My state, NC, is letting the Feds do it and doesn't have it's own. A recent newspaper article says that we are paying an additional 3.5% fee on our insurance policies paid to the fed that would not be there if we had a state exchange.
And to reply to my own post, on the whole wki page that I cite, there is a single Cat 3 storm mentioned hitting NY. Not much data to draw a pattern from. Since you mention Robert Moses State Park, which is not in NYC, you must be looking at all of Long Island. If you expand to include Cat 2 you will find storms from
1904 (unnamed)
1960 (Donna)
1985 (Gloria)
1991 (Bob)
Sounds like strong hurricanes hitting the NY coast are getting more frequent.
Cite your sources
According to this wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_hurricanes the storm of 1893 was cat 1 and Hurricane Hazel in 1954 created the strongest winds measured in NYC. It doesn't look like a clear trend of decreasing strength of hurricanes to me.
Last year's Blizzcon was tremendously popular. So much so that their servers were unable to handle the strain of fans competing for 15,000 available tickets. This year, Blizzard was more prepared; they made an additional 5,000 tickets available and set up a queue so that the transaction servers weren't overwhelmed. CEO Mike Morhaime said during the keynote address that if you weren't able to get into the queue within 30 seconds of its opening, the tickets were sold out before your turn came. Tens of thousands more chose to order the pay-per-view coverage, demonstrating the extraordinary enthusiasm felt for Blizzard's games. Their presentations didn't disappoint. Read on for details on the status of StarCraft II, Diablo III, World of Warcraft: Cataclysm, and the new Battle.net. It's divided into sections by game in case you're only interested in one or two of them.
The main difference is that health care is *insurance*. Insurance only works when more people participate than actually need it (or take less money out than others). Can you imagine being in a skiing accident and needing $100k in medical bills and being the only participant in your medical policy. You'd have to pay $100k + overhead.
If only sick people were a part of the insurance then the costs for that care would be averaged out to only be paid by the sick people.
The question is, should healthy people be forced to subsidize the care of those that are chronically ill?
Nah, healthy people won't need coverage for skiing accidents or acute leukemia. And if they did then they'd be winners since they only participate in the healthy people's insurance pool which would have lower premiums than the sick people's pool.
Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
