Comment Re:Militia, then vs now (Score 1) 1633
If you believe that, and I don't...
We as a People don't send 200 armed agents to collect $300K bills. Nor do I have any interest in funding such.
If you believe that, and I don't...
We as a People don't send 200 armed agents to collect $300K bills. Nor do I have any interest in funding such.
Staged. Bundy and family banned carrying of weapons on their land and made folks disarm. The photo from the bridge is a single photo, no one can find any attribution for it, nor Copyright notice (interesting, considering all of the outlets that are using it, they apparently don't have permission of the photographer under the law), and hell... it's the world of Photoshop. The *key* photo for all the whiny media outlets seems to have appeared from nowhere with no attribution.
Which even if true, means it's inept to send 200 armed soldiers to collect. That's not how we handle debts in the U.S.
If it were, we'd have surrounded Al Sharpton's house with 200 armed agents many years ago for the $3.5M in back-taxes he owes. And we probably wouldn't want the top law-enforcement person in the country speaking at his events.
BLM already ran off over 50 other ranchers in the area. Pretty sure Bundy's "damage" was a lot less than the 50 other ranches combined in the late 80s and early 90s when they started claiming the land was theirs to manage instead of the State of Nevada's.
His family was using it 76 years before BLM existed. Incorrect.
Bundy's family was using it 78 years before BLM even existed. Incorrect.
OK guys. We've promoted Open Source for decades. We have to own up to our own problems.
This was a failure in the Open Source process. It is just as likely to happen to closed source software, and more likely to go unrevealed if it does, which is why we aren't already having our heads handed to us.
But we need to look at whether Open Source projects should be providing the world's security without any significant funding to do so.
Jeff, I'm sorry that you're paying more. I'm envious that your state is implementing single-payer, though! California considers and rejects the bill every session, so far.
MVP itself is not-for-profit. Interesting that they think the pool in the two states they focus on is now that much more expensive. I can't imagine why.
Thanks
Bruce
To pick a nit, if you require medical attention after an auto accident, typically the at-fault driver's auto policy would need to cover that.
If they are so kind to stick around and your expenses do not exceed the limits.
Certainly such scams existed, but 30 seconds of googling can typically separate the good from the fraud.
The web helps. At the time, I was not able to see the plan until the salesman was present.
I think you are confusing laissez-faire capitalism with freedom. In this particular case the insurers had the task of operating a risk pool, but no incentive to allow any but the lowest risk customer into the pool. Freedom was harmed overall, as a significant number of people had no viable path to medical care.
There are a good number of people who, like you, would feel less encumbered if they were able to live on an island without any civil services and thus without any burden to pay for their fellow man rather than themselves. My surmise is that few of them would survive very long. However, I would encourage you to try if you are able to find such a place. Go ahead, prove me wrong.
I am hardly surprised that insurance companies do not like the situation of having any additional regulation imposed upon them and will raise fees or do anything else they can do to protest and to discredit it.
If you've even hung around the emergency department of a hospital, you will have seen where the real cost of uninsured patients was going. Suddenly this cost is transferred from the hospital to subsidized plans. Ultimately, it should result in better management of the expense.
It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.