conspire to set prices.
>
> Actually, for most, it is the not the providers that set fee schedule
> but the consumers via their agents; insurance companies and the states.
> This year the State of California imposed a flat across the board 6% cut
> in fees. If you want their clients you accept the contract. Few
> medical providers can exist without the state as a client.
>
>> And to overprescribe testing to use
>> the equipment that is owned by the same businesses. (Sometimes using the
>> risk of lawsuit as an excuse.)
>
> In the U.S., it is not always an excuse.
>
> The companies that are really making cash are Siemens and G.E. In the
> U.S. if your facility does not have; PET, CAT and MRI... you can't
> compete. If you can find a way to cut the ER, you can make a good
> return.
>
>>
>> > How many providers do you have in Canada ? How many provinces are there ?
>>
>> Providers are, like in the US, independent or incorporated businesses.
>> However the prices are determined by the insurance.
>
> This differs from my personnel experience in British Columbia, for
> services rendered I (my insurance) paid the Government. In California,
> these would be paid to private individual providers.
???
Sounds odd. Doctors are independent providers in BC like elsewhere in
Canada. It's *the insurance* that's public.
Your insurance would have paid him, not another insurance. More likely,
*you* would have had to pay. Cash, Visa, MC. Then you would have filed
your claim with your insurance in the US.
>> And they do not practice insurance fraud on a large scale either.
>>
>> > My personal experience is that anywhere near 10 to 30% of insurance
>> >> claims are fraudulent or borderline fraudulent. "Computer error,"
>> >> computer make for nice scapegoats.
>> >>
>> >> Free market solution :-).
>> >
>> > And when people have a co-pay this number drops, when it's 'free' who
>> > looks at the bill ?
>>
>> Co-ay would indeed have that advantage. However it is also a trojan
>> horse. Look at any country where they started with a small amount. Where
>> they are twenty years later. Guess what, the co-pay eventually turns into
>> the lion's share.
>
> Well when Marcus Wellby MD came to your home, he didn't have a CAT scan
> in that Ford. The miracles of technology cost big bucks. The exposure
> to insurance co. has grown geometrically.
Technology that's grossly underutilized, or overprescribed (or more likely
a combination) does cost big bugs indeed.
>> I don't believe that, without a co-pay, there is massive fraud in Canada the
>> way there is in the US. For a simple reason: single payer, which cares
>> about costs. While in the US, insurance companies have in effect no way
>> to fight fraud. And it's easier to pass on the cost into premiums.
>
> If people have a direct financial stake in it, it can only bring down
> costs.
Do I disagree with that?
I think I am saying there got to be another way. In Canada there is no
such a thing, yet I don't see massive abuses.
Incidentally, most cost-effective medicine is preventive medicine. The
last thing you want is to dissuade folks to visit their family doctor for
regular check-ups.
Jun 16th 2003, 11:52 am
#230
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
In article ,
Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
> > schools ?
>
> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
> business.
>
> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
>
> A pure and simple market operation.
>
> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
>
> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
> escapes you?
Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
insurance....
jay
Mon, Jun 16, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Harvey
>
> For e-mail, change harvey to whhvs.
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
> > schools ?
>
> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
> business.
>
> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
>
> A pure and simple market operation.
>
> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
>
> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
> escapes you?
Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
insurance....
jay
Mon, Jun 16, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Harvey
>
> For e-mail, change harvey to whhvs.
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
Jun 16th 2003, 12:05 pm
#231
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
In article ,
"devil" wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 19:35:48 +0000, Go Fig wrote:
>
> > In article ,
> > "devil" wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:23:14 +0000, Go Fig wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article ,
> >> > "devil" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:57:22 +0100, Marie Lewis wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > In article , devil
> >> >> > writes
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Biggest program in socialist medicine in the world.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Socialist = good!
> >> >>
> >> >> Eh, I was talking to Jay.
> >> >>
> >> >> And of the RICO statutes against racketeering. Which I have long
> >> >> beleived ought to be used against the monopolistic medical business in
> >> >> the
> >> >> US.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Humm, I have an almost limitless amount of individual providers to
> >> > choose from.
