I like when companies throw out the line about offering a range of products to suit specific needs of consumers. It actually means that they are confusing the consumer and most definately will push the most expensive product to the consumer by telling them it is be better in some miniscule way that the consumer would not have noticed to begin with.

I do think that it is tough to give definitive bad reviews on diagnoses and outcomes of treatments due to the complexity of our bodies. However, I think it is completely fair to give reviews based on the experiences with the staff and office itself. If you wait an hour after your appointment was scheduled, if the nurse or doctor was rude, or if the office was not in a clean condition, I want to be able to read those reviews.

All horrible privacy issues aside, I'm not a big fan continuing to add expenses to vehicles. Airbags and safety systems are great, but is this really going add that much safety to a driver and passengers? We will have to pay for these black boxes when we buy the car, and what happens when the "black box" malfunctions? Does the car shutdown? When you get pulled over does the cop somehow check that the device is working and ticket you if it doesn't? I'm guessing the way it needs to be mounted and the eletronics won't make it a cheap device, but I could be wrong.

He makes comments about government control and implies that it is bad, which is usually something you hear from which side?

You make it sound like the elderly loves entitlement programs because it is a free lunch. Most elderly people "love" Social Security and Medicare because they need it to live. They paid into the programs as well, it isn't like someone decided later to give them a free bus pass because they're old.

I'm not arguing it either way, just answering the question: "My question though is why is there this extra tax on supplying health insurance for domestic partners?"

There isn't an extra tax. Domestic partners health premiums cannot be paid pretax like a spouse or child's can. The part of the premium for the partner is considered income (imputed income).

I'm guessing here, but I think the UK vs US issue here is attitudes towards time off.

It was strange that they did that, because Comedy Central has only aired the movies all at once, and has advertised it as a single movie. It was split up into 4 parts but played back to back.

I understand your point regarding incompetence, but the only reason we know about this is because this is a government agency. If it was private company the public would have no idea. You could make an argument regarding hiring standards between the government and private companies, but based on my experience private companies hire lazy and incompnent employees as well. Where is the public report from a Health Care company where mistakes cost hundreds of premium paying customers money or time to recoupe money due to sloppiness on the insurance company? Or worse, where are the reports where people were delayed necessary procedures? You won't see it because it is a private company. I agree the government may not do a great job managing heathcare, but this is not a valid example.