Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 235 of 885 - 234 + 236
From : Stephen Currier 1:286/708 Wed 15 Sep 93 01:32
To : Chris Richards
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
.MSGID: 1:286/708 2C8FD912
For one thing here is an example of what they know about answering
business. The new health bill will provide small businesses with
quite an ''unexpected windfall'' in savings because health insurance
costs will be forced down and kept regulated which means their
cost in insuring their employees is going to actually cost them less
under the new health program,than ever before. And for big business,
health insurance for big business is going to cost a little more than
before because big business pays bottom dollar prices on group
insurance packages for their employees (group insurance package
premiums get bigger discounts for larger groups than for smaller
groups). However,big business will get benefits from lessening
health service (not health insurance but health service) costs,and
the benefit of no threat of inflationary ruin,plus an greater guarantee
of lower taxes in the next several years.
There is how well the health bill is designed so as to benefit
both small and large business.Plus its designed to also help
the entire public with guaranteed health insurance,and the windfall
of guaranteed decreased health care costs. All of which benefits the
U S consumer household economies with big time needed, honest ,dollar
savings. A very good intelligently planned U S bit of legislation,
like it or not. All proof yes they do know their economics and the
laws and civil advantages of laws dfending our inherant human rights
against criminal suppressions such as that which is still going on
in Bosnia where alleged ''lords'' and fuedal racist savages are
still trying to lie to the U N and are still trying to kill Christian
Croats and Muslims simply to be attempting to ruin Bosnia with warfare.
The Bosnian President came to the U S visited with both our
officials and U N officials about the way Lord Owens and others
had tried to mislead the Geneva peace negotiations into one which
compromised Muslim rights to access to the seas,rights to trade and
import and export free of revenues paid Serbian filth,etc. And what
stupid old Owens told Bosnians,in their President's words is
''when ya deal with such murderers ya got ta settle for what ya
can get...''. NATO Shouldn't have backed down from killing the
murder sucking Serbian savages this time,they should have
anahilated the serbian army on Mt Inman,and made it plain the
civilized world is not draw its punches in punishing such
ruthless savage massmurderers. Facts are Owens thought that
was too hard a way to deal with such criminals. Facts are he's
not much smarter than the Serbs are. At least the Muslims aren't
alone this time,the Croats are using force against the Sebian
criminals now as well as are also the Muslims. And its plain to the
Croats now,as its been to the Muslims a long while,that the Serbs
are not respectors of civil law or human life. The Serbs hit Croat
villages with rockets in one of their usual ruthless surprise
attacks Tuesday night.And several days before that they hit an
Muslim village in mid day during an market celebration uptown,
an unarmed market celebration in the midst of the day.
The Serbs are being demonically military criminals,and such
criminals are not to be dealt with as would ''lord'' Owens
saltlessly attempted to suggest Bosnians and Croats should deal
with such criminals in such situations. The Serbs should be
destroyed as we destroyed the army of Sadam Hussein who'd tried
to invade Kuwait.
--- QuickBBS 2.76a
* Origin: Look for this message in the next Net 286 Gazette! (1:286/708)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 705 707 708 710 711 712 713 714 716 717
SEEN-BY: 286/730 777 926
.PATH: 286/708 710 703 730
Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 236 of 885 - 235 + 237
From : Stephen Currier 1:286/708 Wed 15 Sep 93 02:06
To : Stephen Currier
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
.MSGID: 1:286/708 2C8FE11C
I didn't mean to get off the subject and on the Bosnian problem.But
while I'm at it I better make my stand clear. NATO should have
stood their ground and followed up with follow through with first
the warning and the use of the bombing strategy if the serbs still
refused to go back to GENEVA AND AGREE WITH THE JUST MUSLIM DEMANDS
FOR THIRTY FOUR PERCENT OF THE TERRITORY AND SUFFICIENT AREA ACCESSING
THE SEA THAT MUSLIMS HAVE NOT RISK OF SUFFERING ANY TYPE OF TRADE
EMBARGOS ETC
THE SERBS HAVE NO RESPECT FOR CIVIL LAW OR LIFE THEY DO NOT
UNDERSTAND THE LAWS OF OUR WORLD AND NATOS THREAT IS THE ONLY
KIND OF LIMITATION THEY COMPREHEND
THEY WENT TO GENEVA BEFORE OF THEIR OWN VOLATION (choice),AND will
do so again if faced with the same threat of NATO's uses of force,
unless they so comply. There thats why NATO should have not decided
to try a more lenient means of sending 50,000 troops there to attempt
to restore peace that way first. The use of air strikes,risks none of
the lives of our civilized troops,and is just and is the only civilized
intelligent strategy of good courage I and any U S or European General
worth his salt,and sober of mind would agree to. ''Spare the rod on the
back of the Serb and ruin the Serb at risk
of harm to innocent lives,thats what I think the current NATO
peacekeeping attempt could amount to. I hope not,but we tried the
same thing in other similar situations,and always innocent lives
of both peacekeepers and civilians got hurt in the process.And
thats not right.
