Phil K

"Let's see, should I scamper off to the solid looking neve to my right, or try my luck with this thin sheet of snice with water running underneath it?"

Sorry Kev, that was too easy to resist. We do differ in opinion, but in a relatively civil way.

Bro - didn't you throw out your logic long ago?

Exactly. I can think of several studies i've read looking at elderly care and medicares costs per person that have all shown that it's much less expensive to pay up front with prevention, monitoring, and support than to pay on the back end for acute cases. Even going locally I had a chance to talk to some folks who worked at Harborview and were well versed in the topic and some local work had shown the cost in ER visits for local homeless folks per year was more than 2x what the cost would be to house them. Right now these same folks are all getting healthcare, it's just a shell game of when, where and who picks up the tab. I'm not trying to pick on you in particular - but I'll respond to your post since you seem like a smart, reasonable guy and you seem to be sympathetic to the arguments put forward by everyone else who supports the mandate. Which studies are you referring to? Systematic reviews of the costs and benefits of "prevention" do not support any such generalization. "Our findings suggest that the broad generalizations made by many presidential candidates can be misleading. These statements convey the message that substantial resources can be saved through prevention. Although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not." http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0708558 The notion that the uninsured are the primary driver of cost shifting that other payers have to bear is also false. That distinction belongs to medicare and medicaid, both of which systematically pay less than it costs to provide care for those covered by the programs, and the costs of the shortfall are passed onto private payers. Cost shifting from Medicare and Medicaid adds roughly 15% to private payer premiums(1). The uninsured add less than two percent(2). (1)http://publications.milliman.com/research/health-rr/pdfs/hospital-physician-cost-shift-RR12-01-08.pdf (2)http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7809.pdf Finally - if you support mandating the purchase of health insurance on the grounds that those who do not do so are imposing costs on everyone else, how would you feel about the government mandating that everyone in the country maintain a healthy body weight and fining those who refuse to comply with the mandate on the basis that they are imposing costs on everyone else? It's not clear to me how a logically consistent person could support the former and not the latter. 'Couple of points: The NEJM article you linked to discusses the topic of whether or not preventative care, increased screenings, etc. reduces overall costs. Not the effect of cost shifting for unreimbursed (uninsured and unable to self pay) care, which is more what I was referring to. This does contribute significantly to facility "overhead" which is eventually paid for somehow, by somebody. I just finished a good quick read on the subject; The House Of Hope And Fear by Audrey Young, MD who is an ER doc at Harborview. Their policy of not turning any patient away means that they are the local medical safety net, and end up seeing many indigents who would have better outcomes at vastly lower costs if they had access to (and chose to use) basic medical care before they end up face down in some alley. A big part of the problem is that many of these people consistently make bad choices in their lives, and to some degree, we either all are going to end up paying for those choices, or as said above, let 'em die lake rats in the street. I choose the former. YMMV. The basic premise of a universal insurance pool is that the costs are spread across the whole of society, and that to some degree, yes, healthy folks, people who make better lifestyle choices, do share some of that burden. We do live in a society where too many people make too many bad choices, but that is a vast, stubborn problem which is likely beyond the means of the CC.com brain trust to solve. As to charging a "fat tax" for our BMI challenged brethren, sure go for it. But then, we'd have to start putting premiums on everything under the sun. Smoker? Going to cost you. Enjoy more than 1 drink per day? Pay up. Climber? Mmmmmm, no free ride for you bucko. Terminally stupid? Pay up front, please. See where that leads?

Kev, if you really were a simpleton that would be excusable. But you are just willfully ignorant like 99% of the Tea-tard/Ron Paul/Faux News kooks. You could have a clue, but you refuse to; shame on you.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner. Or would that be socialism? Like the Veterans Administration.

What people seem not to understand, is that by having a disproportionate percentage of the population uninsured, not only are "we" (the insured population) paying for the inevitable costs of caring for the uninsured, but are paying much more when they show up at the ER with advanced diseases that could have been treated cheaper and yielded better outcomes had they had access to basic medical services to begin with. That's a big part of why the US pays more as percent GDP than any other country for poorer results. I'd like to see how the righties come up with the figures which they're trying to terrorize the Tea-tards with now which describes this a giant huge new tax burden on ordinary 'Muricans. I call BS. It's not like they aren't pathological liars already.

Classic spray is back! In-your-face personal attacks, Boner's ineffable logic, calling out the libtards as jackbooted thugs... You gotta love it.

Ryder Hesjedal!

Not that I really care, but from what I hear they DO suck......

I doubt it has anything to do with risk and is just about cutting "students" slack. Would you be happy if they offered a senior citizen discount too? :-) Nanny State!

And cat lovers.

You've checked the weather forecast?

Yes, I read that too. And the kid's dad was active in local SAR. Yikers.

Here is a link to the Seattle Mountain Rescue January '74 report. SMR January '74 No mention of fresh snow, but creaking, tottering seracs seem to be on the menu. As I suspected, WS, the owner of the suspicious sling was no other than Bill Summner. I wonder what kind of shennagins ol' Bill was up to.

Is Mick going to audition for the California Raisins anytime soon?

Just kidding, don't really give a rat's patooty.

I'm not too happy about the 2012 Mariners.

So true. And where will the next generation of 5.8 leader go to tick a 5.10a? Exit 38?

This kind of BS wouldn't be happening if Herman Cain were Prez.

We've gotta get some spraymasters on this ASAP! 'Bone.... JayB.... j_b..... KKK....Tvashie.....let's get on the ball guys! How we going to fix the deficit if you'all don't figure this out?

I think it's not so much a matter of footwear as "technique." When you put your foot on a hold and it sticks, relatively little polishing action occurs. Put a newb on something that they can't reasonably climb, and watch their feet scuffle, scrape, and slide around. That's how you buff granite. Anyone been on Flying Circus lately? Those hoser guided groups hang a TR on it all effing day long and let their clients thrutch themselves to exhaustion on something they have no good reason to be on. They've ground all that Squamish crystalline goodness down to snot. I've been wanting to rant about that for a while now.

Sold to MarkMcP.

Much as it surprises me, I have to halfway agree w/ Serenity here. (There's a first time for nearly everything, apparently.) Having a draft, one that young Georgie W or Darth Cheny types couldn't so easily duck out of would probably make the old white guys in DC less likely to unleash the dogs of war. It would certainly change the dynamic of opposition within the general population. One of the biggest reasons we saw tens of thousands of young people (and others) protesting the police action in Vietnam (not a "Declared War" BTW) was that most young men at the time knew that they stood a fair chance of being sent over. 'Kinda riled up the parents of said young men too. SSG Bales is a sad case. If he's guilty, it's a horrific crime, but I see him more as a tragic figure than a monster.