• Do you have credits to spend? Why not pick up some VOD rentals? Find out how!

Ronald Reagan speaks out on socialized medicine

JacknCoke

Stick with Freeones
I think it's the normal practice for the winner to be awarded costs , certainly in this country.That's one reason why "no win no fee" isn't the bargain it appears to be.There are cases though where the case goes one way but the judge considers it is in the interest of justice not to award costs.

I assume you don't live in the United States of American?
 

Hot Mega

I'm too lazy to set a usertitle.
The only circumstances I know of where this is true is when there is a written contract between parties stating that losing party is responsible for court fee's. (I obtained this knowledge from a lawyer so I guess we can leave it up to the judge if this is true or not haha).

Varies by state law but usually a landlord for example my recoup court costs for an eviction....not aware if that language is written into the lease or rental agreements though.

I know landlords sometimes use fairly generic rental agreements and I can't imagine that the clause is written into those.
 

JacknCoke

Stick with Freeones
Varies by state law but usually a landlord for example my recoup court costs for an eviction....not aware if that language is written into the lease or rental agreements though.

I know landlords sometimes use fairly generic rental agreements and I can't imagine that the clause is written into those.

I think that's why they are called slum lord's. Always always read through their contracts. If there isn't a huge demand for their apartment then make changes to the contract and negotiate with them. It can never hurt.

Funny story you just reminded me of, There was a kid from my college who got a job in another state. The landlord sent him his contract in the mail. This guy proceeded to change the "negotiate" the contract by retyping it on his computer, and formatting it to look exactly like the one the landlord sent him. He changed things around on the contract to favor himself in the lease (not sure on specific details but use your imagination). Signed dated and sent it back. The landlord also signed and never reread the contract before signing so he had no idea that this guy had changed anything.

Moral? Sign all legal documentation before sending it to someone else, and always reread the contract before agreeing to it. I am sure the landlord is going to mega pissed but it's his own damn fault for being an idiot.
 

JacknCoke

Stick with Freeones
Lose your job and then let's see how you feel about socialized health care.

Probably the same job less Americans feel about the magical stimulus bill that cost us hundreds of billions for what?
 

jasonk282

Banned
Lose your job and then let's see how you feel about socialized health care.

I lost my job 3 months ago and I still feel strongly about NOT having socialized medicine.
 

Hot Mega

I'm too lazy to set a usertitle.
I lost my job 3 months ago and I still feel strongly about NOT having socialized medicine.

I suppose the proposition should have been....lose your job then need medical attention. I mean, who misses something like auto insurance (for example) until they need it???
 

Facetious

Moderated
When the NHS was founded in the UK in 1948 the medical profession was implacably opposed to it. That is not the case today after over 60 years of actual experience of it.
The doctors aren't badly paid, the average family doctor gets around £110 000 a year , specialists and surgeons a lot more.And they don't have to chase the payments or carry malpractice insurance.

Badly paid is debatable when you're faced with a significant pay cut.
Surely you wouldn't advocate a global salary standard for services performed would you ?

In any event, the best doctors set their own pay scales in most cases, after all, they deserve to, they spend, what ?, 11 - 12 - 13 + years educating themselves.

As for kicking the non green card non citizens out-how much do you thing this would really save overall?
The most important thing is that they're illegally residing here in the first place ! We must demand that our own government upholds the very laws that they have drafted. Second, since our government has failed in their duty of border breach prevention,
we don't know who is or who isn't illegally residing here. How can a nation expect to survive if it's government neglects to perform one of it's most basic functions ? ! Have we entered a time frame in our short history where everything just becomes relative and w/out even realizing it we (our govt.) just drop the ball out of complacency ? How in the gawdforsaken world can a government serve it's legal citizens when we have millions upon millions of non citizens running around either directly or indirectly exhausting our public resources ? Let's fix the leak first, then do the sorting out of percentages. I cannot give you any accurate numbers on how much the savings would be but it is interesting to see how many hospitals have become bankrupt in the Southernmost areas of the states as compared to the Northernmost states.
Most of them in any case are young adults who statistically make lowest use of medical facilities.The only figure I've seen quoted (which must in any case be a pure guess) is around 1.5%
Yea but there is a litany of assorted sundry social expenditures that arise with their illegal presence.
If you insist, I'll :computer: (?)
 

marquis2

If I had a my Freeones account, I would have just gotten 25 points!
Badly paid is debatable when you're faced with a significant pay cut.
Surely you wouldn't advocate a global salary standard for services performed would you ?

In any event, the best doctors set their own pay scales in most cases, after all, they deserve to, they spend, what ?, 11 - 12 - 13 + years educating themselves.

I don't know what doctors get over there.The salaries I quoted were for General practitioners - the ordinary family , non hospital based local ones.It makes a lot of sense to pay a general rate for this sort of service.
Bear in mind that part of the package is an inflation proof pension (half pay) plus 3 years' salary as a lump sum on retirementso remuneration is quite reasonable.
It is, I believe a 7 year course to qualify
 

jasonk282

Banned
I suppose the proposition should have been....lose your job then need medical attention. I mean, who misses something like auto insurance (for example) until they need it???

