Quote:
Originally Posted by rahl
So by your logic if you can't fix something 100% then you shouldn't fix it at all?
|
I don't pretend thing are what they are not. If I "fix" something and it is a bad fix or a temporary fix, I keep working on it until I get it done properly, don't you?
Quote:
|
You do realise that nothing can be 100% percent where humans are concerned right?
|
I used the term "inadequate" for a reason. If you take the time to try to understand my point perhaps you will find that you actually agree with me. Elderly people in MediCare all have the same requirments for eligibility and it is simple:
Quote:
* Must be at least 65 or disabled to qualify
* Must be a legal resident or citizen
* Either you or your spouse must have worked in Medicare-covered employment for at least 10 years.
|
medicarequalifications
Eligibility for SCHIP should be:
*Must be under 18 years old.
From there I would design coverage around preventive, routine, and emergency/catastrophic care.
The current program is inadequate and should not depend on a child's address their parents income or their parents ability or willingness to complete paper work. Being under 18 in this country should allow you to receive the medical care needed
---------- Post added at 05:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:28 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
I love your bizarre analogy.
A program that has an enrollment rate of over 80% (of eligible families) and a participation rate of over 75% is somehow comparable to getting a failing grade - 45% (90 out of 200) on a test score.
WTF kind of logic is that?
|
It is a question of standards. I agree that a person who has low standards may not understand the person or the logic used by the person who has high standards.