Question:

Hello everybody, I am currently in a 4-year Bachelor of Applied Business program. I have a choice of Accounting or financial planning ? Which direction should  I go in terms of finding a job ? Thanks, Accounting Or Financial Planning Man

Response:

Hello everybody, I am currently in a 4-year Bachelor of Applied Business program. I have a choice of Accounting or financial planning ? Which direction should  I go in terms of finding a job ? Thanks, Accounting Or Financial Planning Man

I take it these are electives in your Applied Business degree?  In my opinion, if you are working on a business degree such as this, you should have an understanding of basic accounting.  Accounting after all is the language of business.  I would select accounting because it is useful in more areas of business than financial planning. Preston Singleton – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Hello everybody, I am currently in a 4-year Bachelor of Applied Business program. I have a choice of Accounting or financial planning ? Which direction should  I go in terms of finding a job ? Thanks, Accounting Or Financial Planning Man

That depends strictly on you.  Good money can be made in both fields.  Look further into both of them in terms of what courses you may need.  Probably you will find that the courses will be very similar.  With an accounting background there are so many things that a person can choose to do. Accounting will be necessary for both of these if you really want to do a good for clients. Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation

Response:

I’ve had jobs doing both since college.  Put it this way doing accounting your guaranteed to get paid everyweek.  If you like working on commission that’s what financial planning is all about.  My problem was that I was never motivated enough to work for free until I got going on financial planning, plus it seems you got to have a more salesperson mentality for financial planning, and I don’t have that.  Put it this way I know people who are fairly rich doing either one.  I have an accounting degree and have had no problem getting financial planning jobs, so what I would do, is get your degree in accounting, and get a job as an accountant, and if you still think you wanna try financial planning do it part time while working as an accountant to see how much you like it and what the better income of the two is.  I’m not saying all financial planning is strictly commission.. The two places I worked for were and I hate strict commission.  I made some money doing it but got out of it when the next accounting job came by.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello everybody, I am currently in a 4-year Bachelor of Applied Business program. I have a choice of Accounting or financial planning ? Which direction should  I go in terms of finding a job ? Thanks, Accounting Or Financial Planning Man

Response:

Question:

Just finishing up OE in intermediate II. Quasi reorganization sounds very interesting. Of course my text omitted it in the new ed., but my instructor thought it important to learn. I am wondering if any of you have been involved with quasi reorganization? Janice

Response:

  Just finishing up OE in intermediate II. Quasi reorganization sounds very interesting. Of course my text omitted it in the new ed., but my instructor thought it important to learn. I am wondering if any of you have been involved with quasi reorganization?   Janice   I’ve been involved with lots of reorganizations but none of them were described as "quasi"

Response:

The old text used the term quasi (from the Latin sort of) to describe the way in which the controller or new head accountant would bring a company’s negative RE to 0 by reassigning values to all or almost all assets and then using the contributed capital portion of the OE (in particular which ever APIC was appropriate). By the by, this is in very general terms. I am well aware of the fact that things are not this easy. ) For a laugh, my instructor tells us that we never want to get mixed up with APIC because there is a room just for APIC, buckets and buckets of different types, and once you go in you’ll never come out clean because it sticks to you. Janice   I’ve been involved with lots of reorganizations but none of them were described as "quasi"

Response:

Why are we posting in HTML to USENET? YES he is correct about APIC.   My company has APIC from common stock sold or issued for services or whatnot, APIC from detachable warrants sold with mandatorily redeemable preferred stock, APIC from beneficial conversion option on a convertible note payable, etc, etc.  To date we have not posted a profit so I don’t have to deal with the diluted EPS on all of these things (fortunately or unfortunately depending on your perspective). We just sold common stock + warrants and at this point I am unsure if we allocate the proceeds in part to the warrants issued in these transactions. I have looked in my accounting text and it discusses only the debt/preferred stock + warrants situation. The quasi-reorg, I dunno what to tell you.  Maybe if you plugged the term into google you will see some financials of a company that has done it. Essentially it is a way to permit the co to pay dividends, as I understand it.  The accumulated deficit wipes out. That is the point of the quasi-reorganization.

The old text used the term quasi (from the Latin sort of) to describe the way in which the controller or new head accountant would bring a company’s negative RE to 0 by reassigning values to all or almost all assets and then using the contributed capital portion of the OE (in particular which ever APIC was appropriate). By the by, this is in very general terms. I am well aware of the fact that things are not this easy. ) For a laugh, my instructor tells us that we never want to get mixed up with APIC because there is a room just for APIC, buckets and buckets of different types, and once you go in you’ll never come out clean because it sticks to you. Janice

I’ve been involved with lots of reorganizations but none of them were described as "quasi"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why are we posting in HTML to USENET? //snipped// O/T Are you speaking French or do you have a frog on your keyboard? <grin Because they can.  If you use HTML enabled browsers, you see the HTML a lot.  If you use them in  text mode, no HTML. I use Agent from Fortec for mail and newsgroups…I worry less about viruses and have no worries about HTML.

Yes, the age-old response – "get a real newsreader!" I have heard that one before.  Maybe someday.

Response:

Question:

you reverse the entry only one.  in other words you look at what is referred to the T which is bank on one side and expense account on the other.  you redeposit and explain in the subject why you are reversing it.

Response:

you reverse the entry only one.  in other words you look at what is referred to the T which is bank on one side and expense account on the other.  you redeposit and explain in the subject why you are reversing it.

If you are referring to Angela Thornton’s post about a stale-dated check, your response is not in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles as they exist in the United States. Wayne Brasch, CPA, M. S. Taxation

Response:

Question:

James Jaeger is a failed filmmaker and $cientologist who grew up on the Main Line in Philadelphia and rails constantly about the "Jewish conspiracy" in Hollywood that’s keeping him out. If I remember correctly, he is no longer a scientologist – he was too loony even for them. Maybe he should date Barbara Schwarz. It is good possible that Garry Scarff will also flee the United States from justice to Germany, just as Gerry Armstrong did. Will you take Garry in Tilmann?

Barbara!!!! I know we enjoy being at each other’s jugulars, and you really hate me because I’ve been playing proctologist with Marty..you know..driving down the Hershey highway…but moving in with Tilman?? Ick!! That’s as mean as telling me I can’t accessorize! Anyway, I don’t really want to know, to be honest.

Then, why’d you ask? But something is of course very wrong with your head too, Tilman Hausherr. You posted that James Jeager claimed that the Jews conspire against him and I should date him. I don’t date any man, because I have crystal clear flash backs and memories that I married Marty Rathbun and are still married to him.

You might have been married to him, but he shares my bed every night and your name never comes up. But if that would be not the case, why on earth would I date a Nazi? I claim that a still existing German Nazi secret service controls the world, the other guy claims that the Jews do it. So why would such different people want to date, Tilman? You’re asking the wrong person, Barbara. Tilman is asexual. The closest he has come to a real girlfriend is a $19.95 blow-up doll. It’s really more likely that *you* would date Gerry Scarff than me anybody you recommend to bring me closer to accept Nazis.

I would NOT date you Barbara..sorry, nothing personal…but wrong gender. I am solely into hot, studly men. And Tilman is out, too. I don’t date outside of my species.

Response:

James Jaeger is a failed filmmaker and $cientologist who grew up on the Main Line in Philadelphia and rails constantly about the "Jewish conspiracy" in Hollywood that’s keeping him out.

If I remember correctly, he is no longer a scientologist – he was too loony even for them. Maybe he should date Barbara Schwarz. — Tilman Hausherr  [KoX, SP5.55]  Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment     Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails. Find broken links on your web site:  http://home.snafu.de/tilman/xenulink.html The Xenu bookstore:                  http://home.snafu.de/tilman/bookstore.html

Response:

James Jaeger is a failed filmmaker and $cientologist who grew up on the Main Line in Philadelphia and rails constantly about the "Jewish conspiracy" in Hollywood that’s keeping him out. If I remember correctly, he is no longer a scientologist – he was too loony even for them. Maybe he should date Barbara Schwarz.

*plonk*

Response:

James Jaeger is a failed filmmaker and $cientologist who grew up on the Main Line in Philadelphia and rails constantly about the "Jewish conspiracy" in Hollywood that’s keeping him out. If I remember correctly, he is no longer a scientologist – he was too loony even for them. Maybe he should date Barbara Schwarz.

