Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
ucodegen
ParticipantWhen you can’t unload a Canadian Maple Leaf for $50 – or even give it away – because the sheep are too gun shy and addicted to paper, then I think it’s safe to say that gold has a LOOOOONG way to run.
Sounds like the argument used by people saying that housing has much more to go up. Bubbles burst when there is no-one willing to buy at the new higher price.. and people have to unload. This applies to gold as well as housing. Since he could not unload the gold coin at the desired price.. it means that the ‘real’ price is actually lower.
NOTE: I think the real thing is that people are brain dead is the real reason. Quotable from the video… “I don’t even have $5 on me..”.
The other problem is being to ID if it is a real coin or not.. I wonder how many people have actually seen a Maple Leaf gold coin and know what its purity is.
Comment on yahoo:
I’m a gold/silver bug, and I wouldn’t buy from this guy off the street either. There are too many fakes, and how can you tell if this guy is telling the truth about the coin?
ParticipantWhen you can’t unload a Canadian Maple Leaf for $50 – or even give it away – because the sheep are too gun shy and addicted to paper, then I think it’s safe to say that gold has a LOOOOONG way to run.
Sounds like the argument used by people saying that housing has much more to go up. Bubbles burst when there is no-one willing to buy at the new higher price.. and people have to unload. This applies to gold as well as housing. Since he could not unload the gold coin at the desired price.. it means that the ‘real’ price is actually lower.
NOTE: I think the real thing is that people are brain dead is the real reason. Quotable from the video… “I don’t even have $5 on me..”.
The other problem is being to ID if it is a real coin or not.. I wonder how many people have actually seen a Maple Leaf gold coin and know what its purity is.
Comment on yahoo:
I’m a gold/silver bug, and I wouldn’t buy from this guy off the street either. There are too many fakes, and how can you tell if this guy is telling the truth about the coin?
November 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #479938ParticipantI just went to the dentist. My bill, before insurance payment was about $220 (x-rays and cleaning). I noticed that a lot of people have terrible teeth but they’ll spend money on other things.
How much after insurance.. and how much was being paid on your monthly insurance?? I stopped paying dental insurance because I found it cheaper to save and pay direct… and I had a lot of work done fixing what a previous dentist had done. I would have easily hit the insurance cap each year for several years as well as potentially the lifetime cap.
November 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480106ParticipantI just went to the dentist. My bill, before insurance payment was about $220 (x-rays and cleaning). I noticed that a lot of people have terrible teeth but they’ll spend money on other things.
How much after insurance.. and how much was being paid on your monthly insurance?? I stopped paying dental insurance because I found it cheaper to save and pay direct… and I had a lot of work done fixing what a previous dentist had done. I would have easily hit the insurance cap each year for several years as well as potentially the lifetime cap.
November 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480463ParticipantI just went to the dentist. My bill, before insurance payment was about $220 (x-rays and cleaning). I noticed that a lot of people have terrible teeth but they’ll spend money on other things.
How much after insurance.. and how much was being paid on your monthly insurance?? I stopped paying dental insurance because I found it cheaper to save and pay direct… and I had a lot of work done fixing what a previous dentist had done. I would have easily hit the insurance cap each year for several years as well as potentially the lifetime cap.
November 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480543ParticipantI just went to the dentist. My bill, before insurance payment was about $220 (x-rays and cleaning). I noticed that a lot of people have terrible teeth but they’ll spend money on other things.
How much after insurance.. and how much was being paid on your monthly insurance?? I stopped paying dental insurance because I found it cheaper to save and pay direct… and I had a lot of work done fixing what a previous dentist had done. I would have easily hit the insurance cap each year for several years as well as potentially the lifetime cap.
November 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480767ParticipantI just went to the dentist. My bill, before insurance payment was about $220 (x-rays and cleaning). I noticed that a lot of people have terrible teeth but they’ll spend money on other things.
How much after insurance.. and how much was being paid on your monthly insurance?? I stopped paying dental insurance because I found it cheaper to save and pay direct… and I had a lot of work done fixing what a previous dentist had done. I would have easily hit the insurance cap each year for several years as well as potentially the lifetime cap.
November 10, 2009 at 11:17 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #479933ParticipantFor example a generic drug prescription could be at a $5 co-pay but a brand name drug prescription would be costly enough to make the patient think again about demanding that drug — perhaps 50% co-insurance.
True, but we also have to be aware that if the threshold is too high, we lose innovation. How about generic being covered at median + 1 std deviation of all generics (to avoid crappy generics), brand name would only have the cost amounting to median+1std deviation of the generic being covered. Any amount above that would not be covered in the name brand. Too many drug companies ‘invent’ a new and improved product once their original goes off patent (they also call this innovation). There is really no significant difference between the earlier drug that went off patent and the new ‘improved’ drug.
I think that it’s better to go into debt for universal health care than it is for war and bank bailouts.
