AtticaFlinch

I'm with you one the first part of the paragraph, but I don't follow you on the last part. I don't think deregulation is the way to go. I think setting reasonable price controls is critical. Out of curiosity, what percentage of the cost of insurance does your company subsidize? Meaning, if you pay $2,200/year, how much does the employee pay? The reason I ask is because if I was single, or at least the only person on my plan, I'd be paying out-of-pocket that much on top of my employer's contribution... and I work for an enormous company with a ton of buying power. We use United Healthcare though, and I couldn't hate this UHC more. I loathe my health plan. If you think about it, we already have a three tier system: those with great insurance, often with supplements; those with standard employer subsidized coverage which is often mediocre at best; those with no insurance. The level of care is vastly different for each tier. Ben Taub's emergency room is one of the busiest in the country, but if you have insurance, the ambulance will park next door at Memorial. If you have the best insurance, you'll probably end up at a place like Methodist. Places like Ben Taub rarely see people with insurance because the care there is so spotty. That place is a wellness factory, and they churn patients out like an assembly line. If you don't have insurance and if your injury isn't immediately life threatening, you may find yourself sitting in the waiting room for up to 24 hours. If you have insurance, you're pushed to the front of the line, regardless of how badly you've been hurt. Also, I have no idea what a Z Pac is, but I imagine it's already cheaper and more rapidly available in Mexico than here. I won't bother to locate a source on this, but I've read/watched on TV/been told as hearsay (I don't know which) that our prescription drug prices are the highest in the world.

Sorry to hear about your grandfather. I know nobody prefers arbitrary death sentences, but like you, I'm not bound by the artificial sanctity dictates either. That's why I hope when it's my time to pass from this mortal coil, euthanasia has progressed from a political taking point to a cultural reality. When people have the ability to choose when it's their time to go, death becomes less arbitrary, and potentially more dignified. As it stands right now, if I develop some sort of terminal illness, the only option I have to not become a burden on my family or the entire healthcare system is some form of ghastly suicide... and life insurance won't pay out on that. By my figures with current law, that leaves me with two options. Either I go skydiving and remove my pack prior to the safety mechanism automatically deploying the parachute or take a trip to the arctic and get into a tickle fight with a polar bear. All other "accidents" I have so far imagined have too big a margin of error where I could survive, alive with a terminal illness and disfigured or paralyzed. My health insurance costs are through the roof. Just to cover myself, my wife and my <1 year old child, I spend $5,200 per year. And a huge chunck of my insurance costs are subsidized by my employer. There's no telling how much my insurance premiums actually cost. I'd bet my employer covers anywhere from a third to half the costs which means my insurance costs anywhere from $7,666 to $10,400 per year. Not to mention, every time anyone goes to the doctor or gets a prescription filled, there's another cost associated with the co-pay. If we go to the emergency room or even so much as ride in an ambulance, the costs escalate even further. Given my wife's current pregnancy and her need to regularly visit the doctor, and couple that with my daughter's regular check-ups at the pediatrician, I figure my total personal out-of-pocket insurance costs exceed ten grand per year. And, before 2010 is out, I'll have a second child who'll be adding even more to those numbers. The cost of healthcare is out of hand. We pay more on average than the residents of any other country for healthcare, and I suppose I wouldn't be bothered by that if our system was considered the best in the world. The WHO (back in 2000 - they no longer rank healthcare systems) has the US ranked 37th in the world in terms of healthcare quality. And, I attribute this to the fact our system is fundamentally flawed. Our system is an industry. Our system is designed to put profits over lives and health, and until that entire flawed premise is overhauled, our system will continue to be costly and the quality will continue to be average at best. And, I can see no way to improve upon this (without a complete socialism overhaul) unless we eliminate the insurers. They drive the price points, and they determine the level of care given to individuals. Then, after we throw out these misguided middlemen, we can begin an honest dialog about end-of-life care. I'm all for allowing indivuals and their families to decide whether euthanasia or hospice care makes more sense for themselves, but it's ridiculous we spend so much keeping alive people who've moved well past the point of usefulness to society. One example I'll give is if a person is in their 90s and develops terminal cancer, I seriously don't think it makes any sense to treat it. At that advanced an age, they need to be allowed to choose the hospice or the needle. That's it. It may not be popular to say, but if the economics of the situation is really the most important aspect of the healthcare debate, that issue needs to be addressed honestly.

