birdog1960

sure, if the private insurers agree to take the sickest patients and not cherry pick (and that is coming in 2014 when pre-existing conditions go away- just wait for the rationing from anthem, humana and the like when it happens. and no, the us came in 31st in world mortality statistics in the most recent report but spent by far the most. almost every nation ahead of us had govt run healtjhcare, rationing and an emphasis on primary care.

that's about it except i think they have better drugs...must admit that the komonawannalaya weekend at skidmore was the highlight of more than a few kid's academic year.

really? ever been to a frat party at an upper echelon school?

no, you don't realize what i'm arguing...for reasonable rationing based on thoughtful allocation of limited resources, for safe harbors to just say no, for refusal without fear of reprisal for denying unnecessary care. for empowering people with actual medical knowledge to be the decision makers. everywhere in the world that this has worked has a govt run system.

well dumbass, most of the country is this way yet i like it here...born and raised, that kind thing. highly educated areas are actually the worst. look at drug resistance in university towns. just say no, huh? i do plenty and then they go to the urgent care for the antibiotic they don't need for a cold. the system feeds this - for- profit medicine. if we were not paid for piece work we wouldn't even see people with colds. the incentives are all wrong. it's not fixed by your simplistic answers.

um, i do have vast experience...have been doing between 5000-6500 pt visits a year for over 20 years. and i'm not high except for 2 cups of coffee. yes pt often come in and say "i need" this drug or test or procedure. "uncle joe would've died without them".

absolutely. unrealistic expectations are rampant. people truly believe they should live forever and anything can be fixed...see it and hear it every day. sure, the blame can and should be spread: drug companies advertising that only the newest, most expensive drug version will work, doctors (mostly proceduralists, doing unnecessary procedures and tests and diagnosticians doing the same for fear of lawsuits), crooked durable equipment sellers.... but the patient is the common denominator. and the american mindset is not currently conducive to cost effective medicine. this only changes when the public is responsible for more of the bill or spending limits and clinical pathways are put in place

but this is what it will take to get entitlements under control...that or have the private insurers do it, which for some reason you folks are eager to accept. we need to stop the mri's for the people that "just want to know" and the stress test on 30 year olds with gas pains and all the futile care. the gov't really is the only entity that can effectively do this. same for social security reform. the painful stuff has to happen. if you're asking if the political will really exists on either side then i agree, that's a serious question.

not a cool choice but an honest one:

well, it is obscene.

i was at an infectious disease lecture where the speaker presented a map of the states with highest incidence followed by the map of red and blue states. the blue states were greatly overrepresented. he said "draw your own conclusion". i first thought of Jerry falwell and his AIDS remarks and then drew the conclusion: the lecturer was a moron.

thanks for your concern, but you're wrong...just got back from a sreamin street festival filled with goodness. bought a painting from a lady that's inspiring me through the roof...god bless americans. i'm not aiming for quixotic...gadfly will do. now fire away.

you confuse envy (another of the seven deadly sins) with disapproval. and what was the goal of the cubicle comment if not to belittle both pbills and my circumstance?

and your attack on me rests on your assumption that i'm financially unsuccessful. logically, this makes as much sense as assuming that someone who doesn't engage in public displays of affection is celibate. but again you miss the bigger point which is that we each define success in very different ways. that "infinitesimally small" group wields much power and influence. that's the problem.

....but prostitution is illegal

you linked to a negative book review and then use that book as evidence? brilliant! the review also says "the real problem, which the authors only hint at, is that Washington and the financial sector have become so tightly intertwined that public accountability has all but vanished." the govt official/financier/industrialist is all the same guy who switches hats back and forth for the purpose of enrichening himself and his buddies. regardless of party affiliation that's just wrong and needs to stop. the most devastating form of class warfare is when we are actually governed by the oppressors. kd, i got plum exhausted reading that extensive list of punished executives...and these cases all happened in such a short time span! what is common to these cases is that the crimes involved victimized the rich. try to cite an example where conviction resulted for victimizing the poor. the point about being ostentatious (and i'm talking more about 20000 sft homes than lobster lunches) is not that it irks me personally but that greed begets greed. it directly or indirectly can lead to events such as this mine disaster. people many centuries ago realized this when greed was listed as one of the seven deadly sins. current american society seems to have deemed it a virtue.

i hope you do meet him and he can here what you say...and i respect your opinion. i'd actually like to like him but any analysis of his tenure just leaves me cold.

if you don't know, then I suspect you really haven't been around too many economic elites. discretion and understatement needn't solely be virtues of the less monied (and it isn't - there are some humble high wealth individuals although our system seems to effectively discourage this)). just because you have it (and possibly have every right to it, unlike blankenship), doesn't mean you need to rub everyones faces in it. ever been to the biltmore? best example of conspicuous consumption i can think of off hand...and people go to it like a shrine, in droves.

you can tell much about a man by the company he keeps. seems like a very reasonable list with thoughtful inclusion criteria to me. not seeing any substantial arguments against it here.

sure, top level execs regularly are held accountable and criminally convicted for stuff like this the article mentions what sounds like a middle manager under the gun which is what generally happens...while the top guys enjoy all the conspicuous consumption they can handle from their ill gotten gains. what do you think they talked about at their board meetings before selling out? i'll bet a large sum it was mostly about plausible deniability. and do you suppose stuff like this might go down even more often without the umwa?

with all the criticism of the president for engaging in class warfare, it's worth remembering the massacre that recently occurred in that war. some forget that it's waged daily with one side completely overwhelming the other. as an aside, by all accounts, alpha natural resources is a fine company and will very likely much improve things for everyone concerned, in and around their mines.

anybody know the score? mermf now 0.098. i'm lost on OXGN- looks to be at 2.67 but was trading at 3.7 on feb 11? AGQ now 166. roughly estimating it looks like no one is winning right now..

thanks!

this is tough one...on one hand it's encouraging to see the IEA take on the serious issue of speculators gone wild. on the other, will it really work? also, is there any precedent for international, orchestrated, overt attempts at market manipulation of commodities, especially the most valuable commodity? (ok- i guess opec might qualify but other than that). this speaks to me of desperation. i knew it was bad but not imminently disastrous...and i doesn't help my opinion of this move that i hold a couple energy stocks another concern is the potential for insider profiteering. there must be many people in many govt's with advance knowledge of this and possible future moves. did they just move the trading profits from speculators to govt insiders?