Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
YW fan
there are many minhagim with sefira. some keep from begginign until LAg baomer some until Lad Ba’aomer some from Rosh chodesh until then end etc.
(as an aside “listening to music” is a later addition to the minhag as well though dancing is brought earlier so your point stands)
Similarly there are many minhagim with Lag Baomer. According to the Mechaber there is no dancing at all not by day nor night. According to the Mishna berura’s understanding of the Remah you are right about Lag baomer night. But not everyone agrees (MB also brings cholkim that haircuts are allowed at night, no reason for haircuts to be different than music)
in short all of sefira is based on minhagim, and there are different minhagim
“You can do avoda zora for darkei shalom?! You have to die rather than do avoda zora!”
who did Avoda Zarah?
thats awful! though maybe start a new thread about that?
“Neville: Every Ben Torah has a little bit Joseph in them.”
Thats true but our avoda is to be kovesh our Joseph and stand up for whats right and emes
LF
could be that could explain why I don’t remeber
thanksLF
“Way back those days (40+) no one had any festivities besides Stolin and maybe some other very few.”I dont remember a fire in the 90’s. They had music and dancing yes. Are you sure they had a fire 40 years ago?
Seems unlikely
Can you provide any primary source ?
There must be some mention of this in the past 100 years“He is counted twice since his two terms were non-consecutive.”
I never understood that:
Counting Presidents can be done by counting people in which case Biden is the 45th person to serve as President
If we count terms. Then Washington was President twice, he won 1788, 1792 Adams was the third president Jefferson the 4th and 5th etc .
Why do terms matter only when non-consecutive. Either count people or termsI thought this thread was going to be about Ozempic
“If they decide the case under the Civil Rights Act…”
right, and that was exactly the question the court was asked: “Whether the court should disapprove the more-than-de-minimis-cost test for refusing religious accommodations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act ….”
now of course the court is required to specificly address that anc could just ignore that aspect. But it is deffinitly to premature to conclude, as you did, that “A precedent would not be that significant”
“may” not be that significant, yes its possible that it may not. “Would not” No way to determine at thsi time
RE
Nope you got it wrong. You didn’t look carefully and mixed up zeros and O’s (which was my point I’m just surprised the point came across so well )
Question was
40 + 2O – 0 x O = ?
where O = 2Translates to
40 + 2(2) – 0 x 2 = ?
40 + 4 – 0 =44But the truth is its not your fault it is hard to tell zero’s and O’s apart, and (near?) impossible to do so in writing. So the fault is not in you but in the unclear question.
Similarly 2x/3y-1 if x=9 and y=2 ?
Is unclear:
is it 2x/(3y-1) ? ( = 3.6)
is it (2x/3y) -1 ? (= 2)
(2x/3)y-1 (=11)
2(x/3)(y-1) (= 6)
among othersGranted some of these make morse sense than others but more than one could have been meant. when typed out it is impossible to convey in a way that is clear to all what the numerator/dividend is and what the denominator/divisor .
So none of these answers (3.6, 2, 11, 6) are incorrect per se*. The question is unclear much like 40 + 2O – 0 x O = ? (especially when handwritten) is unclear
*Ok some are silly, but definitely more than one especially the first 2 can be equally valid
Well put Yserbius
PEMDAS isn’t optional it is a rule like + means addition
using / for division is ambiguous . It would be like saying solve this equation
40 + 2O – 0 x O = ?
where O = 2while solving it here is doable, imagine it handwritten
Akuperma
It would depend on what how court decides if more narrowly limited to 1st amendment then I agree witjh you
but if they add that it violates the civil rights act of 64, somewhat overuling TWA v Hardison that seems significant“But my statement is fact, each new supreme court ruling further entrenches it,”
absolutely. It is a fact Ive said many times. no argument at all
but the same way courts can entrench it, courts can dislodge it.“As for my practical answer i would have left it on the books.”
thanks for the reply
Kudos on the consistencyKriger
“I live in the town of Beitar, Israel.”
guns are very regulated in Israel. If we enacted their regulation Id be fine with that.“America feast on violence,”
this isnt the answer. Europeans have the same violence Japanese movies have more They simply don’t have the same number of mass shootings as we do. This theory doesnt hold water“(might as well have said “since everyone murders anyway , do you support….””