I don't have an Android, but I do have a Storm. The only app I cannot live without (anymore, now that I have it) is Google Maps. It works better than a GPS in my opinion, and the latest version is voice capable. I would warn that you be careful what you install though. Some programs, even from trusted sources, will screw your phone up. A case in point for me was when I downloaded ESRI's GPS app for the Storm. It worked beautifully. It gave me precise coordinates for my location (the standard geodetic degree-minute-second system, WGS 84 and NAD 83), plus it could track my routes and later upload my plotted points as a layer in ArcGIS. The app was brilliant. I loved this app. The only problem was once I downloaded and installed it, my screen never went black. With this app, my phone had only about an hour of life with each full charge. I don't know anymore what my point was, but I really hated to see that app go. I really wish it was more stable and worked better on my phone. I have not come across a better, more useful app than that. Maybe that will work well with your Android. Also, if data usage isn't a concern for you, Pandora is sorta cool. I've also got Baby Go which keeps the kid entertained when she absolutely will not leave my phone alone. Considering you've also got a couple small kids, it would probably be useful for you too. Ever since I installed Baby Go, my kid doesn't rub the phone screenside down on the fireplace bricks anymore.

Considering this is an American based forum, and soccer (excuse me, real football) isn't isn't in the top four most popular or profitable sports here, I don't understand why fans are confused by the fact other people are understandably perplexed by the fans' fervor. Soccer doesn't have to justify itself, but it sure would be nice if the fans didn't take such a haughty attitude about their sport. I think American soccer fans like to keep the sport esoteric, in that it allows them to carry an elitist attitude about it. I said I thought the game probably was fun, but that I just don't get it. I'm not pooping all over the game. For some reason though, you've leant the game some level of mythical status akin in cultural importance as the ballgame was to the ancient Mesoamericans. This is a topic about the World Cup. Why should it be off-limits to ask why the game is so popular? Humans are naturally curious creatures, and I think there are a number of us who feel like we're missing out on something that 5 billion people in the world already do enjoy. Why would it be weird that I'd express an opinion about not understanding that? I have Canadian and Coloradoan coworkers that don't dismiss my lack of understanding in hockey. Rather than say, "You don't get it, then don't watch it," they've tried to explain the sport, and we've even been to an Aeros game together. As a result, I appreciate the sport more than I did previously. And to the people who always inevitably point to the fact that soccer is the world's most popular sport as a sign of why it's a good sport, I'm going to pull a Niche and point out that this is the logical fallacy known as argumentum ad numerum. McDonald's has sold billions and billions of burgers, but despite the number served, it means neither that their hamburgers are good or good for you. As for why it's so popular, I thank you 20thStDad for answering my question. It's popular because it's easy to play, the rules are simple and the plays aren't complex. At least somebody answered my general inquiry. Now, where's a good place to go to watch a game where I might find people who don't take the game seriously, and where I can act like a suburban housewife during the Super Bowl and say "Why did that guy do that?" with out getting dirty looks?

Ricco, that's how I understand it too. That's why I, as a proponent of healthcare reform, think this reform law is a turd.

Well, that makes sense. Considering most people don't have insurance unless their employer is subsidizing a substantial portion of the costs, and considering so many people are currently unemployed, it stands to reason prices will have to climb in order for the insurers to not show negative growth or financial losses. Of course, these increases are fueling consumer (voter) anger, which could lead to demands for even more drastic healthcare reforms. The need to adhere to traditional measures of capitalistic success (ie growth and profitability) may end up causing the insurance industry to implode upon itself. The insurance industry is Ouroboros.

