From: Peter on
"David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hr235j$lln$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu...

>
> I'm not much for conspiracy theories, but one of them does
> appear to stand out recently. The Republicans voted for the
> VERY expensive *unfunded* Medicare "Advantage" plan,
> and to me it appears likely to have been intended to bankrupt
> Medicare much sooner (the Republicans are not normally
> considered the party of public welfare...;-), and thus finally
> eliminate that "socialistic" program. Much as I personally like
> my Medicare Advantage plan (what's not to like about it,
> except what it would do to the future of Medicare funding),
> I would be quite willing to pay more for a "straight" form of
> Medicare, without the deceptions and nonsense. With the
> recent health care reform legislation, this change is likely to
> happen. I tend to see the financial area nonsense as a "Gee,
> how can we make it easy for our (rich) friends and us to
> make even more money, the industry (and country) stability
> be hanged!". Gosh, libertarian rapaciousness really CAN
> still operate even in a "socialist" economy...! 8^)

To reform our Medicare system, just allow negotiation of drug prices. It is
outrageous that I can purchase my pharms in Canada for less money than my
co-pay here.



--
Peter

From: David J. Littleboy on

"Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote:
> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not much for conspiracy theories, but one of them does
>> appear to stand out recently. The Republicans voted for the
>> VERY expensive *unfunded* Medicare "Advantage" plan,
>> and to me it appears likely to have been intended to bankrupt
>> Medicare much sooner (the Republicans are not normally
>> considered the party of public welfare...;-), and thus finally
>> eliminate that "socialistic" program. Much as I personally like
>> my Medicare Advantage plan (what's not to like about it,
>> except what it would do to the future of Medicare funding),
>> I would be quite willing to pay more for a "straight" form of
>> Medicare, without the deceptions and nonsense. With the
>> recent health care reform legislation, this change is likely to
>> happen. I tend to see the financial area nonsense as a "Gee,
>> how can we make it easy for our (rich) friends and us to
>> make even more money, the industry (and country) stability
>> be hanged!". Gosh, libertarian rapaciousness really CAN
>> still operate even in a "socialist" economy...! 8^)
>
> To reform our Medicare system, just allow negotiation of drug prices. It
> is outrageous that I can purchase my pharms in Canada for less money than
> my co-pay here.

Toss in single-payer and strict control of medical services fees (as done in
Japan, where medical expenditures are 1/3 (per capita) those in the US and
quality of care is better) and we can begin to make a dent in the Bush
deficit.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


From: Bill Graham on

"David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hr1bfa$ins$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu...
>
> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:T6idnUo7yoT1bE7WnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
> > "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:4bd18a78$1$27723$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
>>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:_cGdnRmAKMX-y0zWnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
>>>> The customers that were buying these derivatives were highly
>>>> sophisticated gamblers. They should have known better. I certainly
>>>> didn't buy them, because I don't play the markets that way. I have my
>>>> retirement funds invested in much more stable instruments. I don't, in
>>>> general gamble in the stock market, although I have been known to take
>>>> a chance now and then, but always on a small scale. (relatively) And,
>>>> when I do, I am never surprised when I lose.
>
> I have been "lucky" in the stock market (dumb luck?), although I've
> made my share of dumb moves (once buying a "penny" stock, and
> being also impatient and selling a real winner or two far too soon...).
> In the last year, if you couldn't make "a killing" almost by throwing a
> dart at a list of stocks, well.... (and Ford and Apple were SO obvious!).
>
>>> The customers that were buying these mortgage backed insured securities
>>> were pension fund managers who were duped into believing they were
>>> buying AA rated investments. The seller's knew the rating was pure
>>> bullshit.
>>> --
>>> Peter
>
> 'Course! A good example of an unregulated "hidden" market at work...
>
>> Who rated them, "AA", and why isn't there a comfortable jail cell for
>> those who have this power and misuse it?
>
> 'Cuz that wasn't illegal (but should have been - but that would have
> been "socialistic" to have regulated these "securities", so.....;-).
>
>> It seems to me that such things would be easy to regulate, and not
>> something that has to be handled by rocket scientists. Has it become
>> politicized?
>
> You bet! The Democrats are for regulation of these markets that have
> caused so much grief, and the Republicans are grudgingly now coming
> along since they see what damage not doing so would do to their
> election bottom line (not so much why these regulations are needed
> for the economic health of the country, alas). But they again are not
> above lying about what is in the proposed bill, and its consequences.
>
>> does every "regulation" bill carry some sort of expensive "rider" that
>> gives lots of money to some undeserving person or organization? Why can't
>> our government handle even the simplest task without F****** it up?
>
> Huh???
> Good regulation isn't expensive, certainly compared with not doing
> it, which basically funnels the money to the rich, and not to the
> "undeserving" (presumably you mean, "the citizenry"? ;-).
> --DR
>
It has been my experience with congressional bills that they carry riders
giving perks to selected groups and/or individuals that have nothing
whatsoever to do with the heart of the bill. So, some congressmen refuse to
vote for some bills, not because they are against the main reason why the
bill was written, but because of these stupid riders. Then, at some later
time, the congressman is asked, "Why did you vote against bill such and such
which would have fed the starving children?" And so the poor guy is
castigated for doing what was perfectly reasonable at the time. This is why
I hesitate to jump to conclusions when a simplistic conclusion is drawn
about legislation not being forthcoming. - I wish I had the time to read
exactly what is going on on the floor of congress.

From: Bill Graham on

"Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
news:4bd48a0d$1$15407$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:T6idnUo7yoT1bE7WnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>
>> "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:4bd18a78$1$27723$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
>
>>> The customers that were buying these mortgage backed insured securities
>>> were pension fund managers who were duped into believing they were
>>> buying AA rated investments. The seller's knew the rating was pure
>>> bullshit.
>
>
>> Who rated them, "AA", and why isn't there a comfortable jail cell for
>> those who have this power and misuse it? It seems to me that such things
>> would be easy to regulate, and not something that has to be handled by
>> rocket scientists. Has it become politicized? does every "regulation"
>> bill carry some sort of expensive "rider" that gives lots of money to
>> some undeserving person or organization?
>
>
> Moody's & Standard & Poor. Do your own research.
>
>>Why can't our government handle even the simplest task without F****** it
>>up?
>
> Too many people don't want to pay for proper oversight. They claim it's an
> intrusion into our rights.
>
> --
> Peter
Why don't the losers sue Moody's and S & P for their losses?

From: Bill Graham on

"Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
news:4bd4d889$0$27747$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
>
> To reform our Medicare system, just allow negotiation of drug prices. It
> is outrageous that I can purchase my pharms in Canada for less money than
> my co-pay here.
>
Amazing! You have finally come around to realizing that there are some
problems that don't require a 2000 page document to fix.....where were you a
few months ago when we were bitching about exactly this kind of thing.
(along with a dozen or so other problems)