> >>
> >> However they conspire to set prices.
> >
> > Actually, for most, it is the not the providers that set fee schedule
> > but the consumers via their agents; insurance companies and the states.
> > This year the State of California imposed a flat across the board 6% cut
> > in fees. If you want their clients you accept the contract. Few
> > medical providers can exist without the state as a client.
> >
> >> And to overprescribe testing to use
> >> the equipment that is owned by the same businesses. (Sometimes using the
> >> risk of lawsuit as an excuse.)
> >
> > In the U.S., it is not always an excuse.
> >
> > The companies that are really making cash are Siemens and G.E. In the
> > U.S. if your facility does not have; PET, CAT and MRI... you can't
> > compete. If you can find a way to cut the ER, you can make a good
> > return.
> >
> >>
> >> > How many providers do you have in Canada ? How many provinces are there
> >> > ?
> >>
> >> Providers are, like in the US, independent or incorporated businesses.
> >> However the prices are determined by the insurance.
> >
> > This differs from my personnel experience in British Columbia, for
> > services rendered I (my insurance) paid the Government. In California,
> > these would be paid to private individual providers.
>
> ???
>
>
> Sounds odd. Doctors are independent providers in BC like elsewhere in
> Canada. It's *the insurance* that's public.
After reviewing the bills; the ambulance and ER were paid to B.C... A
follow-up visit to an MD does appear to be a private provider.
In truth, the ER and Ambulance could be provided by the State of
California, but not always the case, my ambulance service would NOT be
provided by the state as it was just medical transportation, not
critical care.
>
> Your insurance would have paid him, not another insurance. More likely,
> *you* would have had to pay. Cash, Visa, MC. Then you would have filed
> your claim with your insurance in the US.
>
>
> >> And they do not practice insurance fraud on a large scale either.
> >>
> >> > My personal experience is that anywhere near 10 to 30% of insurance
> >> >> claims are fraudulent or borderline fraudulent. "Computer error,"
> >> >> computer make for nice scapegoats.
> >> >>
> >> >> Free market solution :-).
> >> >
> >> > And when people have a co-pay this number drops, when it's 'free' who
> >> > looks at the bill ?
> >>
> >> Co-ay would indeed have that advantage. However it is also a trojan
> >> horse. Look at any country where they started with a small amount. Where
> >> they are twenty years later. Guess what, the co-pay eventually turns into
> >> the lion's share.
> >
> > Well when Marcus Wellby MD came to your home, he didn't have a CAT scan
> > in that Ford. The miracles of technology cost big bucks. The exposure
> > to insurance co. has grown geometrically.
>
> Technology that's grossly underutilized, or overprescribed (or more likely
> a combination) does cost big bugs indeed.
>
>
> >> I don't believe that, without a co-pay, there is massive fraud in Canada
> >> the
> >> way there is in the US. For a simple reason: single payer, which cares
> >> about costs. While in the US, insurance companies have in effect no way
> >> to fight fraud. And it's easier to pass on the cost into premiums.
> >
> > If people have a direct financial stake in it, it can only bring down
> > costs.
>
> Do I disagree with that?
>
> I think I am saying there got to be another way. In Canada there is no
> such a thing, yet I don't see massive abuses.
>
> Incidentally, most cost-effective medicine is preventive medicine. The
> last thing you want is to dissuade folks to visit their family doctor for
> regular check-ups.
Some providers are seeing the light, my coverage, Blue Shield is moving
in that direction.
jay
Mon, Jun 16, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
"devil" wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 19:35:48 +0000, Go Fig wrote:
>
> > In article ,
> > "devil" wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 18:23:14 +0000, Go Fig wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article ,
> >> > "devil" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:57:22 +0100, Marie Lewis wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > In article , devil
> >> >> > writes
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Biggest program in socialist medicine in the world.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Socialist = good!
> >> >>
> >> >> Eh, I was talking to Jay.
> >> >>
> >> >> And of the RICO statutes against racketeering. Which I have long
> >> >> beleived ought to be used against the monopolistic medical business in
> >> >> the
> >> >> US.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Humm, I have an almost limitless amount of individual providers to
> >> > choose from.