Yes I agree that would be a fine comparison. though I used a better one .
Would you accept that argument for abortion.
A year ago it was legal. States made laws making it illegal. why isnt this something that worries you? Or is it?you said you are ” more worried about millions of law abiding citizens being persecuted for something that is currently legal”
You mentioned to Yserbius
“First everyone here with their heads in the clouds are ignoring the fact that the second amendment is only becoming more entrenched in law”
The oppsoite is true./ IVe pointed out over and over how the reinterpretation of the second amendment as applying to ordinary citizens is relatively new.
Granted at this point it is more of a historical argument and not practically too significant since the court gets to decide , though a new court can undo Heller and revert to the original interrepations. The Left should approach guns the way the right did abortion.
(Though probably wouldn’t be quite as successful I dont think anti-gun camp is quite as fired up as the anti-abortion camp)mentsch
would you accept that argument in any other realm?
Eg making abortion illegal would just make criminals out of all the people who will continue to get abortions therefore they shouldn’t be banned? as history has shown, will they be more likely to ignore the govt, and all you have accomplished is making millions of citizens into criminals
“Rav miller was saying this since the 70s btw.”
I dont beleive Rav Miller would have said something so dumb
I’m moche for the Kavod of Rav Miller.Dr P
” it seems as if different textbooks teach the order of operations differently.”This hasnt been my experience. And today although people calim there are nobody has ever been able to identify these alleged textbooks (although IVe asked)
I think people (myself included) forget the order of operations (most of us havent done these kind of problems in decades) So we get the question wrong. Then when reminded we feel silly that we got an elemntray school problem wrong.
Instead of saying “” wow cant beleive I forgot the rule” The responses are “There must be other rules” “the rules are made up its up to each person if they should follow them ” etc (these arent verbatim quotes from this thread)“(I can not recall seeing a textbook that gave an order of operation that would yield a number other than 1 but from Google searches it seems like there are.)”
I could not find any such rule for order of operations. (a few posters said “PEMDAS is a convention, not a hard and fast rule.” and “Following the system where multiplication is deemed a higher order operation than division:” These are verbatim quotes. and not based on any thing real
BUT
however I did find some debate over Flaming’s Pitfal #2 with some fellow (who seemed well reaosned) arguing that 8÷2(4) was not the same as 8÷2×4 (which would absolutly be 16) rather that 2(4) was one unit equaling 8 (thus leaving 8÷8 = 1) not two seperate units 2×4 (which would require first dividng the 8 by 2)
For interesting sources see Slate’s “What Is the Answer to That Stupid Math Problem on Facebook?
And why are people so riled up about it?” (3/12/13) where he argues (wrongly in my opinion) “none is incorrect.” the thrust of the article is that histoically there are different ocnventions, and sure in 1919 a different answer may have been correct but that has no bearing on today.Dr P
“but who has the authority to make this convention”
I’m not sure. but the fact that every math textbook says same is a good indication.
” and what happens if someone doesn’t follow it? (I.e. what are the consequences going to be? Can an architect be sued if the builder uses a different convention and the building collapses?)”
I would think for sure. If Architect said using my convention 3 + 2 = 6, or 1 + 2 × 3 = 9 . Of course he could be sued. neither of those are correct.
(When documenting a process, I personally put in parentheses very generously to avoid any ambiguity.)
emes
“1. Following the system where multiplication is deemed a higher order operation than division:… Neither answer is more correct or better, they just reflect a different set of rules for parsing the equation.”
Can you provide a source for this system? I have never heard of it (except from people who misremembered/ never learnt PEMDAS)
“Reading the comments here amaze me how convoluted people are in their thinking.”
