Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
bubba99
ParticipantI dont get it. How does writing off more pricipal benefit the bank?
Are they expecting that we the tax payer will bare the burden of the writedown?
Bubba
ParticipantI dont get it. How does writing off more pricipal benefit the bank?
Are they expecting that we the tax payer will bare the burden of the writedown?
Bubba
ParticipantThe solution to health care is relatively simple – redefine the role of doctor, and pubicly fund it.
For 80% of all medical procedures/visits, a nurse practicioner is adequately trained. 10 years of med school and residency is not required to set a simple fracture, or treat a cold. Reduce the investment in “Dr.” and reduce the price.
Private medical insurance has not lived up to the high ideals of “privatization”. We have seen no innovation, no cost reductions through productivity increases, nor any capital efficiencies pushed into the industry. Each year we are seeing cost increases of 25% and more. This is hardly a great track record. The state could not be any worse.
When you start to look at the embedded capital costs created by privatization of true “Non-profit charitable Hospitals” you see where the giant increases in costs comming from. As a child I broke my arm. The doctor at the hospital emergency room set it and put on a cast after x-rays at a total cost of $100.19. This was done at a church hospital run by nurse/nuns Recently when my nephew did the same, the cost was closer to $10,000.00 The hospital for my nephews treatment was a former community hospital sold to Blue Cross, then resold three more times to “Private” non-profit entities owned by Caremark among others. Each time the “profit center” was repriced upwards creating new debt to be loaded on the “non-profit” entity. The end result, 25% year over year price increase to service un-necessary capital ocsts.
ParticipantThe solution to health care is relatively simple – redefine the role of doctor, and pubicly fund it.
For 80% of all medical procedures/visits, a nurse practicioner is adequately trained. 10 years of med school and residency is not required to set a simple fracture, or treat a cold. Reduce the investment in “Dr.” and reduce the price.
Private medical insurance has not lived up to the high ideals of “privatization”. We have seen no innovation, no cost reductions through productivity increases, nor any capital efficiencies pushed into the industry. Each year we are seeing cost increases of 25% and more. This is hardly a great track record. The state could not be any worse.
When you start to look at the embedded capital costs created by privatization of true “Non-profit charitable Hospitals” you see where the giant increases in costs comming from. As a child I broke my arm. The doctor at the hospital emergency room set it and put on a cast after x-rays at a total cost of $100.19. This was done at a church hospital run by nurse/nuns Recently when my nephew did the same, the cost was closer to $10,000.00 The hospital for my nephews treatment was a former community hospital sold to Blue Cross, then resold three more times to “Private” non-profit entities owned by Caremark among others. Each time the “profit center” was repriced upwards creating new debt to be loaded on the “non-profit” entity. The end result, 25% year over year price increase to service un-necessary capital ocsts.
ParticipantThe solution to health care is relatively simple – redefine the role of doctor, and pubicly fund it.
For 80% of all medical procedures/visits, a nurse practicioner is adequately trained. 10 years of med school and residency is not required to set a simple fracture, or treat a cold. Reduce the investment in “Dr.” and reduce the price.
Private medical insurance has not lived up to the high ideals of “privatization”. We have seen no innovation, no cost reductions through productivity increases, nor any capital efficiencies pushed into the industry. Each year we are seeing cost increases of 25% and more. This is hardly a great track record. The state could not be any worse.
When you start to look at the embedded capital costs created by privatization of true “Non-profit charitable Hospitals” you see where the giant increases in costs comming from. As a child I broke my arm. The doctor at the hospital emergency room set it and put on a cast after x-rays at a total cost of $100.19. This was done at a church hospital run by nurse/nuns Recently when my nephew did the same, the cost was closer to $10,000.00 The hospital for my nephews treatment was a former community hospital sold to Blue Cross, then resold three more times to “Private” non-profit entities owned by Caremark among others. Each time the “profit center” was repriced upwards creating new debt to be loaded on the “non-profit” entity. The end result, 25% year over year price increase to service un-necessary capital ocsts.
ParticipantThe solution to health care is relatively simple – redefine the role of doctor, and pubicly fund it.
For 80% of all medical procedures/visits, a nurse practicioner is adequately trained. 10 years of med school and residency is not required to set a simple fracture, or treat a cold. Reduce the investment in “Dr.” and reduce the price.
Private medical insurance has not lived up to the high ideals of “privatization”. We have seen no innovation, no cost reductions through productivity increases, nor any capital efficiencies pushed into the industry. Each year we are seeing cost increases of 25% and more. This is hardly a great track record. The state could not be any worse.
