Bolas

Would love to know the whole story as it seems as if wingsuiters were singled out. Almost would make more sense if they had previously banned turns over 90 if truly concerned about risk (don't agree with that either) Don't agree with what the DZO did, but their playground, their rules.

As stated in the other thread: Incentives are basically coupons. They offer discounts to encourage "business" with the thinking that the increases in "sales" will offset the loss of not selling at "retail." In essence not a large difference between: Save $500 off this $1500 TV And Buy a hybrid car for $30k and get a $3k deduction. Or mortgage, Or high efficiency AC.

Does anyone know what the swooping rules are there? Do they allow turns over 90? Dz.com shows AAD's not required and hook turns allowed but could be out of date. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

338,000 square feet is 7.7 acres. That seems way way overkill for students. As I stated in the other thread they appear to have landing area confused with landing pattern area. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

What are the landing area sizes required by this proposal for students and experienced jumpers? I can understand not wanting to include active runways in that size, but disagree with excluding taxiways. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

The biggest issue most had with Obamacare is that it didn't address the core reasons why healthcare is expensive, it just shifted how it's paid for and mandated everyone buy health insurance It's similar to raising taxes but not cutting spending.

It'd be more like this: "I have a sore foot. Can you fix it?" "This is the Emergency Room. Here's a pamphlet listing local clinics in the area that will treat you for little or no cost." If it would cost $100 in the ER, in a clinic it would be far less.

They are available but there would be more if EMTALA was changed or repealed as there'd then be a demand. Currently they just go to the ER as it's 24/7 and "free." If I have a non life threatening situation, I see a primary care doctor during normal hours. They either treat me or refer me. The clinics are like that. Remember this is not a health care bill, it's a health insurance bill.

Many countries have a system of charity hospitals and clinics, paid for by the government, that are available to all. The lines are long, and the doctors are young. But it's somewhere that the other, paid, hospitals can send non-paying patients to. People with money can buy insurance to go to the private hospitals which also exist. Maybe, just maybe, if there is some alternative for the poor that doesn't involve just walking into the closest emergency room, the overall situation will improve. Maybe not, but since we know that what we're doing now isn't working real well, it's time to start making changes before costs escalate even more. Wendy P. You mean like a free clinic or public health offices? We have those already. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Fine. we rewrite EMTALA so that it only addresses triage and immediate life threatening situations. The issue is not people in car accidents, it's people that are walking into the ER to see a doctor for a non emergency non life threatening item. The hospitals need to be able to basically tell them to "go screw" without threat of frivolous lawsuit except in cases of EXTREME gross negligence. We're not "discarding" anyone, we're just letting everyone fend for themselves. Granted this will be harder for some people than others but it's not impossible and it's equal treatment for all versus the insane "if you're capable but still don't do it, we'll do it for you" we have today. Protecting people from themselves just leads to more dependence. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Even ignoring the heath debate, I agree with this statement. That sounds good in theory, but for it to work, ALL or at least a majority need to do it. Hell, if the majority did this this we wouldn't be in any of the messes we're in now. For now the best we can do is to all take care of ourselves trying not to directly impact others in the process. Which if we all do, our society will be much better off than we are now.

If you have insurance you're not paying that much as they've negotiated lower prices on everything. Medicare/Medicaid pays even less. $60 for aspirin is just the MSRP.

Methinks they've confused landing area with landing pattern area.

Unless they repeal EMTALA, that's not gonna happen. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

+1 If one pays the tax and they have medical expenses, they have to pay those solely out of pocket. Think of it as uninsured motorist coverage. You pay for it but it provides no coverage. Only now you don't even have to have a car. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

You pay taxes to support public schools whether or not you homeschool your kids. It's a "penalty". Unless that location uses vouchers. In those cases those with no children are the only ones "penalized."

You pay taxes to support public schools whether or not you homeschool your kids. It's a "penalty". Unless that location uses vouchers. In those cases those with no children are the only ones "penalized."

Bill, you obviously aren't thinking of the children... Or not realizing the school comparison means treating adults like children. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

I see the requirement to purchase HC as similar to the requirement to go to school. Sure, a bit different cuz most people go to school in their district, out of the pool of taxes paid by everyone; whereas HC offers the freedom to pretty much see the doc of choice and is paid out of pocket versus taxes. But the bottom line is that everybody is required to go to school because it benefits the public good. HC is the same way - a basic benefit set that increases public health can be very affordable and is definitely in the public interest. The other thing is if we want guarantee issue (how can everybody not be entitled to a basic benefit set?) than mandatory enrollment has to go along with that. How could anybody not want at least a basic benefit set? Cost of course is key, and the biggest factor there is supply of docs. If any politician ever gets the kahunas to take on te AMA and loosen that stranglehold you will finally see downward price pressure on cost of care. Very simple stuff really - supply and demand. Schools are only required for children.

Re: impeachment of a justice. Tried only once unsuccessfully. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Chase Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Various articles linked to this thread suggest differently. Ensuring legacy is a term often used to describe his motivation. Lose his job? Justices are appointed for life to avoid this very issue. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

See post 376.

A deduction for having health insurance would be much better and more inline with current policy than what the ACA proposes. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Incentives are basically coupons. They offer discounts to encourage "business" with the thinking that the increases in "sales" will offset the loss of not selling at "retail." In essence not a large difference between: Save $500 off this $1500 TV And Buy a hybrid car for $30k and get a $3k deduction. Whether the government should be using this common business practice is unfortunately now a moot point cuz there's something far worse thanks to the SC playing politics. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

There's a direct difference between a deduction and an additional tax. Anything you can get a deduction for, costs you more out of pocket than the deduction. It's an incentive, but one doesn't "break even" or profit from it. The only possible exception might be marriage deductions but that's only if there's no ring or wedding. Boiled down, the government can now subject people to disincentives as well as incentives. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.