It is good possible that Garry Scarff will also flee the United States from justice to Germany, just as Gerry Armstrong did. Will you take Garry in Tilmann? Will you embrace Garry as you embraced Gerry? Anyway, I don’t really want to know, to be honest. But something is of course very wrong with your head too, Tilman Hausherr. You posted that James Jeager claimed that the Jews conspire against him and I should date him. I don’t date any man, because I have crystal clear flash backs and memories that I married Marty Rathbun and are still married to him. But if that would be not the case, why on earth would I date a Nazi? I claim that a still existing German Nazi secret service controls the world, the other guy claims that the Jews do it. So why would such different people want to date, Tilman? It’s really more likely that *you* would date Gerry Scarff than me anybody you recommend to bring me closer to accept Nazis. Barbara Schwarz

Response:

If you’re sick of all the trash coming out of Hollywood, circulate the below post to as many of your friends and associates as possible.  Also, feel free to join in on the very active discussion going on at http://www.b2g4.com/boards/board.cgi?&user=FilmReform Hollywood Insider’s Club Posted on August 19, 2003 at 10:48:01 AM by John Cones, Esq. Hollywood publicist Paul Rosenfield refers to the Hollywood insiders’ group as "The Club" and he thought so much of their preeminence that he titled his 1992 book about Hollywood The Club Rules. Rosenfield specifically asserts that "the club" controls show business. In his words, the club " . . . which controls show business–is provocative because it’s based not just on connections or power or style–but all of these together–and it prefers to remain private." Rosenfield further states that "Club traditions are very deeply rooted, the way traditions were in the Old Country–and they must be paid attention to." Rosenfield does not make it clear whether he is referring to a specific "old country" or a number of different European countries from which most of the Hollywood insider’s can trace their ancestry, including Russia, Germany, Austria and Poland (see Ephraim Katz’ Film Encyclopedia). Rosenfield, thus may be referring to the fact that most of the people in the Hollywood insider’s club are direct descendants of fairly recent immigrants from Europe whose loyalty to their extended family or ethnicity is still dominant. Rosenfield also fails to systematically analyze the racial, ethnic, religious and/or cultural backgrounds of the club members. Rosenfield does, however, go on to say that a person needs " . . . billions to buy . . . " his or her way into the Hollywood insider’s club " . . . and even then it’s iffy . . . more than anything else . . . " he states, " . . . you had to play by the rules." But, Rosenfield’s concept of the insider’s group that control’s Hollywood is more expansive than most. He suggests, for example, that there are " . . . a thousand people floating around the top of this world–and they all know each other. They make money together, and sometimes they make magic–and almost always they protect each other. They are the club that controls show business–the attorneys, agents, talents, studio chiefs, and bankers–and they know who they are." The ten years of work in Hollywood and research that went into the writing of this book and the associated series on Hollywood, including the observations of others who have written about this phenomenon, make it clear that it is even more accurate to say that the U.S. motion picture industry is dominated by a small group of vertically integrated major studio/distributors and talent agencies, the vast majority of whose top executives and their associates are members of an insider’s group who routinely move from company to company within that small group of major studio/distributors and agencies (see the discussion relating to the "Executive Shuffle or Musical Chairs" in the companion volume How the Movie Wars Were Won). Rosenfield, for example, makes the claim in his book that certain movie stars are actually considered to be in "the club". On the other hand, he goes on to say, they are there for a reason, (i.e., " . . . every movie star in the club–and there aren’t that many–is in the club because of sex (read "sexuality") . . . " In other words, he observes that " . . . stars . . . are part of the club machinery, the public part." Rosenfield thus, is admitting that the stars are involved with the Hollywood insider’s club merely as window dressing. It thus appears, that stars are by definition not really members of "the club". Lawyer and former Universal Pictures business affairs executive Rudy Petersdorf agrees that talent seldom gets into the Hollywood insider’s club. He is quoted in Pierce O’Donnell and Dennis McDougal’s book Fatal Subtraction as saying: " . . . talent can only move from one lower caste to a slightly higher caste. A select few get to be gross players, but they are still only talent. They never get into The Club. As soon as their box office draw diminishes, they descend back down the caste ladder . . . " Rosenfield also later admits that " . . . the club is comprised of more business people than creative people . . . " and suggests how unlikely it is that talent will actually be included in "The Club" by reporting on the attitude of club members toward talent. He states that " . . . these businessmen believe they are not going to be played with by the talent." In other words, the top studio executives and agents look on talent as something to exploit, and little more. As David Prindle reported in his 1993 book Risky Business-The Political Economy of Hollywood, "Hollywood’s liberal political slant influences the sorts of stories its citizens want to tell and colors the way they interpret objections to those stories." Prindle goes on to say that " . . . it is not Hollywood’s willingness to embrace national problems in movies and on television that is disturbing. It is the relentless one-dimensional viewpoint that dominates the films and television that come out of the industry." Thus, the available evidence supports the conclusion that the small group of men at the top in Hollywood, and others associated with them, are politically liberal (also see the discussion under the heading "Liberal Political Slant" in the earlier chapter entitled "Patterns of Bias: Movies Mirror Their Makers"). In addition, however, Medved points out that the " . . . best available study of the industry establishment (for ‘Public Opinion’, 1983) shows that 93 percent of (the entertainment community) . . . attend no religious services of any kind . . . " Lawyer and former Universal Pictures business affairs executive Rudy Petersdorf echoed these observations in Fatal Subtraction saying: "[s]tudios are like a secret club. Their whole raison d’etre is to perpetuate the privileged, luxurious lifestyle of a select few white males . . . They don’t care about the stockholders . . . They don’t care about the talent. And they don’t care about the quality of the movies. They want to perpetuate their power and huge incomes. So when a studio head falls from grace, he never falls far from the trough. He gets an independent production deal or gets hired by another studio. He is still a member of The Club." O’Donnell and McDougal later reiterated in the same article cited above that "[f]or the most part, ultimate power in Hollywood rests with an exclusive group–The Club-of two dozen white males, too many of whom have little or no taste, are not intellectually curious or well read, do not see many movies, and seldom watch plays. Almost none have been filmmakers, writers or directors; instead, Club members are self-selected from the ranks of law firms, talent agencies, television networks, and other studios." Without raising the more specific issues of religious or cultural heritage, and notwithstanding the arbitrariness and irrelevance of placing a precise number on the size of Hollywood’s inner circle, O’Donnell and McDougal are clearly critical of the way the U.S. film industry is run and places the primary blame directly on that small group of "white males". O’Donnell and McDougal further observe in their 1992 book Fatal Attraction that " . . . a fired studio boss usually lands on his feet–either at another studio, his own production company or a talent agency. It is one big happy Club . . . " they say, again making reference to the fact that membership in that club is " . . . reserved almost exclusively for white males." The O’Donnell/McDougal writing team go on to say that "[b]y their bad taste, lack of creativity, biases, and anti-competitive business practices, many studio executives have abused the public trust . . . " In another variation on the same statement by McDougal and O’Donnell, the pair report that a " . . . handful of greedy men with often questionable talent ran the movie business like a private emirate . . . They were members of a loosely knit club who moved in and out of studio hierarchies, made mega-bomb movies and still bounced back, never seeming to lose a paycheck in the process. They held all the power, scratched each other’s backs and operated the industry at the expense of others, hiding their lucrative dealings behind a cloak of accounting and contractual secrecy that rarely saw the antiseptic light of a public trial." The reference to "others" in the phrase "at the expense of others", refers to the corporate shareholders of the major studios, all net profit participants including actors, actresses, writers, producers, directors and outside investors, and even gross profit participants considering the prospects for thievery inherent in the settlement transaction (see the related discussions in How the Movie Wars Were Won and The Feature Film Distribution Deal). O’Donnell and McDougal continued by saying that this " . . . Hollywood executives club surfaced as a group from time to time: during Hollywood charity dinners, labor negotiations with the guilds, Beverly Hills bar mitzvahs, (which is as close as the McDougal/O’Donnell team come to suggesting a religious/cultural heritage for the group) Motion Picture Association of America meetings and celebrity funerals. Most of the time, however, the studio cabal remained an informal network with one overriding credo: Don’t rock the boat. All of that was popular knowledge in the film business, but no writer or producer or actor or director had been able to break the system’s grip for almost a century because everyone who made movies was genuinely afraid of the old Hollywood adage: if you buck the system, you’ll never work in this town again." [Excerpted from "What's Really Going On In Hollywood" by John W. Cones a free copy of the book at http://www.homevideo.net/FIRM/whats.htm ] Source: … read more »

Response:

Question:

yes. open the entered invoice. on the toolbar, find ‘adjust invoice’ enter relevant information. post.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t know if this is the best group but this has been puzzling me for some time now. When using Simply Accounting v7 to generate invoices, I occasionally find I have missed something  after I post the invoice. Items like a spelling mistake or forgetting to enter a PO number. The error is not an accounting one but something I would like to be able to correct before mailing the invoice. Is it possible to change the invoice without having to generate a reverse journal entry and generating another invoice? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks Bob

Response:

Works like a charm.  I’ve tried this before but must have given up because I was clicking on some accounting field or something and just went for the manual method. Thanks  J.T.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – yes. open the entered invoice. on the toolbar, find ‘adjust invoice’ enter relevant information. post. I don’t know if this is the best group but this has been puzzling me for some time now. When using Simply Accounting v7 to generate invoices, I occasionally find I have missed something  after I post the invoice. Items like a spelling mistake or forgetting to enter a PO number. The error is not an accounting one but something I would like to be able to correct before mailing the invoice. Is it possible to change the invoice without having to generate a reverse journal entry and generating another invoice? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks Bob

Response:

I don’t know if this is the best group but this has been puzzling me for some time now. When using Simply Accounting v7 to generate invoices, I occasionally find I have missed something  after I post the invoice. Items like a spelling mistake or forgetting to enter a PO number. The error is not an accounting one but something I would like to be able to correct before mailing the invoice. Is it possible to change the invoice without having to generate a reverse journal entry and generating another invoice? Any ideas appreciated. Thanks Bob

Response:

Question:

I’m wondering if that means they want a broader "bracket" (expand the 27% range to include lower incomes) or if it means raising the rates.  Does 27% become 36%?

