Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
In response to waggoner41: Well said!
Also, don’t forget that the Pentagon had a thorough war plan for Iraq, which foretold and planned for a significant post-war effort. This plan was dismissed by Cheney; the generals that disageed with either Cheney or Bush were fired.
I agree with waggoner41. The Bush tax cuts were just a gimmick to garner votes to help the Republicans gain enough votes to control both houses of congress.
The Republicans did the cuts in such a way that it would be nearly impossible for the next administration to allow the taxes to raise back to their pre-Bush levels.
How did the Republicans ever expect to pay for the two needless wars that thet started?
Will the new service have an option where users can rate their experience with a particular real estate agent? For example, a 1-5 star rating.
Sprite,
You just don’t get it.
My suggestion in the [b]Just a Suggestion[/b] post (https://www.welovecostarica.com/members/cfmbb/messages.cfm?threadid=65150D35-24E8-5ED2-F1E6D25AB8B9ADD2) was simply to set up separate forums for bigots like you.
I am just tired of going to the [b]Costa Rica Living Forum[/b] and getting suckered into a caustic thread on either Politics or Religion. Take your bigotry someplace else.
Joe
Scott,
I forgot about sex. However, what is your objection to having separate forums for Politics and Religion?
I am glad that you have joined this discussion.
Joe
I have always been taught to never discuss either politcs or religion with someone that you do not know to be of like mind.
What a way to ruin a possible relationship!
A few links as to where the loophole originated:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/mar/26/tom-coburn/health-bill-appears-exempt-some-congressional-staf/
http://mediamatters.org/research/201003250022A few links to the March 24 AP story that includes Obama’s pledge to enter the exchange voluntarily:
http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/news_details/article/121/2010/march/24/obama-signs-order-on-abortion-in-health-care-bill.html
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/mar/24/obama-issues-order-on-abortions/I will also reply privately in case this gets deleted.
Article from the NY Times on How the Health Care Bill Will Affect You:
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/how-the-health-care-bill-will-affect-you/?emc=eta1
Also, the aforementioned “Loophole” that “Exempts Washington Insiders” was the result of an error in the wording of an amendment sumbitted by a Republican. President Obama has pledged that all White House staff will abide by the intent of the legislation.
Sounds like a rip-off. This is the same price ($65/ft sq) that we were quoted two years ago in the US for a finished house, including an insulated roof, R-19 walls, triple pane windows, hardwood floors, a deep foundation (northern winters) and all kitchen cabinetry. The work was to be done by unionized labor. I can’t believe that non-union labor costs and material in CR are the same as unionized labor and material in the north-eastern US. We are looking forward to responses to your post.
Jet Blue from JFK to SJO departing Feb 2, returning Feb 10 is $149 each way. New planes, great seats!
Something of interest that I received regarding Medicare coverage for expats from Angela Neal at AARP. Please write your comgressman/woman and senators if you are a US Citizen:
Medicare Coverage for Expatriates
By Keith Lind
AARP Public Policy Institute
April 2006By law, Medicare generally does not pay for the health care services delivered to Medicare beneficiaries in a foreign country. For eligible beneficiaries, Medicare will pay for covered services furnished in the United States, including the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands, and within the territorial waters of the U.S. In addition, Medicare will pay for services rendered aboard a ship within six hours of arrival or departure from a U.S. port.
Exceptions to the geographical limits on Medicare coverage are made when a Canadian or Mexican hospital is the closest appropriate facility for (1) emergencies arising in the U.S. or while the beneficiary is traveling between Alaska and the lower 48 states and (2) non-emergencies for U.S. residents.
American expatriates complain that Medicare’s geographic coverage limitations discriminate against them despite eligibility for Medicare by virtue of their contributions to Social Security. Formerly, lack of Medicare portability fell particularly harshly on retired military personnel and their families who lived abroad, because their CHAMPUS/TRICARE benefits ended at age 65. However, since 2001, CHAMPUS for those over age 65, known as TRICARE-for-Life, offers comprehensive fee-for-service benefits at no additional premium for those age 65 and older who are Medicare eligible and enrolled in Part B, regardless of their country of residence.