> >>
> >> However they conspire to set prices.
> >
> > Actually, for most, it is the not the providers that set fee schedule
> > but the consumers via their agents; insurance companies and the states.
> > This year the State of California imposed a flat across the board 6% cut
> > in fees. If you want their clients you accept the contract. Few
> > medical providers can exist without the state as a client.
> >
> >> And to overprescribe testing to use
> >> the equipment that is owned by the same businesses. (Sometimes using the
> >> risk of lawsuit as an excuse.)
> >
> > In the U.S., it is not always an excuse.
> >
> > The companies that are really making cash are Siemens and G.E. In the
> > U.S. if your facility does not have; PET, CAT and MRI... you can't
> > compete. If you can find a way to cut the ER, you can make a good
> > return.
> >
> >>
> >> > How many providers do you have in Canada ? How many provinces are there
> >> > ?
> >>
> >> Providers are, like in the US, independent or incorporated businesses.
> >> However the prices are determined by the insurance.
> >
> > This differs from my personnel experience in British Columbia, for
> > services rendered I (my insurance) paid the Government. In California,
> > these would be paid to private individual providers.
>
> ???
>
>
> Sounds odd. Doctors are independent providers in BC like elsewhere in
> Canada. It's *the insurance* that's public.
After reviewing the bills; the ambulance and ER were paid to B.C... A
follow-up visit to an MD does appear to be a private provider.
In truth, the ER and Ambulance could be provided by the State of
California, but not always the case, my ambulance service would NOT be
provided by the state as it was just medical transportation, not
critical care.
>
> Your insurance would have paid him, not another insurance. More likely,
> *you* would have had to pay. Cash, Visa, MC. Then you would have filed
> your claim with your insurance in the US.
>
>
> >> And they do not practice insurance fraud on a large scale either.
> >>
> >> > My personal experience is that anywhere near 10 to 30% of insurance
> >> >> claims are fraudulent or borderline fraudulent. "Computer error,"
> >> >> computer make for nice scapegoats.
> >> >>
> >> >> Free market solution :-).
> >> >
> >> > And when people have a co-pay this number drops, when it's 'free' who
> >> > looks at the bill ?
> >>
> >> Co-ay would indeed have that advantage. However it is also a trojan
> >> horse. Look at any country where they started with a small amount. Where
> >> they are twenty years later. Guess what, the co-pay eventually turns into
> >> the lion's share.
> >
> > Well when Marcus Wellby MD came to your home, he didn't have a CAT scan
> > in that Ford. The miracles of technology cost big bucks. The exposure
> > to insurance co. has grown geometrically.
>
> Technology that's grossly underutilized, or overprescribed (or more likely
> a combination) does cost big bugs indeed.
>
>
> >> I don't believe that, without a co-pay, there is massive fraud in Canada
> >> the
> >> way there is in the US. For a simple reason: single payer, which cares
> >> about costs. While in the US, insurance companies have in effect no way
> >> to fight fraud. And it's easier to pass on the cost into premiums.
> >
> > If people have a direct financial stake in it, it can only bring down
> > costs.
>
> Do I disagree with that?
>
> I think I am saying there got to be another way. In Canada there is no
> such a thing, yet I don't see massive abuses.
>
> Incidentally, most cost-effective medicine is preventive medicine. The
> last thing you want is to dissuade folks to visit their family doctor for
> regular check-ups.
Some providers are seeing the light, my coverage, Blue Shield is moving
in that direction.
jay
Mon, Jun 16, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
Jun 16th 2003, 8:14 pm
#232
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
Following up to EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)
>Oh, I thought it was an accepted synonym for "McDonald's", since I first
>encountered the term here. Sorry, I assumed everyone would make the
>connection.
Ah, I see. Wasnt to hard to spot really, but it was very hot
yesterday. McLibel, McDogburger etc are what i'm used to.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale, landscape photos, London & the Thames path "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk"
Spain, food and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" (see web for email)
>Oh, I thought it was an accepted synonym for "McDonald's", since I first
>encountered the term here. Sorry, I assumed everyone would make the
>connection.
