In fact, he felt like quite a heel.
I should have credited him previously but failed to do so. Sorry about that Steve! If I do quote other writers I usually highlight in italics.
The very idea that being able to shout louder than someone else or that a few words written on a placard contributes anything to a debate on such an important issue is simply asinine. Such behavior, including mindless chanting of simplistic slogans, effectively halts all objective discussion and obscures the real issues.
So, stop mouthing off, stop quoting anecdotal examples and stop using prefabricated, emotive labels designed to perpetuate already polarized thinking.
Yes I know this a new concept, but just bear with me for a while, you never know, we might then draw some reasoned and sensible conclusions. Here are some facts: Sometimes by a factor of three or four over countries with effective universal systems.
It is an invidious practice that can be extremely detrimental to both employee and employer interests. The practice has its origins in the pay freezes of World War IIyet now seems entrenched in the American working life.
Why should your employer decide what health cover you get? Individual tax costs will increase but, if a scheme is implemented effectively, there will be no health insurance premiums to pay.
Employers should no longer have to pay their portion to the insurers and there should be no co-pay.
As a follow-up to Tuesday’s post about the majority-minority public schools in Oslo, the following brief account reports the latest statistics on the cultural enrichment of schools in Austria. Vienna is the most fully enriched location, and seems to be in roughly the same situation as Oslo. Many thanks to Hermes for the translation from ashio-midori.com Copy and paste the following code to link back to this work (CTRL A/CMD A will select all), or use the Tweet or Tumblr links to share the work on your Twitter or Tumblr account. Issuu is a digital publishing platform that makes it simple to publish magazines, catalogs, newspapers, books, and more online. Easily share your publications and get them in front of Issuu’s.
Your employer may even pass his or her savings on to you as a wage increase. In the current situation prevailing in the United States of America, there is little incentive for health insurers to finance preventative care.
The premise is that, as people change jobs and healthcare insurers, the financial benefits of preventative medicine might be enjoyed by organizations other than those that originally funded it.
This hypochondria is fueled by a constant barrage of television commercials for prescription drugs containing information that should only really be evaluated by competent medical professionals. Trendy acronyms only exacerbate the obsession — why not become obsessed by health and wellness instead?
Physicians are encouraged to treat where treatment is perhaps unnecessary. Pharmaceutical companies need a steady stream of new illnesses, gullible or mercenary physicians and new drugs to keep them in business.
Health insurers need to be able to promise nurturing care from cradle to grave and yet be able to deny treatment on all possible occasions. Most universal or national health schemes operate this policy.
Supporters of the status quo in United States health policies consider it blasphemy. It is a prime example of the emotive labeling so apparent in current healthcare discussions.
Single-payer simply means that payment for medicines and treatment comes from a single source. That single source is the organization that operates the health service — almost invariably the government.
Pharmaceutical companies and medical practitioners abhor this policy because they are unable to play numerous payers with differing priorities off against each other. Instead they have to deal with a single body that has the single objective of balancing cost and patient benefit — more simply known as value for money.
This does mean that many medical practitioners will get less for the work that they do. Pharmaceutical companies will undoubtedly claim that they will be unable to research new treatments.
Personally, I can live with this because the physicians that earn substantially less will only be those who have been financially focused in their practices. Pharmaceutical companies will continue to research and develop because that is what they have to do to exist. Maybe these new pressures will force them to be more focused on effective remedies?
Am I the only person who wonders whether drug companies develop new products and then look for an illness to treat with it? The objective of a healthcare system is to look after the receivers of that healthcare — not to make a few professionals obscenely wealthy.
The bottom line is that the current healthcare systems in terms of delivery and outcomes in the United States of America are ineffectual and probably irreparable in their current form. Federal and state politicians are scared to death of the pharmaceutical lobby and failure to be re-elected but then I repeat myself.
The AMA represents the interests solely of the medical profession and has stood four-square in the way of any proposed initiatives that benefit patients at the expense of their members. When it dawns on them that single-payer may become a reality, they will get the rest of the politicians that the pharmaceutical companies missed.
It should not and cannot be beyond the wit of the US Government to take the time to investigate the healthcare schemes that are the most successfully operated in other industrialized countries.
Surely, somewhere in this nation, we have officials with the ability to judge and evaluate the best of those and surely we have the expertise to implement such a scheme here. Here are some final kickers. How can the country that considers itself the most advanced economy in the world, allow its citizens to be denied preventative healthcare because of corporate avarice?
How can it allow aroundfamilies each year to bankrupt themselves seeking healthcare?The Tomatometer rating – based on the published opinions of hundreds of film and television critics – is a trusted measurement of movie and TV programming quality for millions of moviegoers.
“It’d be legalistic if we obeyed out of obligation, but we obey because we love Jesus; He said, ‘If you love Me, obey My commands’.
Our renewal requires two efforts, God’s and ours. Our part is to love and obey Jesus; God’s part is to transform us.
The two go together like two blades of scissors. Dec 13, · Over the past two weeks we have seen releases from the IG that are building toward a much more consequential outcome.
The corruption is jaw-dropping. The very heart of the U.S. system of Law (DOJ) and Order (FBI) is now at risk. The IG obviously understands the . Featured Products TCM: Christmas in the Movies Book: 30 Classics to Celebrate the Season. $ The Farmer's Daughter DVD $ Casablanca DVD $ $ Casablanca DVD $ yellow describes in fictional form the life of Ella, Anna’s alter ego; the blue is a diary of “real” life, although it is clearly fictional.
These four books make up The Golden Notebook, a fifth and final notebook that sums up the other four. Free Women is the story of two women friends, Anna and Molly, who have been sharing the same.
MICHELE RIVKIN-FISHUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Tracing landscapes of the past in class subjectivity: Pr.