Honda Car Forum

On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:20:32 -0600, Gordon McGrew
<gRmEcMgOrVeEw@mindspring.com> wrote:

>>Today that is no longer the case, and any future war will
>>not be overseas, to give us time to gear up, it will be here on American
>>soil.
>
>This is just goofy talk. What scenario are you envisioning where we
>would need to rush more tanks into production?

Not only is he envisioning tanks, but he's expecting an invasion. US
based terrorism is a very real possibility - but it doesn't come on
landing crafts and troop carriers.

>> You import supporters who always complain about President Bush, who
>>has kept the country safe for eight years,
>
>Will, except for ignoring that memo about Bin Laden being determined
>to strike US.

Yeah, Bush has done one heck of a job, what with invading a sovereign
country under a web of known lies. That's really made the world a much
safer place. Pissing off the North Koreans so that they kicked out all
the inspectors and followed through on their nuke plans was another
key point in making us safer. Failing to complete the mission in
Afghanistan has also been great stabilizer.

>> will be the first to complain
>>when your city is attacked.
>
Somebody needs a dose of reality.

We know, that person is you LOL

"me" <noemail@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:1t0tl4189ks4i631gnasiqjmcochuue37q@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:20:32 -0600, Gordon McGrew
> <gRmEcMgOrVeEw@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>>Today that is no longer the case, and any future war will
>>>not be overseas, to give us time to gear up, it will be here on American
>>>soil.
>>
>>This is just goofy talk. What scenario are you envisioning where we
>>would need to rush more tanks into production?
>
> Not only is he envisioning tanks, but he's expecting an invasion. US
> based terrorism is a very real possibility - but it doesn't come on
> landing crafts and troop carriers.
>
>>> You import supporters who always complain about President Bush, who
>>>has kept the country safe for eight years,
>>
>>Will, except for ignoring that memo about Bin Laden being determined
>>to strike US.
>
> Yeah, Bush has done one heck of a job, what with invading a sovereign
> country under a web of known lies. That's really made the world a much
> safer place. Pissing off the North Koreans so that they kicked out all
> the inspectors and followed through on their nuke plans was another
> key point in making us safer. Failing to complete the mission in
> Afghanistan has also been great stabilizer.
>
>>> will be the first to complain
>>>when your city is attacked.
>>
> Somebody needs a dose of reality.

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 16:32:55 -0500, "Mike Hunter" a lame top poster
wrote:

>"me" <noemail@nothere.com> wrote in message
>>
>>>> you will be the first to complain
>>>>when your city is attacked.
>>>
>> Somebody needs a dose of reality.
>

>We know, that person is you LOL

Enjoy hanging with your friends in the militia. Be sure to hide some
guns in the walls of your house so the gov't doesn't get 'em all when
they send "them" after you. Don't forget to keep your tinfoil hat on
tight.

On Jan 2, 4:19*pm, me <noem...@nothere.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:20:32 -0600, Gordon McGrew
>
> <gRmEcMgOrV...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >>Today that is no longer the case, and any future war will
> >>not be overseas, to give us time to gear up, it will be here on American
> >>soil.
>
> >This is just goofy talk. *What scenario are you envisioning where we
> >would need to rush more tanks into production? *
>
> Not only is he envisioning tanks, but he's expecting an invasion. US
> based terrorism is a very real possibility - but it doesn't come on
> landing crafts and troop carriers.
>
> >> * You import supporters who always complain about President Bush, who
> >>has kept the country safe for eight years,
>
> >Will, except for ignoring that memo about Bin Laden being determined
> >to strike US.
>
> Yeah, Bush has done one heck of a job, what with invading a sovereign
> country under a web of known lies. That's really made the world a much
> safer place. Pissing off the North Koreans so that they kicked out all
> the inspectors and followed through on their nuke plans was another
> key point in making us safer. Failing to complete the mission in
> Afghanistan has also been great stabilizer.
>
> >> will be the first to complain
> >>when your city is attacked.
>
> *Somebody needs a dose of reality.

Mike is immune to reality, as is deebs, hatching roachie, and the rest
of the rightwingnuts here.

On Jan 2, 10:38*pm, me <noem...@nothere.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 16:32:55 -0500, "Mike Hunter" a lame top poster
> wrote:
>
> >"me" <noem...@nothere.com> wrote in message
>
> >>>> you will be the first to complain
> >>>>when your city is attacked.
>
> >> Somebody needs a dose of reality.
>
> >We know, that person is you * *LOL
>
> Enjoy hanging with your friends in the militia. Be sure to hide some
> guns in the walls of your house so the gov't doesn't get 'em all when
> they send "them" after you. Don't forget to keep your tinfoil hat on
> tight.

Here's the fallacy of owning guns to protect yourself from your
government - the same awesome fire power we exhibit on any battlefield
will be turned on you guys with peashooters. Mike fires his AR15 once
or twice and a helicopter gunship levels his whole neighborhood.