--- QuickBBS 2.76a
* Origin: Look for this message in the next Net 286 Gazette! (1:286/708)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 705 707 708 710 711 712 713 714 716 717
SEEN-BY: 286/730 777 926
.PATH: 286/708 710 703 730
Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 237 of 885 - 236 + 240
From : Stephen Currier 1:286/777 Wed 15 Sep 93 11:26
To : Stephen Currier
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
.MSGID: 1:286/777 2C906480
BOSNIAN SITUATION UPDATE: I just learned from a good nieghbor of
mine that the reason NATO didn't follow up with the bombing strategy
is that the SErbs moved women and children into their military areas
to use as human shields. So thats why not the follow up on the NATO
air strike strategy.
According to Lord Owens he believes the Serbs will go back
to the Geneva talks in the next several weeks,if he's really being
sincere and is seriously about getting the Muslims as well as
the Croats and Serbs just civil settlements-and thats waht has to be
for an real and lasting peace to be established-well maybe they will,
maybe the Serbs will agree to go back to the peace table once our
NATO ground forces successfully defeat Serba military hostilities.
We're just have to wait and see.
--- QuickBBS 2.76a
* Origin: Don't worry about it,it just means your two tents. (1:286/777)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 705 707 708 710 711 712 713 714 716 717
SEEN-BY: 286/730 777 926
.PATH: 286/777 710 703 730
Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 241 of 885 - 240 + 243
From : Kent Ogle 1:286/777 Thu 16 Sep 93 16:24
To : Stephen Currier
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
-=> Quoting Stephen Currier to Chris Richards <=-
SC> For one thing here is an example of what they know about answering
SC> business. The new health bill will provide small businesses with
SC> quite an ''unexpected windfall'' in savings because health insurance
SC> costs will be forced down and kept regulated which means their
SC> cost in insuring their employees is going to actually cost them less
SC> under the new health program,than ever before.
First of all, how many small businesses do you know that provide health
insurance. I'll tell you...almost NONE of them. There will be NO savings
for two reasons:
1) They will be forced to provide a minimum level of coverage
which they do not provide, thus increasing the total
costs associated with an employee,
2) Nothing, and I mean NOTHING ever regulated by government
has been cheaper to attain than it was when regulated
by market forces.
And for big business,
SC> health insurance for big business is going to cost a little more than
SC> before because big business pays bottom dollar prices on group
SC> insurance packages for their employees (group insurance package
SC> premiums get bigger discounts for larger groups than for smaller
SC> groups). However,big business will get benefits from lessening
SC> health service (not health insurance but health service) costs,and
Secondly, you sure seem to know an awfull lot of details of a plan that
hasn't even be unveiled.....
SC> the benefit of no threat of inflationary ruin,plus an greater
SC> guarantee of lower taxes in the next several years.
what do you mean by "guarantee of lower taxes"?
