Trump admin rescinds Obamacare hhs contraceptive mandate

[StLucieBengal]

(10-12-2017, 12:44 PM)Benton Wrote: I'm ok with it, but you would have to dismantle our entire healthcare system if insurance is going to stop paying for heart attacks, diabetes, ED, etc. People can't afford a heart cath without insurance, so if insurance isn't going to cover heart caths, then there's two options: let the market decide what people can afford (which is going to be next to nothing in this economy) or we continue to subsidize part of the costs and let healthcare providers decide what a heart cath is worth, eliminating it as an option for a large portion of people.

I have long advocated for an insurance free health market. So this is right up my alley.

If we have to have insurance it should not cover much, anything routine should be out of pocket.

[Benton]

(10-12-2017, 01:59 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I have long advocated for an insurance free health market.   So this is right up my alley.  

If we have to have insurance it should not cover much, anything routine should be out of pocket.

I'm ok with that. But you'd have to undo the last century, and that's going to be difficult. 

Imagine if they went to the extreme of outlawing insurance companies. Everything is out of pocket. Right now, all the costs are set around insurance companies deciding who gets what services. You'd have multi-million dollar equipment suddenly sitting empty, and general practitioners and pharmacies inundated with people wanting a cheap pill to fix 40 years of abusing their body, which was encouraged by a culture of 'eat what you want, drink what you want, do what you want — how bad can it be, cigarettes are full of vitamins and beer cures many diseases!'

[GMDino]

(10-12-2017, 02:26 PM)Benton Wrote: I'm ok with that. But you'd have to undo the last century, and that's going to be difficult. 

Imagine if they went to the extreme of outlawing insurance companies. Everything is out of pocket. Right now, all the costs are set around insurance companies deciding who gets what services. You'd have multi-million dollar equipment suddenly sitting empty, and general practitioners and pharmacies inundated with people wanting a cheap pill to fix 40 years of abusing their body, which was encouraged by a culture of 'eat what you want, drink what you want, do what you want — how bad can it be, cigarettes are full of vitamins and beer cures many diseases!'

And doctors with hundred of thousands of dollars invested in their education...get paid $2 for a checkup.  Maybe.

[Belsnickel]

(10-12-2017, 12:37 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Dont employers end up paying more for obese workers?

In some situations, yes. Which is why this is flawed thinking. Productivity in this country is often measured based upon you being present in the office, which is a shit way of measuring it and results in these problems, including exploitation.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-12-2017, 12:37 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Dont employers end up paying more for obese workers?

Interesting question. The answer is yes or no depending upon who you ask. Corporate wellness programs are a $6 billion dollar industry. Independent research has shown these wellness programs don't improve health, outcomes, or reduce the cost of healthcare. What they do is allow the employer to shift the cost from the employer to the employee further eroding their wages and benefits. So the corporations making money from these scams will cite small or poorly constructed studies that do show they work (an individual tree) while ignoring the overall body of evidence (the forest). Supplement companies do the same thing, but on a smaller scale. It's your basic rich guy gets richer, poor guy gets poorer scam.

[Benton]

(10-12-2017, 03:14 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: In some situations, yes. Which is why this is flawed thinking. Productivity in this country is often measured based upon you being present in the office, which is a shit way of measuring it and results in these problems, including exploitation.

That's tough to balance.

Like hourly versus salary.

On the one hand, if you're paid hourly, there's no reason to do 30 hours labor in 30 hours and not get paid for 40. So people milk the clock. The other extreme is salary where employers expect 60 hours and pay you for 40.

[Belsnickel]

(10-12-2017, 03:51 PM)Benton Wrote: That's tough to balance.

Like hourly versus salary.

On the one hand, if you're paid hourly, there's no reason to do 30 hours labor in 30 hours and not get paid for 40. So people milk the clock. The other extreme is salary where employers expect 60 hours and pay you for 40.

I don't disagree, and there really is no good solution that is acceptable to most capitalist societies.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-12-2017, 02:26 PM)Benton Wrote: I'm ok with that. But you'd have to undo the last century, and that's going to be difficult. 

