Re: Replacing Michelle


"Methuselah" <methuselah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:JlCmm.323697$Ta5.108776@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Paul M. Cook wrote:
"Tony" <tony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%eBmm.8356$nQ6.462@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Paul M. Cook wrote:

"Methuselah" <methuselah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:aXymm.276782$E61.40514@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Paul M. Cook wrote:

"Tony" <tony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2hwmm.155853$0e4.97518@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


CigarBaron wrote:


On Aug 30, 1:29 am, "Tom S." <tmsw...@xxxxxxx> wrote:


But now that Mrs. Obama has resigned, the hospital says her
position will
remain unfilled. How can that be, if the work she did was vital
enough to be
worth $317,000?

Let me add that Michelle's position was a part time, 20 hour a
week job. And
to think they were critical of Blagoyovich' s wife for taking
$100,000 in
fuzzy real estate commission.



It is unbelievable. She, and no one else in the health care field,
is
worth that much for that position. Most hospital Presidents make
in
the 200,000 range, so why is that part time job worth so much?
"Senator's Wife"is the obvious answer. You have to pay to play I
guess.


She was also instrumental in the patient dumping program where high
cost patients were "dumped" to lesser expensive hospitals (much like
Paul was when he had his "problems") so that the hospital could save
money.



Uh no, I was dumped on the street for not having insurance.
Basically left to die. We don't have many county hospitals here in
SoCal anymore. All closed down to "save money."



Wow - government hospitals shutting down because they can't exist
because of financial constraints.

Yep, they could not raise taxes to keep them going. So now everyone is
just sooo better off without those hospitals.

I know I am. Less of a suck on my income to run an inefficient health
care facility that can't get by on fees.


Who would have thought they'd be so inefficient they couldn't justify
their own existence.

Costs rise. If you can't keep up with costs you go under. Pretty
complicated formula, eh?

Costs raise, you raise your fees. If you can't attract people with the
new fees because of your inefficiencies, you go under. That's how it
works in the real world. If you'd like to find out what it's like you'd
better take the "red pill". Otherwise take the "blue pill" and stay
dumb and happy. (Interesting the color correlations, isn't it).


Maybe we ought to put Michelle in charge of health care cost
savings. She *does* have experience. Who needs "death panels" when
we have the first lady.


We already have death panels. Real ones who say "sorry, no
transplant for you. Don't come back you're cancelled."

Paul



We could shoot more prisoners like the Chinese do and harvest their
organs. Then there would be
enough transplants to make the non prisoners happy. A perfect
government solution for those
who would have big government control their lives. For the good of
the many at the sake of the few.

Sounds like a repug idea if I ever heard one. Then we can say, execute
people the same day they are sentenced and with no appeal.

Shoot, don't execute them at all. Just keep them warehoused until
they're room temperature. Unfortunately, there's no guarantee some
misguided liberal won't let them out like Dukakis did with Willie
Horton.


That woudl speed things up a bit. We'd have to preserve the organs so
they'd be put to death by draining their blood, which we'd also sell.
Then we can make spitting on the sidewalk a crime punishable by death
so we can harvest even more of those juicy organs and sell them for 80K
each.

Paul, you're too much. :)


I see your point though. One day we have medical care for all, the
next day we are reading from Mao tse Tung's book and singing songs in
praise of farmers crops.



You can have medical care for all if you want as long as you don't have
to steal money from the unwilling to fund it (or borrow money you can't
afford, or counterfeit money).


Which would you pick? A tax of 12K a year or a policy fee of 36K a year?

Hmmm?

And when or if the public plan is put in place you'll be standing in line
to sign up. Once your employer cuts your benefits because they are too
expensive.

Paul



So, you're saying that a public plan can provide the same coverage as a
private plan with a savings of $24K/Year (36K-12K. That's really silly!


Done every day. Called Medicare. Hugely more efficient because it has much
lower overhead, no executive salaries or multi-billion dollar advertising
campaigns or thousands of paper shufflers.

BTW: One can get an excellent private policy for a little more than
$12K/year and it will include decent dental and optical care as well. If
you'd stop pulling numbers out of your ass and do a little research, you
wouldn't look so foolish. As it is, you're 100% NOT credible!


The cost for a family of 4 in 7 years is projected to be $36,000.00. That's
more than a mortgage for a 250K house. Some plans now can be had for 12-16K
a year, yes but they have rather large co-pays and deductibles. Employers
are dropping insurance benefits at a rapid pace and not many people can
absorb the huge cost. But they are experiencing double digit price
increases with no end in site. Comprehensive plans are getting scarcer by
the day.

You need to do some research, not me. You're either pulling numbers out of
your own ass or you have not checked the price in years.

Paul


.

Loading