Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:12:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
/Snicker wrote:

Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson


Belongs on the Arizony retard group(s). Not here, idiot.

"Jim Thompson" /Snicker
wrote in message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the substitute for
Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve for
health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital), they negotiate
a cash price rate. This rate is substantially lower than the normal
insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and bureaucrats that
would only further raise the costs of care when government gets involved?

Obama care aside. It is pretty pathetic that insurance as it is increases
the care provider's costs so. A while back I needed to get an orthotics
device (drop foot brace) for my wife. Surgical supply store quoted something
like $275. I balked but took out my checkbook. The owner thought a minute
and reduced the price by almost 50% since I paid 'cash' and he wouldn't have
to wait for reimbursement.

....Oppie

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 22:06:24 -0500, "Oppie" wrote:

"Jim Thompson" /Snicker
wrote in message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the substitute for
Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve for
health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital), they negotiate
a cash price rate. This rate is substantially lower than the normal
insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and bureaucrats that
would only further raise the costs of care when government gets involved?

Obama care aside. It is pretty pathetic that insurance as it is increases
the care provider's costs so. A while back I needed to get an orthotics
device (drop foot brace) for my wife. Surgical supply store quoted something
like $275. I balked but took out my checkbook. The owner thought a minute
and reduced the price by almost 50% since I paid 'cash' and he wouldn't have
to wait for reimbursement.

...Oppie

It's probably been mentioned before, but this graphic from that
well-known lefty marxist rag, National Geographic (*National*, get it?
How much more of an admission of a socialist -- or National Socialist --
agenda is needed? Scary stuff!) is pretty telling:

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/20...t-of-care.html

--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote in
message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the substitute
for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve for
health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital), they
negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is substantially lower than
the normal insurance rate.


Be quite!!! If Nancy Reed hears that they will outlaw it!

"Oppie" wrote in message
...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve for
health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital), they negotiate
a cash price rate. This rate is substantially lower than the normal
insurance rate.

Are you sure they weren't claiming to negotiate a substantially lower rate
than the normal *hospital* rate?

I mean -- insurance companies have plenty of incentive to negotitate very
tight deals (more money for them), and they have a lot more leverage (many
thousands of subscribers) they a few Amish do.

There is something to be said for hospital-run HMOs, though, where there's
only one entity (the hospital) that needs to make a profit or at least break
even rather than the more typical two (the hospital and the insurer).

---Joel

Jim Thompson wrote:
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/


Old news. From October:

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/stor...id=OTC-RSS-FH0

Mayo Clinic performance rating comes under scrutiny

"The White House has praised the Mayo Clinic and other Midwest clinics for
performance ratings, but critics argue that Mayo's low- to no-acceptance of
Medicare/Medicaid skews the results.

Critics say the high scores in the Dartmouth College rankings do not reflect
Mayo's refusal to accept Medicare for patients in its Arizona facility or
that only five percent of patients in its flagship Minnesota facility are on
Medicaid.

The clinics have collectively leveraged their high-performance rankings,
critics say, to insert favorable language in healthcare legislation
provisions to reward themselves with higher Medicare payments. The language
would also punish facilities with low rankings--primarily in the South and
in larger U.S. cities."


Looks like their plan to sucker legislators suckered you.

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote in
message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the substitute
for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve for
health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital), they
negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is substantially lower than
the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and bureaucrats
that would only further raise the costs of care when government gets
involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs, making your characterization a lie.

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:23:37 -0500, Rich Webb
wrote:

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 22:06:24 -0500, "Oppie" wrote:

"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote in
message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve
for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital),
they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is substantially lower
than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and bureaucrats
that would only further raise the costs of care when government
gets involved?

Obama care aside. It is pretty pathetic that insurance as it is
increases the care provider's costs so. A while back I needed to
get an orthotics device (drop foot brace) for my wife. Surgical
supply store quoted something like $275. I balked but took out my
checkbook. The owner thought a minute and reduced the price by
almost 50% since I paid 'cash' and he wouldn't have to wait for
reimbursement.