The number of Medicare eligible Americans living abroad is not known precisely because neither Medicare nor the Census Bureau collects this information; however, independent estimates hover around four million or about 10 percent of the beneficiary population. To some extent, the lack of Medicare portability serves as a disincentive to retiring abroad. In addition, Medicare beneficiaries who want to preserve the option of returning to the U.S. to obtain Medicare-covered services must continue to pay their Part B and Part D premiums or face lifetime premium penalties if they drop out and reenroll later.
Policymakers have resisted extending Medicare portability to beneficiaries living in foreign countries, ostensibly, for two reasons: (1) potential increased costs and (2) administrative difficulties, such as determining appropriate reimbursement rates and ensuring compliance with Medicare conditions of participation.
Advocates for Medicare portability, such as American Citizens Abroad and the Association of Americans Resident Overseas, have criticized this Medicare policy as unfair and discriminatory. Analysts have observed that, while Medicare expenditures might increase as a result of spending for expatriates who are currently paying their health care costs out-of-pocket, the Medicare program would save money to the extent that expatriates could obtain comparable medical services at lower cost in foreign countries, rather than returning to the U.S. for care. This potentially cost saving substitution of foreign services could be obtained for both acute and long-term care services. Advocates point out that allowing Medicare portability would also tend to relieve labor pressures created by shortages of U.S. health care workers.
Additionally, advocates note that administrative obstacles to reimbursement for foreign medical services have been surmounted by the TRICARE program which could serve as a model for Medicare portability. Proponents have also offered a variety of alternatives for expanding Medicare portability, most likely in the form of demonstrations, including the following , :
• Use Part B premiums paid by Medicare eligible expatriates to pay for health care coverage of expatriates in foreign countries, either from the foreign government’s health care program or from private health insurance carriers.
• Allow Medicare eligible expatriates to have Medical Savings Accounts (MSAs) by removing current law requirements which permit only U.S. residents to receive Medicare contributions to MSAs.
• Encourage development of better private health insurance products for Medicare eligible expatriates living in foreign countries where private health insurance and Medigap coverage are either limited or unavailable.
Occasionally, federal legislation has been introduced to expand Medicare portability for expatriates. Currently, a bill is pending in the House (International U.S. Seniors Act, HR 3901) that, if enacted, would provide a special enrollment period in Part B and would waive the late enrollment penalty for expatriate Medicare beneficiaries. This bill also includes an expression of Congressional support for an international convention that would allow foreign governments with reciprocal arrangements to reimburse for the health care costs of their respective expatriates.
AARP does not have policy on whether Medicare coverage should be expanded to include eligible expatriates and has not taken a formal position on proposed legislation that would have this effect.
In the absence of Medicare coverage for services received abroad, most expatriate Medicare beneficiaries need to secure health insurance from another source. Some private insurance companies provide health coverage for people residing abroad but with stipulations, such as requiring the individual to maintain U.S. residency for part of the year or limiting coverage to a certain length of time. Among companies that currently provide expatriate health insurance plans are MediCare International, Lloyd’s of London, and HealthCare International. The cost of a policy that includes hospital inpatient and outpatient physician services is around $8,000 per year in 2006 for an individual age 65-69; similar coverage would cost over $16,000 for someone over age 80. Policies that include coverage for services furnished in the U.S. are more expensive than policies that do not. When checking on whether the coverage offered abroad includes services such as routine care, emergency care, and hospitalization, beneficiaries should consider whether coverage for medical evacuation services is included.
Expatriates may also find it useful to check with organized groups in the American community of their new country of residence to learn about how citizens pay their medical bills and whether the same coverage is available to resident foreigners. In countries where many American expatriates reside, such as Mexico, local private international health insurance companies are more likely to offer coverage to U.S. citizen residents.
Hi Sprite. The issue presented here was not river pollution by growers or nasty odors emanating from neighboring pigs (both the beasts and their owner). Lets confine this discussion to the diversion of water resulting in the property damage.