Hate to inform you, but the government is profiting from the bank bailouts. Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae is paying the government about $1B per quarter, $4Billion a year EACH just on interest payments under TARP. BofA is paying $405Million per quarter, $1.6Billion/year on interest payments to the government on their TARP money.. and the principal still needs to be repaid or the stock warrants become effective and the government owns a large block of stock… which they can sell for a gain because the strike price on the warrant will be lower than the stock price (the warrants have a decreasing strike price on them).
November 10, 2009 at 11:17 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480101ParticipantFor example a generic drug prescription could be at a $5 co-pay but a brand name drug prescription would be costly enough to make the patient think again about demanding that drug — perhaps 50% co-insurance.
True, but we also have to be aware that if the threshold is too high, we lose innovation. How about generic being covered at median + 1 std deviation of all generics (to avoid crappy generics), brand name would only have the cost amounting to median+1std deviation of the generic being covered. Any amount above that would not be covered in the name brand. Too many drug companies ‘invent’ a new and improved product once their original goes off patent (they also call this innovation). There is really no significant difference between the earlier drug that went off patent and the new ‘improved’ drug.
I think that it’s better to go into debt for universal health care than it is for war and bank bailouts.
Hate to inform you, but the government is profiting from the bank bailouts. Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae is paying the government about $1B per quarter, $4Billion a year EACH just on interest payments under TARP. BofA is paying $405Million per quarter, $1.6Billion/year on interest payments to the government on their TARP money.. and the principal still needs to be repaid or the stock warrants become effective and the government owns a large block of stock… which they can sell for a gain because the strike price on the warrant will be lower than the stock price (the warrants have a decreasing strike price on them).
November 10, 2009 at 11:17 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480458ParticipantFor example a generic drug prescription could be at a $5 co-pay but a brand name drug prescription would be costly enough to make the patient think again about demanding that drug — perhaps 50% co-insurance.
True, but we also have to be aware that if the threshold is too high, we lose innovation. How about generic being covered at median + 1 std deviation of all generics (to avoid crappy generics), brand name would only have the cost amounting to median+1std deviation of the generic being covered. Any amount above that would not be covered in the name brand. Too many drug companies ‘invent’ a new and improved product once their original goes off patent (they also call this innovation). There is really no significant difference between the earlier drug that went off patent and the new ‘improved’ drug.
I think that it’s better to go into debt for universal health care than it is for war and bank bailouts.
Hate to inform you, but the government is profiting from the bank bailouts. Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae is paying the government about $1B per quarter, $4Billion a year EACH just on interest payments under TARP. BofA is paying $405Million per quarter, $1.6Billion/year on interest payments to the government on their TARP money.. and the principal still needs to be repaid or the stock warrants become effective and the government owns a large block of stock… which they can sell for a gain because the strike price on the warrant will be lower than the stock price (the warrants have a decreasing strike price on them).
November 10, 2009 at 11:17 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480538ParticipantFor example a generic drug prescription could be at a $5 co-pay but a brand name drug prescription would be costly enough to make the patient think again about demanding that drug — perhaps 50% co-insurance.
True, but we also have to be aware that if the threshold is too high, we lose innovation. How about generic being covered at median + 1 std deviation of all generics (to avoid crappy generics), brand name would only have the cost amounting to median+1std deviation of the generic being covered. Any amount above that would not be covered in the name brand. Too many drug companies ‘invent’ a new and improved product once their original goes off patent (they also call this innovation). There is really no significant difference between the earlier drug that went off patent and the new ‘improved’ drug.
I think that it’s better to go into debt for universal health care than it is for war and bank bailouts.
Hate to inform you, but the government is profiting from the bank bailouts. Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae is paying the government about $1B per quarter, $4Billion a year EACH just on interest payments under TARP. BofA is paying $405Million per quarter, $1.6Billion/year on interest payments to the government on their TARP money.. and the principal still needs to be repaid or the stock warrants become effective and the government owns a large block of stock… which they can sell for a gain because the strike price on the warrant will be lower than the stock price (the warrants have a decreasing strike price on them).
November 10, 2009 at 11:17 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480762ParticipantFor example a generic drug prescription could be at a $5 co-pay but a brand name drug prescription would be costly enough to make the patient think again about demanding that drug — perhaps 50% co-insurance.
True, but we also have to be aware that if the threshold is too high, we lose innovation. How about generic being covered at median + 1 std deviation of all generics (to avoid crappy generics), brand name would only have the cost amounting to median+1std deviation of the generic being covered. Any amount above that would not be covered in the name brand. Too many drug companies ‘invent’ a new and improved product once their original goes off patent (they also call this innovation). There is really no significant difference between the earlier drug that went off patent and the new ‘improved’ drug.
I think that it’s better to go into debt for universal health care than it is for war and bank bailouts.
Hate to inform you, but the government is profiting from the bank bailouts. Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae is paying the government about $1B per quarter, $4Billion a year EACH just on interest payments under TARP. BofA is paying $405Million per quarter, $1.6Billion/year on interest payments to the government on their TARP money.. and the principal still needs to be repaid or the stock warrants become effective and the government owns a large block of stock… which they can sell for a gain because the strike price on the warrant will be lower than the stock price (the warrants have a decreasing strike price on them).