Mike Hunter wrote:
><rantonrave@mail.com> wrote in message
>news:7c641a62-8a4f-446c-ba9a-57bf234b1bcc@z27g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>:
>>>Besides the shark lawyers, one of the primary reason healthcare costs are
>>>so high in the US is BECAUSE of the government! It SETS the Medicare
>>>reimbursement rates very high. Any doctor or hospital that accepts
>>>Medicare patients MUST charge the SET Medicare reimbursement rates TO
>>>EVERYBODY or they can be charged with Medicare fraud!
>>>
>>You could be correct if the year was still 1968, but Medicare has
>>operated under cost controls since the mid-1970s, and currently no
>>health payment system, public or private, sets lower reimbursements
>>for hospitals and doctors than Medicare, except possibly some Medicaid
>>programs or Tricare.
>
>That may be your opinion but you are not correct I was recently
>hospitalized for six days. The Medicare set rate was over $13,000, my HMO
>settled it for about one third that amount and I paid a $50 co-pay. The
>doctor(s) bills were also settled for less than half the Medicare rate
>
From what I know of Aetna, Cigna, and Humana reimbursement practices,
that's highly unlikely, especially for the doctor bills. You're
probably confusing the billings with the payments, which often differ
by as much as 4:1.

I'm not confusing anything. The doctors bill was nearly $6,000 and my HMO
settled at $2,800.

In addition our VOLUNTEER community ambulance corps, of which I am a member,
MUST submit a bill to my HMO for transporting me the five miles to the
hospital, BECAUSE I am over 65. The Medicare reimbursement rate is $850
for that five miles . My HMO settled for $420 plus a co-pay of $25. Since
I pay $40 a year, to be a member, I do not need to pay the co-pay.

The stupidity of the high Medicare rates is, if I were a member of the corps
under 65, the corps would NOT charge me or my HMO a dine. Since I am of 65
and they did NOT bill the HMO they would be charged with Medicare fraud.
Medicare IS DEFINITELY one of the primary reasons for our high medical care
cost in the US and for the reasons stated previously

<rantonrave@mail.com> wrote in message
news:6f07b44d-bee3-45cc-959a-f633800b80dd@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>>>Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>:
>>>>Besides the shark lawyers, one of the primary reason healthcare costs
>>>>are
>>>>so high in the US is BECAUSE of the government! It SETS the Medicare
>>>>reimbursement rates very high. Any doctor or hospital that accepts
>>>>Medicare patients MUST charge the SET Medicare reimbursement rates TO
>>>>EVERYBODY or they can be charged with Medicare fraud!
>>>>
>>>You could be correct if the year was still 1968, but Medicare has
>>>operated under cost controls since the mid-1970s, and currently no
>>>health payment system, public or private, sets lower reimbursements
>>>for hospitals and doctors than Medicare, except possibly some Medicaid
>>>programs or Tricare.
>>
>>That may be your opinion but you are not correct I was recently
>>hospitalized for six days. The Medicare set rate was over $13,000, my
>>HMO
>>settled it for about one third that amount and I paid a $50 co-pay. The
>>doctor(s) bills were also settled for less than half the Medicare rate
>>
> From what I know of Aetna, Cigna, and Humana reimbursement practices,
> that's highly unlikely, especially for the doctor bills. You're
> probably confusing the billings with the payments, which often differ
> by as much as 4:1.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@lycos/com> wrote in message
news:VuednYUiCYw2LMLUnZ2dnUVZ_vninZ2d@ptd.net...
> I'm not confusing anything. The doctors bill was nearly $6,000 and my
> HMO settled at $2,800.
>
> In addition our VOLUNTEER community ambulance corps, of which I am a
> member, MUST submit a bill to my HMO for transporting me the five miles to
> the hospital, BECAUSE I am over 65. The Medicare reimbursement rate is
> $850 for that five miles . My HMO settled for $420 plus a co-pay of $25.
> Since I pay $40 a year, to be a member, I do not need to pay the co-pay.
>
> The stupidity of the high Medicare rates is, if I were a member of the
> corps under 65, the corps would NOT charge me or my HMO a dine. Since I
> am of 65 and they did NOT bill the HMO they would be charged with Medicare
> fraud. Medicare IS DEFINITELY one of the primary reasons for our high
> medical care cost in the US and for the reasons stated previously
>
> <rantonrave@mail.com> wrote in message
> news:6f07b44d-bee3-45cc-959a-f633800b80dd@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>>>Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>>:
>>>>>Besides the shark lawyers, one of the primary reason healthcare costs
>>>>>are
>>>>>so high in the US is BECAUSE of the government! It SETS the Medicare
>>>>>reimbursement rates very high. Any doctor or hospital that accepts
>>>>>Medicare patients MUST charge the SET Medicare reimbursement rates TO
>>>>>EVERYBODY or they can be charged with Medicare fraud!
>>>>>
>>>>You could be correct if the year was still 1968, but Medicare has
>>>>operated under cost controls since the mid-1970s, and currently no
>>>>health payment system, public or private, sets lower reimbursements
>>>>for hospitals and doctors than Medicare, except possibly some Medicaid
>>>>programs or Tricare.
>>>
>>>That may be your opinion but you are not correct I was recently
>>>hospitalized for six days. The Medicare set rate was over $13,000, my
>>>HMO
>>>settled it for about one third that amount and I paid a $50 co-pay. The
>>>doctor(s) bills were also settled for less than half the Medicare rate
>>>
>> From what I know of Aetna, Cigna, and Humana reimbursement practices,
>> that's highly unlikely, especially for the doctor bills. You're
>> probably confusing the billings with the payments, which often differ
>> by as much as 4:1.
>
>