... Economic policies courtesy of Moscow U, 1968
--- Blue Wave/QBBS v2.05 [NR]
* Origin: Don't worry about it,it just means your two tents. (1:286/777.0)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 705 707 708 710 711 712 713 714 716 717
SEEN-BY: 286/730 777 926
.PATH: 286/777 710 703 730
Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 243 of 885 - 241 + 244
From : Stephen Currier 1:286/701 Thu 16 Sep 93 23:56
To : Kent Ogle
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
.PID: QE 2.76a-
.MSGID: 1:286/701 2C916599
Inflationary health care costs results in the necessity for tax
increases in order to provide Federal Health Care recipients with
civilly tolerable health care coverage.Thats an fact which the
Government and economic proffessionals discovered and have scientifically
provided the evidence to proove as a result of the
Grace Commission study requisitioned by President Reagon. It is
an proffessionally done study which provides management and government
with projections of the debt and deficit stats for the economy from
1985 to 1990 to 2000.The results of the study show that if public
health care costs are not controlled,and forced down they will
become the major cause of super inflation by 1995,and that health
care costs would become the major portion of the government's
budget,and taxes unbearably high to pay the costs.
To some few folk,whom hate government and gains,etc,that might
seem a pleasing result,not me,no way,and nobody I know.You?
I hope not. The study was made in 1982,thus far the problem has
yet progressed,though in lessening degrees,as predicted.Its not
intended as to be something to support or believe as destiny,its
meant as a report of the cause of inflation for government to solve.
President Clinton's health care bill is proof he and the Democrats
are serious,and are about putting to the end to the health care
cost part of the inflationary problem.And our Republicans are
slowly realizing he might be right,if their give up on their
thoughtless dislike of the Democrats wiser loyalty to God and
the people,and the New Deal and its uses to provide all with
guaranteed balances of power to material and educated civil
equalities.
I think Clinton's health care plan is going to be a success
to extents.I am not so sure I agree with the idea of enlarging
public health insurance beyond providing health insurance to those
who otherwise couldn't afford it. That part of the President's bill
seems to me ambigous spending as most whom can afford health care
insurance really don't need government health care insurance.
Some of the Rpublicans,I think,realize that,their prepairing
for a fight against that part of the bill I think.Thats why they
came up with an health care proposal of their own.Room for debate,thats
what it creates.However the parts of Clinton's plan which would
appoint a board of individuals given the job of regulating health
care costs,that I agree with,and the stipulation requiring employers
to pay more of the health care insurance costs I agree with,that to
-as well as health care cost regulation-are help make a tax
decrease more possible,and are help end the problems
of inflation. All of which President Clinton and the Democrats
probably are also agree with when its all said and done.
--- QuickBBS 2.76a
* Origin: Is that smoking slag your computer? :) (1:286/701)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 710 712 717 730
.PATH: 286/701 703 730
Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 245 of 885 - 244 + 246
From : Mike Brandon 1:286/711 Thu 16 Sep 93 23:14
To : Stephen Currier
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
.MSGID: 1:286/711 2C915BE4
SC> For one thing here is an example of what they know about answering
SC> business. The new health bill will provide small businesses with
SC> quite an ''unexpected windfall'' in savings because health insurance
SC> costs will be forced down and kept regulated which means their
SC> cost in insuring their employees is going to actually cost them less
SC> under the new health program,than ever before.
I think I already know the answer, but do you own a business with employees?
It would seem not from your above statement. Small business will not save money
by any means. Small business will be forced to purchase insurance for all there
employees thereby cost will skyrocket. here's an example in my business:
At present I have three people on my insurance.
Cost per month: $925
(One person is over $600 because of several dieseses).
Expected cost per month of all employess: $3700 - $5400
As you can see thats a big difference. I have three to recover these costs.
1.) Lay off 2 - 4 people ( The oldest and sickest )
2.) Cut everyone back to minimum wage and lay off 1 person.
3.) Liquidate my assets and invest the money in the market etc. putting all 15
out of work.
Believe it or not these are my only chances to recover such an unfair law. Oh
yes, I could also raise my prices 25%!
Clinton is an idiot without a clue of how to work in a free market economy.