Same!
This very topic amazed me when I first encountered it. I still find it fascinating
“PEMDAS is a convention, not a hard and fast rule.”
I’m not sure about that
In order to have meaningful symbolic math we all have to use the same conventions, thus making them hard and fast rules.Otherwise suppose I say + means divide or that 5 means take the square root , or when unsure just take the last number convert it to a letter and reply with a bird starting with that letter
In order for math to work we all have to agree what to do first when faced with say: 1 + 2 × 3
If there is no “rule” then 9, 7 or for that matter 11, 5.4, 6.3333456 and chicken all become equally correct depending on the individual’s “convention”
Fake
no thorny debate.
You made an assertion. Is it correct? I like learning new things .
If you can provide a source please supply it.
If you vaguely remember hearing it but aren’t exactly sure where or when, say that
If you just made it up say thatFlaming (and Yserbius)
you said “BUT, strictly speaking, there is only this juxtaposition between a constant coefficient and a variable, never a constant and another constant.”
(Yserbius didn’t say exactly that but implication is the same “These questions are all kind of silly, because the way it was written is ambiguous. “)I was under the impression that 2×2; 2*2; (2)(2); 2(2) are all equally valid ways of expressing the same thing, namely: two multiplied by two.
In which case there is absolutely no ambiguity and nothing remotely incorrect about the OP’s problem. (assuming you recall how to perform order of operations)can you provide a source for your assertion that the latter two equations above are ” technically incorrect”
(FWIW google had no problem solving them which seems odd for an equation that is not written correctly)We have come full circle.
The thread that first got me addicted to YWN was this one1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 – 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 x 0 = ?
I found it fascinating that even after the correct answer (with detailed explanation) ws pointed out to people they still insisted that there was more than one correct approach.
I love this place
Of course in this case the answer is 16
Participant
I understood it
so no that’s not itAAQ
I think he’s saying becasue the NYPD is involved and the ycan be sued in secular court beis din will let him include the mother and shomirim.
It is good that it makes no sense to yo, because the whole thing is silly. no-one is getting sued. I mean there are frivolous cases but even lawyers have their limits
The silliness level was the same
Participant
you forgot the rest of the line
Caesar didn’t know your rule, the rest of the line is “Then fall Caesar” which is English yet spoken to Romans and even if you argue that it is being said to the audience.
“Friends Romans countrymen…” is obviously being said to Romans yet in English
J’Accuse!
akuperma
“Thus none of the “examples” you suggest are even remotely relevant. ”
not necessarily. If Lanky and his friend are in some sort of anti-sefer club trying to get seforim banned or something, and he finds out his friend published a sefer he can say Et tu? You also published a sefer?
CS
Zero chance
for NYPD there has to be “probable cause” No question being accused of asking a child to leave with you is “probable cause”It is typically used as an unexpected betrayal
So unless you are frei and feel betrayed by the baal tshuva its a little odd to say ““Et tu?” he’s also a baal tshuvah?”
On the other hand “Et tu? You also vote democrat?” that I’ve heard
CS
“@GH, now the lawsuits start”
Chas veshalom! how can you suggest such a thing ?Are you suggesting this Erliche tzadik is anything but!!??
(and anyway he isn’t wining anything It is hard to imagine a jury faulting a mother who called authorities when she says she was concerned for her child. The only ones a bit at blame are the media cites though agian hard to show what damages they caused, generaly libel in the US is hard to win)
Another recent propublica story relevant to this thread
“How Cigna Saves Millions by Having Its Doctors Reject Claims Without Reading Them” which details exactly what headline suggests . Thousands upon thousands of claims rejected without actually being reviewed.
Again I get that cigna has to do this to be profitable. But that is exactly the problem
Avram
I don’t agree either. I was just saying if THAT was the impediment then ok I want Dr. P’s support so Ill settle fora coeercive measure to remove the impediment .
