SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : JDS Uniphase (JDSU) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Carolyn who wrote (17484)1/30/2001 8:58:52 PM
From: Liatris Spicata  Respond to of 24042
 
Carolyn- OT-

<<No, I do not ignore that issue.>>
What is "that issue"? I raised a few distinct issues: e.g. "the issue of costs, who should pay [and whose life will subsequently be constrained], and should I (or anyone) be coerced into paying for other people's medical services". You may have considered them all deeply, but your responses here fail to address any of them.

<<they are all aware of it each time they call to get permission from a secretary to do a medical procedure>>
A rather biased way to put it, Carolyn, when someone inquires if an insurance company's policies cover a given procedure or test. I thought permission was normally the prerogative of the patient. I would say that my friend's colleagues who cannot correctly place the decimal point when guessing the costs of procedures they recommend are, in fact, unaware of the costs. So unless you think my friend is inaccurate in his reporting, you are, simply, wrong. Moreover, asking "permission" [i.e. inquiring whether something is covered by insurance] for a test does not necessarily mean you know what the costs are, so I don't follow your reasoning.

Regards, and good night,

Larry

P.S. With all due respect to those frustrated by this OT stuff, I'll say 1) the issue here is important, even if it is misplaced, and 2) nobody forces you to read something clearly marked OT. But I'll try to make this my last comment on the subject.