A guy in the Chesapeake

Members
  • Content Count

    19,885
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by A guy in the Chesapeake

  1. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Anyone ever tie a kite to a SOT kayak?

    Was just wondering whether or not anyone had hooked up a kiteboarding kite to a kayak? Seems that it might work, and eliminate the need to have outriggers ala the Hobie AI. Caveat - if this is a dumb question, mea culpa - I have ZERO experience in this. I ordered a trainer kite a couple days ago - and was just thinking about different ways it might be put to use.
  2. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gop-lawmakers-wear-pearls-gun-control-new-hampshire-republicans-pearl-necklaces-hearing/?fbclid=IwAR3ZrsXv2PqSpsNUw0f2wyYAHdJCWkrAl8souF1PogNDqaoGKhZUsEQiXhk
  3. A guy in the Chesapeake

    House votes in favor of illegal immigrant voting

    What has either party done legislatively besides kick the can down the road since 1986, D?
  4. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Drip Drip Drip

    Bent - It's funny to see how invested you've become in trying to discredit my comments. Keep watching - I'm sure I'll give you more to work with as conversations progress.
  5. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Ocasio

    We agree - lots of opportunities for cost reduction: Reduce over-utilization ( IE ER visits for a cold), standardization of administrative proceses/procedures/adjudication factors, tort reform, moving from FFS to outcome-based billing, pharmaceutical price controls, standardized pricing - ie, an EKG oughta cost what an EKG costs - regardless of where it's being done or whether the person has good insurance or not.
  6. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Title required work around.

    I didn't understand that - that's an idiotic constraint.
  7. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Drip Drip Drip

    So - the offender's demeanor and remorsefulness are factors that should be considered as well? We agree - and I said so - the people responsible for the mortgage crisis are a group that come to mind. The intent of my original post was to get those who'd previously said that "non-violent offenders shouldn't be incarcerated" to talk about what they felt was an appropriate consideration of those mitigating circumstances, as well as to point out that absolute positions are rarely correct. I don't think that "disagreement with my political position" is a factor that is an appropriate sentencing consideration.
  8. A guy in the Chesapeake

    A Scandal For The Ages is About to Explode

    Hoping for some pointers, O?
  9. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Ocasio

    Thanks for the link - finally, something substantive to discuss. From your cite: "The Mercatus report’s author took issue with Sanders’ focus on that figure. Charles Blahous said that to come up with that estimate, Mercatus used a relatively generous assumption about how well Sanders’ plan will end up controlling health care costs. It assumes that provider payment will be reduced to Medicare levels, that negotiation with prescription drugmakers will generate significant savings, and that administrative costs will be cut from 13 to 6 percent. However, in an alternative scenario in which cost-control works less effectively (see Table 4) Mercatus found that over the same 10-year period, national health expenditures would actually increase by $3.252 trillion compared to current law. So while the number Sanders chose really does appear in the report, he’s cherry-picked the more flattering of two estimates. Sanders’ bill "indicates that health providers would be paid at Medicare’s payment rates, which are about 40 percent lower than those paid by private insurance," Blahous said. "Obviously, immediately cutting payments to health care providers by roughly 40 percent would lower national health spending." But would cuts that large actually occur (and without other negative consequences, such as mass retirements of doctors unwilling to accept lower fees)? This is where independent experts express caution. Sustained cuts as deep as those projected in the Mercatus model Sanders pointed to are "not likely feasible," said John Holahan, a fellow in the health policy center at the Urban Institute. His Urban Institute colleague, Linda Blumberg, agreed, saying it’s a "pretty heroic assumption to say that you can dial payment rates down to those levels system-wide politically." So - the answer is likely somewhere close to that - and understanding the basis for the variance is where rational discussion of options can occur. I personally think that expanding Medicaid/Medicare, w/a graduated premium schedule would have been significantly more effective and palatable to that part of the public who are now paying for ACA's largesse. So, IMHO - we ought to figure out the most efficacious approach, while balancing costs/benefits - and then figure our the best way to pay for it. I think that the best way is going to be a combination of increased taxes ( line items, not sin taxes) and premiums - and that if it can be demonstrated that the indivudal outlay is teh same or reduced? That the basis for rational objection is gone. I don't think that Sanders is right - I don't think that "medicare for all" WILL reduce costs - individually or collectively, because I don't think that the assumptions he makes will survive implementation.
  10. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Title required work around.

