Doc
-
Posts
64,669 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Doc
-
-
Reportedly, the deal is for 4-years and for $27M in new money. So added to this year's $3M salary, it's essentially a 5-year $30M deal. Not bad.
BTW, McGee says he'll be ready to go Sunday.
-
I know, I know you think that this idea is the cure all. I am not sold, you can do it right now, though notice neither the insurance cos nor doctors and anyone else is really promoting the idea. Probably because they don't make enough money off the deal. The other problem with it is that you have a hard time rolling over the money from year to year and it assumes that you make enough in a given year to cover your medical expenses this way... another words there is a short term build up issue and it won't work for those who have chronic expensive medical issues.
I still like it to remain as an option though.
There is no "cure all." HSA's and HDHP's are IMHO the best option. It's like a debit card (HSA which people will ideally try to keep as large as possible) with a safety net (HP kicks-in after HSA depleted). Current plans are like buying on credit, with no real care by the consumer to spend wisely.
And don't get me wrong, insurance companies need reform as well. Dropping people who pay their premiums for getting sick is reprehensible. And while the pre-existing condition thing seems odious, it is there to prevent people from not buying coverage when they're healthy and only getting it when they're sick. As was explained, that's not how (any) insurance works. Maybe there should be a 1-year wait for those with pre-existing conditions or auditing someone's finances to determine if they had the ability to pay previously and just didn't. I don't know and there are no simple answers, but the Dems' proposals are surely not. Not when tort reform is nowhere to be found, and personal responsibility isn't stressed.
-
So we will at least have McKelvin, McGee, and Corner ready to go next year, with Youboty a possible departure, and Ellis Lankster maybe competing for the dimespot with Drayton Florence? There is no reason for this team to acquire a CB in 2010.
Now if only it were so clear with safety.
It will be Whitner and Byrd. Whitner is signed through 2010. Although I guess we could be looking at a 2nd or 3rd rounder on his replacement.
-
You clown--"niggar"? In your dreams, perhaps--it would have allowed you to elevate this incident to the atrocity that you imagine.
LOL @ the "in [my] dreams" part! I was sure hoping that some idiot kids would use racial epithets!
The act itself was the atrocity, even though what was allegedly written wasn't as bad as what I thought it was, though still offensive.
And there was no evidence that he knew he hit the canadian? Neither he nor his passenger (who was not a suspect and therefore could not avail himself of "5th amendment" protection) would cooperate by providing their version of the events of that night. The threat of his passenger having to describe the event of the ENTIRE night to the imminent grand jury hearing lead to resolution of this "simple traffic ticket"--a month later. Even if he didn't realize he hit her, it is unimaginable only to a few select sycophants on this board that he MAY have been drinking (overtly or, as is his custom, covertly) that night. Any evidence of that passed with time (4 weeks).Anyway, you were saying?
LOL! So someone is a "sycophant" if he/she believes that Lynch wasn't drinking that night because, well, no one saw him drinking and there is zero evidence to support that he was, much less impaired when he drove? So what are you if you believe he was drinking, "covertly," like "in the bathroom" (as you know, a personal favorite of mine!), without any evidence whatsoever? Yes, a "clown." "In your dreams" you want to believe he was guilty of DUI hit-and-run, because, gosh darn it, he had the audacity to remain quiet, and that's obviously all the proof you need of his guilt, right? That and "come on, dontcha think he was drinking..." doesn't hold up anywhere, much less in a court of law.
And the grand jury was dismissed after the DA laughably overplayed his hand by subpoenaing Wilson, Brandon, 3 Bills execs (all of whom were no doubt out partying that night on Chippewa, if not in Lynch's car), Steve Johnson, James Hardy, and Christian Gaddis (did the DA forget about Billy Buffalo?), for the sole purpose of getting Lynch to admit he was the driver. The DA either finally came to his senses and offered the plea deal he should have offered in the beginning, or, more likely, his boss(es) told him to stop wasting taxpayer time and money and offer Lynch the plea deal that was appropriate for the facts gathered after a month-long investigation. Which was a traffic ticket. Lynch's passenger, the aforementioned Steve Johnson, wouldn't have given testimony any different than Lynch's account because, had Lynch truly hit-and-run and Johnson saw/knew it, Johnson could have been charged for being a material witness and not reporting a crime and/or obstruction of justice. But you knew that part, right?