And unfortunately the way the rules are written, all dialysis patients have
to go on Medicare after 33 months, no matter how old they are. God, I hate
that rule, I feel like I'm stealing from the old folks.

Sir Charles the Curmudgeon

Mike Hunter wrote:
><rantonrave@mail.com> wrote in message
>
>news:6f07b44d-bee3-45cc-959a-f633800b80dd@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>>>Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>>>:
>>>>>Besides the shark lawyers, one of the primary reason healthcare costs
>>>>>are so high in the US is BECAUSE of the government! It SETS the Medicare
>>>>>reimbursement rates very high. Any doctor or hospital that accepts
>>>>>Medicare patients MUST charge the SET Medicare reimbursement rates TO
>>>>>EVERYBODY or they can be charged with Medicare fraud!
>>>>>
>>>>You could be correct if the year was still 1968, but Medicare has
>>>>operated under cost controls since the mid-1970s, and currently no
>>>>health payment system, public or private, sets lower reimbursements
>>>>for hospitals and doctors than Medicare, except possibly some Medicaid
>>>>programs or Tricare.
>>>
>>>That may be your opinion but you are not correct I was recently
>>>hospitalized for six days. The Medicare set rate was over $13,000, my
>>>HMO settled it for about one third that amount and I paid a $50 co-pay. The
>>>doctor(s) bills were also settled for less than half the Medicare rate
>>
>>From what I know of Aetna, Cigna, and Humana reimbursement practices,
>>that's highly unlikely, especially for the doctor bills. You're
>>probably confusing the billings with the payments, which often differ
>>by as much as 4:1.
>
>I'm not confusing anything. The doctors bill was nearly $6,000 and my HMO
>settled at $2,800.
>
It's common, nearly universal, for reimbursement to be far less than
the bill, and your example doesn't say anything about Medicare.
>
>In addition our VOLUNTEER community ambulance corps, of which I am a member,
>MUST submit a bill to my HMO for transporting me the five miles to the
>hospital, BECAUSE I am over 65. The Medicare reimbursement rate is $850
>for that five miles . My HMO settled for $420 plus a co-pay of $25. Since
>I pay $40 a year, to be a member, I do not need to pay the co-pay.
>
>The stupidity of the high Medicare rates is, if I were a member of the corps
>under 65, the corps would NOT charge me or my HMO a dime. Since I am of 65
> and they did NOT bill the HMO they would be charged with Medicare fraud.
> Medicare IS DEFINITELY one of the primary reasons for our high medical care
> cost in the US and for the reasons stated previously
>
Medicare WAS definitely one of the primary reasons for high medical
costs - that was how President Johnson got the AMA to support its
passage, but since the 1970s it's been the leader in cost cutting, so
much that HMOs and the rest of the private insurance business have
copied its practices. Doctors will tell you the 2 things they hate
most are the low rates of Medicaid reimbursement and the hours they
waste daily talking with HMOs and private insurers.

Mark A wrote:
>"80 Knight" <nospam> wrote in message
>news:zPadnayjd4M6hc3UnZ2dnUVZ_oPinZ2d@giganews.co m...
>
>>I don't know what countries you are talking about, but here in Canada, I
>>can choose whatever Doctor I want, I and my Doctor decide what treatment I
>>get, and the waiting times are much less then most people think they are.
>>As for you comment about age, that is pure bull shit.
>
>I can't speak about CA but in most European countries if a patient has a
>serious disease and are over a certain age, they might not spend as much
>money treating you as if you were younger (depending on what the treatment
>costs are).
>
>You cannot go to "any" doctor and get free care, you can only go to doctors
>who are paid by the national health care plan. That is like an HMO and why
>people in the US complain about it. A lot of Canadians come to the US and
>pay for healthcare out of their own pocket, to get the treatment they want.
>
Far more Canadians get health care paid for by their government when
they come to the U.S.