...Oppie

It's probably been mentioned before, but this graphic from that
well-known lefty marxist rag, National Geographic (*National*, get
it? How much more of an admission of a socialist -- or National
Socialist -- agenda is needed? Scary stuff!) is pretty telling:

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/20...t-of-care.html

The problem with simplistic graphs and explanations is precisely that
they're baby talk simplistic.

For example, one of the reasons for the "unneeded treatment," as they
put it, is ass covering for law suits due to the "absolute liability"
principle U.S. courts have placed on the system.

No such thing has occurred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_liability





"Government"
healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't sue the
government and the 'remedy' is whatever the government, not a
'sympathetic' jury, decides to provide.

Sorry, Obamacare uses private providers.



Whether you think that's 'better' is another matter but there are ways
to improve the problem without government running everything.

Another is that equipment and treatment is much more readily available
in the U.S., and that costs money. Another is that, in the U.S.,
'heroic' effort at end of life is common, and that costs a heap of
money. Now, whether you think it's 'better' to wait 6 months to see a
specialist and that when you get a 'terminal illness' it's appropriate
to just die off and get out of the way to 'save money' is a 'good
thing'

The graphic is of life expectancies, making this a line of bull****. lol

Jon Slaughter wrote:
Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote in
message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the substitute
for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve
for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital),
they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is substantially lower
than the normal insurance rate.


Be quite!!! If Nancy Reed hears that they will outlaw it!

Someone has their parties switched.

It was given away to the republicans. They will not pass a bill
containing it, same as they crippled it for medicare meds. No negotiating
based on scale on the republicans' watch. lol

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:03:21 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote in
message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no longer
accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the substitute
for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve
for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital),
they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is substantially lower
than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and bureaucrats
that would only further raise the costs of care when government gets
involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs,

Government does not 'negotiate'. It legislates, mandates, and
dictates.

Must be why it had to be specifically prohibited by law. lol



making your characterization a lie.

Says the serial liar.

Poor floppy is projecting again. lol

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:11:08 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:23:37 -0500, Rich Webb
wrote:

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 22:06:24 -0500, "Oppie" wrote:

"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote in
message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no
longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve
for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital),
they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is substantially
lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care when
government gets involved?

Obama care aside. It is pretty pathetic that insurance as it is
increases the care provider's costs so. A while back I needed to
get an orthotics device (drop foot brace) for my wife. Surgical
supply store quoted something like $275. I balked but took out my
checkbook. The owner thought a minute and reduced the price by
almost 50% since I paid 'cash' and he wouldn't have to wait for
reimbursement.

...Oppie

It's probably been mentioned before, but this graphic from that
well-known lefty marxist rag, National Geographic (*National*, get
it? How much more of an admission of a socialist -- or National
Socialist -- agenda is needed? Scary stuff!) is pretty telling:

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/20...t-of-care.html

The problem with simplistic graphs and explanations is precisely
that they're baby talk simplistic.

For example, one of the reasons for the "unneeded treatment," as
they put it, is ass covering for law suits due to the "absolute
liability" principle U.S. courts have placed on the system.

No such thing has occurred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_liability

My bad, I meant strict liability.


"Government"
healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't sue the
government and the 'remedy' is whatever the government, not a
'sympathetic' jury, decides to provide.

Sorry, Obamacare uses private providers.

So did Mussolini.

That doesn't save your point. If you have evidence that Obamacare
providers are to be lawsuit-proof, now would be a good time.



Whether you think that's 'better' is another matter but there are
ways to improve the problem without government running everything.

Another is that equipment and treatment is much more readily
available in the U.S., and that costs money. Another is that, in
the U.S., 'heroic' effort at end of life is common, and that costs
a heap of money. Now, whether you think it's 'better' to wait 6
months to see a specialist and that when you get a 'terminal
illness' it's appropriate to just die off and get out of the way to
'save money' is a 'good thing'

The graphic is of life expectancies, making this a line of
bull****. lol

It is a combined graph of cost, life expectancies, and 'number of
visits' and cutting 'cost' spent for 'marginal return', meaning the
elderly and young, is precisely the mechanism espoused by Obama
appointees in their writings..

That doesn't save your point. You can't have America so low on the life
expectancies axis, then claim that the alternative under universal health
care in case of terminal illness is just 'dying off'.