    Is that process less onerous than declaring it abandoned on the property and filing claim to it on that basis? Just curious - I don't understand the timeframes/costs associated with either option.
  11. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Drip Drip Drip

    Tone police? Damn straight - and I'll offer no apologies for that. There's no hypocrisy in pointing out the inconsistency of the people who suggest that non-violent offenders should't be incarcerated while calling for Manafort to have been handed a heavier sentence purely because they oppose his politics while. I think that the people who took bailouts for being "too big to fail" did more damage to more people than most single-victim violent offenders, and thus are as deserving, for different reasons, to be isolated from society as well. Thus my statement: "If the jail/no-jail standard is the violent nature of the crime - " It's funny to see many of you disingenuous fucks want to crucify someone for political hate while excusing others who's crimes are "non-violent". " Perhaps you take offense to my calling the disingenuous fucks disingenuous fucks? As to your assertion that those you agree with are pulling the basis for that disagreement out of their collective asses - here's a few from the forum search function -
  12. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Ocasio

    Show me the #s - and the methodoogy behind them, for the US and it's population. If they exist - then THAT should be the basis for the conversation, and who pays for it how is an almost equal consideration. The bullshit of "the left wants government to pay for everything" and " the right are evil bastards who want to keep minorities too sick to fight back" is just that - bullshit.
  13. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Why AOC ?? .. a theoretical discussion

    Don't want to take up the screen real-estate to quote your post, Lark - but, I do want to thank you for a thoughtful response. BTW - I could support the opstions as you've presented them, as long as the considerations for efficacy that you mentioned are implemented as well.
  14. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Drip Drip Drip

    So you're the topic police now? Go piss up a rope. Several people commented on the fairness of his sentence, and a desire to see more jail time than he got. Many of those same individuals have stated that they don't think that incarceration is warranted for non-violent offenders. Seems to be a bit of inconsistency in those two opinions, hence the question.
  15. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Ocasio

    Edited to remove a stupid comment and add a little more context. That it created some benefit for some folks doesn't negate that it's a POS that didn't come close to addressing it's intended objectives, it was shoved thru on a party line vote to saitsfy the insurance lobby. My costs have increased 300% since its inception with a significant reduction in benefits. There are 2 things that the ACA did well - eliminated exclusions due to pre-existing conditions, and provided the ability for adult children to be covered on their parents' plans 'til age 26. NEITHER of those things has done anything to address the cost of health care delivery ( as was touted as the main selling point ). The same things could have been accomplished much simpler and more cheaply with greater overall benefit by simply expanding Medicaid and establishing a graduated premium schedule. BUT - "Obama's Legacy" and the appearance of "giving something to the helpless" were more important considerations for the Ds.
  16. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Tom Clancy Books

    His estate on the Chesapeake is for sale: https://www.realtor.com/news/celebrity-real-estate/tom-clancy-maryland-estate/
  17. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Grilling 2018

    If we're back to grill choices? I still think that the Big Green Egg is the best thing long-term - BUT - ya gotta be patient getting it warmed up. Gas grills? I've not seen any that will last outside more than 5 years.
  18. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Jussie Smollett

    Can you learn how to quote?
  19. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Ocasio

    If they exist - ( and I question that ) - then they ought to be at the forefront of any discussion. The ACA sucks - in almost every way it can be considered. I don't want to see another poorly conceived, even more poorly executed bureaucratic mess being suggested to address shortcomings in such a major component of our society and economy. If we're going to make a change - then we ought to make the right change, for the right reasons, as efficiently as possible.
  20. A guy in the Chesapeake

    House votes in favor of illegal immigrant voting

    OK - I appreciate the explanation. I think we're generally in agreement, though I still don't think that recent illegal immigrants deserve to be granted legal status outside established procedures just because they got across the border, and under no circumstances do I believe that "undocumented residents" should be afforded a vote. You can search my prior comments on the topic - I outlined what I thought was a fair and equitable approach.
  21. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Jussie Smollett

    You're both right - Smollett made up the image of the attackers as a means to denigrate that segment of the population. Aside from the thrill of "sticking it to them" - I suspect that his primary motivation for that was he anticipated that the greatest outrage and sympathy to his plight would come from framing the "attack" as being motivated by racism and homophobia, a common projection.
  22. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Jussie Smollett

    If this happens? Then those who are defending his behavior will have made an incredibly telling admission about their motivation.
  23. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Why AOC ?? .. a theoretical discussion

    Excellent point, I agree. If you don't mind, expound a little on your explanation of "underestimating".
  24. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Ocasio

    Yup - J28 - I think you're a bit outta line shittin' on Cap, he's not in the same boat as Jiblets or 3 in 1.
  25. A guy in the Chesapeake

    Ocasio

    So - the messenger is more important than the factual accuracy of the message? You're grasping here, I suspect that it might be because you mistook my comments as a slam against Mz AOC, rather than the idea that actually presenting empirical measurements and supportable facts is a better defense for a position than is baseless character attacks against that position's opponents. If she's run #s that show that "medicare for all IS cheaper"? Then THAT is what everyone should be talking about. If those #s don't exist? Then nobody ought to be making the claim.