ChezGiven

His healthcare bill dropped tens of millions of new paying customers into the lap of the health insurance industry....they lobbied in favour of his changes.....omitting a public option. Very much a corporate stooge on that score. His rhetoric was of a public option, which he dropped once in power. He didn't affect the change he promised. No-one in washington is double dealing....they're all pulling in the same direction. Corporate ownership of state. The reform bill requires the industry to pay over $100 billion in cash to the government for funding. The impact of the additional insured population depends on the price they pay, which will be driven down by insurance exchanges. The cost to the population of any insurance will be high because healthcare is absurdly expensive in the US because of the huge remuneration to doctors. A jobbing oncologist earns half a million dollars a year. Paid for via fee for service reimbursement from public and private insurance. The return to the insurance industry in terms of profit is not clear, revenues will go up but their fear is this will not be enough to compensate for the increased costs of providing healthcare to people who are paying lower and lower premiums, who are the least healthiest and have the highest costs. The increased population with access to drugs will be offset for pharma from downward price pressure from the insurance companies on prices. Medicare and Medicaid will set price limits for drugs outside of the private market as they are squeezed by federal budget cost pressures. Tiered pricing schemes for newly insured patients will further reduce actual prices (rather than what are called WAC or list prices). Whilst these effects are playing out, both industries are subsidising healthcare reform directly. Corporate stooge my fat arse. None of that backs up Fish's claim he's affected the change promised in his early rhetoric. What period is that $100Bn coming in from the insurers over btw? Never heard that figure and the combined profits of the top 5 suppliers are only about a tenth of that aren't they? He couldnt even affect a watered down version because of resistance. He lost the mid-terms because centrist voters have dropped him, not because of disaffected lefties abstaining. The $100bn is coming from pharma, not insurance. I presume they have to pay too.

Then perhaps he should not have been in Aspers at 2-30am tis morning telling anyone who'd listen that he's out. Yeah, cause that happened Not exactly beyond the realms of possibility, is it? Not in the slightest. However, something about the last couple of weeks made me suspicious. It was when Pardew described the injury as being difficult to know how bad it was, i thought it didnt sound right. If there is a tear in the muscle, you see it, evaluate it and make a decision. Then he gets sent off to Dubai for a break which is a bit odd but takes him out the limelight anyway. I couldnt help but thinking Pardew wants him chomping at the bit for the mackems and used the slight injury as a way of sending him off to rest and return fired up. This does rely on the idea that he felt we could beat West Ham and Wigan without him (which we did obviously). It was his comments on the injury and the way he talked about Best that set me off. Probably a load of shite.

His healthcare bill dropped tens of millions of new paying customers into the lap of the health insurance industry....they lobbied in favour of his changes.....omitting a public option. Very much a corporate stooge on that score. His rhetoric was of a public option, which he dropped once in power. He didn't affect the change he promised. No-one in washington is double dealing....they're all pulling in the same direction. Corporate ownership of state. The reform bill requires the industry to pay over $100 billion in cash to the government for funding. The impact of the additional insured population depends on the price they pay, which will be driven down by insurance exchanges. The cost to the population of any insurance will be high because healthcare is absurdly expensive in the US because of the huge remuneration to doctors. A jobbing oncologist earns half a million dollars a year. Paid for via fee for service reimbursement from public and private insurance. The return to the insurance industry in terms of profit is not clear, revenues will go up but their fear is this will not be enough to compensate for the increased costs of providing healthcare to people who are paying lower and lower premiums, who are the least healthiest and have the highest costs. The increased population with access to drugs will be offset for pharma from downward price pressure from the insurance companies on prices. Medicare and Medicaid will set price limits for drugs outside of the private market as they are squeezed by federal budget cost pressures. Tiered pricing schemes for newly insured patients will further reduce actual prices (rather than what are called WAC or list prices). Whilst these effects are playing out, both industries are subsidising healthcare reform directly. Corporate stooge my fat arse.

Was he a muslim?

How, Mystic Keg, tell us what song its going to be then?

Wrong KD, you can leave the floor challenging for a header so that clearly isnt the law.

Hence the appeals process, no?

My hairdresser (ex) didnt even speak English. Am exactly the same, cant stand the chit chat in the hairdresser's at all so when i started to go to and get it done here, was a nightmare. Small talk in another language! Anyway, its an Algerian / Tunisian owned place and because my dark complexion and dashing good looks they were all interested in where i came from. When you ask 'what origin are you?' in French, the answer isnt 'whitley' its where your from genetically. So i gans 'England' and they think i dont get the question, like what they mean i look like an arab and therefore i'm English but originally not from there. I insist that am English and they just start talking amongst themselves. 'Nah, he doesnt understand, he's Egyptian / Morrocan etc'. I couldnt be arsed to argue with them so i just let them believe it. Anyway, am going regular and am treated like one of them, they give us free coffee and want to talk about English football eveytime. Bought myself some clippers and our lass does it now.