Based on our experience with "Read my lips" George the 41st, my guess would be lowering the rates at the top and extending the top rates much deeper. The effect would be a flatter tax – George & Dick pay less – you and I pay more. I also think that would be a political disaster.  There are a lot more people making $60,000 per year than $600,000.   Jim

Response:

New Tax Plan May Bring Shift In Burden Poor Could Pay A Bigger Share By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, December 16, 2002; Page A03 As the Bush administration draws up plans to simplify the tax system, it is also refining arguments for why it may be necessary to shift more of the tax load onto lower-income workers.

=== The Washington Post is putting the Democrats’ spin on the story.  Everyone except the freeloaders will probably benefit.  The Liberals don’t like to see any reduction whatsoever for high-income taxpayers, but want to give Earned Income Credits to freeloaders. If either party really wanted to simplify taxes they should [1] Start with gross, total income.  [2] Allow deduction for any expense whatsoever incurred in order to enable the person to earn that income (with a standard maximum allowance for commuting and  a mileage allowance for business car expense).  [3] Allow Medical expenses in full. [4] Allow a standard deduction for food, clothing, shelter.  [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?) The tax return could be reduced to a post card size, even with a progressive tax rate–the complicated part of taxes is not the mathematics of calculating it once you arrive at taxable income.

Response:

, my guess would be lowering the rates at the top and extending the top rates much deeper. The effect would be a flatter tax – George & Dick pay less – you and I pay more. I also think that would be a political disaster.  There are a lot more people making $60,000 per year than $600,000.

George and Dick are well aware that it would be a political disaster.  Even if they tried something that stupid, the congressmen and senators want to be re-elected time and again and would never vote for it.   The fat cats may get a bigger cut, but they won’t offset it by increasing taxes on lower incomes. One method they may revive is  "bracket creep" which is the slickest way to raise taxes through use of the printing press and inflating incomes and cost of living so that you pay a higher percent. $6000 a year used to be a good salary.  Now $60,000 is only a moderate income. A buck private in the Army used to get $21 per month.  In WW II, they raised it to $75 a month. At that time, $21 a month was better than the breadline.

Response:

George and Dick are well aware that it would be a political disaster. Even if they tried something that stupid, the congressmen and senators want to be re-elected time and again and would never vote for it.  

We will all be on the edge of our seats watching this one. The fat cats may get a bigger cut, but they won’t offset it by increasing taxes on lower incomes.

Someone has to get an increase – unless overall spending is reduced – which is highly unlikely if we go to war with Iraq. One method they may revive is  "bracket creep" which is the slickest way to raise taxes through use of the printing press and inflating incomes and cost of living so that you pay a higher percent. $6000 a year used to be a good salary.  Now $60,000 is only a moderate income. A buck private in the Army used to get $21 per month.  In WW II, they raised it to $75 a month. At that time, $21 a month was better than the breadline.

The above only works during inflationary periods.  Presently we are flirting with deflation. Jim

Response:

[3] Allow Medical expenses in full.

I can’t see any rhyme or reason to your prescriptions. The medical establishment should not be favored by tax subsidies. It should be taxed just as heavily as every other sector of the economy, until there is both, universal health care and removal of structural barriers that are blocking the supply of doctors and nurses. [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?)

THAT is something long overdue!   But what difference if we agree on this or that? What are your *principles*? Todd

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m wondering if that means they want a broader "bracket" (expand the 27% range to include lower incomes) or if it means raising the rates.  Does 27% become 36%? Based on our experience with "Read my lips" George the 41st, my guess would be lowering the rates at the top and extending the top rates much deeper. The effect would be a flatter tax – George & Dick pay less – you and I pay more. I also think that would be a political disaster.  There are a lot more people making $60,000 per year than $600,000. Jim

As I see it, you can pay directly or you can pay indirectly, but you will pay. The only solution is to shrink government, e.g., get rid of Medicare, etc…   Not going to happen.  It is also impossible to control as "needs" are unlimited and will expand to consume any identifiable resource. The thing is like a baloon, it will expand until it bursts. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – George and Dick are well aware that it would be a political disaster. Even if they tried something that stupid, the congressmen and senators want to be re-elected time and again and would never vote for it. We will all be on the edge of our seats watching this one. The fat cats may get a bigger cut, but they won’t offset it by increasing taxes on lower incomes. Someone has to get an increase – unless overall spending is reduced – which is highly unlikely if we go to war with Iraq.

Let you in on a little secret.  War has nothing to do with it.  You know who used Viet Nam as an excuse to blow domestic spending out of all known proportion.  Slimeball O’Neil & cohorts pulled the same stunt when Reagan was trying to build up the defenses.  You want a $1 for defense, you have to sign these $4 worth of pork to keep us in office. When you have time, get the budget, its on the net, and compare the Defense Budget to HHS, HUD & Do.Ed. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – One method they may revive is  "bracket creep" which is the slickest way to raise taxes through use of the printing press and inflating incomes and cost of living so that you pay a higher percent. $6000 a year used to be a good salary.  Now $60,000 is only a moderate income. A buck private in the Army used to get $21 per month.  In WW II, they raised it to $75 a month. At that time, $21 a month was better than the breadline. The above only works during inflationary periods.  Presently we are flirting with deflation. Jim

– *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [3] Allow Medical expenses in full. I can’t see any rhyme or reason to your prescriptions. The medical establishment should not be favored by tax subsidies. It should be taxed just as heavily as every other sector of the economy, until there is both, universal health care and removal of structural barriers that are blocking the supply of doctors and nurses. [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?) THAT is something long overdue! But what difference if we agree on this or that? What are your *principles*? Todd

I would go with the one fixed percentage against all income earned by labor. I would also close down HHS, HUD, Do.Ed., and a big chunk of Ag., and Interior. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [3] Allow Medical expenses in full. I can’t see any rhyme or reason to your prescriptions. The medical establishment should not be favored by tax subsidies. It should be taxed just as heavily as every other sector of the economy, until there is both, universal health care and removal of structural barriers that are blocking the supply of doctors and nurses. [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?) THAT is something long overdue! But what difference if we agree on this or that? What are your *principles*? Todd I would go with the one fixed percentage against all income earned by labor. So unearned income wouldn’t be taxed at all???

Correct.  I want the maximum amount of National capital formation possible and I want it to follow the "invisible hand." It would lower the cost of money and spur investment, building the Nation’s wealth. I would also close down HHS, HUD, Do.Ed., and a big chunk of Ag., and Interior. HHS and Ed. are semi-pointelss, but HUD helps a lot with the poor, it just needs a beauracratic overhaul.

HUD is one of those really bad ideas that even the english permanent civil service wouldn’t be able to get to work. It can’t be fixed and no one has ever been able to even get it veer into a reasonably useful direction.  It is and always will be a massive failure. -=john=-

– *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

[5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?)

Well, I don’t have a million dollar house and I find the mortgage interest deduction to be quite nice.  I would say that this deduction isn’t going to put much of a dent in the tax burden of someone that can afford a million dollar house to begin with. — Todd Stephens

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [3] Allow Medical expenses in full. I can’t see any rhyme or reason to your prescriptions. The medical establishment should not be favored by tax subsidies. It should be taxed just as heavily as every other sector of the economy, until there is both, universal health care and removal of structural barriers that are blocking the supply of doctors and nurses. [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?) THAT is something long overdue! But what difference if we agree on this or that? What are your *principles*? Todd I would go with the one fixed percentage against all income earned by labor.

So unearned income wouldn’t be taxed at all??? I would also close down HHS, HUD, Do.Ed., and a big chunk of Ag., and Interior.

HHS and Ed. are semi-pointelss, but HUD helps a lot with the poor, it just needs a beauracratic overhaul. -=john=-

Response:

I read somewhere else recently that the administration was planning to squeeze a substantial sum out of Medicare.  I don’t know how they plan to provide drug benefits to seniors, which they also claim to be working on, while cutting funding.

I’m wondering if that means they want a broader "bracket" (expand the 27% range to include lower incomes) or if it means raising the rates.  Does 27% become 36%? — Todd Stephens

Response:

"The president is making the case that people who earn between $50 [thousand] and $75,000 a year should be paying a third more taxes," Matsui said. "I’d love to debate him on that."

Well, my household falls in that category.  I didn’t realize I was working poor though. (Actually, I do work, and I feel poor most of the time so maybe that counts.)  Paying 1/3 more taxes?  I’d love to debate GWB on that one as well. — Todd Stephens

Response:

New Tax Plan May Bring Shift In Burden Poor Could Pay A Bigger Share By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, December 16, 2002; Page A03 <snip "The president is making the case that people who earn between $50 [thousand] and $75,000 a year should be paying a third more taxes," Matsui said. "I’d love to debate him on that."

"A third more" than what?  That’s as empty as "half off", "the more you shop, the more you save", and "Hi, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help". — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens,  Georgia

Response:

"A third more" than what?  That’s as empty as "half off", "the more you shop, the more you save", and "Hi, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help".