Ah, I see. Wasnt to hard to spot really, but it was very hot
yesterday. McLibel, McDogburger etc are what i'm used to.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale, landscape photos, London & the Thames path "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk"
Spain, food and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" (see web for email)
Jun 16th 2003, 8:14 pm
#233
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
Following up to Go Fig
>Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health costs
>so they can have a family and kids that attend private schools ?
civilised countries provide healthcare for all regardless of means.
Thats the bottom line, you can argue any intricacies you want.
Thats the simple fact.
Some are born ill, some are poor because they have no skills or
through bad luck. Countries where healthcare is free at point of
delivery dont s*** on these people.
The fact that some may abuse such a system is one of its acceptable
costs.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale, landscape photos, London & the Thames path "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk"
Spain, food and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" (see web for email)
>Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health costs
>so they can have a family and kids that attend private schools ?
civilised countries provide healthcare for all regardless of means.
Thats the bottom line, you can argue any intricacies you want.
Thats the simple fact.
Some are born ill, some are poor because they have no skills or
through bad luck. Countries where healthcare is free at point of
delivery dont s*** on these people.
The fact that some may abuse such a system is one of its acceptable
costs.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale, landscape photos, London & the Thames path "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk"
Spain, food and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" (see web for email)
Jun 16th 2003, 8:14 pm
#234
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
Following up to devil
>> Socialist = good!
>Eh, I was talking to Jay.
no you were not, you didnt email him!
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale, landscape photos, London & the Thames path "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk"
Spain, food and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" (see web for email)
>> Socialist = good!
>Eh, I was talking to Jay.
no you were not, you didnt email him!
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale, landscape photos, London & the Thames path "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk"
Spain, food and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" (see web for email)
Jun 16th 2003, 8:47 pm
#235
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
In article ,
The Reid wrote:
> Following up to Go Fig
>
> >Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health costs
> >so they can have a family and kids that attend private schools ?
>
> civilised countries provide healthcare for all regardless of means.
Well what about food and housing, you will hardly need health care
before years and years of needing food and housing !
> Thats the bottom line, you can argue any intricacies you want.
> Thats the simple fact.
>
> Some are born ill, some are poor because they have no skills or
> through bad luck. Countries where healthcare is free at point of
> delivery dont s*** on these people.
The UK health care s*** on people everyday... service delayed can be
service denied.
That is a simple fact.
jay
Tue, Jun 17, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
> The fact that some may abuse such a system is one of its acceptable
> costs.
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
The Reid wrote:
> Following up to Go Fig
>
> >Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health costs
> >so they can have a family and kids that attend private schools ?
>
> civilised countries provide healthcare for all regardless of means.
Well what about food and housing, you will hardly need health care
before years and years of needing food and housing !
> Thats the bottom line, you can argue any intricacies you want.
> Thats the simple fact.
>
> Some are born ill, some are poor because they have no skills or
> through bad luck. Countries where healthcare is free at point of
> delivery dont s*** on these people.
The UK health care s*** on people everyday... service delayed can be
service denied.
That is a simple fact.
jay
Tue, Jun 17, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
> The fact that some may abuse such a system is one of its acceptable
> costs.
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
Jun 16th 2003, 10:46 pm
#236
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
Following up to Go Fig
>> civilised countries provide healthcare for all regardless of means.
>Well what about food and housing, you will hardly need health care
>before years and years of needing food and housing !
Public housing does this inperfectly. Food is covered by social
security payments but isnt really an issue in affluent countries.
But these are red herrings anyway.
If youre well you can get your own food and housing. If your ill there
is nothing you can do.
Its a test of civilisation and the US fails IMHO.
>The UK health care s*** on people everyday... service delayed can be
>service denied.
Imperfections in practice make no difference to principles.
All this is just nit picking.
I believe one either believes in public healthcare or you have to
admit you just dont give a s*** about other people less fortunate.
Sorry, if that is a bit rude, but I might as well say what I think.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale, landscape photos, London & the Thames path "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk"
Spain, food and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" (see web for email)
>> civilised countries provide healthcare for all regardless of means.
