US Goverment coul possible be able to shut down internet

There's a saying, "Never ascribe to malice that which can reasonably be attributed to stupidity."

What can I say? There are idiots everywhere. About one time out of four, my private insurance company refuses to cover services provided at a local hospital that is part of its network because the hospital has the same name as another hospital, 200 miles away, that is not part of its network. The hospitals have unique code numbers in their system, but the clowns handling claims do not look at those numbers, they look at the names. Each time this happens, there is a delay of 2-3 months during which I get several huge bills that I should not have to pay, and I have to make several phone calls, and spend several hours on hold, to get them to correct the problem.

Anecdotes, however appalling, do not trump aggregate data. The aggregate data demonstrate that people are better off in places that have universal health coverage enforced by government mandate, whether single-payer or not. "We are not other countries", but the Medicaid example demonstrates that in *this country*, at least in some states that have generous Medicaid plans, government health insurance can provide excellent, responsive coverage with low administrative overhead.



Politicians are in the pockets of drug companies and insurance companies. This is also why the Medicare Part D program legislation prohibited the federal government from negotiating prices with drug companies for the drugs that Medicare would pay for. The idea was that such negotiation would be unwarranted government interference in the free market, and that competing Part D drug plans would hold prices down. We have now seen what nonsense that was. Walmart, now--they may actually succeed in getting drug prices down--but only because of the same monopolistic practices that brought us lead-painted toys and poisoned toothpaste from China. How long do you think it will be before there's lead in your Walmart antibiotics?

As for psychotropic drugs: The first generation of anti-psychotics had horrible side-effects that made people miserable. The second generation didn't have those side-effects, but now we're learning that they have their own dangers, and they don't really work any better than the first generation drugs. On the other hand, people who take them tend to be able to function better than those who take the first generation drugs or who don't take any drugs at all. In any case, it did take years to find out that the second-generation drugs aren't what they were cracked up to be. The FDA could not have found that out any sooner. And the FDA is constantly being pushed from both sides: Not only drug companies, but desperate sick people want drugs approved faster than may be safe.

As for institutions: They all suck, and they are all more expensive than providing treatment and support services in the community. When institutions were closed, the money saved should have been put into those community services. It didn't happen. But that doesn't mean the institutions, which were wholesale violators of people's civil and human rights, shouldn't have been closed.

i was for rational arguments...but the introduction of references to frances farmer...who i am assuming you did not know and got info about from a book or movie....and to the nazi's just pushed me over the edge of reason never to return....

so make sure that you pull your curtains tonight and maybe wear a tinfoil hat...cuz i forgot to mention theliens who are trying to read our thoughts....

nite nite peeps...

Federal regulations regarding preservation of assets and eligibility for federally-funded long-term care were more generous until late in the Bush Administration, when the Department of Health and Human Services unilaterally (and, some say, illegally) suddenly started disallowing income and asset levels that they had previously permitted.

You might be interested in the Community Choice Act, a bill that Obama supported as a candidate but is now opposing. It would let people who are eligible for Medicaid and for institutional placement choose to have the same amount of Medicaid money spent for home and community-based services instead. Home and community-based services are, on average, 1/3 the cost of serving the same person in an institution, and they enable a much better quality of life.

You're absolutely right on this point. The whole thing in Washington is about acute care health insurance coverage. Long-term care, one of the two fastest growing health-care cost centers (the other is prescription drugs), is not being addressed at all. When the baby boomers hit their peak of old age, between 30% and 40% of the US population will be using long-term care. It's going to be nightmarishly expensive if we don't stop forcing people into institutions and instead assist them to stay in their own homes and communities.

I try not to. Intention counts for a lot, with me (either way.)



Not all insurance companies are that inefficient or suck pond water to the same extent. It's not a reason to do away with them ALL.



Disagree. Again, lies, damn lies, and statistics. Also, people's personal experiences and those of their families/friends are what gives context to any data. (Whatever data it is you are placing all your confidence in.)

I'll go with the input of people who know their stuff rather than any govt. study.



If you say so. What else can I say to that? It's an opinion. What I see is a lot of fraud, bloat, and bad policy. Not to say some of the larger insurance companies are not guilty of same.



A lot of drug ingredients are ALREADY manufactured in China. Including for antibiotics. And foods and other ingredients are manufactured there and other nations without our food and drug laws. Why is that going on at all? What are our laws for, if we just skirt them that way? I mean, if what happened with the GHB in children's toys and melamine in dog food wasn't enough to change that - and you wanna trust the same govt. who allows that, with your life and decisions which impact it completely?

I wouldn't put Wal-Mart up as a poster child for fair practise, either. Not with its policies toward employees and health care.

Forget prices, though. Drug companies even offer their pills free. How about just enforcing laws and standards for drug testing and safety? So that people don't die at the tune of over 100,000 a year (a conservative number, since it only counts hospital deaths) from drug ADR?