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:54:12 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:11:08 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:23:37 -0500, Rich Webb
wrote:

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 22:06:24 -0500, "Oppie"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote
in message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no
longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a
hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is
substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care when
government gets involved?

Obama care aside. It is pretty pathetic that insurance as it is
increases the care provider's costs so. A while back I needed to
get an orthotics device (drop foot brace) for my wife. Surgical
supply store quoted something like $275. I balked but took out
my checkbook. The owner thought a minute and reduced the price
by almost 50% since I paid 'cash' and he wouldn't have to wait
for reimbursement.

...Oppie

It's probably been mentioned before, but this graphic from that
well-known lefty marxist rag, National Geographic (*National*,
get it? How much more of an admission of a socialist -- or
National Socialist -- agenda is needed? Scary stuff!) is pretty
telling:

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/20...t-of-care.html

The problem with simplistic graphs and explanations is precisely
that they're baby talk simplistic.

For example, one of the reasons for the "unneeded treatment," as
they put it, is ass covering for law suits due to the "absolute
liability" principle U.S. courts have placed on the system.

No such thing has occurred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_liability

My bad, I meant strict liability.


"Government"
healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't sue
the government and the 'remedy' is whatever the government, not a
'sympathetic' jury, decides to provide.

Sorry, Obamacare uses private providers.

So did Mussolini.

That doesn't save your point.

My point, as it was written, stands on it's own.

So, it is your actual claim that government cannot be sued? lol

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:47:00 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:03:21 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote in
message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no
longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash reserve
for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a hospital),
they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is substantially
lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care when
government gets involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs,

Government does not 'negotiate'. It legislates, mandates, and
dictates.

Must be why it had to be specifically prohibited by law. lol

Liberals love to mangle the language and that is a good example
Medicare does not 'negotiate' ANY thing.

Not now, anyway, they prohibited it by law. lol

Next you will be telling us the VA does not 'negotiate'.

Oh, wait, you already did that. HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW

http://www.cov.com/files/Publication...%20Pharmac.pdf

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:18:04 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:54:12 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:11:08 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:23:37 -0500, Rich Webb
wrote:

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 22:06:24 -0500, "Oppie"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote
in message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no
longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a
hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is
substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care
when government gets involved?

Obama care aside. It is pretty pathetic that insurance as it
is increases the care provider's costs so. A while back I
needed to get an orthotics device (drop foot brace) for my
wife. Surgical supply store quoted something like $275. I
balked but took out my checkbook. The owner thought a minute
and reduced the price by almost 50% since I paid 'cash' and
he wouldn't have to wait for reimbursement.

...Oppie

It's probably been mentioned before, but this graphic from that
well-known lefty marxist rag, National Geographic (*National*,
get it? How much more of an admission of a socialist -- or
National Socialist -- agenda is needed? Scary stuff!) is pretty
telling:

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/20...t-of-care.html

The problem with simplistic graphs and explanations is precisely
that they're baby talk simplistic.

For example, one of the reasons for the "unneeded treatment," as
they put it, is ass covering for law suits due to the "absolute
liability" principle U.S. courts have placed on the system.

No such thing has occurred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_liability

My bad, I meant strict liability.


"Government"
healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't sue
the government and the 'remedy' is whatever the government, not
a 'sympathetic' jury, decides to provide.

Sorry, Obamacare uses private providers.

So did Mussolini.

That doesn't save your point.

My point, as it was written, stands on it's own.

So, it is your actual claim that government cannot be sued? lol


Wrong

Really?

healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't sue
the government

Sure looks like you made the claim. lol

What was that about a 'lying ass'...?

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:27:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:47:00 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:03:21 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote
in message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no
longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a
hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is
substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care when
government gets involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs,

Government does not 'negotiate'. It legislates, mandates, and
dictates.

Must be why it had to be specifically prohibited by law. lol

Liberals love to mangle the language and that is a good example
Medicare does not 'negotiate' ANY thing.

Not now, anyway, they prohibited it by law. lol

They never have for ANY thing, you damn snip ass liar.


Next you will be telling us the VA does not 'negotiate'.

