Billy Cox wrote:
> I heard a report on NPR the other day in which a study revealed that the
> lifetime healthcare costs for people with unhealthy lifestyles were actually
> lower than those who take good care of themselves.
>
> The finding was that smokers and obese people died earlier in life whil
ge-
> From: Cameron Childress [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:16 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: ironic question about healthcare
>
>
> Mary Jo Sminkey wrote:
>> And how to do that? I agree it would be great, but the first step
Subject: Re: ironic question about healthcare
Mary Jo Sminkey wrote:
> And how to do that? I agree it would be great, but the first step
> would be to require such care as being covered *before* a deductible
> on insurance plans. And that of course will push premiums higher just
> lik
Mary Jo Sminkey wrote:
> And how to do that? I agree it would be great, but the first step would be to
> require such care as being covered *before* a deductible on insurance plans.
> And that of course will push premiums higher just like everything else. And
> how to encourage doctors to push w
small side note -- my new job comes with "good" health insurance --
Blue Cross Blue Shield -- which, for some perverse reason, assigns the
highest deductible to the preventative medications that I take --
albuterol and Nexium. Wierd. Now supposing I did not have that
insurance, that Nexium would be
>I guess I wasn't specific enough, but preventive care and wellness is
>exactly what I was talking about. It's far cheaper too. For example -
>what ever happened to the physical fitness tests and programs in
>schools? Am I remembering correctly that they have been partially or
>totally elimi
You do, I have a registration card from 92.
William Bowen wrote:
>> When I turned 18 in 1979 we were required to register for the draft
>> and be ready to get called.
>> I thought that still existed.
>
> Selective Service registration, yes. Draft, no.
>
> Same for me, though I did Selective Serv
No, wrong, thats selective service not the draft
Sam wrote:
> When I turned 18 in 1979 we were required to register for the draft
> and be ready to get called.
> I thought that still existed.
>
> On Feb 11, 2008 10:19 AM, William Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Sam, IIRC you're in your mid-fo
Mary Jo Sminkey wrote:
>> I would MUCH rather see my tax money spent helping people quit smoking
>> and be healthier than fixing them after a life of self destructive behavior.
>>
>
> You do realize that being able to get preventative care is essential to such
> things, and to help people le
>I would MUCH rather see my tax money spent helping people quit smoking
>and be healthier than fixing them after a life of self destructive behavior.
You do realize that being able to get preventative care is essential to such
things, and to help people lead healthier lives? What if everyone had
That's the one
On Feb 11, 2008 11:07 AM, William Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > When I turned 18 in 1979 we were required to register for the draft
> > and be ready to get called.
> > I thought that still existed.
>
> Selective Service registration, yes. Draft, no.
>
> Same for me, though I
> When I turned 18 in 1979 we were required to register for the draft
> and be ready to get called.
> I thought that still existed.
Selective Service registration, yes. Draft, no.
Same for me, though I did Selective Service registration in '87. Not
sure what the rules are now... probably still ha
When I turned 18 in 1979 we were required to register for the draft
and be ready to get called.
I thought that still existed.
On Feb 11, 2008 10:19 AM, William Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sam, IIRC you're in your mid-forties, right?
>
> So if you're 45 now and you turned 18 in 1980 and regi
> I did register for the draft and waited many years for them to
> call.
Sam, IIRC you're in your mid-forties, right?
So if you're 45 now and you turned 18 in 1980 and registered for
Selective Service, you still missed "The Draft" by seven years given
that it was abolished by Congress in 1973, s
I haven't been following the thread but I see them not as being similar,
but as being very different.
On the one hand there are those who are volunteering to bravely defend
the country . By volunteering - they are volunteering to potentially
sacrifice themselves for the good of everyone else.
I considered becoming a doctor and decided against it.
I thought about the military and decided not to make a career out of
that, I did register for the draft and waited many years for them to
call.
On Feb 11, 2008 6:25 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This got me to thinking ho
> So, then I got to wondering what's the difference between the two
> positions. Why is it that the ultimate sacrifice for defense of the country
> is acceptable while paying more in taxes for, in essence "defense" of the
> country isn't. Maybe it's the way it's framed? Is it because it's not
>
This weekend, I was watching the thread about healthcare go on and on and
on. I saw one response that summed up a lot of people's view on national
healthcare. "Why should I pay for you?"
This got me to thinking how thankful I was that this sentiment isn't echoed
by our soldiers regarding defense
18 matches
Mail list logo