November 10, 2009 at 11:03 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #479921ParticipantThe Brits have bad teeth for sure. And they don’t look healthy generally speaking. Maybe it’s the rain. Or maybe because I’m from sunny Southern California.
Interesting fact on British teeth..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1135582/Man-pulls-13-teeth-pliers-NHS-dentist.html
http://flapsblog.com/category/dentistry/socialized-dentistry/.. and the Brits have Universal Health care. The problem is that the price is driven below the cost to the dentist, so you don’t have many new dentists entering the field.
As for general health, the human body has a great capacity to heal itself if you don’t screw with it. Unfortunately too many doctors screw with it I’m not saying all, but too many doctors feel compelled to do something when nothing may actually be better. Factors contributing to this may include profit motive, reducing liability or patient demanding that the doctor do something.
Right now, the insured are subsidizing the uninsured.
This is a falsehood spread by the insurance companies. If you remember back in time, it is the same falsehood used to push for mandatory auto insurance in California. The promise was that auto insurance rates would drop after passage. They didn’t. The public in California then pushed for an insurance commissioner. I think the first guy holding that position was John Garamendi. We got a ‘token’ reduction in auto insurance costs.. but nothing real, and yet another politician got a government paycheck.
If you look at hospital room costs (just for the room, they micro-bill everything else), they range from $3000/per night on up. Considering that most hospital rooms are double occupancy, the room is really costing people $6000 per night. If the cause was the uninsured, it would mean that up to 19 out of 20 people in the hospital are uninsured.
Being uninsured doesn’t mean you get a ‘free pass’. You get hounded by debt collectors on behalf of the hospital. Only when it is finally determined that it is un-collectible, or you have been bled dry after all sort of ‘collection fees’ have been racked up.. might they consider it a ‘charity act’ and listed on their expense as such.. which makes it tax deductible against the hospital’s revenues. An interesting note on ‘charity acts’ is that it also include costs on providing help (surgery etc) to need cases from other countries, as well as charitable contributions. The actual cost of the uninsured to a hospital is buried in the noise.
What might really help all of the health care costs, is to deal with $3000+/bed/day, $6000+/room/day costs ($90,000 – $180,000 per month). If hospital stays did not have this cost, health care would really not be that expensive. Nursing homes (nice ones) manage to provide own room in the cost range of $3500 to $5000/month.
The present bills do not address any of the costs of health care.. it only conceals it under a layer of insurance. This is guaranteed to do only one thing, make the true costs higher.
November 10, 2009 at 11:03 AM in reply to: House crams healthcare bill down the countries throat. #480088ParticipantThe Brits have bad teeth for sure. And they don’t look healthy generally speaking. Maybe it’s the rain. Or maybe because I’m from sunny Southern California.
Interesting fact on British teeth..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1135582/Man-pulls-13-teeth-pliers-NHS-dentist.html
http://flapsblog.com/category/dentistry/socialized-dentistry/.. and the Brits have Universal Health care. The problem is that the price is driven below the cost to the dentist, so you don’t have many new dentists entering the field.
As for general health, the human body has a great capacity to heal itself if you don’t screw with it. Unfortunately too many doctors screw with it I’m not saying all, but too many doctors feel compelled to do something when nothing may actually be better. Factors contributing to this may include profit motive, reducing liability or patient demanding that the doctor do something.
Right now, the insured are subsidizing the uninsured.
This is a falsehood spread by the insurance companies. If you remember back in time, it is the same falsehood used to push for mandatory auto insurance in California. The promise was that auto insurance rates would drop after passage. They didn’t. The public in California then pushed for an insurance commissioner. I think the first guy holding that position was John Garamendi. We got a ‘token’ reduction in auto insurance costs.. but nothing real, and yet another politician got a government paycheck.
If you look at hospital room costs (just for the room, they micro-bill everything else), they range from $3000/per night on up. Considering that most hospital rooms are double occupancy, the room is really costing people $6000 per night. If the cause was the uninsured, it would mean that up to 19 out of 20 people in the hospital are uninsured.
Being uninsured doesn’t mean you get a ‘free pass’. You get hounded by debt collectors on behalf of the hospital. Only when it is finally determined that it is un-collectible, or you have been bled dry after all sort of ‘collection fees’ have been racked up.. might they consider it a ‘charity act’ and listed on their expense as such.. which makes it tax deductible against the hospital’s revenues. An interesting note on ‘charity acts’ is that it also include costs on providing help (surgery etc) to need cases from other countries, as well as charitable contributions. The actual cost of the uninsured to a hospital is buried in the noise.
What might really help all of the health care costs, is to deal with $3000+/bed/day, $6000+/room/day costs ($90,000 – $180,000 per month). If hospital stays did not have this cost, health care would really not be that expensive. Nursing homes (nice ones) manage to provide own room in the cost range of $3500 to $5000/month.
The present bills do not address any of the costs of health care.. it only conceals it under a layer of insurance. This is guaranteed to do only one thing, make the true costs higher.
-
AuthorPosts