SC> And for big business,
SC> health insurance for big business is going to cost a little more than
SC> before because big business pays bottom dollar prices on group
SC> insurance packages for their employees (group insurance package
SC> premiums get bigger discounts for larger groups than for smaller
SC> groups). However,big business will get benefits from lessening
SC> health service (not health insurance but health service) costs,and
SC> the benefit of no threat of inflationary ruin,plus an greater
SC> guarantee
SC> of lower taxes in the next several years.
SC> There is how well the health bill is designed so as to benefit
SC> both small and large business.Plus its designed to also help
SC> the entire public with guaranteed health insurance,and the windfall
SC> of guaranteed decreased health care costs. All of which benefits the
SC> U S consumer household economies with big time needed, honest ,dollar
SC> savings. A very good intelligently planned U S bit of legislation,
SC> like it or not. All proof yes they do know their economics and the
SC> laws and civil advantages of laws dfending our inherant human rights
SC> against criminal suppressions such as that which is still going on
SC> in Bosnia where alleged ''lords'' and fuedal racist savages are
SC> still trying to lie to the U N and are still trying to kill Christian
SC> Croats and Muslims simply to be attempting to ruin Bosnia with
SC> warfare.
SC> The Bosnian President came to the U S visited with both our
SC> officials and U N officials about the way Lord Owens and others
SC> had tried to mislead the Geneva peace negotiations into one which
SC> compromised Muslim rights to access to the seas,rights to trade and
SC> import and export free of revenues paid Serbian filth,etc. And what
SC> stupid old Owens told Bosnians,in their President's words is
SC> ''when ya deal with such murderers ya got ta settle for what ya
SC> can get...''. NATO Shouldn't have backed down from killing the
SC> murder sucking Serbian savages this time,they should have
SC> anahilated the serbian army on Mt Inman,and made it plain the
SC> civilized world is not draw its punches in punishing such
SC> ruthless savage massmurderers. Facts are Owens thought that
SC> was too hard a way to deal with such criminals. Facts are he's
SC> not much smarter than the Serbs are. At least the Muslims aren't
SC> alone this time,the Croats are using force against the Sebian
SC> criminals now as well as are also the Muslims. And its plain to the
SC> Croats now,as its been to the Muslims a long while,that the Serbs
SC> are not respectors of civil law or human life. The Serbs hit Croat
SC> villages with rockets in one of their usual ruthless surprise
SC> attacks Tuesday night.And several days before that they hit an
SC> Muslim village in mid day during an market celebration uptown,
SC> an unarmed market celebration in the midst of the day.
SC> The Serbs are being demonically military criminals,and such
SC> criminals are not to be dealt with as would ''lord'' Owens
SC> saltlessly attempted to suggest Bosnians and Croats should deal
SC> with such criminals in such situations. The Serbs should be
SC> destroyed as we destroyed the army of Sadam Hussein who'd tried
SC> to invade Kuwait.
SC>
SC> --- QuickBBS 2.76a
SC> * Origin: Look for this message in the next Net 286 Gazette!
SC> (1:286/708)
SC> SEEN-BY: 286/703 705 707 708 710 711 713 714 716 777 926
--- QuickBBS 2.76
* Origin: A running track?! How about a bomb shelter? (1:286/711)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 705 707 708 710 711 712 713 714 716 717
SEEN-BY: 286/730 777 926
.PATH: 286/711 710 703 730
Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 248 of 885 - 247 + 249
From : Kevin Martin 1:286/713 Fri 17 Sep 93 03:13
To : Stephen Currier
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
.PID: RA 1.11
.MSGID: 1:286/713 5237c8c6
.REPLY: 1:286/701 2C916599
* In a message originally to Kent Ogle, Stephen Currier said:
SC > Inflationary health care costs results in the necessity
SC > for tax
SC > increases in order to provide Federal Health Care
SC > recipients with
SC > civilly tolerable health care coverage.
This statement is true, but extremely self supporting. In itself, it is akin to
me saying that since the price of milk has all but tripled over the past ten
years, and my wages have increased by only one third, that in order for the
government to assist me, tax increases must be made to support the expense.
This is as insidious as the health care plan solely for that line of irrational
reasoning.
Let's take Mike's example. As he stated, if the health care plan is approved,
he will be faced with one or a combination of four choices.