Imagine if they went to the extreme of outlawing insurance companies. Everything is out of pocket. Right now, all the costs are set around insurance companies deciding who gets what services. You'd have multi-million dollar equipment suddenly sitting empty, and general practitioners and pharmacies inundated with people wanting a cheap pill to fix 40 years of abusing their body, which was encouraged by a culture of 'eat what you want, drink what you want, do what you want — how bad can it be, cigarettes are full of vitamins and beer cures many diseases!'

Oh we would have some people suffering. I'm ok with that because you need to reset the mentality. A generation of short life span wouldn't necessarily be awful.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-12-2017, 02:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: And doctors with hundred of thousands of dollars invested in their education...get paid $2 for a checkup.  Maybe.

Doctors would offer concierge services. This would make them a lot more conscience of patient care rather than filing insurance forms.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-12-2017, 11:04 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Doctors would offer concierge services. This would make them a lot more conscience of patient care rather than filing insurance forms.

Oh, Christ, doctors aren't filing insurance forms. That's what the billers and coders do. Concierge medicine is a business relationship for the wealthy and the entitled and claims of increased quality of care are nothing more than marketing hype.

https://khn.org/news/concierge-medicine-co-found-liable-for-doctors-negligence/

From Florida no less.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-12-2017, 11:02 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Oh we would have some people suffering. I'm ok with that because you need to reset the mentality. A generation of short life span wouldn't necessarily be awful.

Didn't Jesus say the same thing during his sermon on the mount?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2017, 03:06 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I would be curious to know what culture pushes intercourse for means other that to procreate.

Lucie's an expert

(07-23-2015, 10:58 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: A post from a reddit user about what her husband did...  


These things are culturally relevant and have been for hundreds of years.   This post was made 25 days ago.

Lucie can tell you all about how responsible parents take their minor children to have sex with adult prostitutes to teach them about love. According to Lucie, it's important for kids to connect emotionally with adult prostitutes so they don't become homosexual.

So, that's settled.

[*bfine32*]

(10-13-2017, 12:38 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Lucie's an expert


Lucie can tell you all about how responsible parents take their minor children to have sex with adult prostitutes to teach them about love. According to Lucie, it's important for kids to connect emotionally with adult prostitutes so they don't become homosexual.

So, that's settled.

cul·ture
ˈkəlCHər/
noun
noun: culture

1. 1.
   the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively.
   

Not sure Lucie taking anyone to a whorehouse = culture.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-13-2017, 11:26 AM)bfine32 Wrote: cul·ture
ˈkəlCHər/
noun
noun: culture

1. 1.
   the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively.
   

Not sure Lucie taking anyone to a whorehouse = culture.

What's funny is you were referring to society norms within a group, not the definition you quoted.

(07-23-2015, 10:58 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: A post from a reddit user about what her husband did...  


These things are culturally relevant and have been for hundreds of years.   This post was made 25 days ago.

Regardless, if you feel the need to play word games take it up with Lucie.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-13-2017, 01:55 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: What's funny is you were referring to society norms within a group, not the definition you quoted.


Regardless, if you feel the need to play word games take it up with Lucie.

Lol. Another 2015 post.

[GMDino]

(10-13-2017, 03:01 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Lol.  Another 2015 post.

Have you changed your thoughts since then?

[StLucieBengal]

(10-13-2017, 03:10 PM)GMDino Wrote: Have you changed your thoughts since then?

Are we putting aside the actual context and just going off breech's cherry picked post?

[GMDino]

(10-13-2017, 03:19 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Are we putting aside the actual context and just going off breech's cherry picked post?

Well when any old quote gets posted the tendency has been to dismiss it because it from a year or more ago.

So the question is do you still maintain the same belief and will stand behind it or have your ideas changed since then?

[StLucieBengal]

(10-13-2017, 03:24 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well when any old quote gets posted the tendency has been to dismiss it because it from a year or more ago.

So the question is do you still maintain the same belief and will stand behind it or have your ideas changed since then?

And this has what to do with the price of tea in china and this thread? Other than You guys trying to derail the thread.

[GMDino]

(10-13-2017, 03:31 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: And this has what to do with the price of tea in china and this thread?  Other than You guys trying to derail the thread.

The discussion of culture was raised.  Rightly or wrongly your thoughts on culture and sex were mentioned.

Either you still agree with what you said two years ago or you do not.  I am just curious why the length of time between posts matters.

Now if your argument is that that post has nothing to do with the culture discussion that is argument that you can make also.