Perhaps as a way t o call his bluff, since I didnt really buy it as a real reasonThough, now that you mention it “I worry more about coercion,” I suppose its fair to argue (not saying this is your argument) that as bad as it is that patients hung out to dry when they need care, IF the only way to get Medicare for all is a coercive type system that would be worse.
I don’t agree, but that could be Dr. P’s responseAND
I f I may add to the last point
Even if you are right that medicare for all won’t work becasue people who don’t take care of their health will abuse the system
OK so support Medicare for all who do take care of their health (or at least try) . Exclude smokers, require exercise , I said a few times if thts what it would take to get you on board I’m inIn that case do we agree?
Dr p
no need to apologize my writing isnt great, and in my zeal to share I don’t always reread to ensure reads easily.Our main point of contention is the following
we agree that our current system Is not good, you even said “Its wrong”
“We also agree that (as unfortunate as it may be) CEOs (and companies) need to either be aggressive in denying claims (lawfully or unlawfully) to keep premiums down or they’ll either go bankrupt or put out of business by the competition. (It’s wrong, I know, but that’s the only way it can function.)”we agree that it doesnt work for many:
“It’s unfortunate and it doesn’t work for many people. I sympathize with them and wish something can be done”We disagree on the last part, namely as to whether something can be done.
I think a large part of our opinions come from our experience.
yes Isay opinions, you don’nt have anygood reason why it won’t work as I explained, though not nearly as well as Avram (your reasons were that the ACA didnt work though that was complely different , and that young people don’t take care of their health which isnt completely true and not grounded in any real data).I say we are talking from our experiences, because you said You don’t think a government run system would work “as well as probably every sane person in the country who currently has health insurance” This has not been my experience at all. In fact almost all people IVe discussed this with do not think its working. Now granted people tend to discuss insurance issues when the yhave a problem so my sample is certainly biased towards those who have had an “extreme situation” but those are PRECISLY the ones ho need the most help. The ones who have to decide whether to sell their house to afford cancer treatment to gain a few extra months . The ones who have gone bankrupt. These are real people, Ive met them. The system isnt working
You say nothing can be done., but you dont offer a compelling reason as to why not
That as where we disagree
taka
“Shtuyot. The plural is shtuyot.”
This isn’t correct. In Hebrew yes the plural is shtuyot but in Yiddish it is shtusim.
Same for Shabbosim
See Dovid Katz’s article “kapitlech in Yiddish” in the ALgemeiner Journal 2/12/2010.
Or ask any Yiddish speaker” I mentioned earlier that Medicare is generally for people aged 65 and older. People that age grew up in a different era where they took more responsibility for their health. Once you start including the younger generations the costs will spiral out of control.”
I dont think its an important point. I know young people careful about their health and old people that ignore it.
This is your go to for every example
elderly, Europeans All super careful about their health. dialysis patients, oh I guess they are too. You made an assertion, with out much to back it up
And no it wont spiral out of control. young people use much much less health dollars than those > 65“I don’t believe you’ve said that they should all be closed down.”
I don’t think you are reading my posts
Here are some verbatim quotes of mine” I don’t think health insurance should be a for profit industry.”
and
“Yes for a healthcare company to profit they have to deny healthcare. people need to suffer/die/go bankrupt. There is no other way.(you said this to me a few times as if I didnt get taht, I get it that is EXACTLY the problem with outr current system. IT CANNOT work for everyone)
The only way to have it work for everyone is for the government to step in”
and
“The truth is I don’t fault him or the company. that is their job they profit by denying healthcare that is there entire business model. I fault the business model.”
and
“You say it is a business. Yes I get that I don’t blame him. But I think it SHOULDN’T Be a business that is PRECISLEY my point. As I’ve been saying from the beginning. Business leads to morally wrong decisions and outcomes (as you agree). Healthcare as a business doesn’t work.”I don’t understand how you could have missed all these
“The massive salaries that the CEOs make can not pay for all the claims that are denied ”
Lets take one a t a time. Lets start with him, he’s a really nice guy“What part don’t you understand-”
I don’t understand why you keep repeatign this. Yes I know the WHY the ceo makes money. I know how. I dont think he should. I don’t think healthcare should be a for profit industry.