As for Lynch's gun, it was essentially a crime of the letter of the law. There was no victim, real or potential. There was just an illegal gun in a trunk that, in the hands of a violent criminal, potentially could be deadly. He had his day in court and was rightfully given a misdemeanor. The suspension however was a joke, especially in light of the Commish's recent ruling on Vick, as well as others. But wait, Vick was "suspended" while in jail, "paid his debt to society," and is rehabilitated, right?
These kids should be hauled before a judge and charged with the equivalent of a traffic ticket, to teach them a lesson. But it shouldn't be grounds for, perhaps, being suspended from school for a different incident.
-
Despite the blah, blah, blah nonsensical line, the low penalties offered is a good argument and should be debated. Any sense of where that is right now in the debate and what levels do you think would make sense.
Well according to Max Bogus, a public option isn't where he wants to go, but instead with co-ops. I was talking about the public option, which many Democrats say needs to happen. I don't know much about medical co-ops, but co-ops in business usually end-up costing consumers more money. And the penalty for not providing health care in Bogus' plan ostensibly will go towards expanding Medicaid, versus the public option.
What makes more sense is health savings accounts and high-deductible health plans. When I priced one out last year and compared it to my regular coverage, it came out less per year, AND the money from the HSA which I didn't use came back to me, tax-deferred, and could be used as a retirement vehicle. But the Dems want to kill those as well.
Other questions you need to ask is, why no real attempt at tort reform? Although the answer is obvious there. Another is, why are Dems exempting members of Congress from health care reform, if it's so great for everyone else? I wonder.
-
?? I love the appointment wait time scare argument... it doesn't happen in Canada any more than it does here and how is that any different than now? I have to wait often times a month for a specialist for my son and our insurance doesn't cover the specialist best able to treat him....
And yes I have cut back eating out and entertainment and travel to pay for a lot of this. I could agree with you if health care and insurance were cheap but it is not...
The reason is too many doctors spend a lot of time at the golf course and on private yachts etc. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but the one's that but most Doctor's live in the top 1% income bracket and until they drop down to say the top 25% bracket, I am not going to worry about it.
Check, please.
-
anyone have any terms of the contract?
I'll bet they're a lot more reasonable than Clements', and probably on the order of Greer's.
-
Yeah, no more 1st round DB's!
-
Liberals are sheep. They are, by their very inclination, more likely to trust the government than a true conservative. So why are you surprised that he believes this nonsense?
I don't know Kelly at all.
-
Kelsay will start this weekend.
-
If Antonio Bryant is out, not a big deal.
-
That is not what the public option in the plans being discussed is. People with private insurance now from their employers are not even eligible for the public plan. Nor are wealthy people who pay privately. NO ONE is being dumped into the public option.
How are you so certain that this won't happen, Kelly? Because you've been told (lied to) that "you can keep your doctor, blah, blah, blah?" Have you seen the "penalties" to employers for not offering health care? They're so ridiculously low, that it makes financial sense for employers to drop every employee and take the "penalties." And the gubment's idea is to take the money from the penalties and use them to help pay for health care.
-
I hear you, but the problem is as a citizen I can't afford your 2/3rds at an 8-15% growth rate. Most folks would take that in long term equities right now and yet you are getting that rate increase in a down economy... Sorry, I don't have sympathy when the system is stretching my finances....
Well that's a good point. Are you employed? What are you doing to curtail your expenses? Have you cancelled your cable TV? Your cell phone plan? stopped eating out? Entertainment? Any other wholly unnecessary things that you want, versus health care which you feel you have to have, and cheap? Do you take good care of your health?
And once the economy recovers (and word is the recession's over...at least for the 90% who have a job), will I be getting paid more? I think we all know the answer to that one.
And as for sympathy, it cuts both ways. If the public option happens, wait and see how long it is before you get an appointment. As it stands right now, 40% of doctors don't take new Medicare patients.
-
It's a bogus study because the one doing it is extremely biased in the outcome...
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2...m-harvard-study
...and if what their saying is true then why are 45% of doctors thinking of quitting the profession if it goes through?
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/A....aspx?id=506199
No problem. The void will be filled with Nurse Practitioners. And there's now a "Doctor of Nursing Practice" degree, that you can get on-line, and you can be called a "doctor."
-
Doctors get paid about 25% less in public plans like Medicare now. In the study linked above, 63% of doctors want private insurers AND a public option, 27% want just private, and only 10% want only the public option.
As an anesthesiologist, I get ~2/3 less in public plans like Medicare and Medicaid, and these patients are usually the sickest ones I see. It's ridiculous.