I think the implication was that their tax burden is only 2/3 of what some believe it should be. — Todd Stephens

Response:

"A third more" than what?  That’s as empty as "half off", "the more you shop, the more you save", and "Hi, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help". I think the implication was that their tax burden is only 2/3 of what some believe it should be.

That was what I got out of it. I’ve been expecting this – or something similiar.   It is real easy for the new guy to talk about tax cuts, but doing it is another matter.   I read somewhere else recently that the administration was planning to squeeze a substantial sum out of Medicare.  I don’t know how they plan to provide drug benefits to seniors, which they also claim to be working on, while cutting funding. I still think of "Read my lips" George the 41st every time I do a schedule A.   Jim

Response:

New Tax Plan May Bring Shift In Burden Poor Could Pay A Bigger Share By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, December 16, 2002; Page A03 As the Bush administration draws up plans to simplify the tax system, it is also refining arguments for why it may be necessary to shift more of the tax load onto lower-income workers. <snip The Council of Economic Advisers’ "Economic Report to the President," scheduled for release late next month or in early February, is to include a section arguing for new methods to calculate the distribution of tax burdens on various income groups. The Treasury Department is working up more sophisticated distribution tables that are expected to make the poor appear to be paying less in taxes and the rich to be paying more. <snip The tenor of the administration’s policy discussions marks a dramatic shift from early in 2001, when Bush sold his 10-year, $1.35 trillion tax cut as a tool to "take down the tollgate on the road to the middle class," emphasizing its beneficial impact on workers "on the outskirts of poverty." At that time, the administration fretted over the tax burden on the working poor, which the White House calculated to include federal income taxes, state taxes and the Social Security tax. <snip But advocates of this new line can expect a furious backlash. Liberal commentators have already reduced the argument to an appeal to tax the poor, and even conservatives worry that the label will stick. "It’s hard to conclude it’s anything else," said the Heritage Foundation’s Beach. Michael J. Graetz, a Yale University law professor and tax reform expert, said he could not figure out where the administration’s arguments are supposed to lead. "I would be very surprised if the agenda is to put more people on the tax rolls," he said. "That doesn’t seem like a good political agenda." But Democrats say that is exactly where the administration is heading. Matsui (Rep. Robert T. Matsui – D-Calif) said he sees the seeds of a disastrous Republican overreach. "The president is making the case that people who earn between $50 [thousand] and $75,000 a year should be paying a third more taxes," Matsui said. "I’d love to debate him on that." <snip http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59577-2002Dec15.html The Democrats may be finding their issue. Jim Hudspeth

Response:

Question:

Agreed- user fees are a great idea – they’d separate the wheat from the chaff for sure! too many abusers make the msp rates go up along with the docs’ salaries and cost of medicine overall! I’d better stop before the soapbox gets stuck to my shoes! Shelagh  AT    valleylu…@telus.net Lupus – Invisible in Plain Sight   AT http://www3.telus.net/valleylupus/index.html "Beverley" <pottings…@sybercom.net> wrote in message

news:ucbujj4icta880@corp.supernews.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> A user fee would be a darn good idea especially with Medicaid patients. The > hospital emergency rooms are overflowing with them because they can "afford" > (using our tax dollars) to visit the emergency room over stubbed toes, hang > nails, and sniffles! And they get to ride in either an ambulance, or taxi > there free!! Yet when our neighbor who was battling cancer of the spine > found it too painful to ride in the car to the hospital for treatments – she > had to use a medical transport vehicle. Her insurance would not cover the > cost of the transport so she paid the very high cost of medical transport > out of pocket.  Our system is not fair! Yet most socialized medicine is > failing both the public and financially. > Over the years I have watched the cost of medication rise. Not because the > production costs have risen but because insurance companies became involved > in paying the cost of Rx’s. Twenty years ago that pink liquid bottle of > ampicillin used on just abut every child cost a little over a dollar. When > health insurance companies started to pay for it the cost rose dramatically. > When my granddaughter needed it the cost was almost $20. Shocking! That same > stuff (so I’ve heard) sells without a Rx in Europe for about $2. > Our system is far from perfect. Insurance companies and pharmaceutical > companies do pressure doctors and hospitals here virtually calling the shots > at times. Personally I’d like to see the insurance companies go away. Things > would probably be better. (Of course they won’t they own half the land in > the USA and just about every shopping mall.) Normal competition would keeps > prices in control. Everybody would make money and the rest of us could > afford it! Years ago a doctor knew who could not afford medical care and > those folks were charged a nominal fee or none. Now, it is big business! > The Medicaid abuses are terrible. Just look at that and you can see exactly > what would happen if we had socialized medicine! But once something becomes > established it is hard to undo. Look at our income tax. It has been proven > over and over that a sales tax would do more good. The coffers of the US > govt. would be overflowing in nothing flat. But the IRS is the largest > employer. Millions of accountants make their living off of income taxes, > etc. Big companies like H & R Block would have almost no business so they > would dissolve. To dissolve the IRS would throw this country into a economic > downward spin due to all the layoffs. So it won’t happen. > Ok, I’ll get off my soapbox. Oops, sorry, I can’t; it’s glued to my feet! >  :-) > Bev > "BJ" <B…@sk.nojunk.ca> wrote in message > <SNIP>  I wish we had a user fee. It would cut down on the number of > > people that see a doctor for a simple cold or a hang-nail. Even a small > > amount might dissuade them. <SNIP>

Response:

On Sun, 05 May 2002 20:09:25 GMT, "Nancy Farrell" <nfarrel…@worldnet.att.net>  wrote: >From the point of view of a Medicaid patient – I’m sure there are abusers, >as in anything to do with humans, but please don’t stereotype us too >quickly. <s>

<gentle snip> Hi Nancy! Gosh, I had no idea.  I really thought Medicaid and things like it were  less complex and more helpful. Almost makes you wonder if it’s worth it sometimes.  Sometimes…  $300 a month vs. the cost of the care otherwise is still probably better… but not good. Wish there was a better way. Sending you good thoughts. KCat

Response:

Lee,     Yes, one does have to be damn near broke to be approved for MediCal. And THEN the fun begins — the co-pays, share-of-costs, which meds are on the list, which procedures will be approved, did the caseworker get my reports?, etc, etc.     I never pay for my med services upfront. I get all services at the County Medical Center or on a referral from them becaise I can get the care *before* either MediCal or I pay. I’ve even been told that if I pay for Rx’s the agency considers that I had the resources to do it, they don’t have to. That’s why it’s so tricky with a share-of-cost – if I need an Rx that I can’t pay for as part of my share-of-cost I have to wait until my payment or pay agreement with the Medical Center is recorded in the state computer. Blech!!!!!     I do agree with you about the absurdity of the rules & processes. Part of the prob with the drugs is that MediCal pressures the vendors to make contracts with very low prices. If a certain vendor won’t accept the offer MediCal puts those meds on a "no" list. A doctor can appeal by saying *why* a patient needs a particular med that is not allowed but it is a very iffy thing to get approval. — Nancy  F <nfarrel…@munge.att.net> "Lee Thompson-Herbert" <l…@gw.retro.com> wrote – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> MediCAL only kicks in if you’re damn near broke.  And not all hospitals > will actually take MediCAL.  Plus, you’re expected to pay cash upfront > at most places and pray that MediCAL will reimburse you.  That combined > with the shrinking number of ERs and trauma units and the totally > ridiculous rules they use for disability, MediCAL and Medicaid, you run > a good chance of not getting anywhere close to adequate treatment.  There > are currently a couple really stupid rules about which antibiotics they’ll > cover, which has bitten a friend of mine on the ass a couple times now. > — > Lee M.Thompson-Herbert        l…@retro.com       KoX 1995, SP4 > Head Muso, White Rats Morris > Member, Knights of Xenu (1995).  Chaos Monger and Jill of All Trades. > "A head-on collision between Morticia Adams and Martha Stewart"

Response:

    Yes, the Medicaid program in California is called MediCal. I just used the more general name of Medicaid to be, hopefully, more clear. Nancy  F <nfarrel…@munge.att.net> – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -"J Rogow" <JRo…@Newsguy.com> wrote: > Doesn’t California have a program called "MediCAL" that will > pay most of your bills that Medicare doesn’t cover?