He didnt say Krul was a flapper though which was Leazes point, he said he shanked some kicks which is pretty matter of fact. If Krul's kicking improves in the next game, its wont be 'man management at its worst' either.

Put it in your sig.

I have tried to put forward the case that for some players, a bit of public admonishment might work. When the player has ability but its not translating perfectly, its a question of psychology and motivation. Which is fucking complex and not subject to bland catch-all statements like 'dont criticise them in public'. In fact maybe this is one of the few tools available to a manager when the financial and other motivational factors arent quite cutting it.

I expect I sound ignorant, but whats that Chez? I suspect its something akin to G.I.L.Fs and M.I.L.F.s but could be totally wrong!! fanny lilke a mouse's ear.

Might not be very fair but is it damaging? Which is what i'm interpreting people as saying. I dont know how people can definitively claim it damages morale or player motivation. Whats the evidence for this? Feels like a truism to me.

Just catching up with this thread. Stevie seeing a f.l.a.m.e. Good work.

Can someone explain why it needs to be kept secret from the public that the manager thinks the goalkeeper's kicking was poor? Some things should stay in house but am not sure a player's performance is immune to criticism. My own view of the modern player is that public image and reputation are hugely motivating factors, much more than they used to be. If you make it in the modern game, financially your future is secure (unless you're a mug like Paul Merson). Few players are good enough to play for a team that realistically challenges for honours. So apart from a sense of professionalism, what is motivating a player? Tevez, Rooney, Henry (off the top of my head), all made big decisions in their career on the basis of public perception (depsite the fact that they are players who could focus solely on winning honours - i hope you see my point). If being paid lots of money and playing for a great club like Newcastle still leaves a player lacking in focus so that they cant translate their talent onto the pitch consistently, where do you go? I presume most players are told to concentrate and ensure they dont make silly mistakes in the nicest possible way. What happens when this isnt working? Kick em up the arse imo.

Till the space alien invasion starts anyway. Thus spoke Parkystani.

I hope you're busying yerself stealing secrets and shit for naked fianancial gain. Of course, I've had to stay clear of the UFO thread in fear of temptation of blurting it out lol Slip me a pm if you hear anything from there that might be of interest. Some ot the other sites I peruse would love a bit of space gossip. *Jimbo waits behind door with sodium pentathol as girlfriend returns home. "Nice day at work love?" Glad you're doing alright anyway mate. Nasa's just a front for the sevret black budget space program Parky They still get upto hijinx of their own, but yes essentially the military space wing (black) does the real juicy stuff. Your best post in years tbh

So what's your point? There's more obese people in the North West mate than the North East. Liverpool and Manchester are heart attack central for this country. Upsetting to watch that to be honest. Humpty Dumpty mugs. Buy some salad. KSA is from that neck of the woods too. Him and Yorkie-Geordie used to swap photos on MSN, looks like Boris Johnson with an afro.

I got quite annoyed by this as it appears that the ignorance and stupidity of people like Sarah Palin and the toxic nature of the debate has played a part in all this. Whether thats true or not is not entirely clear but the suggestion of it is enough to get me a bit upset.

Has Gejon shown his greek-esque podgy face in this thread yet? The Stevenage dwelling twat.

A valuable lesson well learned.

It's true though, Ranger clearly needs a bullet up his ass and Pardew is holding the gun.

TN it says everything of the logic being applied here when one of our best players reveals he isnt playing on twitter and the manager is criticised for complaining about it. Pardew fucked up yesterday by bring Tiote on and he deserves criticism for that.

Well, it's the question if the manager should criticise players in public. Imho it's man managment at its worst tbh. Ferguson does it. http://www.gloryunited.info/4810/2010/08/2...g-silly-points/ You've just heard that a manager shouldnt criticise his players in public and as it sounds like a reasonable thing, now hold it as a form of truth. The reality is that you arent qualified to understand the motivational dynamics at play. Speaking as a manager of people i'd say 'bollocks' to that claim 'it depends on the individual'. Anyway, lets look again at what he said rather than examining the notion of player criticism. 'A few young boys got caught out'. If you deem that language as potentially damaging to player morale, i'd have to question your motives for saying that.