Real answer: I have had or experienced medical care in England, Spain, and the US. Despite horror stories I saw no difference and the English medical care at an Emergency room was far faster and got directly to the solution rather than using referrals. They tried to get me to stay overnight and I kind of got out of that but I now feel (having later had to spend a significant stay in a very new American hospital and realizing the English one was just as clean and new-looking) that perhaps I had been scared by propaganda. Spain was completely free clinic even though the patient (not me) was a visiting tourist and was also really fast and friendly. But that was not a major medical emergency.

In England there certainly are complaints about the Dental system. The NHS is not paying enough and dentists can get out of serving NHS patients so there is either huge lines or you pay a lot. I did not experience it so I can't say first-hand, but this is the one area where I believe the US system is superior. There was some other posts here pointing out that how Dental works here with users actually able to and having a motive to do price comparisons may be an explanation. I also know first-hand (being across from the USC Dental School) that poor are served by these for free, though I am unsure if this is enough to make up for the lack of an NHS-style government program to serve them.

I am unsure how that could be applied to major medical however: if your deduction is $3000 then you don't care if the hospital is going to charge $10000 or $50000, that's a good deal different from comparing a $50 or $100 cleaning. Maybe it could apply to doctor's visits but then people just don't go at all if it is not free, while they will get their teeth cleaned because it is an obvious service, not just somebody looking at you.

By far the worst place I ever saw was when I was a kid and went with my father to an emergency room in Vegas. We went to the public hospital and it was a kafka scene, pretty horrible. After hours we finally saw somebody, who realized my father had insurance and said we were at the wrong hospital, and sent us to the really nice and clean and completely empty private one where he was treated within 30 minutes of arrival (it was a fractured ankle). This is before Reagan signed the law that said all emergency rooms must treat all incoming patients. I think it is interesting that this has not turned all emergency rooms into this scene, instead the ones I have been to since seem to be as nice as that empty private one was.

Transient-for hint works across process boundaries.

He just said the employees were paying half of $550 (ie $275), and now they are paying $130-$250. So yes, the employees are saving money (assuming he is telling the truth).

COBRA has a limited period it works for.

And previously you could not get that private policy if you had a preexisting condition.

Not everything is wine and roses with Obamacare, but ignoring what was happening before is not helping any arguments about it.

The problem is that people who don't pay for routine medical care don't die. Instead they get *major* medical care and thus cost the system a lot more. You car example would match more if what happened if a person refused to go to work because the transportation cost too much then the work would be forced to charter a helicopter for them.

I agree this also happened to me when I went to an out-of-network doctor (I had reasonable health insurance at that time). He immediatly knocked a great deal off the bill because he knew the insurance company would not do it.

Your existing plan really does not cover contraceptives? That will actually make it *more* expensive, not less.

HIPAA is only for group health plans. Nice try, however.

COBRA expires after 6 months (I think it was extended by Obama but still finite). I know this from personal experience.

Nice but it would be really better if you could post some details (cost and coverage and deductables, etc).

Though the people saying "I lost my insurance" are much worse at refusing to post the reason the insurance was cancelled, or posting actual costs/benifits from before/after, it appears supporters of Obamacare seem to do the same thing sometimes.

I agree this (single payer) is the likely result in the long run.

I have to say I am absolutely disgusted with the right wing. They have taken an idea from the Heritage Institute to use capitalism which may have worked (it may have failed as well but at least we would have tried) and made it now politically impossible. If they get in office and repeal Obamacare the result will be so obviously awful that there will be a fix very soon afterwards. And the left will use all the arguments that the Tea Party came up with to say that private companies cannot be used (because the mandate is unconstitutional, etc) and it will be a government service just like all European countries use.

Yes healthcare is cheaper in Europe, but that does not mean it is the best system. A regulated competitive market should do better because competition leads to innovation and reduced cost. But we will probably never see it tried, thanks to the fanatics in the right wing. Thanks a lot, assholes.

Can you please post the reason the insurance was cancelled? What part of Obamacare regulations did it not fulfill?

This whole discussion is full of shills on every side. I believe insurance was cancelled, but every time somebody says it was they do not say the reason. This leads everybody else to say "well it probably only covered hangnails", which is certainly false. But I am also suspicious that in all these Slashdot postings saying "Obama took away my insurance" I have NEVER seen the reason an insurance was cancelled, except for one post that said "my employer refused to pay the cadillac tax" which is not something likely to be mentioned on Fox News.

I believe there are screwups all around. Some of the regulations the left wing forced into Obamacare are probably silly and excessive and causing unhelpful cancellations, but there is a distinct refusal to post exactly what is wrong.

Please describe in equal detail the "plan" you had before. Don't lie.

The main app is aware that it is executing the file dialog program, they are talking to each other (probably just by using a pipe). Therefore the app can tell the file dialog that it lost focus, or (more likely) it can just stay in a modal state where the user cannot change things until they dismiss the file dialog.

There are TV's and Amps that will do that adjustment for you (check for a button marked "loudness"). No need to unreversably process the input signal when your equipment could do it for you.

The Unix philosophy would help with the file dialogs. They should be a separate executable, at least for simple ones that are in a floating window. Then all the toolkits could share them. More importantly people could write new and better file dialogs. Also the common one could share a daemon that kept track of preview icons, etc.

FLTK was tiny, but more than 50% of the code was for the file chooser dialog.