When you start to look at the embedded capital costs created by privatization of true “Non-profit charitable Hospitals” you see where the giant increases in costs comming from. As a child I broke my arm. The doctor at the hospital emergency room set it and put on a cast after x-rays at a total cost of $100.19. This was done at a church hospital run by nurse/nuns Recently when my nephew did the same, the cost was closer to $10,000.00 The hospital for my nephews treatment was a former community hospital sold to Blue Cross, then resold three more times to “Private” non-profit entities owned by Caremark among others. Each time the “profit center” was repriced upwards creating new debt to be loaded on the “non-profit” entity. The end result, 25% year over year price increase to service un-necessary capital ocsts.
ParticipantThe solution to health care is relatively simple – redefine the role of doctor, and pubicly fund it.
For 80% of all medical procedures/visits, a nurse practicioner is adequately trained. 10 years of med school and residency is not required to set a simple fracture, or treat a cold. Reduce the investment in “Dr.” and reduce the price.
Private medical insurance has not lived up to the high ideals of “privatization”. We have seen no innovation, no cost reductions through productivity increases, nor any capital efficiencies pushed into the industry. Each year we are seeing cost increases of 25% and more. This is hardly a great track record. The state could not be any worse.
When you start to look at the embedded capital costs created by privatization of true “Non-profit charitable Hospitals” you see where the giant increases in costs comming from. As a child I broke my arm. The doctor at the hospital emergency room set it and put on a cast after x-rays at a total cost of $100.19. This was done at a church hospital run by nurse/nuns Recently when my nephew did the same, the cost was closer to $10,000.00 The hospital for my nephews treatment was a former community hospital sold to Blue Cross, then resold three more times to “Private” non-profit entities owned by Caremark among others. Each time the “profit center” was repriced upwards creating new debt to be loaded on the “non-profit” entity. The end result, 25% year over year price increase to service un-necessary capital ocsts.
Participant18 inches is the legal minimum, but never cut it that short. 18.5 is the recommended minimum since about a half inch goes into the upper receiver, and some police might think 18 is really 17.5 which would be illegal.
Plus, any modification to a stock weapon makes it harder to explain to a DA or jury that you were only acting in self defense. The modification make it look like you had the intent to kill, the desire to harm etc.
Participant18 inches is the legal minimum, but never cut it that short. 18.5 is the recommended minimum since about a half inch goes into the upper receiver, and some police might think 18 is really 17.5 which would be illegal.
Plus, any modification to a stock weapon makes it harder to explain to a DA or jury that you were only acting in self defense. The modification make it look like you had the intent to kill, the desire to harm etc.
Participant18 inches is the legal minimum, but never cut it that short. 18.5 is the recommended minimum since about a half inch goes into the upper receiver, and some police might think 18 is really 17.5 which would be illegal.
Plus, any modification to a stock weapon makes it harder to explain to a DA or jury that you were only acting in self defense. The modification make it look like you had the intent to kill, the desire to harm etc.
Participant18 inches is the legal minimum, but never cut it that short. 18.5 is the recommended minimum since about a half inch goes into the upper receiver, and some police might think 18 is really 17.5 which would be illegal.
Plus, any modification to a stock weapon makes it harder to explain to a DA or jury that you were only acting in self defense. The modification make it look like you had the intent to kill, the desire to harm etc.
Participant18 inches is the legal minimum, but never cut it that short. 18.5 is the recommended minimum since about a half inch goes into the upper receiver, and some police might think 18 is really 17.5 which would be illegal.
Plus, any modification to a stock weapon makes it harder to explain to a DA or jury that you were only acting in self defense. The modification make it look like you had the intent to kill, the desire to harm etc.
ParticipantAlthough lending directly to distressed businesss and other borrowers would solve the main problem, it would fail to address the real issue that Secretary Paulson is trying fix:
– Preserve the value of his Goldman stock and Options
Or the real issue the House Banking Committee is trying to address:
– 15 or so members from the NY CT Ma area scarred to death that Wall Street Revenues (tax and payroll)will not reach the various cities in the area.
ParticipantAlthough lending directly to distressed businesss and other borrowers would solve the main problem, it would fail to address the real issue that Secretary Paulson is trying fix:
– Preserve the value of his Goldman stock and Options
Or the real issue the House Banking Committee is trying to address:
– 15 or so members from the NY CT Ma area scarred to death that Wall Street Revenues (tax and payroll)will not reach the various cities in the area.
-
AuthorPosts