>Well what about food and housing, you will hardly need health care
>before years and years of needing food and housing !
Public housing does this inperfectly. Food is covered by social
security payments but isnt really an issue in affluent countries.
But these are red herrings anyway.
If youre well you can get your own food and housing. If your ill there
is nothing you can do.
Its a test of civilisation and the US fails IMHO.
>The UK health care s*** on people everyday... service delayed can be
>service denied.
Imperfections in practice make no difference to principles.
All this is just nit picking.
I believe one either believes in public healthcare or you have to
admit you just dont give a s*** about other people less fortunate.
Sorry, if that is a bit rude, but I might as well say what I think.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Wasdale, landscape photos, London & the Thames path "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk"
Spain, food and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" (see web for email)
Jun 17th 2003, 3:50 am
#237
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:52:42 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
>In article ,
> Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
>> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
>> > schools ?
>>
>> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
>> business.
>>
>> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
>> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
>> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
>
>> A pure and simple market operation.
>>
>> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
>> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
>> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
>>
>> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
>> escapes you?
>Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
>insurance....
I gather you have never actually shopped for health insurance...
There is no great competition to offer lower rates, and it is
debatable whether it is, in fact, a free market. In any case, the
actuarial requirements force a certain minimum to prices.
Note that insurance companies do not go for the largest possible
group, and, in fact, do their best to reduce groups to smaller
subgroups. Insurance, more or less by definition, is a pooled
means to indemnify the members of a group for unanticipated costs
that could not be handled by the individual should such a costly
event occur. Once an individual can be anticipated to be likely
to have such an event occur he/she is no longer part of the
larger pool, but now a smaller one. For instance, I have coronary
artery disease; were I to shop around for health insurance (or
even life insurance) my history of cardiac problems means that
either (a) no insurance will be offered, or (b) the premiums will
be so high that there is no way I could afford them. Actuarialy,
an insurence company would be foolish to insure me inexpensively,
and would probably be violating its fiduciary responsibility to
its shareholders.
Fortunately for me, I am included in a larger group pool and as
part of my retirement my health insurance is free, but there was
certainly no shopping involved, since it is part of the CalPERS
plan.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
>In article ,
> Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
>> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
>> > schools ?
>>
>> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
>> business.
>>
>> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
>> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
>> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
>
>> A pure and simple market operation.
>>
>> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
>> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
>> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
>>
>> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
>> escapes you?
>Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
>insurance....
I gather you have never actually shopped for health insurance...
There is no great competition to offer lower rates, and it is
debatable whether it is, in fact, a free market. In any case, the
actuarial requirements force a certain minimum to prices.
Note that insurance companies do not go for the largest possible
group, and, in fact, do their best to reduce groups to smaller
subgroups. Insurance, more or less by definition, is a pooled
means to indemnify the members of a group for unanticipated costs
that could not be handled by the individual should such a costly
event occur. Once an individual can be anticipated to be likely
to have such an event occur he/she is no longer part of the
larger pool, but now a smaller one. For instance, I have coronary
artery disease; were I to shop around for health insurance (or
even life insurance) my history of cardiac problems means that
either (a) no insurance will be offered, or (b) the premiums will
be so high that there is no way I could afford them. Actuarialy,
an insurence company would be foolish to insure me inexpensively,
and would probably be violating its fiduciary responsibility to
its shareholders.
Fortunately for me, I am included in a larger group pool and as
part of my retirement my health insurance is free, but there was
certainly no shopping involved, since it is part of the CalPERS
plan.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Jun 17th 2003, 5:47 am
#238
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 18:10:03 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
>In article ,
> [email protected] (Hatunen) wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:52:42 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
>>
>> >In article ,
>> > Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>> >
>> >> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
>> >> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
>> >> > schools ?
>> >>
>> >> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
>> >> business.
>> >>
>> >> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
>> >> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
>> >> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
>> >
>> >> A pure and simple market operation.
>> >>
>> >> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
>> >> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
>> >> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
>> >>
>> >> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
>> >> escapes you?
>> >
>> >Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
>> >insurance....
>>
>> I gather you have never actually shopped for health insurance...