Oh, wait, you already did that. HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW

http://www.cov.com/files/Publication...%20Pharmac.pdf



Typical liberal liar as the first 4 words explicitly explain "DoD
Final Rule Mandates..."

"which requires..."

"every manufacturer must offer... equal to or below the Federal
Ceiling Price ("FCP")."

"despite the "voluntary" label, DoD states... pricing to TRRx at or
below FCP to be mandatory.."

There's your lying ass 'negotiation'.

"WAIVER
Under the Final Rule, DoD has indicated that the obligation to pay refunds
for TRRx
prescriptions filled in 2008 could be waived in whole or in part pursuant to
a negotiation of
"voluntary" agreements regarding the prospective availability of covered
drugs to TRRx at
or below FCP."

Why, you're right, there it is, right there. "Negotiation". Gawrsh,
reading really IS fundamental!

Keep lying, ass.

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:47:33 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:18:04 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:54:12 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:11:08 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:23:37 -0500, Rich Webb
wrote:

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 22:06:24 -0500, "Oppie"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker
wrote in message
...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will
no longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care
(at a hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This
rate is substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care
when government gets involved?

Obama care aside. It is pretty pathetic that insurance as it
is increases the care provider's costs so. A while back I
needed to get an orthotics device (drop foot brace) for my
wife. Surgical supply store quoted something like $275. I
balked but took out my checkbook. The owner thought a minute
and reduced the price by almost 50% since I paid 'cash' and
he wouldn't have to wait for reimbursement.

...Oppie

It's probably been mentioned before, but this graphic from
that well-known lefty marxist rag, National Geographic
(*National*, get it? How much more of an admission of a
socialist -- or National Socialist -- agenda is needed?
Scary stuff!) is pretty telling:

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/20...t-of-care.html

The problem with simplistic graphs and explanations is
precisely that they're baby talk simplistic.

For example, one of the reasons for the "unneeded treatment,"
as they put it, is ass covering for law suits due to the
"absolute liability" principle U.S. courts have placed on the
system.

No such thing has occurred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_liability

My bad, I meant strict liability.


"Government"
healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't
sue the government and the 'remedy' is whatever the
government, not a 'sympathetic' jury, decides to provide.

Sorry, Obamacare uses private providers.

So did Mussolini.

That doesn't save your point.

My point, as it was written, stands on it's own.

So, it is your actual claim that government cannot be sued? lol


Wrong

Really?

Yes


healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't sue
the government

Sure looks like you made the claim. lol

What was that about a 'lying ass'...?

Your lying ass snipping, cutting, and pasting out of context.

"Government"
healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't sue
the government and the 'remedy' is whatever the government, not
a 'sympathetic' jury, decides to provide.

"Out of context" = pathetic lie. lol

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:05:13 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:27:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:47:00 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:03:21 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote
in message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no
longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a
hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is
substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care
when government gets involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs,

Government does not 'negotiate'. It legislates, mandates, and
dictates.

Must be why it had to be specifically prohibited by law. lol

Liberals love to mangle the language and that is a good example
Medicare does not 'negotiate' ANY thing.

Not now, anyway, they prohibited it by law. lol

They never have for ANY thing, you damn snip ass liar.


Next you will be telling us the VA does not 'negotiate'.

Oh, wait, you already did that. HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW

http://www.cov.com/files/Publication...%20Pharmac.pdf



Typical liberal liar as the first 4 words explicitly explain "DoD
Final Rule Mandates..."

"which requires..."

"every manufacturer must offer... equal to or below the Federal
Ceiling Price ("FCP")."

"despite the "voluntary" label, DoD states... pricing to TRRx at or
below FCP to be mandatory.."

There's your lying ass 'negotiation'.

"WAIVER
Under the Final Rule, DoD has indicated that the obligation to pay
refunds for TRRx
prescriptions filled in 2008 could be waived in whole or in part
pursuant to a negotiation of
"voluntary" agreements regarding the prospective availability of
covered drugs to TRRx at
or below FCP."

Why, you're right, there it is, right there. "Negotiation".
Gawrsh, reading really IS fundamental!

Yes, just like the word "voluntary" for mandatory price requirements
is "right there" and the supposed 'negotiation' line you quote is that
the RETROACTIVE penalty (required refund for not complying with rules
that didn't exist at the time. How so 'liberal') 'might' (could) be
'waived' if one 'voluntarily' agrees to the MANDATE.

