From: Eeyore on 14 Nov 2006 08:52 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > > >$30 a month is massively expensive for USENET. > > I don't think so. The service provided was 7x24, never down > and the people knew what was going whenever something odd > was happening. When I said I got what I paid for, I meant > that the service was superb, timely, and absent of all bullshit. I pay $2.95 for news access and it seems just fine too. 24/7 is the norm. Graham
From: Eeyore on 14 Nov 2006 08:54 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > >BTW, we were both making a quarter above the minimum wage of > >$2/hr.> > > You were rich. When I started saving for college, I was making > $.65/hour. I thought I was very rich because before that > I was making $.07/lb picking blueberries. Or a dollar a day > babysitting brats. I dropped the babysitting; it wasn't worth > the money. When was this ? Graham
From: jmfbahciv on 14 Nov 2006 08:50 In article <dZ6dnXZEJqkw0crYnZ2dnUVZ8qidnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:ej79a0$8qk_013(a)s851.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <maydndxa-ZzRrMvYnZ2dnUVZ8tednZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:ej4feq$8ss_006(a)s977.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <kkcal2ll82lsuqk1pk5uanjcat876o49ei(a)4ax.com>, >>>> Ben Newsam <ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk> wrote: >>>>>On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 15:51:47 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>>>news:ej22vn$8qk_014(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is decreasing towards zero as conversion to a few payers >>>>>>> increases. What do you think will happen when the few payers >>>>>>> become one? >>>>>> >>>>>>When that one payer doesn't have the profit motive that's currently >>>>>>driving >>>>>>prices? Everybody will have access. Check out the cost (and I'm >>>>>>talking >>>>>>the total cost to society) and availability of the UK system versus >>>>>>ours. >>>>> >>>>>AFAIAC, the biggest advantage of our (UK) system isn't the quality of >>>>>the service, although it is very good at day to day stuff like mending >>>>>broken bits and plugging leaks, but the peace of mind that comes from >>>>>not having to worry about whether one is covered or not. If you need >>>>>to see a doctor, you go and see a doctor, and if you need treatment, >>>>>you get it. It's as simple as that. Yes, of course the system is >>>>>strapped for cash, and certain treatments and drugs aren't available >>>>>on the National Health, but that will always be the case with whatever >>>>>system is in place, whether public or private. >>>> >>>> And how do you find a doctor? >>> >>>Well in my case, there is a GP practice about 4 miles away. If I was >>>somewhere else and it was urgent I would go to see the nearest doctor. >>> >>>> Are you assigned to a doctor >>>> who has to OK other specialists' services? >>> >>>Not in the manner you mean. The doctor has to OK the medical need for the >>>specialist, but it really shouldn't be any other way. >>> >>>> Can you walk into >>>> a cardiologist's office and get treated or do you have to >>>> be "vetted" through a series of physicians' offices and labs >>>> to get to that heart doctor? >>> >>>If I need to be treated by a cardiologist I will be. The vetting process >>>may >>>well exist but not in the manner you hope to imply here. Patients are >>>assessed as to the clinical need for treatment they have. If the patient >>>needs to see a cardiologist, s/he gets to see one. >>> >>>Are you implying that access to treatment should be on the basis of what >>>the >>>patient _thinks_ they need and can afford, rather than what the doctor >>>thinks is the best treatment? >> >> In the US, we have to be our own experts. > >But, without six years medical school and subsequent real world experience >you are not experts. If you had an NHS you wouldn't have to self diagnose. When JMF was dying, I had to learn nursing procedures and doctor procedures without the benefit of schooling. I became an expert in minimizing side effects of drugs he was taking and made all kinds of mechanical assists to keep him as comfortable as possible. The ultimate question was who would die first? Him or me? My Dad is now going through the same bullshit only he has no advocate who will speak up and say no. On top of it all, their assigned "GP" is stupid. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 14 Nov 2006 08:51 In article <455760C3.C0979C51(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >I'm wondering if BAH thinks we have our treatment 'rationed'. >> >> Would you know if that happened? Since you can't "shop around" >> and compare, you cannot find out if your treatment is rationed, >> especially its efficacy. > >In one case I wasn't happy with the treatment I got from a concultant so my >doctor referred me to another one. How many referrals are you allowed? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 14 Nov 2006 08:53
In article <45585202.F8E9C40D(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Ben Newsam <ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk> wrote: >> >On Sun, 12 Nov 06 14:00:10 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>I'm wondering if BAH thinks we have our treatment 'rationed'. >> >> >> >>Would you know if that happened? Since you can't "shop around" >> >>and compare, you cannot find out if your treatment is rationed, >> >>especially its efficacy. >> > >> >All health systems of whatever sort are limited by cost. An >> >insurance-based scheme will give up long before the NHS, however. >> >> That is one of the reasons an NHS doesn't work well. > >Right. > >BAH - you have now moved from making vague assertions about how you think things >might work in theory to saying now that the NHS doesn't work well. If it works so well, why is there a backup system called private practice? > >Get over it ! It *does* work well ! 60 million ppl in the UK use it for their >health care and we even have a life expectancy 2 years longer than US citizens ! > >Start considering instead why the US health care system doesn't work well and >costs so much ! That's what I've been talking about all along. An NHS does not and will not work. > >You're looking at imaginary problems btw. No, they are real. /BAH |