This paragraph seems to say conflicting things. But if I understand it correctly - you are saying that pills today are safer and more effective? They are not. Look up the Zyprexa lawsuits, or read sites such as prozactruth.org.

Yes they work for some and without as many or as severe side effects for some people, too. But so did/do the older pills. Why don't they try to find out what actually causes mental illness before they cook up these chemical cocktails. Or at least, mandate a Cytochrome P450 test for anyone who is prescribed psych meds. If not all meds - since most pills rely upon that pathway to metabolise. To do less is literally condemning some to being crippled or killed.

The FDA isn't pushed by drug companies, though. They OWN it. Check into donations to politicians, too, and how many people have now or in the past, held positions on both. Check into how many people were fired for whistle blowing as to falsifying data. And other things like that...Your govt in action.



I never said they shouldn't have.

It is a FACT, what I referenced and it was only one example of the way Steilacoom was.

My point about propaganda films is that just because a place has a pamphlet with tidy manicured grounds and pictures of someone painting ceramics, does not mean it's not a cesspool in actuality. Picking on the analogy is an excuse.

Glad you are not insulting me. I guess "tinfoil hat" and all the rest is a compliment, Jojo.

Sleep well.

*whps off her pants and waves them in salute.

Hi Brenda!

yep that was insulting on purpose....told you that you would know if i insulted you...good work!

my tinfoil hat and other points were to counter your outlandish nazi ones...its all crazy talk at this point so just thought i would join in the fun.

no fair if you get to throw around inflammatory statements all by yourself now is it>you made it look so enticing that this one time i just couldnt resist...hehe

I thought you were leaving 3 or 4 posts ago? This is the longest goodbye since Jig's.

Oh and you were insulting me before that, Jojo. Just passive-aggressively.

Here's one back, since you are gloating over yours. I can't help it if you are too stupid to understand my points. I can't help it if you are too arrogant to count anyone else's experience or opinion but your own. I can't help it if you insist upon misquoting me, either deliberately or out of stupidity. I can't help it if you refuse to see when I am actually AGREEING with you and if you insist upon arguing and insulting me instead.

Hmm, somehow I don't feel better. It isn't much fun being you.

What I'm saying, I guess, is it's a wash. The first generation had horrible side-effects. They often stopped the psychotic symptoms, but also often stopped people in their tracks--made it impossible for them to do much more than sit in a room and watch TV while they twitched uncontrollably. The second generation didn't have those side-effects. They made it possible for people to have careers and relationships. And then, after some time passed, some of those people got chronic physical diseases, or died. It's really up to the person taking the drugs, you know: Would you rather be psychotic or immobile with a normal lifespan, or have a meaningful but shorter life? Of course, no drug works for everybody. That is not a reason for people to not take drugs.

As for the FDA, etc. For the last 8 years the federal government, including the FDA, has been in the hands of two kinds of people: those who were philosophically opposed to government, and therefore deliberately sabotaged its operations; and those who were cynically engaged in milking government for the benefit of their friends in the private sector. If for those 8 years the government had instead been run by people who were sincerely trying to make things better, we might have had a very different result. As you said, intentions are important.

Guns don't kill people, criminals kill people.

Government doesn't mess things up, criminals mess things up.

I never said people should not take them - But at least testing them to make sure the dosage will be correct and will not poison them, would be a nice start.

Also, I disagree with you a bit about the effect of some of those drugs. Zyprexa put some people into a diabetic coma. Some pills - even non psychiatric ones, such as quinolone antibiotics, and drugs like Tamiflu or Neurontin - caused people to commit suicide or have psychotic breaks. I guess I should say it is "anecdotal" since it hasn't been proven yet in court - but - many pills that are not even for psychiatric conditions do currently list suicidal thoughts as a possible side effect. So, is an admission by drug companies that taking an antibiotic can cause a person to commit suicide, enough proof?

Why are those drugs on the market?

Often new drugs are not even 'new' but a 'me too' pill with perhaps one molecule changed - once the drug can legally be sold as generic. Repackage it, and make another few billion instead. Meanwhile, lessen or falsify data as to side effects by grouping them into a nicer sounding heading, or omit or change the rate of occurence. I've talked with someone whose job it used to be, to do exactly that. They were not 'sabotaging' - they just lacked enough conscience to disobey.

I guess it depends on what you would define as "meaningful life." And if you assume doctors prescribe responsibly. Often they do not. For instance doctors prescribe for other conditions than pills are meant for, and in areas of practise they are not qualified in (such as a GP prescribing a drug for depression, when they are not qualified to diagnose it.)



If you say so - I think it's been run by people who stood to gain millions from the sales of drugs rushed to market. Dangerous, unnecessary pills in many instances.



...and if they are one and the same?