And a mugger 'might' not shoot you if you 'voluntarily' hand over your
wallet.

As I said, Liberals love to mangle the language, a generous alternate
description to what the average person would understandably call
"lying."

OK, have it your way - government never negotiates. The republicans paid
the price in 2008 for preventing medicare from negotiating drug prices when
no such thing was ever possible - and Obama got a health care deal out of
the Pharma companies by promising the bill would not do something that was
already impossible. lol

Apparently, under your scenario, republicans are real dupes.

On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:23:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:05:13 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:27:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:47:00 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:03:21 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker wrote
in message ...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will no
longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care (at a
hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This rate is
substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care
when government gets involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs,

Government does not 'negotiate'. It legislates, mandates, and
dictates.

Must be why it had to be specifically prohibited by law. lol

Liberals love to mangle the language and that is a good example
Medicare does not 'negotiate' ANY thing.

Not now, anyway, they prohibited it by law. lol

They never have for ANY thing, you damn snip ass liar.


Next you will be telling us the VA does not 'negotiate'.

Oh, wait, you already did that. HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW

http://www.cov.com/files/Publication...%20Pharmac.pdf



Typical liberal liar as the first 4 words explicitly explain "DoD
Final Rule Mandates..."

"which requires..."

"every manufacturer must offer... equal to or below the Federal
Ceiling Price ("FCP")."

"despite the "voluntary" label, DoD states... pricing to TRRx at or
below FCP to be mandatory.."

There's your lying ass 'negotiation'.

"WAIVER
Under the Final Rule, DoD has indicated that the obligation to pay
refunds for TRRx
prescriptions filled in 2008 could be waived in whole or in part
pursuant to a negotiation of
"voluntary" agreements regarding the prospective availability of
covered drugs to TRRx at
or below FCP."

Why, you're right, there it is, right there. "Negotiation".
Gawrsh, reading really IS fundamental!

Yes, just like the word "voluntary" for mandatory price requirements
is "right there" and the supposed 'negotiation' line you quote is that
the RETROACTIVE penalty (required refund for not complying with rules
that didn't exist at the time. How so 'liberal') 'might' (could) be
'waived' if one 'voluntarily' agrees to the MANDATE.

And a mugger 'might' not shoot you if you 'voluntarily' hand over your
wallet.

As I said, Liberals love to mangle the language, a generous alternate
description to what the average person would understandably call
"lying."

OK, have it your way - government never negotiates. The republicans paid
the price in 2008 for preventing medicare from negotiating drug prices when
no such thing was ever possible - and Obama got a health care deal out of
the Pharma companies by promising the bill would not do something that was
already impossible. lol

Apparently, under your scenario, republicans are real dupes.

You're a goddamned idiot.

The American people have been duped and idiots like you help perpetuate
it.

UltimatePatriot wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:23:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:05:13 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:27:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:47:00 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:03:21 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker
wrote in message
...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will
no longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care
(at a hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This
rate is substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care
when government gets involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs,

Government does not 'negotiate'. It legislates, mandates, and
dictates.

Must be why it had to be specifically prohibited by law. lol

Liberals love to mangle the language and that is a good example
Medicare does not 'negotiate' ANY thing.

Not now, anyway, they prohibited it by law. lol

They never have for ANY thing, you damn snip ass liar.


Next you will be telling us the VA does not 'negotiate'.

Oh, wait, you already did that. HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW

http://www.cov.com/files/Publication...%20Pharmac.pdf



Typical liberal liar as the first 4 words explicitly explain "DoD
Final Rule Mandates..."

"which requires..."

"every manufacturer must offer... equal to or below the Federal
Ceiling Price ("FCP")."

"despite the "voluntary" label, DoD states... pricing to TRRx at
or below FCP to be mandatory.."

There's your lying ass 'negotiation'.

"WAIVER
Under the Final Rule, DoD has indicated that the obligation to pay
refunds for TRRx
prescriptions filled in 2008 could be waived in whole or in part
pursuant to a negotiation of
"voluntary" agreements regarding the prospective availability of
covered drugs to TRRx at
or below FCP."