>I suggest you look at a site like http://www.ehealthinsurance.com, you
>will find a huge assortment rate schedules by many companies.
I'll say it again: I gather you have never actually shopped for
health insurance. Looking rates up on a web site is only the
first step in shopping.
Of course you can find all kinds of rates. But it's only truly
competitive if they will actually cover you and provide
equivalent services. And, of course, if they actually deliver
what they say they will, this being something of a problem in the
health insurance area.
I put in my ZIP code and said I was born in 1948. From Golden
Rule for $129/month I can get $5000 deductible and 20%
coinsurance, office visits not covered, no apparent cap on the
20%, etc.
[...]
>> Fortunately for me, I am included in a larger group pool and as
>> part of my retirement my health insurance is free, but there was
>> certainly no shopping involved, since it is part of the CalPERS
>> plan.
>Are you saying your agent just took the first policy that came across
>his desk ? Is this your primary coverage ?
What agent? It's part of my retirement benefits. And CalPERS
(California Public Employees Retirement System) has enough
financial clout to get a pretty good deal, but since it's free to
me that's pretty much not my direct concern; any shopping was not
on my part, and, frankly, I don't think CalPERS role makes it a
free market, just one giant working things out with another.
Nothing to do with individuals goint shopping for health
insurance.
And I'm damn glad: I wouldn't be able to get health insurance if
I had to do it on my own.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
>In article ,
> [email protected] (Hatunen) wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:52:42 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
>>
>> >In article ,
>> > Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>> >
>> >> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
>> >> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
>> >> > schools ?
>> >>
>> >> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
>> >> business.
>> >>
>> >> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
>> >> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
>> >> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
>> >
>> >> A pure and simple market operation.
>> >>
>> >> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
>> >> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
>> >> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
>> >>
>> >> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
>> >> escapes you?
>> >
>> >Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
>> >insurance....
>>
>> I gather you have never actually shopped for health insurance...
>I suggest you look at a site like http://www.ehealthinsurance.com, you
>will find a huge assortment rate schedules by many companies.
I'll say it again: I gather you have never actually shopped for
health insurance. Looking rates up on a web site is only the
first step in shopping.
Of course you can find all kinds of rates. But it's only truly
competitive if they will actually cover you and provide
equivalent services. And, of course, if they actually deliver
what they say they will, this being something of a problem in the
health insurance area.
I put in my ZIP code and said I was born in 1948. From Golden
Rule for $129/month I can get $5000 deductible and 20%
coinsurance, office visits not covered, no apparent cap on the
20%, etc.
[...]
>> Fortunately for me, I am included in a larger group pool and as
>> part of my retirement my health insurance is free, but there was
>> certainly no shopping involved, since it is part of the CalPERS
>> plan.
>Are you saying your agent just took the first policy that came across
>his desk ? Is this your primary coverage ?
What agent? It's part of my retirement benefits. And CalPERS
(California Public Employees Retirement System) has enough
financial clout to get a pretty good deal, but since it's free to
me that's pretty much not my direct concern; any shopping was not
on my part, and, frankly, I don't think CalPERS role makes it a
free market, just one giant working things out with another.
Nothing to do with individuals goint shopping for health
insurance.
And I'm damn glad: I wouldn't be able to get health insurance if
I had to do it on my own.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Jun 17th 2003, 6:10 am
#239
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
In article ,
[email protected] (Hatunen) wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:52:42 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
>
> >In article ,
> > Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
> >
> >> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
> >> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
> >> > schools ?
> >>
> >> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
> >> business.
> >>
> >> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
> >> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
> >> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
> >
> >> A pure and simple market operation.
> >>
> >> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
> >> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
> >> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
> >>
> >> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
> >> escapes you?
> >
> >Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
> >insurance....
>
> I gather you have never actually shopped for health insurance...
I suggest you look at a site like http://www.ehealthinsurance.com, you
will find a huge assortment rate schedules by many companies.
> There is no great competition to offer lower rates, and it is
> debatable whether it is, in fact, a free market. In any case, the
> actuarial requirements force a certain minimum to prices.