Your response to that has been “well the CEO deserves the profit”. He only deserves the high salary if you think healthcare should be a for profit industry. yes in a for profit healthcare world he desrves high slary. He helped guide thousands of denials! he shortned so man ylives saving the company millions. He definitely deserves his salary. But this is a premise I completely reject (again and again and again)“As mentioned previously, Medicare works because it’s for a more responsible part of the population”
Yes you mentioned that. I dont think you have any real data to bck that up.
And again i’ll bet the extra expense incurred by the young population that ignores there health is much less than the expenses incurred by the elderly that don’t.“When I used to take my kids to the doctor for an ear infection I would make sure to follow the doctors directions and pick up the medication right away-”
you get a gold star!
Some of my patients do some don’t I see no correlation based on their insurance“If they keep paying all the bills (with no cost to the patient) what’s going to discourage someone with a paper cut from going to the emergency room,”
The uninsured already do that . Providing them insurance would ease the pressure on emergency rooms, they can now go to their regular doctor“You need to explain why you think the same US Government could successfully run something of a much larger magnitude.”
Medicare works, here other countries manage. I see no reason why the US can’t manage soemthing similar.
The fact that something else was tried has nothing to do with this .Sure
No premiums. taxes go up. Government pays for health costs.
Easy peasy
Same as medicare just for everybody“I’ve said this point before and you haven’t addressed is so I’m going to repeat again- this is mostly due to the irresponsible culture here of people not caring about their health or taking responsibility for their wellbeing.”
I am nto sure what there is to address. But I’ll repeat it again so encourage people to care about their health.
“You still haven’t explained how a company will survive with a low paid CEO.”
for the 21st? Time they shouldn’t survive. that is my plan.
How on earth are you still not getting this?Take one day’s worth of the Ceo’s salary use it to pay my neighbor’s cancer treatment for 2 years (10,000 a month), the ceo will barely notice the missing money its not even a rounding wrror. And neighbor gets to live a few more years . I know I know “no sane person” would expect insurance company to shell out money just to gain few years (The rep practically told him that too) . and leshitascha I can’t blame them they have to make profit.
“CMS isn’t a private company- it’s a government agency.”
YES!!!! Exactly. so it can be done.
” typical company that acted like that would be out of business within a year…”
This is incorrect Medicare is very popular.
and by far the easiest company to deal with.“Obviously the shareholders and board which determines his compensation felt that that’s what he’s worth. If you feel that he’s overpaid start a mutual, not-for-profit company that’s owned by the policy holders, become the low paid CEO, pay all claims, charge lower premiums and if you can stay in business you can put them out of business- that’ll show them.”
what ? Seriously, What?
“CAN NOT work until people start taking more responsibility for their health. Can you please respond to that directly?”
Again?
Sure. so encourage people to take more responsibility. You got me. I’m in.“Uh- there was- the comparison to the public school that I just repeated again. Please explain why it’ll be different”
Sure.
firstly Medicare works so no reason to compare to ecucation which is less similar.
Second all the government will be doing is paying the bills. The Government is nt running anything You still go to your doctor and instead of him billing aetna he bills medicare. Just like he’ll do when you are 65 just does it earlier
And I’m not sure how you think private medical insurance makes sure their clients are listening to doctors any more than Medicare does. In fact Medicare (escpecially with dialysis) is MORE data driven deducting pay certain medical benchmarks arent made (like keeping hemoglobin in certain range, keeping out of hospital etc)“”You’re going to have to defend the ACA if you’re insisting that the government can come up with a single player system that’ll work after they failed miserably on something of a much smaller scale.”
I dont understand this.
I support one idea, why do I “have to” defend a different idea ?” Please explain though why any sane person (not in an extreme situation) would want to pay more for a lower quality healthcare system?”