Why, you're right, there it is, right there. "Negotiation".
Gawrsh, reading really IS fundamental!

Yes, just like the word "voluntary" for mandatory price requirements
is "right there" and the supposed 'negotiation' line you quote is
that the RETROACTIVE penalty (required refund for not complying
with rules that didn't exist at the time. How so 'liberal') 'might'
(could) be 'waived' if one 'voluntarily' agrees to the MANDATE.

And a mugger 'might' not shoot you if you 'voluntarily' hand over
your wallet.

As I said, Liberals love to mangle the language, a generous
alternate description to what the average person would
understandably call "lying."

OK, have it your way - government never negotiates. The
republicans paid the price in 2008 for preventing medicare from
negotiating drug prices when no such thing was ever possible - and
Obama got a health care deal out of the Pharma companies by
promising the bill would not do something that was already
impossible. lol

Apparently, under your scenario, republicans are real dupes.

You're a goddamned idiot.

About all you ever say around here, innit? lol

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:19:12 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:47:33 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:18:04 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:54:12 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:11:08 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:23:37 -0500, Rich Webb
wrote:

On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 22:06:24 -0500, "Oppie"
wrote:

"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker
wrote in message
...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will
no longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care
(at a hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This
rate is substantially lower than the normal insurance
rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of
care when government gets involved?

Obama care aside. It is pretty pathetic that insurance as
it is increases the care provider's costs so. A while
back I needed to get an orthotics device (drop foot
brace) for my wife. Surgical supply store quoted
something like $275. I balked but took out my checkbook.
The owner thought a minute and reduced the price by
almost 50% since I paid 'cash' and he wouldn't have to
wait for reimbursement.

...Oppie

It's probably been mentioned before, but this graphic from
that well-known lefty marxist rag, National Geographic
(*National*, get it? How much more of an admission of a
socialist -- or National Socialist -- agenda is needed?
Scary stuff!) is pretty telling:

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/20...t-of-care.html

The problem with simplistic graphs and explanations is
precisely that they're baby talk simplistic.

For example, one of the reasons for the "unneeded
treatment," as they put it, is ass covering for law suits
due to the "absolute liability" principle U.S. courts have
placed on the system.

No such thing has occurred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_liability

My bad, I meant strict liability.


"Government"
healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't
sue the government and the 'remedy' is whatever the
government, not a 'sympathetic' jury, decides to provide.

Sorry, Obamacare uses private providers.

So did Mussolini.

That doesn't save your point.

My point, as it was written, stands on it's own.

So, it is your actual claim that government cannot be sued? lol


Wrong

Really?

Yes


healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't
sue the government

Sure looks like you made the claim. lol

What was that about a 'lying ass'...?

Your lying ass snipping, cutting, and pasting out of context.

"Government"
healthcare sure does solve that 'problem' because you can't
sue the government and the 'remedy' is whatever the
government, not a 'sympathetic' jury, decides to provide.

"Out of context" = pathetic lie. lol


Your mangling of posts and taking things out of context does indeed
equate to "pathetic lie."

Poor floppy, once again, believes he is the only one here with a command
of the english language. lol

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:23:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:05:13 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:27:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:47:00 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:03:21 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker
wrote in message
...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will
no longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care
(at a hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This
rate is substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care
when government gets involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs,

Government does not 'negotiate'. It legislates, mandates, and
dictates.

Must be why it had to be specifically prohibited by law. lol

Liberals love to mangle the language and that is a good example
Medicare does not 'negotiate' ANY thing.

Not now, anyway, they prohibited it by law. lol

They never have for ANY thing, you damn snip ass liar.


Next you will be telling us the VA does not 'negotiate'.

Oh, wait, you already did that. HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW

http://www.cov.com/files/Publication...%20Pharmac.pdf



Typical liberal liar as the first 4 words explicitly explain "DoD
Final Rule Mandates..."

"which requires..."

"every manufacturer must offer... equal to or below the Federal
Ceiling Price ("FCP")."

"despite the "voluntary" label, DoD states... pricing to TRRx at
or below FCP to be mandatory.."

There's your lying ass 'negotiation'.