1) To lay off a few employees. This is one business. Now if you multiply that
times the number of similar small businesses, the inevitible result will be
increased unemployment which will not directly add to the national deficit, but
will have a definite affect on state and local budgets.
2) To decrease the salaries of his employees. Once again, if you multiply this
times the number of small businesses, what will happen is many of these people
will no longer be able to live as they are accustomed. This could most likely
result in these people losing their homes, cars, and other basic necessities,
and I would think that at that point, federal assistance to fix a sprained ankle
will be the least of their worries. If you really think about it, this type of
situation could ultimately lead to an increase in the number of people on
welfare, which would only add to the federal tax burden.
3) To liquidate and close down. This not only would be extremely detrimental to
the local governments, but could ultimately affect the federal government as
well because both of the above references would apply.
4) To increase his retail prices 25%. Here is the main crux of government
intervention in any free market society. If profits are taken from the
employer, most likely he will be forced to pass that on to his customers in
order to keep his employees, maintain his business, and to provide a large
enough profit margin to guarantee growth. What this results in is the
consumer's dollar buying less. While they no longer have to worry about health
care costs, I seriously doubt that would outweigh the added costs over an annual
period to purchase food, clothing, etc.
The only true solution to the national healthcare dilemna is to use the system
for what is was designed for. As Kent (I believe) said, if there were enough
health care facilities that offered reasonable rates, you would see an almost
immediate reduction in costs. Take a look at Joplin. All three hospitals have
expanded their facilities within the past three years alone. Construction costs
alone were in excess of $200 million. That amounts to almost $70 million per
year for three businesses alone. While the additions were most likely a
necessity of sorts, I seriously doubt that they could actually account for the
actual medical benefits attained from anything over 45% of the amount the spent
in construction because most of it was cosmetic.
Another thing that could be done is to make laws that would restrict the amounts
awarded in malpractice suits. It is common knowledge and almost an everyday
joke to some that if something goes wrong, they'll sue. While there is indeed
instances where malpractice suits are warranted, it is not, in my opinion,
justifiable to award a single person in excess of $20 million in damages. If
you want regulation, regulate malpractice settlements.
--- FMail 0.94
* Origin: SuperSystem WBBS. The Name Says It All... (1:286/713)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 705 707 708 710 711 712 713 714 716 717
SEEN-BY: 286/730 777 926
.PATH: 286/713 710 703 730
Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 258 of 885 - 257 + 259
From : Kent Ogle 1:286/777 Fri 17 Sep 93 18:17
To : Stephen Currier
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
-=> Quoting Stephen Currier to Kent Ogle <=-
SC> Inflationary health care costs results in the necessity for tax
SC> increases in order to provide Federal Health Care recipients with
SC> civilly tolerable health care coverage.
You want to increase the coverage of those that need Federally Funded
Health Care? Then get those people who don't NEED it off of it!
The easier it is for some to get a free ride, the harder it is for
those of us that pull the load!
SC> The results of the study show that if public
SC> health care costs are not controlled,and forced down they will become
SC> the major cause of super inflation by 1995,and that health care costs
SC> would become the major portion of the government's budget,and taxes
SC> unbearably high to pay the costs.
Good grief!! Social costs are ALREADY the majority of the Federal Budget!
I saw Donna Shalala (sic) introduced as "the person in control of the
of the fourth largest budget IN THE WORLD(!) (empahsis mine) exceeded
only by the federal budgets of the US, Germany, and [someone else]."
But that's not MY point. What you are not comprehending is the fact that
health care costs will come down when companies decide to lower them.
Companies will decide to lower them when there is a good reason. That
reason is NOT government regulation. The reason(s) is/are MARKET FORCES.
If you do not understand the laws of supply and demand, you cannot
comprehend this reason!
You are claiming to be the "Entrepeneur BBS". A true entrepreneur wants
ZERO government regulations, unless they are ones that ensure a small
business has the opportunity to compete fairly in the market, and not
be squeezed out by bigger businesses.