Response:

Good heavens – the things you learn on ASL! "Lee Thompson-Herbert" <l…@gw.retro.com> wrote in message

news:ab4ml7$gh2$1@gw.retro.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> In article <ab4eiq02…@enews2.newsguy.com>, > J Rogow <JRo…@Newsguy.com> wrote: > >Doesn’t California have a program called "MediCAL" that will > [Hey folks, learn to trim.  I just chopped out 80 lines worth of old > posts!] > MediCAL only kicks in if you’re damn near broke.  And not all hospitals > will actually take MediCAL.  Plus, you’re expected to pay cash upfront > at most places and pray that MediCAL will reimburse you.  That combined > with the shrinking number of ERs and trauma units and the totally > ridiculous rules they use for disability, MediCAL and Medicaid, you run > a good chance of not getting anywhere close to adequate treatment.  There > are currently a couple really stupid rules about which antibiotics they’ll > cover, which has bitten a friend of mine on the ass a couple times now. > — > Lee M.Thompson-Herbert        l…@retro.com       KoX 1995, SP4 > Head Muso, White Rats Morris > Member, Knights of Xenu (1995).  Chaos Monger and Jill of All Trades. > "A head-on collision between Morticia Adams and Martha Stewart"

Response:

In article <ab4eiq02…@enews2.newsguy.com>, J Rogow <JRo…@Newsguy.com> wrote: >Doesn’t California have a program called "MediCAL" that will

[Hey folks, learn to trim.  I just chopped out 80 lines worth of old posts!] MediCAL only kicks in if you’re damn near broke.  And not all hospitals will actually take MediCAL.  Plus, you’re expected to pay cash upfront at most places and pray that MediCAL will reimburse you.  That combined with the shrinking number of ERs and trauma units and the totally ridiculous rules they use for disability, MediCAL and Medicaid, you run a good chance of not getting anywhere close to adequate treatment.  There are currently a couple really stupid rules about which antibiotics they’ll cover, which has bitten a friend of mine on the ass a couple times now. — Lee M.Thompson-Herbert        l…@retro.com            KoX 1995, SP4 Head Muso, White Rats Morris Member, Knights of Xenu (1995).  Chaos Monger and Jill of All Trades. "A head-on collision between Morticia Adams and Martha Stewart"

Response:

Doesn’t California have a program called "MediCAL" that will pay most of your bills that Medicare doesn’t cover? "Nancy Farrell" <nfarrel…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:VjgB8.7625$6T5.693591@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> From the point of view of a Medicaid patient – I’m sure there are abusers, > as in anything to do with humans, but please don’t stereotype us too > quickly. <s> >     Here in California we are supposed to pay $1.00 co-pay for every office > visit, Rx, ER is $5.00, no fee for labs, X-rays, etc. Some offices see this > as a hassle and don’t bother to collect. With the budgetary constraints > those $1.00’s become precious. >     Also, if the *household’s* total income is more than a ridiculously low > amount for California (currently about $1,000 a month for 2 people) we have > to pay (or make an arrangement to pay) a monthly "share of cost" before > Medicaid pays *anything*. This means that if my Share of Cost is $300 per > month I must either pay cash price upfront for my meds & services up to $300 > or sign a pay agreement at the medical center for $300 for that month (And > then get the most services I can on meds, labs, tests, specialty visits > while in that month.). With my HUD assisted housing costs of $500 a month, > utils, car payment & ins (Yes, we can’t get anywhere without our own car > that can hold my mobility cart), there isn’t much left! >     Please understand that we don’t go zooming off to the ER in an ambulance > any time we have a trivial complaint. It is an agonizing process to decide > if a current "emergency’ is emergent enough for Medicaid to pay when I am > losing consciousness. If I guess wrong I’ll have to somehow pay the > ambulance service, the ER, the ER doc, the lab, whatever else they throw in. > This is especially hard on parents of sick children, ie asthmatics, > diabetics, etc. >     Thank you for my turn "on the soapbox".– > Nancy  F <nfarrel…@munge.att.net> > "Shelagh" <valleylu…@telus.net> wrote in message > news:aznx8.8675$dd7.615314@news0.telusplanet.net… > > Agreed- user fees are a great idea – they’d separate the wheat from the > > chaff for sure! too many abusers make the msp rates go up along with the > > docs’ salaries and cost of medicine overall! > > I’d better stop before the soapbox gets stuck to my shoes! > > Shelagh  AT    valleylu…@telus.net > > Lupus – Invisible in Plain Sight   AT > > http://www3.telus.net/valleylupus/index.html > > "Beverley" <pottings…@sybercom.net> wrote in message > > news:ucbujj4icta880@corp.supernews.com… > > > A user fee would be a darn good idea especially with Medicaid > > patients. The > > > hospital emergency rooms are overflowing with them because they can > > "afford" > > > (using our tax dollars) to visit the emergency room over stubbed toes, > > hang > > > nails, and sniffles! And they get to ride in either an ambulance, or > > taxi > > > there free!! Yet when our neighbor who was battling cancer of the > > spine > > > found it too painful to ride in the car to the hospital for > > treatments – she > > > had to use a medical transport vehicle. Her insurance would not cover > > the > > > cost of the transport so she paid the very high cost of medical > > transport > > > out of pocket.  Our system is not fair! Yet most socialized medicine > > is > > > failing both the public and financially. > > > Over the years I have watched the cost of medication rise. Not because > > the > > > production costs have risen but because insurance companies became > > involved > > > in paying the cost of Rx’s. Twenty years ago that pink liquid bottle > > of > > > ampicillin used on just abut every child cost a little over a dollar. > > When > > > health insurance companies started to pay for it the cost rose > > dramatically. > > > When my granddaughter needed it the cost was almost $20. Shocking! > > That same > > > stuff (so I’ve heard) sells without a Rx in Europe for about $2. > > > Our system is far from perfect. Insurance companies and pharmaceutical > > > companies do pressure doctors and hospitals here virtually calling the > > shots > > > at times. Personally I’d like to see the insurance companies go away. > > Things > > > would probably be better. (Of course they won’t they own half the land > > in > > > the USA and just about every shopping mall.) Normal competition would > > keeps > > > prices in control. Everybody would make money and the rest of us could > > > afford it! Years ago a doctor knew who could not afford medical care > > and > > > those folks were charged a nominal fee or none. Now, it is big > > business! > > > The Medicaid abuses are terrible. Just look at that and you can see > > exactly > > > what would happen if we had socialized medicine! But once something > > becomes > > > established it is hard to undo. Look at our income tax. It has been > > proven > > > over and over that a sales tax would do more good. The coffers of the > > US > > > govt. would be overflowing in nothing flat. But the IRS is the largest > > > employer. Millions of accountants make their living off of income > > taxes, > > > etc. Big companies like H & R Block would have almost no business so > > they > > > would dissolve. To dissolve the IRS would throw this country into a > > economic > > > downward spin due to all the layoffs. So it won’t happen. > > > Ok, I’ll get off my soapbox. Oops, sorry, I can’t; it’s glued to my > > feet! > > >  :-) > > > Bev > > > "BJ" <B…@sk.nojunk.ca> wrote in message > > > <SNIP>  I wish we had a user fee. It would cut down on the number of > > > > people that see a doctor for a simple cold or a hang-nail. Even a > > small > > > > amount might dissuade them. <SNIP>

Response:

Soap box or no box, who cares? We all need to vent. I received a notice from our private insurer, informing us they are receiving "rebates" from the Pharmaceutical companies. And those dollars are not reimbursable to us the insured? We pay a tremendous amount of money for insurance. I think everyone will agree, a dollar is a dollar. We all need them. I have physicians, that will not file our major med. let alone Medicare. They are good doctors, so do we find another, or bite the bullet and pay the doctor and take our chances that the insurance co. will receive our claim in the mail, let alone consider it for benefits. Then there is the whole matter of Medicare and what they allow, approve, and are willing to pay. Nothing if they can help it. I’m finished, I think. Wende "Nancy Farrell" <nfarrel…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:VjgB8.7625$6T5.693591@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> From the point of view of a Medicaid patient – I’m sure there are abusers, > as in anything to do with humans, but please don’t stereotype us too > quickly. <s> >     Here in California we are supposed to pay $1.00 co-pay for every office > visit, Rx, ER is $5.00, no fee for labs, X-rays, etc. Some offices see this > as a hassle and don’t bother to collect. With the budgetary constraints > those $1.00’s become precious. >     Also, if the *household’s* total income is more than a ridiculously low > amount for California (currently about $1,000 a month for 2 people) we have > to pay (or make an arrangement to pay) a monthly "share of cost" before > Medicaid pays *anything*. This means that if my Share of Cost is $300 per > month I must either pay cash price upfront for my meds & services up to $300 > or sign a pay agreement at the medical center for $300 for that month (And > then get the most services I can on meds, labs, tests, specialty visits > while in that month.). With my HUD assisted housing costs of $500 a month, > utils, car payment & ins (Yes, we can’t get anywhere without our own car > that can hold my mobility cart), there isn’t much left! >     Please understand that we don’t go zooming off to the ER in an ambulance > any time we have a trivial complaint. It is an agonizing process to decide > if a current "emergency’ is emergent enough for Medicaid to pay when I am > losing consciousness. If I guess wrong I’ll have to somehow pay the > ambulance service, the ER, the ER doc, the lab, whatever else they throw in. > This is especially hard on parents of sick children, ie asthmatics, > diabetics, etc. >     Thank you for my turn "on the soapbox".– > Nancy  F <nfarrel…@munge.att.net> > "Shelagh" <valleylu…@telus.net> wrote in message > news:aznx8.8675$dd7.615314@news0.telusplanet.net… > > Agreed- user fees are a great idea – they’d separate the wheat from the > > chaff for sure! too many abusers make the msp rates go up along with the > > docs’ salaries and cost of medicine overall! > > I’d better stop before the soapbox gets stuck to my shoes! > > Shelagh  AT    valleylu…@telus.net > > Lupus – Invisible in Plain Sight   AT > > http://www3.telus.net/valleylupus/index.html > > "Beverley" <pottings…@sybercom.net> wrote in message > > news:ucbujj4icta880@corp.supernews.com… > > > A user fee would be a darn good idea especially with Medicaid > > patients. The > > > hospital emergency rooms are overflowing with them because they can > > "afford" > > > (using our tax dollars) to visit the emergency room over stubbed toes, > > hang > > > nails, and sniffles! And they get to ride in either an ambulance, or > > taxi > > > there free!! Yet when our neighbor who was battling cancer of the > > spine > > > found it too painful to ride in the car to the hospital for > > treatments – she > > > had to use a medical transport vehicle. Her insurance would not cover > > the > > > cost of the transport so she paid the very high cost of medical > > transport > > > out of pocket.  Our system is not fair! Yet most socialized medicine > > is > > > failing both the public and financially. > > > Over the years I have watched the cost of medication rise. Not because > > the > > > production costs have risen but because insurance companies became > > involved > > > in paying the cost of Rx’s. Twenty years ago that pink liquid bottle > > of > > > ampicillin used on just abut every child cost a little over a dollar. > > When > > > health insurance companies started to pay for it the cost rose > > dramatically. > > > When my granddaughter needed it the cost was almost $20. Shocking! > > That same > > > stuff (so I’ve heard) sells without a Rx in Europe for about $2. > > > Our system is far from perfect. Insurance companies and pharmaceutical > > > companies do pressure doctors and hospitals here virtually calling the > > shots > > > at times. Personally I’d like to see the insurance companies go away. > > Things > > > would probably be better. (Of course they won’t they own half the land > > in > > > the USA and just about every shopping mall.) Normal competition would > > keeps > > > prices in control. Everybody would make money and the rest of us could > > > afford it! Years ago a doctor knew who could not afford medical care > > and > > > those folks were charged a nominal fee or none. Now, it is big > > business! > > > The Medicaid abuses are terrible. Just look at that and you can see > > exactly > > > what would happen if we had socialized medicine! But once something > > becomes > > > established it is hard to undo. Look at our income tax. It has been > > proven > > > over and over that a sales tax would do more good. The coffers of the > > US > > > govt. would be overflowing in nothing flat. But the IRS is the largest > > > employer. Millions of accountants make their living off of income > > taxes, > > > etc. Big companies like H & R Block would have almost no business so > > they > > > would dissolve. To dissolve the IRS would throw this country into a > > economic > > > downward spin due to all the layoffs. So it won’t happen. > > > Ok, I’ll get off my soapbox. Oops, sorry, I can’t; it’s glued to my > > feet! > > >  :-) > > > Bev > > > "BJ" <B…@sk.nojunk.ca> wrote in message > > > <SNIP>  I wish we had a user fee. It would cut down on the number of > > > > people that see a doctor for a simple cold or a hang-nail. Even a > > small > > > > amount might dissuade them. <SNIP>

Response:

From the point of view of a Medicaid patient – I’m sure there are abusers, as in anything to do with humans, but please don’t stereotype us too quickly. <s>     Here in California we are supposed to pay $1.00 co-pay for every office visit, Rx, ER is $5.00, no fee for labs, X-rays, etc. Some offices see this as a hassle and don’t bother to collect. With the budgetary constraints those $1.00’s become precious.     Also, if the *household’s* total income is more than a ridiculously low amount for California (currently about $1,000 a month for 2 people) we have to pay (or make an arrangement to pay) a monthly "share of cost" before Medicaid pays *anything*. This means that if my Share of Cost is $300 per month I must either pay cash price upfront for my meds & services up to $300 or sign a pay agreement at the medical center for $300 for that month (And then get the most services I can on meds, labs, tests, specialty visits while in that month.). With my HUD assisted housing costs of $500 a month, utils, car payment & ins (Yes, we can’t get anywhere without our own car that can hold my mobility cart), there isn’t much left!     Please understand that we don’t go zooming off to the ER in an ambulance any time we have a trivial complaint. It is an agonizing process to decide if a current "emergency’ is emergent enough for Medicaid to pay when I am losing consciousness. If I guess wrong I’ll have to somehow pay the ambulance service, the ER, the ER doc, the lab, whatever else they throw in. This is especially hard on parents of sick children, ie asthmatics, diabetics, etc.     Thank you for my turn "on the soapbox".– Nancy  F <nfarrel…@munge.att.net> "Shelagh" <valleylu…@telus.net> wrote in message

news:aznx8.8675$dd7.615314@news0.telusplanet.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Agreed- user fees are a great idea – they’d separate the wheat from the > chaff for sure! too many abusers make the msp rates go up along with the > docs’ salaries and cost of medicine overall! > I’d better stop before the soapbox gets stuck to my shoes! > Shelagh  AT    valleylu…@telus.net > Lupus – Invisible in Plain Sight   AT > http://www3.telus.net/valleylupus/index.html > "Beverley" <pottings…@sybercom.net> wrote in message > news:ucbujj4icta880@corp.supernews.com… > > A user fee would be a darn good idea especially with Medicaid > patients. The > > hospital emergency rooms are overflowing with them because they can > "afford" > > (using our tax dollars) to visit the emergency room over stubbed toes, > hang > > nails, and sniffles! And they get to ride in either an ambulance, or > taxi > > there free!! Yet when our neighbor who was battling cancer of the > spine > > found it too painful to ride in the car to the hospital for > treatments – she > > had to use a medical transport vehicle. Her insurance would not cover > the > > cost of the transport so she paid the very high cost of medical > transport > > out of pocket.  Our system is not fair! Yet most socialized medicine > is > > failing both the public and financially. > > Over the years I have watched the cost of medication rise. Not because > the > > production costs have risen but because insurance companies became > involved > > in paying the cost of Rx’s. Twenty years ago that pink liquid bottle > of > > ampicillin used on just abut every child cost a little over a dollar. > When > > health insurance companies started to pay for it the cost rose > dramatically. > > When my granddaughter needed it the cost was almost $20. Shocking! > That same > > stuff (so I’ve heard) sells without a Rx in Europe for about $2. > > Our system is far from perfect. Insurance companies and pharmaceutical > > companies do pressure doctors and hospitals here virtually calling the > shots > > at times. Personally I’d like to see the insurance companies go away. > Things > > would probably be better. (Of course they won’t they own half the land > in > > the USA and just about every shopping mall.) Normal competition would > keeps > > prices in control. Everybody would make money and the rest of us could > > afford it! Years ago a doctor knew who could not afford medical care > and > > those folks were charged a nominal fee or none. Now, it is big > business! > > The Medicaid abuses are terrible. Just look at that and you can see > exactly > > what would happen if we had socialized medicine! But once something > becomes > > established it is hard to undo. Look at our income tax. It has been > proven > > over and over that a sales tax would do more good. The coffers of the > US > > govt. would be overflowing in nothing flat. But the IRS is the largest > > employer. Millions of accountants make their living off of income > taxes, > > etc. Big companies like H & R Block would have almost no business so > they > > would dissolve. To dissolve the IRS would throw this country into a > economic > > downward spin due to all the layoffs. So it won’t happen. > > Ok, I’ll get off my soapbox. Oops, sorry, I can’t; it’s glued to my > feet! > >  :-) > > Bev > > "BJ" <B…@sk.nojunk.ca> wrote in message > > <SNIP>  I wish we had a user fee. It would cut down on the number of > > > people that see a doctor for a simple cold or a hang-nail. Even a > small > > > amount might dissuade them. <SNIP>

Response:

A user fee would be a darn good idea especially with Medicaid patients. The hospital emergency rooms are overflowing with them because they can "afford" (using our tax dollars) to visit the emergency room over stubbed toes, hang nails, and sniffles! And they get to ride in either an ambulance, or taxi there free!! Yet when our neighbor who was battling cancer of the spine found it too painful to ride in the car to the hospital for treatments – she had to use a medical transport vehicle. Her insurance would not cover the cost of the transport so she paid the very high cost of medical transport out of pocket.  Our system is not fair! Yet most socialized medicine is failing both the public and financially. Over the years I have watched the cost of medication rise. Not because the production costs have risen but because insurance companies became involved in paying the cost of Rx’s. Twenty years ago that pink liquid bottle of ampicillin used on just abut every child cost a little over a dollar. When health insurance companies started to pay for it the cost rose dramatically. When my granddaughter needed it the cost was almost $20. Shocking! That same stuff (so I’ve heard) sells without a Rx in Europe for about $2. Our system is far from perfect. Insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies do pressure doctors and hospitals here virtually calling the shots at times. Personally I’d like to see the insurance companies go away. Things would probably be better. (Of course they won’t they own half the land in the USA and just about every shopping mall.) Normal competition would keeps prices in control. Everybody would make money and the rest of us could afford it! Years ago a doctor knew who could not afford medical care and those folks were charged a nominal fee or none. Now, it is big business! The Medicaid abuses are terrible. Just look at that and you can see exactly what would happen if we had socialized medicine! But once something becomes established it is hard to undo. Look at our income tax. It has been proven over and over that a sales tax would do more good. The coffers of the US govt. would be overflowing in nothing flat. But the IRS is the largest employer. Millions of accountants make their living off of income taxes, etc. Big companies like H & R Block would have almost no business so they would dissolve. To dissolve the IRS would throw this country into a economic downward spin due to all the layoffs. So it won’t happen. Ok, I’ll get off my soapbox. Oops, sorry, I can’t; it’s glued to my feet!  :-) Bev "BJ" <B…@sk.nojunk.ca> wrote in message