>
> Note that insurance companies do not go for the largest possible
> group, and, in fact, do their best to reduce groups to smaller
> subgroups. Insurance, more or less by definition, is a pooled
> means to indemnify the members of a group for unanticipated costs
> that could not be handled by the individual should such a costly
> event occur. Once an individual can be anticipated to be likely
> to have such an event occur he/she is no longer part of the
> larger pool, but now a smaller one. For instance, I have coronary
> artery disease; were I to shop around for health insurance (or
> even life insurance) my history of cardiac problems means that
> either (a) no insurance will be offered, or (b) the premiums will
> be so high that there is no way I could afford them. Actuarialy,
> an insurence company would be foolish to insure me inexpensively,
> and would probably be violating its fiduciary responsibility to
> its shareholders.
>
> Fortunately for me, I am included in a larger group pool and as
> part of my retirement my health insurance is free, but there was
> certainly no shopping involved, since it is part of the CalPERS
> plan.
Are you saying your agent just took the first policy that came across
his desk ? Is this your primary coverage ?
jay
Tue, Jun 17, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
>
>
> ************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
> * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
> * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
[email protected] (Hatunen) wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:52:42 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
>
> >In article ,
> > Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
> >
> >> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
> >> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
> >> > schools ?
> >>
> >> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
> >> business.
> >>
> >> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
> >> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
> >> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
> >
> >> A pure and simple market operation.
> >>
> >> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
> >> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
> >> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
> >>
> >> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
> >> escapes you?
> >
> >Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
> >insurance....
>
> I gather you have never actually shopped for health insurance...
I suggest you look at a site like http://www.ehealthinsurance.com, you
will find a huge assortment rate schedules by many companies.
> There is no great competition to offer lower rates, and it is
> debatable whether it is, in fact, a free market. In any case, the
> actuarial requirements force a certain minimum to prices.
>
> Note that insurance companies do not go for the largest possible
> group, and, in fact, do their best to reduce groups to smaller
> subgroups. Insurance, more or less by definition, is a pooled
> means to indemnify the members of a group for unanticipated costs
> that could not be handled by the individual should such a costly
> event occur. Once an individual can be anticipated to be likely
> to have such an event occur he/she is no longer part of the
> larger pool, but now a smaller one. For instance, I have coronary
> artery disease; were I to shop around for health insurance (or
> even life insurance) my history of cardiac problems means that
> either (a) no insurance will be offered, or (b) the premiums will
> be so high that there is no way I could afford them. Actuarialy,
> an insurence company would be foolish to insure me inexpensively,
> and would probably be violating its fiduciary responsibility to
> its shareholders.
>
> Fortunately for me, I am included in a larger group pool and as
> part of my retirement my health insurance is free, but there was
> certainly no shopping involved, since it is part of the CalPERS
> plan.
Are you saying your agent just took the first policy that came across
his desk ? Is this your primary coverage ?
jay
Tue, Jun 17, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
>
>
> ************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
> * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
> * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
Jun 17th 2003, 7:16 am
#240
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: How can there be so much traffic in this group?
In article ,
[email protected] (Hatunen) wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 18:10:03 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
>
> >In article ,
> > [email protected] (Hatunen) wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:52:42 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article ,
> >> > Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
> >> >> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
> >> >> > schools ?
> >> >>
> >> >> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
> >> >> business.
> >> >>
> >> >> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
> >> >> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
> >> >> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
> >> >
> >> >> A pure and simple market operation.
> >> >>
> >> >> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
> >> >> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
> >> >> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
> >> >> escapes you?
> >> >
> >> >Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
> >> >insurance....
> >>
> >> I gather you have never actually shopped for health insurance...
> >
> >I suggest you look at a site like http://www.ehealthinsurance.com, you
> >will find a huge assortment rate schedules by many companies.
>
> I'll say it again: I gather you have never actually shopped for
> health insurance. Looking rates up on a web site is only the
> first step in shopping.
>
> Of course you can find all kinds of rates. But it's only truly
> competitive if they will actually cover you and provide
> equivalent services.
OK, but are you saying everyone's needs are the same ?
> And, of course, if they actually deliver
> what they say they will, this being something of a problem in the
> health insurance area.