Sorry, that was too easy. Although it may also have been how you knew I'd reply.

ok just to clarify...im on the edge of me seat waiting for your next comments so i cant even go to sleep! lol

for the record...i understood every single word of all your statements...however you seem to have lost the point of mine long ago. and you also have dismissed every point ive made from my own experience while i never even mentioned yours and i certainly never made light of your families experiences.

since ive actually worked in a mental hospital and with the patients, i have an extremely clear undetrstanding of the abuses, the horrific things thet went on and what i consider to be a horrible system now. my point in brining up the alternative treatments years ago was to emphasize the point that the introduction of drug companies and insurance companies into the mental health treatment arena was not necessarily the best for the patients...which was to support the same argument i made that they are also not good when driving our current health care system.

tbh the info ive seen about the treatment style of using the farming, gardening and self sufficiency to actually help treat mental illness is a far superior method than just drugging people into oblivion which is standard practice now....were there abuses in the past? of course there were....i never said there were not. were there practices like lobotomies that were horrfic...yes there were...but those were far better than the snake pit which had been the norm years before. but there did in fact exist a treatment model using occupational therapy to try to help some of these folks. was it always administered fairly and correctly...no it was not. did the model exist...yes it did and the ideal model is documented in the link i pasted in a past post. i would guess that in years to come we will look at many of the medical and mental health treatments we use now and find them just as abusive once we have something better.

but by latching onto those points and then inserting comments about nazis, etc....you completely missed the point of my comments and intentionally try to inflame. my points of view and personal experiences are just as valid as yours. but once you dive down into mud slinging....yes i could not resist a bit of fun slinging some back.

as for passive agressive...if you cant distinguish between blanket comments and comments directed at you specifically...i cant help you with that one....when i mean YOU ill say YOU...

so lets see...im passive agressive, have no clue about mental health and state hospitals where ive worked, and i use propogada type comments in the same way the nazis did....am i missing any of your insults??

those were specific and definiately directed at me....

oops sorry... i didnt list you calling me stupid and arrogant also...my bad

YYYAAAYYY!!! for socialism gawd obama hes smark!!!!!
WOOOTTT!!! Liberals you guys ROCK!!!

(idiots)

Sorry Jojo, not reading yours any more. (Saw your first sentence, realised it's you and stopped. When things get personal I'm out of that exchange. Congrats though, for being the first person for whom I retaliated in kind.)

So you may as well go to sleep now if waiting for my next comment is what's keeping you awake.

oh clarissa...did you really just put your fingers in your ears and go lallalalalala.

My that Stone Soup tastes a bit cold and bland tonight. SL at it's best ...

Cheap shot.

My question to you, Larissa, is: Since you are an expert on the upcoming changes to your healthcare system, why are you belabouring the point here instead of heading to Washington or wherever these things are thought up?

No doubt they are waiting for someone like you to make sure they get it right as they've obviously have not thought of any possible consequences, probably have not studied other countries to see what works there and what doesn't, have not gauged the mood of the average consumer, have not studied statistics and historical data.

They are also sitting with their fingers in their ears, saying lalalala because they are bent on doing evil things to the population because they'd rather be in charge of that than let the private insurers and drug companies continue to do that.

So, off you go, set 'em straight, GF. We're rootin' for ya.

(Damn, I need a sarcasm font

Ooh. Alt?

Why should I care what you think of me, Brann?

And if you think I'm alone in my opinions, you haven't been watching the news lately.

I did not get insulting until someone else did so repeatedly, not that it's an excuse, but everyone has limits. You BEGAN that way. Bravo.



Who?



Not really - you could be a bit better at it, though. True sarcasm contains actual meaning.

Hmm, I'm pretty sure that I didn't express an opinion of you one way or the other.

Oh RIGHT - this is a compliment. Give me a freaking break.

I'm sorry you are so upset by this issue, truly.
But you are hammering away on this without giving any credence to what anybody else is saying or even considering that you might not have all the facts, after all.
Then you get upset when people throw up their hands and get snippy. Resorting to picking on typos is just petty.

LOL wut?

Ok first.

I am not upset by this issue. I have opinions on it. Big difference.

Backing them up with personal and family experiences and my own research on certain points is a bad thing, somehow? Details = paranoia, if they happen to disagree with someone else's?

I did give credence to and reply to other people's points. Sometimes point by point. If I did not agree that is not the same as not giving credence to it.

The level of childishness one person repeatedly bent to was not just 'getting snippy.'

As for Josh he never answered my questions in which I tried to have a discussion with him; instead took a shot.

Going by the tone of your post to me, (in which I assume, unless you are Jojo's alt, you have no dog in this fight), and also the fact you capitalised the L, calling me some other name seemed intentional. NOT a typo.

But that's the part of your post you're worried about? LOL.

*I'M* the one being petty? Oh pot how black thou art.

Clarissa, you have a tendency of getting all high and mighty on people when they don't agree with what you say or you start demanding apologies for silly things like you did in that other thread with Eli. If you can't deal with it or ignore it, then stick to the "how do i open a box" threads. If you're such a proponent of the Stone Soup parable you have in your sig, perhaps you need to read it again.