-
Doctors are in favor of the public option, in huge numbers. And they are the ones that should know. And they are the ones that would be asked to accept less in the public plans. In the latest study, 73% of doctors were in favor of the public option and 27% in favor of just private. 10% of that 73% wanted a single payer only public option.
http://healthcarereform.nejm.org/?p=1790&query=home
http://www.drudge.com/news/125153/poll-63-...r-public-option
Looking at the numbers a different way, 90% of us want a private option. And those who support a public option want it to cover those out of the 47M (or so) who truly can't afford health insurance. Not for people previously with private insurance to be "dumped" into the public option.
-
I get your response and generally agree with it, but why did you automatically job to this word as being spray painted on his lawn? Agreed this would be an entirely different ballgame (and I don't fault him for pressing charges even though it was much less seriously than thought) but it's kinda sad you made this jump to assume.
I heard what was spray-painted was offensive and saw what looked like "gar" on the lawn, as someone else pointed out in one of the threads.
-
Here's where the "credibility factor" plummets:
The Harvard study, funded by a federal research grant, was published in the online edition of the American Journal of Public Health. It was released by Physicians for a National Health Program, which favors government-backed or "single-payer" health insurance.And I have a suggestion on what we can do: tell people to eat, sleep, and exercise properly, and avoid high risk activities. But like everything else, it's too hard and throwing money at the problem is the answer.
-
Hitting someone and driving away is a crime. Marshawn did hit someone, and he did drive away. Or at minimum, someone driving his car hit someone and drove away. Just because someone has the right to not incriminate themselves does not mean that they did not commit a crime. If you're going to dispute that this is what happened, I don't want to argue with you, it's not worth the effort.
The incident was investigated fully and there was no evidence that Lynch knew he hit the woman. I agree that he did hit her, but unwittingly, and thus unwittingly left the scene, and thus got the traffic infraction. I guess that could be called a "crime."
There was speculation on this board about what was painted on his lawn; what's come out since then is that it was not a racial epithet, but basically said: "Learn to take a knee" with the score of the game, and a graphic depiction of the male anatomy.My mistake on what was actually written, but it's still inappropriate. If this were done all the time, there'd be a lot of players' lawns messed-up after games.
But it's good that the DA is looking to press charges while McKelvin is not.
-
What did certain Bills player learn by "going through the system" and getting "a slap on the wrist"? Did it prevent another crime (within a year or so?)?
What crime did Lynch commit again, WEO, prior to his egregious crime of having a gun in the trunk of his car? Exercising his 5th amendment rights? Yeah, HUGE crime there.
Nice try.
Leo would be a credible "victim" if he demonstrated appropriate outrage immediately after grass blade genocide was committed on his lawn--and pressed charges. But he didn't. Now he's decided to press charges on these two criminal masterminds??One would think it wouldn't be possible to fumble this decision....
Again I am entertained by all the posters who initially gave him props for NOT pressing charges who are now praising his decision to nail these sick sick bastards.
It's just innocent teenage hijinks. Spray painting "niggar" (sic) on a lawn is perfectly acceptable behavior. Now, if some black kids had spray painted "cracker" on Trent's lawn after any number of crap games last year...
-
AVP agreed with TO.
-
What's even funnier? Everyone is running around saying that waste and corruption in Medicare is so rampant that, once fixed, it will pay for three-quarters of a universal health care plan. But THIS corruption is somehow different?
What's even funnier still is that ACORN was supposed to be a player in health care reform.
-
The Bucs will likely be without Bryant, and WILL be without their center, Jeff Faine, and have no other true center on the roster. Game over.
-
What this says to me is, if you lose a game like that, its ok. There will be no message sent to the team or choaching staff. Good showing though.
Wow, what a great idea. After every big game loss, someone gets fired. It could be like Trump's "The Apprentice."
Ref caught cheating for Patriots
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Take a look at this video. According to the NFL gamebook, the ball was at the Bills' 35-yard line. Now while the ball is rarely ever exactly on the yard line (and it looks like it's snapped at the 36, although centers usually bring the ball closer to them when they snap it), it's within half a yard of the yard line mentioned on either side, i.e. it's between the 35.5 and 34.5 yard line. At :19 Welker catches the ball and the ball is in his arm and clearly down at the 26 yard line. So he's short of the first down, and it said 3rd and 1. Now look at what the ref does at :30. And voila, it's an automatic first down!
Also notice how far behind the LOS LT Matt Light lines-up on the play. Pathetic, but typical.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxA95K5gP9s