|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Also, I almost felt bad for the Republican Party for a second because at the end of the focus group the CNN anchor was saying, LOL they're going to keep voting R. e: Dogs dont know anything, get them to do everything. 
PhazonLink fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Jun 28, 2017 |
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 18:03 |
|
|
PhazonLink posted:LOL they're going to keep voting R. I swear that was a poll.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
Reik posted:Healthcare providers are the ones that set their prices though? Kinda? They set them, but then insurance company (or Medicare) goes "Yeah, no, we will pay the schedule rate as per contract", and pay way less than try were theoretically asked for, so only people who are likely too poor to afford insurance see the insanely inflated provider-set prices anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Holy poo poo. ABC just settled with the manufacturer of "pink slime" for their report on McDonald's use of the product as a filler in their food. Why did ABC settle when journalism has legal protections that make it very hard to ever lose a case for reporting on something? Because the meat manufacturer decided to sue ABC in Elk Point, South Dakota. South Dakota has an "Agricultural Food Products Disparagement Act" that: quote:Is also known as "the food disparagement law" and establishes a lower standard for civil liability and allows for punitive damages and attorney's fees for plaintiffs alone, regardless of the case's outcome. I'm well-versed in weird state laws and I've seen some that are similar to this, but South Dakota's is ridiculously extreme.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:Don't most Republicans view Trump as an outlier in the party rather than representative of the party, and therefore feel comfortable still voting for Republicans? They don't have to. Most republicans genuinely like Trump.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:Don't most Republicans view Trump as an outlier in the party rather than representative of the party, and therefore feel comfortable still voting for Republicans? Most Republicans approve of Trump. It was something like 2/3rd of ALL Americans who think that "Trump is his own thing" and his successes/failures are not representative of the Republican Party as a whole. Lots of people who think Trump is racist don't think the Republican Party is racist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:They don't have to. Most republicans genuinely like Trump. That'll never cease to amaze me. I'm acutely aware of the fact I live in a blue bubble, but honestly, what's to like? I keep trying to see the appeal and coming up with nothing
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Kinda? They set them, but then insurance company (or Medicare) goes "Yeah, no, we will pay the schedule rate as per contract", and pay way less than try were theoretically asked for, so only people who are likely too poor to afford insurance see the insanely inflated provider-set prices anyway. I mean, there's only like one state (Maryland) where the hospital can't charge different prices. It's well within their ability to charge uninsured people reasonable rates.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Most Republicans approve of Trump. How much of that is obligation via sports team though
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Crow Jane posted:That'll never cease to amaze me. I'm acutely aware of the fact I live in a blue bubble, but honestly, what's to like? I keep trying to see the appeal and coming up with nothing Most of it is because liberals don't like him and he makes us upset.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Crow Jane posted:That'll never cease to amaze me. I'm acutely aware of the fact I live in a blue bubble, but honestly, what's to like? I keep trying to see the appeal and coming up with nothing Because he hates you
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/funder/status/879527706219749376
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Holy poo poo. I'm surprised they would settle. Even if they lost in South Dakota, I can see absolutely no possibility of that holding up on appeal, that law is clearly in violation of the first amendment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
Reik posted:I mean, there's only like one state (Maryland) where the hospital can't charge different prices. It's well within their ability to charge uninsured people reasonable rates.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Sloober posted:How much of that is obligation via sports team though 2/3 of Americans are not Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:2/3 of Americans are not Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:I'm surprised they would settle. Even if they lost in South Dakota, I can see absolutely no possibility of that holding up on appeal, that law is clearly in violation of the first amendment. I wouldn't be shocked if they just decided that cost of settling was better than the PR hit from losing the case, even if they were certain to win it on appeal
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
God drat. Pro-watch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
I guarantee if Trump weren't president, they wouldn't be settling.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
farraday posted:Cassidy is GOP, that's him trying to explain how pregnancy should be optional coverage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:And yet more than half vote Republican. Nope, Democrats get more votes at every election level overall, just not in the right locations, since those boundaries were drawn by Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:BTW neither party has any coherent plan to control medical costs. They aren't even trying. obamacare has all sorts of regulations and programs to control medical costs and is a very significant part of the bill
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:LOL they're going to keep voting R. I wouldn't be so sure of this. They probably won't vote for the Dems, but that doesn't mean they can't be discouraged from turning out to vote for the Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:I'm surprised they would settle. Even if they lost in South Dakota, I can see absolutely no possibility of that holding up on appeal, that law is clearly in violation of the first amendment. The settlement is probably akin to the amount they'd likely spend on legal fees.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Al Borland Corp. posted:Nope, Democrats get more votes at every election level overall, just not in the right locations, since those boundaries were drawn by Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
South Dakota will let you sue someone for $5.7 billion dollars (plus legal fees and additional civil penalties) for the crime of "disparaging agriculture" by showing a video of their factory and interviewing a McDonald's employee. And you can collect from them even if you lose the case. Just take that in again in case you glossed over it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:South Dakota will let you sue someone for $5.7 billion dollars (plus legal fees and additional civil penalties) for the crime of "disparaging agriculture" by showing a video of their factory and interviewing a McDonald's employee. If I had to guess, that law was enacted during the mad cow disease scare in 2003.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:obamacare has all sorts of regulations and programs to control medical costs and is a very significant part of the bill Mcconellcare on the other hand has premiums going up across the board but they try to hand wave that away by saying that more free market competition will lead to lower rates because of more options but even their own base does not seem to be buying that
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:33 states have Republican governors. Yes, well while Republicans didn't draw those lines of course, if you totalled all 50 state government races, you would have more Democratic votes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Star Man posted:If I had to guess, that law was enacted during the mad cow disease scare in 2003. According to Google, it was the 2011 South Dakota State Legislature session and intended to punish animal rights activists for "misleading videos" depicting "animal cruelty." Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jun 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Why would they do that? Hospitals are for-profit and their #1 job is to make money for shareholders. Fewer than 20% of hospitals in the US are for-profit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
How does any law saying you collect whatever you sue for even if you lose the court case even work? That's why they just sue for one million billions?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Quoting this because it deserves reposting
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
aware of dog posted:Fewer than 20% of hospitals in the US are for-profit. Also the NFL is a non-profit so Josh Lyman fucked around with this message at 20:53 on Jun 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Rad Russian posted:How does any law saying you collect whatever you sue for even if you lose the court case even work? That's why they just sue for one million billions? Even if you lose the case on the merits, the law allows plaintiffs to make the defendant pay their legal fees and additional civil penalties if they can show that they did it to "disparage agriculture" or that it had the effect of hurting an agricultural business. The law lets you collect penalties even if you lose the case, but it doesn't let you collect the full amount that you sued for if you lose. It also establishes a very low bar of civil liability, but only for civil cases involving agriculture. So, you can win the case without even proving anything other than the other side did something that had the effect of potentially hurting agriculture in South Dakota. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Jun 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
aware of dog posted:Fewer than 20% of hospitals in the US are for-profit. Non profit doesn't actually mean poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Then why do 100% of hospital bills seem outrageous? because the people that make the things to do the healthcare can jack up the amount it costs to use them willy-nilly
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Then why do 100% of hospital bills seem outrageous? https://www.uta.edu/faculty/story/2311/Misc/2013,2,26,MedicalCostsDemandAndGreed.pdf Well worth the read on this topic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:Then why do 100% of hospital bills seem outrageous? Unfortunately I can't answer that question 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 18:03 |
|
