The Brutal Truth About America's Healthcare

[BaalsTears]

Never said I was a lawyer - did some work in poverty law but mostly worked in taxation. My writing is perfectly clear but you right wing delusionals keep reading into my posts rather than reading them.

I don't bother asking you what you do for a living so let's keep the personal life out of the equation. OK?
...

Law isn't a growth field. Many recent law school grads have made poor career choices.

Only about half of recent American law school students are able to find jobs practicing law even after incurring huge amounts of indebtedness to finance the cost of law school. Now those folks are sort of screwed in the sense that it will be more difficult for them to attain the living standard that they had hoped to reach.

The only recent law school graduates doing well are those who attend Tier One law schools like Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Virginia, etc. who are at the very top of their class. Law firms have the luxury of cherry picking.

If you are doing tax work you had better get an LL.M in Taxation from a place like NYU, or get a Masters in Taxation of the type CPAs get. Otherwise there isn't a future.

Don't get upset about being asked personal questions. That's how we get to know each other.

 

[gopher]

If you are doing tax work you had better get an LL.M in Taxation from a place like NYU, or get a Masters in Taxation of the type CPAs get. Otherwise there isn't a future.

The problem you referred to about underpaid/underemployed law graduates has been in existence for a long time. I'm into my 60s and expect no profitable future in tax or any other form of law.

 

[BaalsTears]

The problem you referred to about underpaid/underemployed law graduates has been in existence for a long time. I'm into my 60s and expect no profitable future in tax or any other form of law.

You're lucky to have lived during America's Golden Age of Power and Prosperity. Pity those who follow you who will never know what it was like. And pity those who follow who will be forced to live under the boot of the National Security/Internal Surveillance Complex.

 

[captain morgan]

Maybe in your delusionalism it hasn't been proven. But if you bothered to read my earlier link to David Stockman's admission that Reaganomics is welfare for the rich you would have known that what I wrote was the truth. When he got caught in his lies he was fired by Reagan in order to save face. But you are too peevish and too dishonest to admit it.

You are very careful to select individual points of reference which are small, individual variables in a very large, very complex equation.

I gave you a scenario/example recently about the bank bail-out.... I see that you are unable to rebut that logic, but rather provide another select reference to one point of view (Stockton).

Until such time you are capable of providing something tangible in terms of a cause/effect situation that supports your premise - all you are offering is highly subjective speculation at best.

 

[EagleSmack]

And just remember who won the election. While you're at it, look again at Walter's post which proved the majority of Americans want HCR.

Health Care Reform... NOT Obamacare.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Health Care Reform... NOT Obamacare.

Roger that. Almost anything would be better than the Insurance Industry Guaranteed Profit Act.

 

[EagleSmack]

New study finds 45,000 deaths annually linked to lack of health coverage | Harvard Gazette

A study which was proved to be so ridiculous.

HARVARD STUDY USES QUESTIONABLE METHODOLOGY, SAY CRITICS

From the article...

• The authors of the Harvard study interviewed the uninsured only once -- and never saw them again; this alone undermines the integrity of the findings.
• A decade later, the researchers assumed the participants were still uninsured and, if they died in the interim, lack of insurance was blamed as one of the causes.

Yet:

• Like unemployment, uninsurance happens to many people for short periods of time.
• Most people who are uninsured regain insurance within one year.
• The authors of the study did not track what happened to the insurance status of the subjects over the decade examined, what medical care they received or even the causes of their deaths.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

NCPA. Heh-heh.

And even the NCPA doesn't claim to have "proved" anything. That's pure EagleSmack.

 

[EagleSmack]

NCPA. Heh-heh.

And even the NCPA doesn't claim to have "proved" anything. That's pure EagleSmack.

Facts hurt eh?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Facts hurt eh?

You tell me. Does the fact that the NCPA doesn't even claim to have proved anything, but merely criticized the Harvard Report, hurt?

 

[EagleSmack]

I wonder how many people died WITH Health Insurance?

See the flaw? C'mon... you can do it!

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Run, run, run, BunnySmack. The NCPA criticism did not prove anything, it criticised the Harvard study. It didn't even claim to prove anything.

 

[EagleSmack]

Run, run, run, BunnySmack. The NCPA criticism did not prove anything, it criticised the Harvard study. It didn't even claim to prove anything.

Yes that is what I thought T. Back to insults because you know I am right and the study is flawed.

"Is this person we interviewed years ago dead? He is! Well he died because he didn't have health insurance then!"

Great study!

A friends father died the other day. He had health insurance. He died because he was insured.

What a clown you are.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Yes that is what I thought T. Back to insults because you know I am right and the study is flawed.

"Is this person we interviewed years ago dead? He is! Well he died because he didn't have health insurance then!"

Great study!

A friends father died the other day. He had health insurance. He died because he was insured.

What a clown you are.

Funny. If you could, you'd cite where the NCPA claimed to have proven something. Since it doesn't, you're a-dodging and a-ducking.

Wouldn't it be easier to just say "You're right, I misspoke. But the NCPA article points out significant flaws in the Harvard study?"

Ain't gonna happen, I calculate.

 

[captain morgan]

You tell me. Does the fact that the NCPA doesn't even claim to have proved anything, but merely criticized the Harvard Report, hurt?

Looks like the NCPA have proven that the statement by Himmelstein & Woolhandler "that nearly 45,000 Americans die each year due to lack of health care coverage" is egregious and unfounded based simply on the fundamental inadequacies of their model

 

[EagleSmack]

Funny. If you could, you'd cite where the NCPA claimed to have proven something. Since it doesn't, you're a-dodging and a-ducking.

Wouldn't it be easier to just say "You're right, I misspoke. But the NCPA article points out significant flaws in the Harvard study?"

Ain't gonna happen, I calculate.

No, I am not going to play your silly game that you try to get people to play when you are wrong.

The study was proven to be flawed and Obama Nation put their faith in it and still do hoping the uninformed will simply believe 45,000 Americans died because they didn't have health insurance. When in fact they just kept track of a mortality rate of people interviewed years before and never followed up if they had at some point in time got health insurance. Nor did they keep stats on the cause of death.

Over the years I have known many people to die with health insurance plans. They died because they were insured.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

No, I am not going to play your silly game that you try to get people to play when you are wrong.

The study was proven to be flawed and Obama Nation put their faith in it and still do hoping the uninformed will simply believe 45,000 Americans died because they didn't have health insurance. When in fact they just kept track of a mortality rate of people interviewed years before and never followed up if they had at some point in time got health insurance. Nor did they keep stats on the cause of death.

Over the years I have known many people to die with health insurance plans. They died because they were insured.

OK, we'll play it your way. Lack of health insurance has never contributed to a death in the United States.

Which makes me wonder, why do you carry health insurance?

 

[EagleSmack]

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Yes, I did say "OK, we'll play it your way."

That is "moving the goalposts." I'm abandoning my argument and approaching it from another angle.

I hope that helped.

Now, how many people a year do you think die, where lack of health insurance is a significant factor in their deaths?

 

[JLM]

Yes, I did say "OK, we'll play it your way."

That is "moving the goalposts." I'm abandoning my argument and approaching it from another angle.

I hope that helped.

Now, how many people a year do you think die, where lack of health insurance is a significant factor in their deaths?

Five?