>
> I put in my ZIP code and said I was born in 1948. From Golden
> Rule for $129/month I can get $5000 deductible and 20%
> coinsurance, office visits not covered, no apparent cap on the
> 20%, etc.
>
> [...]
>
> >> Fortunately for me, I am included in a larger group pool and as
> >> part of my retirement my health insurance is free, but there was
> >> certainly no shopping involved, since it is part of the CalPERS
> >> plan.
> >
> >Are you saying your agent just took the first policy that came across
> >his desk ? Is this your primary coverage ?
>
> What agent? It's part of my retirement benefits. And CalPERS
> (California Public Employees Retirement System) has enough
> financial clout to get a pretty good deal,
But again, Im sure they had a choice in the market and they made a
decision on your behalf.
> but since it's free to
> me that's pretty much not my direct concern; any shopping was not
> on my part, and, frankly, I don't think CalPERS role makes it a
> free market, just one giant working things out with another.
> Nothing to do with individuals goint shopping for health
> insurance.
>
> And I'm damn glad: I wouldn't be able to get health insurance if
> I had to do it on my own.
If you first get insurance in your 50s it is going to be more costly.
jay
Tue, Jun 17, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
>
> ************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
> * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
> * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
[email protected] (Hatunen) wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 18:10:03 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
>
> >In article ,
> > [email protected] (Hatunen) wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:52:42 GMT, Go Fig wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article ,
> >> > Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> > Is it your position that one taxpayer should pay another's health
> >> >> > costs so they can have a family and kids that attend private
> >> >> > schools ?
> >> >>
> >> >> Insurance -- health, life, dental -- is a really, really simple
> >> >> business.
> >> >>
> >> >> The more people in the pool, the more the risk is spread, and the less
> >> >> it costs to cover each individual. The smaller the pool, the higher
> >> >> the cost to each individual to cover the risk.
> >> >
> >> >> A pure and simple market operation.
> >> >>
> >> >> So: the cheapest way to cover everybody's health insurance is to make
> >> >> sure that the largest group is in the scheme. And the largest group
> >> >> possible on a national basis is the population of the nation.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there something about the basic operation of market systems that
> >> >> escapes you?
> >> >
> >> >Does competition elude you ? Perhaps you don't shop around for
> >> >insurance....
> >>
> >> I gather you have never actually shopped for health insurance...
> >
> >I suggest you look at a site like http://www.ehealthinsurance.com, you
> >will find a huge assortment rate schedules by many companies.
>
> I'll say it again: I gather you have never actually shopped for
> health insurance. Looking rates up on a web site is only the
> first step in shopping.
>
> Of course you can find all kinds of rates. But it's only truly
> competitive if they will actually cover you and provide
> equivalent services.
OK, but are you saying everyone's needs are the same ?
> And, of course, if they actually deliver
> what they say they will, this being something of a problem in the
> health insurance area.
>
> I put in my ZIP code and said I was born in 1948. From Golden
> Rule for $129/month I can get $5000 deductible and 20%
> coinsurance, office visits not covered, no apparent cap on the
> 20%, etc.
>
> [...]
>
> >> Fortunately for me, I am included in a larger group pool and as
> >> part of my retirement my health insurance is free, but there was
> >> certainly no shopping involved, since it is part of the CalPERS
> >> plan.
> >
> >Are you saying your agent just took the first policy that came across
> >his desk ? Is this your primary coverage ?
>
> What agent? It's part of my retirement benefits. And CalPERS
> (California Public Employees Retirement System) has enough
> financial clout to get a pretty good deal,
But again, Im sure they had a choice in the market and they made a
decision on your behalf.
> but since it's free to
> me that's pretty much not my direct concern; any shopping was not
> on my part, and, frankly, I don't think CalPERS role makes it a
> free market, just one giant working things out with another.
> Nothing to do with individuals goint shopping for health
> insurance.
>
> And I'm damn glad: I wouldn't be able to get health insurance if
> I had to do it on my own.
If you first get insurance in your 50s it is going to be more costly.
jay
Tue, Jun 17, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
>
> ************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
> * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
> * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