<SNIP>  I wish we had a user fee. It would cut down on the number of – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> people that see a doctor for a simple cold or a hang-nail. Even a small > amount might dissuade them. <SNIP>

Response:

WOW!! An absolutely overwhelming situation and you have my full admiration for your ability to accept and work with ‘what has to be’. I for one, appreciate the explanation of the system as I really had no knowledge at all of billing procedures and all….what I did know would fit into a thimble…eg: Canadians are very fearful of getting sick (or even seeing a clinic for emerg.)  in the States due to the ‘unknown’ and ’scary’ hospital costs….so most always invest in travellers insurance. Thanks for sharing and good luck to you and your family with regards to your health and maintaining payments. Shelagh  AT    valleylu…@telus.net Lupus – Invisible in Plain Sight   AT http://www3.telus.net/valleylupus/index.html "Beverley" <pottings…@sybercom.net> wrote in message

news:ucarjl26uflm8f@corp.supernews.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Since this seems to keep cropping up I decided I’d start a new thread and > see what happens. Having no insurance is not easy. Plans vary in the USA > often depending on what an employer has available. > If you really are poor you do get help, Medicaid. And with Medicaid often > comes some other help in the form of housing assistance and food stamps. The > amount varies depending upon which State within the USA you live. > Most folks do have insurance. I don’t know the numbers but I do know there > is a very high percentage of folks that do not have any insurance.  Of > course the nice thing would be to have enough money to be considered self > insured! But many folks are sitting in a position much like ourselves, > employers offer insurance but we cannot afford the premiums (monthly > payments). Insurance where my husband works would be over $400/month. That > is a big chunk of money for us so we declined insurance. > Then George got sick seriously sick, not once but twice. First was not quite > 2 years ago. He had a lung infection. The medical bills for that staggered > to almost $8,000. During that bout of sickness upon routine examination and > blood work it was discovered he had another problem. They said it needed to > be investigated further when we had the chance. So about a year later we > returned for an additional exam and biopsy. Cancer! > This time the bills are mounting to what we expect will be about $35,000 for > cancer treatment, alone. How, do we pay it? Slowly. Every month we pay small > amounts to each medical bill. Our biggest bill right now is to the local > hospital. They do something called stacking the bills where others are > combining them into one account. So for instance, we pay $50/month to the > one hospital. They credit one of the bills until that one disappears and > then start with the next bill.  Quite honestly at that rate it will take us > 18 years to pay off the bill. > The big hospital where my husband is going for his cancer has a different > set-up but it is probably better for us. They combine all the actual > hospital bills into one account and all the doctors associated with the > hospital into another account.  So that is another $100/month, $50 to each > account. > But you have to get on the phone to the billing offices and beg for payments > that fit the budget. They will work with you!! But then you have to stick > with what you promise. I have promised $25 to several bills but pay $50, > knowing if I do have a problem one month I can drop it down to the $25. > I’m still paying the pulmonologist from 2 years ago and every once in a > while another odd bill floats in because some radiologist read a chest X-ray > or cat-scan. Or some lab/pathologist charges us for some sort of blood work. > Often these little bills can just totally foul up our payment system mostly > because they are unexpected and usually several hundred dollars. > My often foggy little brain has to really try hard to keep up with > everything. We got one bill in for almost $3,000 for a pathology report. > REPORT!!!! The pathology lab was less than $300. Naturally, I got on the > phone about that one and it seemed to vanish. I think someone made a mistake > and hit too many zeros while typing in the bill. It’s a wee bit harder > because I am the only one looking at  what we are being charged for and I > have to understand the charges or I pick up the phone and don’t let up until > I understand the charges. > The good thing is not one of these bills have interest charged on them. So > each payment does reduce the balance. If I quit paying somebody I’d get into > big trouble fast. If something comes up I could probably skip a month if I > asked first. Communication is very important with billing offices. > The strange thing is – if my husband were to lose his job today most of > these bills would vanish as we would fall under Medicaid and they will back > pay up to 3 months of medical bills incurred. Of course if he were to be > laid off we’d also probably lose everything including our house! So, no, > having him laid off to prevent us from having to pay medical bills doesn’t > work very well! (LOL) > So right now we are paying out about $300 a month in medical bills. Most > everybody is getting 50 and some getting 25 per month. It’s a lot of money > for us. That is also why I don’t want to incur any more bills. For instance > if I go to a Rheumy it will probably be $180 up front and then blood work > $300? and who knows what else. See the problem? > On the other hand having no insurance gave us the freedom to choose who we > wanted and to make sure my husband is getting the very best care. Most > insurance plans limit you to only certain types of medical treatments and to > only certain facilities and doctors. We got to use one of the best > pulmonologists in the area when he needed a pulmonologist. Now that my > husband is battling cancer we were able to choose one of the best radiation > oncologists on the east coast and still use the local radiation oncology > department for a portion of his treatment so that he did not have to travel > 4 hours a day for treatment. He was able to continue working and really was > only a few minutes late for work daily for 5 weeks. Time he could make up at > lunch without losing his 40 hours. This was a better alternative to us than > using the more standard treatment for this type of cancer; surgery and six > weeks of lost wages while home recuperating. > So really it is a trade off. We have the bills but we also got exactly the > type of treatment we wanted from the people and facilities we chose. His > work is not interrupted. So he will continue to be the main income provider. > And with this superior treatment I should have him around for another 30 > years or more! > Of course there is one other thing we could do. Bankrupt. Not something I > would even want to consider but it is a last resort. People do it. > As long as we have income I will continue to pay the bills. It has taken > almost 2 years but I just about have the pulmonologist paid off. When the > bill hits zero it will free up another $50/month I can put towards another > bill. > So what if one of us gets sick again? The bills get stacked/combined etc. > Our local hospital cannot deny treatment as long as we are faithfully paying > on our bills. It has something to do with ethics. > We do ask the doctors to prescribe generic or cheaper brands if possible. > And fortunately neither one of us is on any daily meds, not including my > naprosyn. So the Rx problem is usually a limited one time item. > How do we do it? We don’t make a whole lot of money. I think we would easily > be considered the working poor these days. We own our house (well, the bank > does-LOL) in a beautiful Historic neighborhood. We drive reasonably decent > cars. And we live pretty ordinary lives. That means we don’t go away on > fancy vacations, I don’t go shopping as a hobby, we don’t have cable TV,etc. > What is often considered normal in some households would be pure luxury > here. Our big panic right now is wondering if the 28 year old AC unit will > work this summer as we cannot afford $6,000 to replace it. It is not > considered fixable because it is too old. (Window units? Not supposed to > have them in a Historic District)  It wasn’t supposed to work last year but > it did. So who knows. > I still think we are better off without insurance. At least we can chose our > doctors and treatments. Now, you also know why I work. > Sorry this is so long. > Bev

Response:

Thanks Bev, It is so confusing for Canadians. I have often asked how the U.S. system works, and did not have a clear picture until you explained your situation. I just got back from having my regular blood work, and a special one ordered by the endocrinologist. It cost me nothing. I would guess that we would be in about the same financial position as you. I had to pick up a presc. which normally costs me $82, but we had reached our deductible with the govt so it only cost $29 today. We start back at $0 every six months. I will look at all of my scripts today and fill anything that is getting low while we are in that position. I take about a dozen meds a day, so that will save us a lot. We would have to have private insurance to pay all, or part of the cost of meds. You see, we have universal medicare here. It is great because the cost of all dr visits and tests are covered. The problem is that both patients and doctors abuse the system. The waiting time for tests and to see specialists is extremely long. A Canadian might have to wait up to two years for hip replacement or knee surgery. A lot of the wait time can depend on the doctor too. I have one doc who really goes to bat for his patients. He actually fudged a requisition for a test for me. He said it was urgent, but it he filled it in properly I might have to wait far too long. He wrote in what would be considered by the govt to be more of a priority, just to speed things up. I was a good thing too, because the test came back positive. I was suffering terribly and got treatment far sooner than I would have otherwise. He could be in trouble if he were caught, but was willing to do it to help me. I wish we had a user fee. It would cut down on the number of people that see a doctor for a simple cold or a hang-nail. Even a small amount might dissuade them. I know that I delay seeing a doctor even though I am seriously ill. I don’t like to strain the system. I wish others felt the same. Again, thank you for your explaination. BJ-who blinked and missed spring "Beverley" <pottings…@sybercom.net> wrote in message

