[SK in CV]

[quote=Hobie]I dunno. May not be an unbiased sample.

IF this gets pushed through my money is on docs forming boutique private practices combining several specialities to serve a small group of local patients who, like the docs, don’t want to deal with the govn’t system.[/quote]

If you can identify bias in the polling data, I invite you to do so.

Most all doctors (with only minor exceptions) already deal with a government payer, medicare. Most physicians can’t avoid it anymore than they can avoid dealing with private insurance.

Anectdotally, most, in my experience, (as an advisor to scores of MD’s over the last 30 years) are quite content dealing with the government as a third party payer, at least as content as they are with private insurance.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Hobie]I dunno. May not be an unbiased sample.

IF this gets pushed through my money is on docs forming boutique private practices combining several specialities to serve a small group of local patients who, like the docs, don’t want to deal with the govn’t system.[/quote]

If you can identify bias in the polling data, I invite you to do so.

Most all doctors (with only minor exceptions) already deal with a government payer, medicare. Most physicians can’t avoid it anymore than they can avoid dealing with private insurance.

Anectdotally, most, in my experience, (as an advisor to scores of MD’s over the last 30 years) are quite content dealing with the government as a third party payer, at least as content as they are with private insurance.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Hobie]I dunno. May not be an unbiased sample.

IF this gets pushed through my money is on docs forming boutique private practices combining several specialities to serve a small group of local patients who, like the docs, don’t want to deal with the govn’t system.[/quote]

If you can identify bias in the polling data, I invite you to do so.

Most all doctors (with only minor exceptions) already deal with a government payer, medicare. Most physicians can’t avoid it anymore than they can avoid dealing with private insurance.

Anectdotally, most, in my experience, (as an advisor to scores of MD’s over the last 30 years) are quite content dealing with the government as a third party payer, at least as content as they are with private insurance.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Hobie]I dunno. May not be an unbiased sample.

IF this gets pushed through my money is on docs forming boutique private practices combining several specialities to serve a small group of local patients who, like the docs, don’t want to deal with the govn’t system.[/quote]

If you can identify bias in the polling data, I invite you to do so.

Most all doctors (with only minor exceptions) already deal with a government payer, medicare. Most physicians can’t avoid it anymore than they can avoid dealing with private insurance.

Anectdotally, most, in my experience, (as an advisor to scores of MD’s over the last 30 years) are quite content dealing with the government as a third party payer, at least as content as they are with private insurance.

[SK in CV]

Recent polling shows that most physicians support reform, and a public option (or even stronger) in a wider margin than the general public.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112818960

Most doctors — 63 percent — say they favor giving patients a choice that would include both public and private insurance. That’s the position of President Obama and of many congressional Democrats. In addition, another 10 percent of doctors say they favor a public option only; they’d like to see a single-payer health care system. Together, the two groups add up to 73 percent.

When the American public is polled, anywhere from 50 to 70 percent favor a public option. So that means that when compared to their patients, doctors are bigger supporters of a public option.

[SK in CV]

Recent polling shows that most physicians support reform, and a public option (or even stronger) in a wider margin than the general public.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112818960

Most doctors — 63 percent — say they favor giving patients a choice that would include both public and private insurance. That’s the position of President Obama and of many congressional Democrats. In addition, another 10 percent of doctors say they favor a public option only; they’d like to see a single-payer health care system. Together, the two groups add up to 73 percent.

When the American public is polled, anywhere from 50 to 70 percent favor a public option. So that means that when compared to their patients, doctors are bigger supporters of a public option.

[SK in CV]

Recent polling shows that most physicians support reform, and a public option (or even stronger) in a wider margin than the general public.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112818960

Most doctors — 63 percent — say they favor giving patients a choice that would include both public and private insurance. That’s the position of President Obama and of many congressional Democrats. In addition, another 10 percent of doctors say they favor a public option only; they’d like to see a single-payer health care system. Together, the two groups add up to 73 percent.

When the American public is polled, anywhere from 50 to 70 percent favor a public option. So that means that when compared to their patients, doctors are bigger supporters of a public option.

[SK in CV]

Recent polling shows that most physicians support reform, and a public option (or even stronger) in a wider margin than the general public.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112818960

Most doctors — 63 percent — say they favor giving patients a choice that would include both public and private insurance. That’s the position of President Obama and of many congressional Democrats. In addition, another 10 percent of doctors say they favor a public option only; they’d like to see a single-payer health care system. Together, the two groups add up to 73 percent.

When the American public is polled, anywhere from 50 to 70 percent favor a public option. So that means that when compared to their patients, doctors are bigger supporters of a public option.

[SK in CV]

Recent polling shows that most physicians support reform, and a public option (or even stronger) in a wider margin than the general public.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112818960

Most doctors — 63 percent — say they favor giving patients a choice that would include both public and private insurance. That’s the position of President Obama and of many congressional Democrats. In addition, another 10 percent of doctors say they favor a public option only; they’d like to see a single-payer health care system. Together, the two groups add up to 73 percent.