Actually once we got married 3 years ago I switched over to my wifes coverage, since it was way cheaper than what i was paying. Now she cover me, her and our son for a mear $100.00 a pay, perk of working for UPMC. Also we got the HMO, since they pay 100% of all hospitial visits as opposed to the 80% that the PCP pays.

So even though I lost my job I still have medicial coverage.
 

Facial_King

I'm too lazy to set a usertitle.
Yes, yes, Medicare and Medicaid are taking us closer to Stalin's gulags every single day!!

I think Reagan was already showing signs of his Alzheimer's when he recorded that. What a bad freakin' joke!
 

carl72

Freeones is my hero!
Across the board, it is normally rich white guys, government employees, or people that have vested good insurance, who are against other people having it too.

Frankly, most of them are total hook in mouthers, who have zero clue about the issue or the meat of any of these proposals. We really are a society of low brow dim wits. Worse than that, we actually walk around like we are informed.

Give me the person who admits and embraces his ignorance any day over the person who sticks his chest out and spits out Bill O'Reilly's talking points.
 

Facial_King

I'm too lazy to set a usertitle.
Across the board, it is normally rich white guys, government employees, or people that have vested good insurance, who are against other people having it too.

Give me the person who admits and embraces his ignorance any day over the person who sticks his chest out and spits out Bill O'Reilly's talking points.

Well, while I agree with you about the ignorant and yet over-confident blowhards (like O'Reilly), not EVERY "government employee" who has good insurance is against other people having it too. Too many of the wealthy federal legislators seem to be against others having it, but not all of them. And I know/have known plenty of state and fed govt. workers (at low and mid-levels) who are all on board with a public health care plan (a la Canada, France, Sweden, Norway, etc.)...
 

Hot Mega

I'm too lazy to set a usertitle.
Actually once we got married 3 years ago I switched over to my wifes coverage, since it was way cheaper than what i was paying. Now she cover me, her and our son for a mear $100.00 a pay, perk of working for UPMC. Also we got the HMO, since they pay 100% of all hospitial visits as opposed to the 80% that the PCP pays.

So even though I lost my job I still have medicial coverage.

Sheesh....You're STILL covered by employer subsidized health insurance. It's obviously irrelevant that you lost your job if your family still has a job which provides coverage.

Being a Vet...you still have options that many other individuals who don't.

Point is, there are way to many people with only 3 options; cost prohibitive insurance, employer subsidized insurance or only being treated in the case of an emergency. All of those options together are bankrupting most involved.
 

jasonk282

Banned
Sheesh....You're STILL covered by employer subsidized health insurance. It's obviously irrelevant that you lost your job if your family still has a job which provides coverage.

Being a Vet...you still have options that many other individuals who don't.

Point is, there are way to many people with only 3 options; cost prohibitive insurance, employer subsidized insurance or only being treated in the case of an emergency. All of those options together are bankrupting most involved.

True, I have a question though

Why can't the democtats get their act together and make a bill, all this in fighting is doing nothing.
 

Friday on my mind

Pain heals, chicks dig scars, Freeones lasts forever
True, I have a question though

Why can't the democtats get their act together and make a bill, all this in fighting is doing nothing.

Powerfull lobbys and special interests which have been able to block any real reform in the past are still at work.

Also it is an old saying that watching legislation being created is like watching sausage being created.Meaning the end product may be Ok but you really wouldn't enjoy seeing how it got created and the things that went into that.

This health care issue is really a test of our govt and democracy IMO.If they can't resist the powerfull lobbys and pass some real reform ,one that does something about the out of control costs of health care system and provides universal coverage then I think we can safely say our system is now a total failure which is unable to serve the peoples interests.
 

Hot Mega

I'm too lazy to set a usertitle.
True, I have a question though

Why can't the democtats get their act together and make a bill, all this in fighting is doing nothing.

Simple....They just have no ability to make a coherent case they can then defend to their constituencies after they vote.

I honestly believe Congressional Demos would have a hard time selling an all expenses paid Tahitian vacation in the dead of winter in Cleveland.

For example, why are they dealing in terms like "public option" when it is mumbo jumbo to the average person and they're not really sure how to perceive what it means?

The have no clue how to defend against the simplest of misconceptions, malarkey or political spin.

They don't point out how full of shit some of the republicans are for whining about costs but had zero problem spending nearly as much in far less time in Iraq for an imagined (to put it kindly) threat.

They fail to make the case that while it's also about covering people, it's more about containing out of control, skyrocketing costs which ultimately threaten even people like you and your family's ability to be covered no matter where the coverage comes from.

People decry socialization but these same people freely accept socialized protection in the form of police depts. and fire depts...while they send their children to public schools.

From a conceptual standpoint many people already pool their money with others to offset costs when they need coverage and they only have a perceived choice. The choices are actually who their employer decides to do business with...not theirs.

It is a great idea to detach affordable health care coverage from whether or not the individual has a job.

Again, how would you feel about it if for example, the only way you could afford to educate your child is if you had a job which offset the costs of that education?

It's in the interests of a country as advanced as the US to reasonably ensure it's people are educated and their health is treated IMO. That is as reasonable as it is to use tax dollars to provide police and fire protection.

I personally don't like the broad concept of what some people consider socialized this or that....but in some cases it just makes obvious sense. Socialization is the whole concept behind what we know as insurance.
 
Top