I've seen a few people who "project" what he might like. I'd like to project the opposite to show what other intentions this stranger might have. He might like to know that you will continue with him and with whoever he can send your way. He might like having that income. He might be able to concentrate fully, pay attention to detail, and advise you well. It is possible. He might appreciate that you will pace things out to suit his current situation. Any other way of projecting is (in my view) a self-serving way of cutting away from someone in need. He could have been "between insurances" when he found the tumor growing, and not felt comfortable about lying / hiding / non-declaring while filling out the application form for the next insurance. I said it "sounds like what I would hear about one of those third world countries. I'll bet this wouldn't happen in one of those countries that have state-run medical services" because in those systems he wouldn't have been fighting against his life savings when a doctor first spoke and said, "buster, that there thing is bad, and you are going to have to get that sucker taken out real soon before it gits ya." Cutting it out happens real fast when the payor is a great payor. There are no delays when the payor is clearly going to pay. It was a cancer, and the best time to snip it out and start following the recovery process was right away. When all you've ever seen is people hedging about when to do things and how much, it may be hard to imagine that some guy like this would NOT delay this kind of surgery. In fact, the doctors don't even present it to you as "you have to get it done" they just say, "we'll schedule it soon, and if you want more tests to be even more certain, that'll be fine too." I saw a remark above stating that even if it were to happen at no cost to him, he might have delayed it until too late. Hmm. Well, we'll never know, because he can't live simultaneously under two systems so we'll never know how he would have turned out under another system. About the medical coverage, my first comments at the top of this thread could be taken either way. So if anyone wants to thank me, I'm willing to hear it. Recently one GW member wrote that I'm also good at projecting, and even to the point of it being a pathology ... Oh, no! Do I have to declare it in all my insurances? Does this mean it's a downward spiral from here on? Am I stuck with the insurance company I'm with now?

AAACK!!! Arkansasgardenboy I love talking with you so much, I really do!!! You are my all-time favorite gardenweb poster! But please please think about WHY welfare rolls are so small! They have five year limits. For everyone. I am totally supportive of the goal of getting people off welfare. I believe that every one of these work training and childcare assistance programs is so extremely valuable. But the fact is that as welfare rolls are shrinking, food banks and homeless shelters are taking in the slack, and their rolls are increasing exponentially. The rolls shrink because families hit the lifetime limit, and there are NO other options for them. They turn to private charities and homelessness. I don't think that it is good for the government to encourage dependency. But I would rather see a certain amount of dependency (which costs us very, very little, taxwise) than see women and chldren homeless and hungry. Anyone would. And that is the only option that welfare reform has given us. You know that many of the recipients who found employment during the ABSOLUTELY UNPRECEDENTED economic boom that took place during the first years of welfare reform, were working for temp agencies, who switched them from job to job with fluctuating hours. Now that they are being laid off, many are not even eligible for a normal amount of unemployment compensation due to their random patterns of employment. What does a laid-off single mom do when she gets no unemployment and she has reached her lifetime limit of welfare? There is no one in this world that I would punch in the face if given the chance, except for Tommy Thompson. Here is a link that might be useful: http://www.lrna.org/league/PT/PT.2001.02/PT.2001.02.9.html

I know I've said this before but as a Canadian I had to have emergency surgery at the ER earlier this year. Walked in, didn't even have my health card because it was expired, walked out later that night never having signed anything or pay a cent. called the billing clerk at the hospital the next week with my new expiry date and she already had it. No muss no fuss no worries and no cash involved. I pay approximately 50% of my income in taxes and federal contributions off the top plus 15% sales tax on many items and services and I'm happy to do so. In return I have access to equitable and excellent public schools, Canada pension plan and employment insurance. Oh and it takes about 15 minutes to do my tax return. there are four main ways the Canadian System saves money and promotes efficiency: 1. Prices for services are set by the provincial governments who act as the public insurer. as we discussed for example a single issue office visit at a GP is $30 In my province. 2. A whole huge layer of middleman and complexity is removed because the system is so simple. What might be a whole wing for billing in an American hospital is a room in a Canadian hospital. Not to mention we don't have intermediate insurers taking a cut. 3. Government negotiate the price of prescription drugs. 4. Family doctors are trained to act as gatekeepers and cost managers. For example if they can solve your problem they wont refer you to a specialist. there's no such thing as an MRI on demand In Nova Scotia unless you want to pay $900 for a private one. This is the most frustrating aspect of the system. but it does make sense, essentially if you're demanding a bunch of testing that doesn't fit the gold standard of care you were likely to be denied.

I may be mistaken, but the Common Core is a set of standards; how they are met is the district's business. A minimum standard of education seems like a good thing. If it is challenging, we ought to ask why. The "new math" can be confusing because it teaches several options for generating answers, and it is not rote -- you have to understand the concept (math expressions is pretty good in elementary). And vouchers -- if charter and other for-profit schools pop up, they will market any way they can to get your voucher dollars. They will decline to educate those with challenging behaviors, special needs, IEPs, 501s, and those children will be left to the public schools, with fewer resources to meet their needs. If you have the money -- great -- buy whatever education you wish. But if you don't have the money, you will be limited to what the voucher folks offer -- and they would aim to make a profit doing so. The incentives to create great 'results' will be immense -- so teaching to the tests (so they can advertise their students do well); and dropping challenging students.... the incentives will be in the wrong place. Some charter schools do very well, but for accurate comparisons, the number of free/reduced lunches, special needs students, english as a second language, etc. needs to be similar for true comparison.