"WAIVER
Under the Final Rule, DoD has indicated that the obligation to pay
refunds for TRRx
prescriptions filled in 2008 could be waived in whole or in part
pursuant to a negotiation of
"voluntary" agreements regarding the prospective availability of
covered drugs to TRRx at
or below FCP."

Why, you're right, there it is, right there. "Negotiation".
Gawrsh, reading really IS fundamental!

Yes, just like the word "voluntary" for mandatory price requirements
is "right there" and the supposed 'negotiation' line you quote is
that the RETROACTIVE penalty (required refund for not complying
with rules that didn't exist at the time. How so 'liberal') 'might'
(could) be 'waived' if one 'voluntarily' agrees to the MANDATE.

And a mugger 'might' not shoot you if you 'voluntarily' hand over
your wallet.

As I said, Liberals love to mangle the language, a generous
alternate description to what the average person would
understandably call "lying."

OK, have it your way - government never negotiates.

Tell you what. Tax time is coming up in a few months so show us all
how it's done by 'negotiating' a different tax rate for yourself and
see how far you get. How about 'negotiating' a lower gasoline tax too?

The republicans paid
the price in 2008 for preventing medicare from negotiating drug
prices when no such thing was ever possible

Liberals claim a lot of things that aren't possible and, as your own
link proved, mangle the language to hide the truth.

- and Obama got a health care deal out of
the Pharma companies by promising the bill would not do something
that was already impossible. lol

As Speaker of the House Pelosi giggled, Obama promised a lot of things
that don't happen.

Apparently, under your scenario, republicans are real dupes.

No, it's just people who take liberals at their word, like calling
mandated pricing 'negotiation', who are duped.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

heh heh heh

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:00:36 -0600, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:58:25 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:23:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:05:13 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 15:27:09 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 09:47:00 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 10:03:21 -0600, "Ouroboros Rex"
wrote:

Oppie wrote:
"Jim Thompson"
/Snicker
wrote in message
...
Important Health Care Announcement...

Mayo Clinic (Glendale, AZ) announced today that they will
no longer accept future Medicare patients, etc...

http://industry.bnet.com/healthcare/...care-payments/

...Jim Thompson

Was listening to the radio today. I think that it was the
substitute for Rush Limbaugh...
They mentioned the Amish communities that put aside a cash
reserve for health care. When someone needs medical care
(at a hospital), they negotiate a cash price rate. This
rate is substantially lower than the normal insurance rate.

What does this say about another layer of middlemen and
bureaucrats that would only further raise the costs of care
when government gets involved?

That it can negotiate for lower costs,

Government does not 'negotiate'. It legislates, mandates, and
dictates.

Must be why it had to be specifically prohibited by law. lol

Liberals love to mangle the language and that is a good example
Medicare does not 'negotiate' ANY thing.

Not now, anyway, they prohibited it by law. lol

They never have for ANY thing, you damn snip ass liar.


Next you will be telling us the VA does not 'negotiate'.

Oh, wait, you already did that. HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW

http://www.cov.com/files/Publication...%20Pharmac.pdf



Typical liberal liar as the first 4 words explicitly explain "DoD
Final Rule Mandates..."

"which requires..."

"every manufacturer must offer... equal to or below the Federal
Ceiling Price ("FCP")."

"despite the "voluntary" label, DoD states... pricing to TRRx at
or below FCP to be mandatory.."

There's your lying ass 'negotiation'.

"WAIVER
Under the Final Rule, DoD has indicated that the obligation to pay
refunds for TRRx
prescriptions filled in 2008 could be waived in whole or in part
pursuant to a negotiation of
"voluntary" agreements regarding the prospective availability of
covered drugs to TRRx at
or below FCP."

Why, you're right, there it is, right there. "Negotiation".
Gawrsh, reading really IS fundamental!

Yes, just like the word "voluntary" for mandatory price requirements
is "right there" and the supposed 'negotiation' line you quote is
that the RETROACTIVE penalty (required refund for not complying
with rules that didn't exist at the time. How so 'liberal') 'might'
(could) be 'waived' if one 'voluntarily' agrees to the MANDATE.

And a mugger 'might' not shoot you if you 'voluntarily' hand over
your wallet.