When the American public is polled, anywhere from 50 to 70 percent favor a public option. So that means that when compared to their patients, doctors are bigger supporters of a public option.

[SK in CV]

Just because some homes in a particular neighborhood have foundation problems does not necessarily mean that all homes in the neighborhood will have foundation problems. Foundation problems (and related wall cracks) can be caused by a dozen or more different things, including, but not limited to, improper soil compaction, improper drainage, improperly installed or lack of moisture barriers, improper foundation installation, improper foundation concrete mix, improper design…. (the list goes on and on).

If a seller is aware of foundation problems (or any other problem for that matter), they must, by law, disclose those issues to a prospective buyer, but there is no requirement (that i’m aware of) to disclose those problems in the listing. If there are material defects which have been the subject of litigation, that litigation must also be disclosed.

These kinds of latent defects are now covered under Civil Code §896 & 897 for homes purchased by binding conract on or after 1/1/03. The statute of limitations for foundation issues is generally 10 years from original purchase from the builder (as it was under prior law also). The statute is shorter for some other components.

Hope this helps.

[SK in CV]

Just because some homes in a particular neighborhood have foundation problems does not necessarily mean that all homes in the neighborhood will have foundation problems. Foundation problems (and related wall cracks) can be caused by a dozen or more different things, including, but not limited to, improper soil compaction, improper drainage, improperly installed or lack of moisture barriers, improper foundation installation, improper foundation concrete mix, improper design…. (the list goes on and on).

If a seller is aware of foundation problems (or any other problem for that matter), they must, by law, disclose those issues to a prospective buyer, but there is no requirement (that i’m aware of) to disclose those problems in the listing. If there are material defects which have been the subject of litigation, that litigation must also be disclosed.

These kinds of latent defects are now covered under Civil Code §896 & 897 for homes purchased by binding conract on or after 1/1/03. The statute of limitations for foundation issues is generally 10 years from original purchase from the builder (as it was under prior law also). The statute is shorter for some other components.

Hope this helps.

[SK in CV]

Just because some homes in a particular neighborhood have foundation problems does not necessarily mean that all homes in the neighborhood will have foundation problems. Foundation problems (and related wall cracks) can be caused by a dozen or more different things, including, but not limited to, improper soil compaction, improper drainage, improperly installed or lack of moisture barriers, improper foundation installation, improper foundation concrete mix, improper design…. (the list goes on and on).

If a seller is aware of foundation problems (or any other problem for that matter), they must, by law, disclose those issues to a prospective buyer, but there is no requirement (that i’m aware of) to disclose those problems in the listing. If there are material defects which have been the subject of litigation, that litigation must also be disclosed.

These kinds of latent defects are now covered under Civil Code §896 & 897 for homes purchased by binding conract on or after 1/1/03. The statute of limitations for foundation issues is generally 10 years from original purchase from the builder (as it was under prior law also). The statute is shorter for some other components.

Hope this helps.

[SK in CV]

Just because some homes in a particular neighborhood have foundation problems does not necessarily mean that all homes in the neighborhood will have foundation problems. Foundation problems (and related wall cracks) can be caused by a dozen or more different things, including, but not limited to, improper soil compaction, improper drainage, improperly installed or lack of moisture barriers, improper foundation installation, improper foundation concrete mix, improper design…. (the list goes on and on).

If a seller is aware of foundation problems (or any other problem for that matter), they must, by law, disclose those issues to a prospective buyer, but there is no requirement (that i’m aware of) to disclose those problems in the listing. If there are material defects which have been the subject of litigation, that litigation must also be disclosed.

These kinds of latent defects are now covered under Civil Code §896 & 897 for homes purchased by binding conract on or after 1/1/03. The statute of limitations for foundation issues is generally 10 years from original purchase from the builder (as it was under prior law also). The statute is shorter for some other components.

Hope this helps.

[SK in CV]

Just because some homes in a particular neighborhood have foundation problems does not necessarily mean that all homes in the neighborhood will have foundation problems. Foundation problems (and related wall cracks) can be caused by a dozen or more different things, including, but not limited to, improper soil compaction, improper drainage, improperly installed or lack of moisture barriers, improper foundation installation, improper foundation concrete mix, improper design…. (the list goes on and on).

If a seller is aware of foundation problems (or any other problem for that matter), they must, by law, disclose those issues to a prospective buyer, but there is no requirement (that i’m aware of) to disclose those problems in the listing. If there are material defects which have been the subject of litigation, that litigation must also be disclosed.

These kinds of latent defects are now covered under Civil Code §896 & 897 for homes purchased by binding conract on or after 1/1/03. The statute of limitations for foundation issues is generally 10 years from original purchase from the builder (as it was under prior law also). The statute is shorter for some other components.

Hope this helps.

[SK in CV]

What is the context of your thesis? What time frame are you talking about? When did this ” intended nationalization of banks in the United States” begin? Five years ago? Fifty years ago? What mechanism was implemented for this “nationalization” to occur? Was it legislative or regulatory? In other words, you may have a point, but without context, I have no idea what it is.

[Author]

Posts