I am advocating paying less for a higher quality system.
By any Benchmark the US pays MORE for healthcare. By most benchmarks we have worse outcomes.“The reason why we’re the only nation where this regularly happens is because we’re the only nation where it’s ingrained in people’s culture that life (their own or others) has little to no value. Change that culture and the number of mass shootings will go down.”
YES!!!!
complete agreement!
Same for healthcare. “Hey it works for me who cares about those it doesnt work for, that is just a necessary evil” (almost a verbatim quote)“At this point I’m getting pretty frustrated with this discussion”
same
1. … Can you show me (or explain how it’s possible) a health insurance company (public or private) that functions with a low paid CEO?
As I said (20 times?) I don’t think health insurance should be a for profit industry. So while you keep repeating this point over and over. It has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand . Ok so CEO wont be filthy rich. I’m fine with using that extra $$$ to approve more cancer treatments.
You say there is no CEO of a healthcare company that gets a reasonable salary. Yes I know, THAT is the problem The problem IS that health insurance IS a for profit venture. Yes Its hard to find a reasonably paid CEO, that is EXACTLY the problem. Have I really not said this ????But if you insist as far as I can tell Chiquita Brooks-Lasure the head of CMS (center for medicare and medicaid services) makes $249,723. In contrast Cigna CEO David Cordani took home more than $91 million in 2021 thats more than 364 times as much!!! put another way, he made her salary every single day of the year minus his birthday.
2. I opined that until people learn to take responsibility for themselves a…. Can you please explain why you disagree with that?
As I said over a month ago (February 2, 2023 5:35 pm) that is a technicality. If you want to increase taxes on smoking /sugary drinks etc to encourage good behavior. sure I can get on board. You want some sort of mandatory exercise program, I’m a bit squeamish but ok if thats what it takes I’m in
” and you don’t respond to many of the strong points that I make.”
My apologies I missed all of your “strong points”
Do you mind repeating themThere were no points in this last post that were strong nor that I didn’t previously reply to
“(I’m not familiar with kidney dialysis but does Mediare actually pay for all their expenses?)”
Yes!!!
IT is the one disease if a person gets it they automatically get government funded health insurance (after a waiting period)
Can thank Nixon ofr that of all people.
” Why aren’t you going to defend it [ACA]? If the government failed catastrophically at the ACA, why do you think they’re going to succeed at something that’s going to be much larger?… The last time they tried this (i.e. the ACA), they failed miserably.”
I’m not defending ACA because that is not my proposal. A single payer system was proposed but quickly shot down.
“I’m in the first category (as well as probably every sane person in the country who currently has health insurance)”
That hasn’t been my experience.
Most people I talk to who have had a medical expense (Cancer treatment denied, procedure denied both in the past week) do not think this is working. They are sane people, but whereas you “sympathize with them and wish something can be done” I know that something can be doneYou remind me of the Onion article that runs after every mass shooting “”‘No Way to Prevent This’, Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens”
I can hear it:
“No way to fix this says only country where medical bills is leading cause of bankruptcy” !
And “we have the best healthcare system in the world says the country with highest healthcare expenditure and lowest life expectancy of (almost) any western country”To sum up
Yes for a healthcare company to profit they have to deny healthcare. people need to suffer/die/go bankrupt. There is no other way.
(you said this to me a few times as if I didnt get taht, I get it that is EXACTLY the problem with outr current system. IT CANNOT work for everyone)
The only way to have it work for everyone is for the government to step in.
There are 2 reasons I can think of why someone would oppsoe this
1) Dont think it would work
2) don;t think governemtn should be involved even if would work.1- I don’t fully get. so make it work. It works for Medicare it works in other countries. It works for dialysis patients expand it to cancer expand the age for medicare.