As I said, Liberals love to mangle the language, a generous
alternate description to what the average person would
understandably call "lying."

OK, have it your way - government never negotiates.

Tell you what. Tax time is coming up in a few months so show us all
how it's done by 'negotiating' a different tax rate for yourself and
see how far you get. How about 'negotiating' a lower gasoline tax too?

The republicans paid
the price in 2008 for preventing medicare from negotiating drug
prices when no such thing was ever possible

Liberals claim a lot of things that aren't possible and, as your own
link proved, mangle the language to hide the truth.

- and Obama got a health care deal out of
the Pharma companies by promising the bill would not do something
that was already impossible. lol

As Speaker of the House Pelosi giggled, Obama promised a lot of things
that don't happen.

Apparently, under your scenario, republicans are real dupes.

No, it's just people who take liberals at their word, like calling
mandated pricing 'negotiation', who are duped.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

First link: The VA Drug Pricing Model: What Senators Should Know

"But the VA does not simply negotiate prices; rather, it **fixes**
prices and then reduces the range of drugs offered to enrollees.
.
.
.
While the VA's pricing practices do not consist of price-fixing
mechanisms alone, they are not "negotiation" either. The VA does not
use its buying power to negotiate with drug companies for lower
prices. Instead, the government, acting through the VA, uses its power
to deny manufacturers market access as a way to extort lower prices.
But these lower prices come at the expense of fewer drugs for
patients."


heh heh heh

Thanks for posting links to how liberals mangle the language to
promulgate falsehoods and lies.



--

THIS POSTING HAS NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH ELECTRONICS
WHY DON'T YOU INSTEAD POST A QUESTION ABOUT A CIRCUIT?

flipper wrote:

First link: The VA Drug Pricing Model: What Senators Should Know

"But the VA does not simply negotiate prices; rather, it **fixes**
prices and then reduces the range of drugs offered to enrollees.
.
.
.
While the VA's pricing practices do not consist of price-fixing
mechanisms alone, they are not "negotiation" either. The VA does not
use its buying power to negotiate with drug companies for lower
prices. Instead, the government, acting through the VA, uses its power
to deny manufacturers market access as a way to extort lower prices.
But these lower prices come at the expense of fewer drugs for
patients."


The VA also imports some medicines and medical supplies from Canada.
Several times my prescriptions were from Canadian companies.


From a VA newsletter for January, 2010:


VA Statement about 2010 Benefits and Programs

WASHINGTON – The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) wants to inform
Veterans and other beneficiaries of the following changes that will take
effect in 2010:

· VA will Freeze Increase in Prescription Copayments: Any
increase in Veterans out-of-pocket payments for pharmaceuticals will be
delayed until June 30, 2010. This means the department will delay a
scheduled $1 increase – to $9 – in the copayments facing Veterans for
each 30-day supply of medicine for the treatment of conditions not
related to military service. During this period, VA will also keep $960
as the maximum, annual out-of-pocket payments for pharmaceuticals for
non-service-related conditions. The $960 cap will not apply to Veterans
in priority groups seven and eight. The yearly maximum out-of-pocket
payment was scheduled to increase to $1,080. There are no copayments
associated with the treatment of conditions related to military service.


--
Greed is the root of all eBay.

flipper wrote:

On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:40:09 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

First link: The VA Drug Pricing Model: What Senators Should Know

"But the VA does not simply negotiate prices; rather, it **fixes**
prices and then reduces the range of drugs offered to enrollees.
.
.
.
While the VA's pricing practices do not consist of price-fixing
mechanisms alone, they are not "negotiation" either. The VA does not
use its buying power to negotiate with drug companies for lower
prices. Instead, the government, acting through the VA, uses its power
to deny manufacturers market access as a way to extort lower prices.
But these lower prices come at the expense of fewer drugs for
patients."


The VA also imports some medicines and medical supplies from Canada.
Several times my prescriptions were from Canadian companies.

Is that an FYI or is there more to it?


It's one of their attempts to control costs, and provide care for
more Veterans on their fixed budget. If they can't get an item in the US
for the budgeted price, they look elsewhere. Generic medicines, and
things like bandages or other consumables are allowed to be bought
outside the US.


--
Greed is the root of all eBay.