Suppose YOU own a business making a decent profit when the government
decides to step in a limit your profit. What will you do? If you just
set there and say, "Duh, okay. The Feds say I was making too much money
so I guess I'll just make less now", then you're a loser. (mind you, I
don't mean you personally). I'll tell you what I'd do...I'd say, "Screw
that! I'm used to making a certain return on my money, and if I can't
make it in this business, I'll find one that I can! Shop closed!"
I could go on and on lecturing on how the free market system and
capitalism kicks the butt of any other economic system, particularly
the idealistic, socialist-in-nature, utopian fairy tale being imminated
from inside the beltway, but until someone actually studies economics,
or better yet, actually tries to run a small business, it's like
"pearls before swine".
To some few folk,whom hate
SC> government and gains,etc,that might seem a pleasing result,not me,no
SC> way,and nobody I know.You? I hope not.
Could you rephrase this statement/question in a manner that is
understandable?
SC> And our Republicans are
SC> slowly realizing he might be right,if their give up on their
SC> thoughtless dislike of the Democrats wiser loyalty to God and
SC> the people,
Which country are you referring to in this statement?
SC> I think Clinton's health care plan is going to be a success
SC> to extents.
Not that I am one prone to do this, but I willing to bet you on this
one. I HOPE I AM WRONG. But I won't be. Notice how your cable TV
bill went down when the government starting regulating it?
I am not so sure I agree with the idea of enlarging
SC> public health insurance beyond providing health insurance to those
SC> who otherwise couldn't afford it.
Well good. You know what happens when you create an economy where people
who are "needy" are given social benefits equivalent to an annual income
of 25,000? Those who bust their heinies and only make 18,000 have no
incentive left to continue. The very fact that people can be dependent
on the government for sustanance is eroding our social stability.
... awake during the 80's
--- Blue Wave/QBBS v2.05 [NR]
* Origin: Don't worry about it,it just means your two tents. (1:286/777.0)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 705 707 708 710 711 712 713 714 716 717
SEEN-BY: 286/730 777 926
.PATH: 286/777 710 703 730
Ä [3] Net 286 Chat (1:286/702) ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ OZARK_NET Ä
Msg : 266 of 885 - 265 + 267
From : Mark Dickenson 1:284/8 Fri 17 Sep 93 19:32
To : Kent Ogle
Subj : inflation
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
.PID: RA 2 2571
.MSGID: 1:284/8 5238ae58
KO> Since when is it
KO> "reasonable" for the government to limit a companies
KO> profit!!!!! For crying
It's called Regulation.
KO> out loud, this economy is supposed to be driven by the
KO> market. Ever hear
KO> of supply and demand?
KO> The reason medical costs go unchecked is from lack of
KO> competition, NOT
KO> from lack of government intervention.
You will find that the medical industry knows they have a captive audience and
charge accordingly. They have a HUGE demand that is in the area of Life and
Death. When a customer has a choice between paying 3000% over cost and dying
guess which wins out. It is not the same thing as looking for a SALE on a VCR.
To even THINK to classify Medical Care as being similar to a CONSUMER MARKET
ITEM is very naive and ignorant of both markets.
Medical Care in this country is more like a Monopoly controlled by Price Fixing
institutions. We have laws against this for other companies so why not extend
it to the Health Care arena.
If all of the Electronics Manufacturers decided to charge $5000 for a $300 VCR
and you couldn't BUY it at ANY electronics store for less than $5000 what would
you call that? Basically the same thing that is going on in the Health Care
industry except the government would have stepped in to break up the price of
that $5000 VCR.
When it is cheaper to rent a Hotel Room and have Nurses and equipment on hand
during recovery than it is to STAY IN THE HOSPITAL then something is deperately
wrong. Yep, I like paying those $300 a night room fees for a semi-private (read
that as we fit as many in there as we have room) room in the hospital on top of
the other daily charges. NOT!
--- GEcho 1.01+
* Origin: TriStar Information System! (417) 889-8743 - 4 Lines! (1:284/8)
SEEN-BY: 284/1 8 286/701 702 703 710 712 717 730
.PATH: 284/8 286/703 730