2 I hear thats where we disagree(note this is what I said from my early post to you THIS is the point of argument
“If you maintain that it isn’t the Government’s job to get involved whether you worked out and saved (Mr A.) or didn’t (Mr. B) I understand that. I disagree (as to most people Even Trump running as a Republican promised to provide “the best healthcare plan” and Medicare is wildly popular )”
the rest eg do healthcare CEO’s make too much is fluff)
“It’s too late for that- health insurance companies have already been started, are going strong and are here to stay.”
Meh when there is a wil lthere is a way
“Sounds good to me, go find another way- one that’ll work though. Just because something isn’t functioning 100% doesn’t mean that you get rid of it for something that has a 0% chance of succeeding.”
Medicare already exists, its popular it works
all we need to do is expand it. We can lower age to 55 then 45 etc etcThe government tried that already with the COOPs (part of the ACA). … ”
I’m not defending the ACe, mentioned that earleir .“Again, just because the system isn’t functioning 100% of the time for 100% of the people- doesn’t mean that you get rid of it for something that has no chance of working.”
Again Medicare works. Other countries manage. We can do it! don;t give up so easily We are the best USA USA ! We put a man on the moon! We can do anything! Murica!!!
“disagree completely”
It would help if you would let me know what part of my comment you’re disagreeing on.Do you disagree that high paid CEOs are needed for health insurance companies to function?
YesIf you think it’s possible, go ahead and start a company that pays all claims- let’s see how long it lasts.
It wont last. I ve said this several times. for profit healthcare system CANNOT work. By design to profit they HAVE to deny care. people have to needlessly die/suffer. You said this.
now if you say the benmefit outweigh that. fien I hear. I disagree but Ihear.
But then you miz up your messages and tell me that healthcare companies need to make a profit.
YEs that is YOUR position not mine. I have said that a few times. I am not sure wh yyou keep repeating that.“Yes becasue of what yyou addmitted was “as unfortunate as it may be” If it is unfortunate, change it! It doesnt HAVE to be this way. We chose this.”
(Is kipped the next few paragrpahs since we are repeating a lot)
“YES! that is where we disagree. As I said from one of my first posts”
Finally! We agree on what we disagree on.No Not finally.
I said that from the begining when I pointed out that you hypothetical was illy.I knew this is where we disagreed. You insisted on a long back and forth. Ive had this conversation before this is where it lands . Thats why I started here .
Square
It isnt nice to gather up every silly thing some fellow has written and post them all here to embarrass him.
2scents
Agree Doctors should
Thats what I meant by “who should “win” when the patient and doctor disagree is a good question and one that potentially needs to be worked out” If patient wants a scan “just to be safe” but doctor doesnt think its necessary I think it shouldn’t be paid for by taxpayer“However, it’s important to realize that insurance companies may not be obligated to cover the cost of these treatments. Since their primary objective is to remain profitable and sustainable, they may reject claims and requests that may be seen as not necessary in order to reduce costs.c
Yes I realize that. I’ve said thst a few times. Thst is EXACTLY the problem putting profit above patient care
“In that world, there are often significant wait times for tests, and appointments can be months away.”
1. In my world I have that too
2. Waiting for a test thst will happen (ie get paid for) is better than an immediate test thst won’t happen (ie get paid for).(Its easy to say if so important just pay for it for many that’s not an option)
2scents
for sure I do it all the time.
I don’t think its a good system. that was all I was saying.“– In terms of payment or patient autonomy?”
I guess both. I’m saying if a Doctor thinks patient would benefit from a drug/scan etc the doctor should be able to prescribe it and the patietn get it.
I do not think a bureaucrat , RN etc should be able to deny treatment (I have a colleague who when on a peer to peer call, if the Insurance company says they do not think test or whatever is indicated, he asks them their name and if they are licensed to practice in NY, he explains he is putting them in the chart as a consultant who advised that the test is not necessary, he claims this always works). what I imagine is a world where if a doctor orders a test it is done and paid for. what I am less certain about is if doctor doesn’t think its indicated If by the book or guidelines Pt doesn’t need antibiotics Scan etc. but the patient begs so Its prescribed it anyway . In my perfect world should we all pay for that? I’m not sure. But this is a minor point I just threw in as an after thought2scents
Tried
a. didn’t work He had no symptoms.
