Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
Mr. Wonk - I don't loose sleep over the credit companyes either, but the people I do feel that do get screwed over are the small businessman who have a ninety day invoice period with wealthy purchasers and they get screwed by a bankruptcy. I see it with these palaces in the Silicon Valley. The people go out and hire all sorts of contracters to build stuff, buy items for their house, etc and then declare bankruptcy.

I don't know if you read the last few lines of the Economist article but it said: "Other quirks of the legislation make one wonder why credit-industry groups are so keen on it. One loophole allows rich debtors to go on shielding assets in special trust accounts that are legal in a few states. And debtors' fancy homes in Texas and Florida will still be off-limits to creditors. The bill's backers say that fear of trampling on states' rights stopped them closing such loopholes. But it smells rather pervasively like special treatment for the rich."

I believe it is these areas where the reform is needed most and the bill doesn't cover these areas. I believe small businesses are the key to the success of the US economy and they are very fragile.

We are in complete agreement on that score. I think that where bankruptcy reform is really needed is a uniform exemption, and stricter rules about restricting discharge for credit that is obtained shortly prior to filing. I also think that asset protection trusts, either domestic or foreign, are abusive as well.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
Also, long-impotent village elders are now routinely having erections.

Wasn't it you who, just last week, was firml rminding some poster that certain things said between posters are not meant for general distribution?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Actually, what I contracted for was to have my health care costs covered. I don't have any bargaining power witht the providers, the insurer does. It ought to be the one negotiating and argeeing on an amount for the hospital stay. It should not be incumbent on me, on my own, to fight it out with the hospital.

Of course you have bargaining power with the providers, and you should use it when you come in with a concussion and go to a different hospital if the one you are at won't give you the services at the price you want (i.e., the amount your insurer will reimburse). While I'm being sarcastic about the concussion thing to point out that this is one service it is difficult to bargain about, I'm serious about the bargaining. A lot of doctors I see lately have signs up saying that some insurers do not reimburse the full amout of the charges, and that the patient will be responsible for any amounts not reimbursed.

If you want everything covered, go with an HMO not and indemnity or whatever it's called.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I don't have an ideology. I believe in facts. You're the one who is trying to suggest that there's a connection between what's happening in Iraq and Lebanon. They're both Arab countries, so there must be a simple explanation tying it all together, right?

Answer me this. Is it ever possible that something that happens in country 1 could effect country 2, without there being a direct, uninterrupted causal connection?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Answer me this. Is it ever possible that something that happens in country 1 could affect country 2, without there being a direct, uninterrupted causal connection?

Yes, of course.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Actually, what I contracted for was to have my health care costs covered.

You're mistaken as to what you contracted for. It's your *reasonable* health care costs. Nothing prevents you from paying more for additional services.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
You're mistaken as to what you contracted for. It's your *reasonable* health care costs. Nothing prevents you from paying more for additional services.

Just adding that the word "reasonable" is specifically and explicitly defined in the contract.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore
Just adding that the word "reasonable" is specifically and explicitly defined in the contract.

I'm sure it's on the front page in large print, too.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Yes, of course.

Well you seem to suggest that unless we can draw a straight, uninterrupted line between the events in Iraq and the events in Lebannon/Syria, it is laughable to suggest that one had any effect on the other.

And IMO, it is not just limited to the events in Iraq. It's also the President's general themes of freedom and democracy which he has repeated over and over again, and the events in Ukraine, Afganistan, Israel/Pali, Egypt (though I recognize these are very modest), and other places.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This vision you have of "a popular Lebanese uprising" that threatens Assad's grip on his own people has very little to do with what ails Lebanon or Syria.

Actually, there is a good chance Assad would lose Syria if he loses Lebanon. Economically, Syria is dependent on it. Geopolitically, Syria would become completely surrounded by generally pro-American states.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Well you seem to suggest that unless we can draw a straight, uninterrupted line between the events in Iraq and the events in Lebanon/Syria, it is laughable to suggest that one had any effect on the other.

And IMO, it is not just limited to the events in Iraq. It's also the President's general themes of freedom and democracy which he has repeated over and over again, and the events in Ukraine, Afganistan, Israel/Pali, Egypt (though I recognize these are very modest), and other places.

I've already suggested that I think our invasion of Iraq has had an effect on Lebanon. It's just not the effect that you seem to be advocating. And it's not the January election there, it's our willingness to use force to remove a leader we don't like and the presence of our troops on Syria's eastern border.

I think it takes a naif to think that sporadic happy talk from Bush about the importance of freedom and democracy has had much of anything to do with developments in Afghanistan, Ukraine, or Israel & Palestine. Egypt I'll grant you, but I'm not convinced that it means anything -- I think Mubarak is betting that he can make a couple cosmetic changes and our attention will move on to something else. We'll see. An election in which the largest opposition party is not permitted to run is not much of an election.

Oh, and you forgot Bolivia.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Who is trying to fit what into their ideological narrative? Or have you forgotten that we are in Iraq at the request of the Iraqi government?

Heh. Heh, heh. That's pretty thin, Club. What you say has been true for oh, about 49 days.

For that matter, al Qaeda was in Afghanistan as guests of the Afghan government -- so that doesn't say much.

S_A_M

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by bilmore
I'm curious about the parameters of the measurement in that study.

One can choose stories to write, and stories not to write, and then write the chosen ones up with an entirely neutral tone, but yet still not be neutral. If, say, the NYT wrote fifty stories about bombs and killings, and none about Iraq public support, or rebuilt power plants, how would that fit into this study? If the chosen stories didn't seem to contain any tilt, or underlying tone, would that count as "neutral"? I suspect it would.

Does the same skepticism apply to the finding that Club cited?

How many stories did you see about the reopening of all the schools?

Quite a few.

But I wouldn't trade an American teenager's life for an Iraqi school, so I don't see the driving need to be "even-handed" on that coverage.

[ltl/fb]

While it's difficult to make a price comparison after the fact, it might be even harder in advance.

Emergency room workers won't talk about prices prior to caring for a patient because of federal requirements that they treat all comers, said Dr. Jonathan Landis, director of emergency medicine at Allegheny General Hospital's Suburban Campus. Talking finances in advance could be construed as trying to scare away a patient, plus it's impossible to assess a patient's needs over the phone, he said.

. . .

People with HSAs, of course, are supposed to worry about the price. A patient with an HSA offered by Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield gets the benefit of Highmark's discounted rate, so that patient might want to know how Highmark reimburses different facilities before making a choice.

But Highmark doesn't give HSA members information about negotiated discounts, said Kim Bellard, a Highmark vice president. The insurer is reluctant because hospital discounts were negotiated at a time when hospitals believed the information wouldn't be shared publicly, Bellard said.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05072/470126.stm

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05072/470126.stm

I wonder if there might be a valid legal argument that, when you're carried into an E-room for E-care, and you truly can't drive to the "approved" facility, the charges, no matter how high (as long as they are the facility's usual charges) are per se "reasonable" and thus fully payable by your insurer.