Right across the street from those newish yuppie townhomes? If it's true, I seriously doubt this will go over very well.

Every time I've watched soccer, it seems the ball movement has no purpose whatsoever. No one seems particularly interested in scoring, nor executing plays, nor doing much really beyond running to the ball and then kicking it out of bounds. Now, I do realize this is not the case, and I also realize if my brain wasn't attuned to American football, basketball and baseball, they would look equally as haphazard and purposeless. I guess I just can't appreciate a game if I don't understand the rules of it or any form of strategy. And, I think at 32, my brain isn't interested in learning rules and strategies for any new games. It's unfortunate, because I bet it's fun.

Maybe not stay in a major conference, but it may have to do with a bid to leave the C-USA. I suspected this too. With Nebraska, Colorado and Missouri gone from the Big 12 (9?), and if the rest of the teams decide not to jump ship for some other conference, that leaves room available for another competitive team or two to join. UH is an obvious choice, and maybe the guarantee of a new stadium is necessary to ensure their inclusion.

I'm not saying there aren't plenty of people in the US who don't love the sport. I'm just saying I don't get it.

We can start by passing a city ordinance requiring women to wear sensible shoes to the bars. If the city can mandate air particulate requirements within the bars, surely it's no stretch for the city government to mandate dress codes as well.

I'll watch this with as much fervor as I'd had for the Winter Olympics.

But they pay for your scrap metal with two dollar bills. Two dollar bills!

I'm more inclined to give positive points now that people can see them. I often just don't think about it, but I don't want to be considered stingy because of my absent-mindedness. I'll probably never giver out a negative rating though, regardless of my opinion of what's written, and regardless of whether or not people knew I gave it. That's just not my style. Anyhow, considering I've got 5,000 positive points to spread around today, everybody who's posted on this thread gets a taste of Flinch love.

And we could employ the former inmates as tour operators: "Don't buy weed from that dude. He only sells bags of oregano."

Ah, now I see it, right at the top. A little reading comprehension would go a long way here - "What should Harris County do..." Well then, considering federal and state reform is off the table here, I suggest the powers that be at Harris County discourage the various county police forces from arresting minor drug offenders and other non-violent offenders. If they ain't hurtin' anybody, leave 'em alone. I'll take the Jacksonian view on this. If the federal and state governments make the bad laws that clog the jails, then the federal and state governments can enforce the bad laws and house the inmates on their own.

Nothing screams "Pacific" to me quite like anything from Oklahoma and Texas. I say bring back the SWC.

The new mobile version looks great on my Storm. Is there a way to give rep points with it though? I couldn't locate the plus sign. And it loads really quickly. (couldn't find the edit button either)

I wasn't aware reform was limited exclusively to the local level.

I'd also recommend decriminalizing all illicit drugs as well as a number of other non-violent offenses. I'd stiffen the penalty for white collar crimes though, so I doubt my solution would solve the overcrowding problem. However, it would put the most dangerous criminals behind bars.

It's the guest room, and what can I say, I've got demanding guests.

I've got an extra bedroom available, and I'll take the going rate to lease it to the county. You gotta do what you can to make ends meet these days.

This thread is turning into the world's worst porn.

That's it! Sorry to spoil the surprise, but you can only keep this level of genius under wraps for so long till it explodes into world consciousness like Fat Man and Little Boy. You are the Enola Gaye and HAIF is your Nagasaki.

Eh... maybe. I think you should just do away with the rating system altogether. Some people around here are already sensitive enough as is. Or, put a limiter on the number of positive and negatives each person can give another person with either a time limit or some other governor. It people couldn't give or take points at will, that would probably be the best way to eliminate what IronTiger's referring to.