IVe since hinted to patients to exaggerate their symptoms, Its easy to get a CT scan in ED, though I hope you appreciate the absurdity of this suggestion, Lie, commit insurance fraud to get Health care you have paid for alreadyb. It was more than 500, and no they didn’t have that much lying around. Though perhaps I should have pushed harder. Renal cell carcinoma does not tend to Grow quickly I was optomistic that they would eventually agree to pay for the scan (as they did). Maybe I should have told him to just pay and figth later to get reimbursed. I doubt it would have changed anything (as I mentioned earleir) but it is something I think about
C. Ultrasound was equivocal
CA
no its better for doctors and/or the patients to decideDrP
“We seem to agree that CEOs make lots of money in their positions and that high paid CEOs are needed for the health insurance companies to function.”
disagree completely” We also agree that (as unfortunate as it may be) CEOs (and companies) need to either be aggressive in denying claims (lawfully or unlawfully) to keep premiums down or they’ll either go bankrupt or put out of business by the competition. (It’s wrong, I know, but that’s the only way it can function.) ”
Agree but while you view that as a feature. To me hat is a bug. In other words yes That is the way it has to be to function this way. My reply is: It cant be that way there fore it shouldnt function this way. we need a new system. Period.
” We finally seem to agree that a physician should be doing everything for the best interest of a patient and setting aside how his / her decision will affect the bottom line of the company.”
Not sure that was ever in dispute. Though this seems to contradict your previous statement “…CEOs (and companies) need to either be aggressive in denying claims…”“What we seem to disagree on is who should be running the healthcare in this country.”
Yes becasue of what yyou addmitted was “as unfortunate as it may be” If it is unfortunate, change it! It doesnt HAVE to be this way. We chose this.
“Despite all the problems going on with corporations running healthcare as a business I still think it’s the lesser of the two evils. Just because there are decisions that are being made that are morally wrong doesn’t mean the alternative is better.”
YES! that is where we disagree. As I said from one of my first posts
Dr P longer response is pending
My reply to this paragraph is hard to follow so I’ll reword it
“We also agree that (as unfortunate as it may be) CEOs (and companies) need to either be aggressive in denying claims (lawfully or unlawfully) to keep premiums down or they’ll either go bankrupt or put out of business by the competition. (It’s wrong, I know, but that’s the only way it can function.) ”
Depends what we mean by agree. Put another way it depends on starting point . Yes for Insurance companies to make a profit They have to deny claims. I a gree with that. We both agree that this is an “unfortunate” situation.
You say too bad “that’s the only way it can function”
I say denying healthcare is a non starter if thats the only way it can function, then we need a different way. Period If that means Insurance will no longer be the lucrative field it is (one that MADE money during a pandemic!!!) and instead we a need a non-for profit system or Government run Ok so be it. But denying healthcare a patient and or doctor* deems neccesary is a non-starter for me* who should “win” when the patient and doctor disagree is a good question and one that potentially needs to be worked out. I’m not certain myself. but I am sure it shouldnt be a bureaucrat or nurse who glanced a t the chart
“In other words, Jean-Paul Sartre stated that anti-Semitism is NOT based on logic!”
I dont understand the point of this thread.
did you think there was some logic to anti-semitism?
Do you think an Anti-semite will say “Oh wait I didnt realize a “highly-respected” philosphper said my views were illogical; I guess Jews are ok after all”
I dont really get it
RE
I give up. How many?
1) I have never heard it with a cholam, maybe a sh’va na
2) “travesty” might be a bit much. its a song, I don’t hink there is any halachic requirment or even hiddur to pronounce the words correctly.
3) If the vowelezation bothers you wait until you find out the passuk doesnt say “Venahapach venahapahc venahapach venahapach venapachu hu…”