news:ucarjl26uflm8f@corp.supernews.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Since this seems to keep cropping up I decided I’d start a new thread and > see what happens. Having no insurance is not easy. Plans vary in the USA > often depending on what an employer has available. > If you really are poor you do get help, Medicaid. And with Medicaid often > comes some other help in the form of housing assistance and food stamps. The > amount varies depending upon which State within the USA you live. > Most folks do have insurance. I don’t know the numbers but I do know there > is a very high percentage of folks that do not have any insurance.  Of > course the nice thing would be to have enough money to be considered self > insured! But many folks are sitting in a position much like ourselves, > employers offer insurance but we cannot afford the premiums (monthly > payments). Insurance where my husband works would be over $400/month. That > is a big chunk of money for us so we declined insurance. > Then George got sick seriously sick, not once but twice. First was not quite > 2 years ago. He had a lung infection. The medical bills for that staggered > to almost $8,000. During that bout of sickness upon routine examination and > blood work it was discovered he had another problem. They said it needed to > be investigated further when we had the chance. So about a year later we > returned for an additional exam and biopsy. Cancer! > This time the bills are mounting to what we expect will be about $35,000 for > cancer treatment, alone. How, do we pay it? Slowly. Every month we pay small > amounts to each medical bill. Our biggest bill right now is to the local > hospital. They do something called stacking the bills where others are > combining them into one account. So for instance, we pay $50/month to the > one hospital. They credit one of the bills until that one disappears and > then start with the next bill.  Quite honestly at that rate it will take us > 18 years to pay off the bill. > The big hospital where my husband is going for his cancer has a different > set-up but it is probably better for us. They combine all the actual > hospital bills into one account and all the doctors associated with the > hospital into another account.  So that is another $100/month, $50 to each > account. > But you have to get on the phone to the billing offices and beg for payments > that fit the budget. They will work with you!! But then you have to stick > with what you promise. I have promised $25 to several bills but pay $50, > knowing if I do have a problem one month I can drop it down to the $25. > I’m still paying the pulmonologist from 2 years ago and every once in a > while another odd bill floats in because some radiologist read a chest X-ray > or cat-scan. Or some lab/pathologist charges us for some sort of blood work. > Often these little bills can just totally foul up our payment system mostly > because they are unexpected and usually several hundred dollars. > My often foggy little brain has to really try hard to keep up with > everything. We got one bill in for almost $3,000 for a pathology report. > REPORT!!!! The pathology lab was less than $300. Naturally, I got on the > phone about that one and it seemed to vanish. I think someone made a mistake > and hit too many zeros while typing in the bill. It’s a wee bit harder > because I am the only one looking at  what we are being charged for and I > have to understand the charges or I pick up the phone and don’t let up until > I understand the charges. > The good thing is not one of these bills have interest charged on them. So > each payment does reduce the balance. If I quit paying somebody I’d get into > big trouble fast. If something comes up I could probably skip a month if I > asked first. Communication is very important with billing offices. > The strange thing is – if my husband were to lose his job today most of > these bills would vanish as we would fall under Medicaid and they will back > pay up to 3 months of medical bills incurred. Of course if he were to be > laid off we’d also probably lose everything including our house! So, no, > having him laid off to prevent us from having to pay medical bills doesn’t > work very well! (LOL) > So right now we are paying out about $300 a month in medical bills. Most > everybody is getting 50 and some getting 25 per month. It’s a lot of money > for us. That is also why I don’t want to incur any more bills. For instance > if I go to a Rheumy it will probably be $180 up front and then blood work > $300? and who knows what else. See the problem? > On the other hand having no insurance gave us the freedom to choose who we > wanted and to make sure my husband is getting the very best care. Most > insurance plans limit you to only certain types of medical treatments and to > only certain facilities and doctors. We got to use one of the best > pulmonologists in the area when he needed a pulmonologist. Now that my > husband is battling cancer we were able to choose one of the best radiation > oncologists on the east coast and still use the local radiation oncology > department for a portion of his treatment so that he did not have to travel > 4 hours a day for treatment. He was able to continue working and really was > only a few minutes late for work daily for 5 weeks. Time he could make up at > lunch without losing his 40 hours. This was a better alternative to us than > using the more standard treatment for this type of cancer; surgery and six > weeks of lost wages while home recuperating. > So really it is a trade off. We have the bills but we also got exactly the > type of treatment we wanted from the people and facilities we chose. His > work is not interrupted. So he will continue to be the main income provider. > And with this superior treatment I should have him around for another 30 > years or more! > Of course there is one other thing we could do. Bankrupt. Not something I > would even want to consider but it is a last resort. People do it. > As long as we have income I will continue to pay the bills. It has taken > almost 2 years but I just about have the pulmonologist paid off. When the > bill hits zero it will free up another $50/month I can put towards another > bill. > So what if one of us gets sick again? The bills get stacked/combined etc. > Our local hospital cannot deny treatment as long as we are faithfully paying > on our bills. It has something to do with ethics. > We do ask the doctors to prescribe generic or cheaper brands if possible. > And fortunately neither one of us is on any daily meds, not including my > naprosyn. So the Rx problem is usually a limited one time item. > How do we do it? We don’t make a whole lot of money. I think we would easily > be considered the working poor these days. We own our house (well, the bank > does-LOL) in a beautiful Historic neighborhood. We drive reasonably decent > cars. And we live pretty ordinary lives. That means we don’t go away on > fancy vacations, I don’t go shopping as a hobby, we don’t have cable TV,etc. > What is often considered normal in some households would be pure luxury > here. Our big panic right now is wondering if the 28 year old AC unit will > work this summer as we cannot afford $6,000 to replace it. It is not > considered fixable because it is too old. (Window units? Not supposed to > have them in a Historic District)  It wasn’t supposed to work last year but > it did. So who knows. > I still think we are better off without insurance. At least we can chose our > doctors and treatments. Now, you also know why I work. > Sorry this is so long. > Bev

Response:

Hi Bev:)))) Bruce On.  Thank you for being so open . It just blows me away that you try to be a good citizen and just for profit on the sick hosp. corp. can repo everything you have. Then have the gall to medicade you to the poor house. But on the other hand where can I buy hosp. stock ? Sounds like they have Enron accountancies with their stacking pyramid scheme. In Canuck land we are also moving that way , Health care is 80% back to 1960 with downsizing privatizing . Here it is drug companies and insurance that control dr. and hosp. My idea was for all casinos be owned by state/prov. and all profits go to health and education as we all use this and we are the losers that gamble. Do hope others fear not to tell their stories?? hugs Bruce "Beverley" <pottings…@sybercom.net> wrote in message

news:ucarjl26uflm8f@corp.supernews.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Since this seems to keep cropping up I decided I’d start a new thread and > see what happens. Having no insurance is not easy. Plans vary in the USA > often depending on what an employer has available. > If you really are poor you do get help, Medicaid. And with Medicaid often > comes some other help in the form of housing assistance and food stamps. The > amount varies depending upon which State within the USA you live. > Most folks do have insurance. I don’t know the numbers but I do know there > is a very high percentage of folks that do not have any insurance.  Of > course the nice thing would be to have enough money to be considered self > insured! But many folks are sitting in a position much like ourselves, > employers offer insurance but we cannot afford the premiums (monthly > payments). Insurance where my husband works would be over $400/month. That > is a big chunk of money for us so we declined insurance. > Then George got sick seriously sick, not once but twice. First was not quite > 2 years ago. He had a lung infection. The medical bills for that staggered > to almost $8,000. During that bout of sickness upon routine examination and > blood work it was discovered he had another problem. They said it needed to > be investigated further when we had the chance. So about a year later we > returned for an additional exam and biopsy. Cancer! > This time the bills are mounting to what we expect will be about $35,000 for > cancer treatment, alone. How, do we pay it? Slowly. Every month we pay small > amounts to each medical bill. Our biggest bill right now is to the local > hospital. They do something called stacking the bills where others are > combining them into one account. So for instance, we pay $50/month to the > one hospital. They credit one of the bills until that one disappears and > then start with the next bill.  Quite honestly at that rate it will take us > 18 years to pay off the bill. > The big hospital where my husband is going for his cancer has a different > set-up but it is probably better for us. They combine all the actual > hospital bills into one account and all the doctors associated with the > hospital into another account.  So that is another $100/month, $50 to each > account. > But you have to get on the phone to the billing offices and beg for payments > that fit the budget. They will work with you!! But then you have to stick > with what you promise. I have promised $25 to several bills but pay $50, > knowing if I do have a problem one month I can drop it down to the $25. > I’m still paying the pulmonologist from 2 years ago and every once in a > while another odd bill floats in because some radiologist read a chest X-ray > or cat-scan. Or some lab/pathologist charges us for some sort of blood work. > Often these little bills can just totally foul up our payment system mostly > because they are unexpected and usually several hundred dollars. > My often foggy little brain has to really try hard to keep up with > everything. We got one bill in for almost $3,000 for a pathology report. > REPORT!!!! The pathology lab was less than $300. Naturally, I got on the > phone about that one and it seemed to vanish. I think someone made a mistake > and hit too many zeros while typing in the bill. It’s a wee bit harder > because I am the only one looking at  what we are being charged for and I > have to understand the charges or I pick up the phone and don’t let up until > I understand the charges. > The good thing is not one of these bills have interest charged on them. So > each payment does reduce the balance. If I quit paying somebody I’d get into > big trouble fast. If something comes up I could probably skip a month if I > asked first. Communication is very important with billing offices. > The strange thing is – if my husband were to lose his job today most of > these bills would vanish as we would fall under Medicaid and they will back > pay up to 3 months of medical bills incurred. Of course if he were to be > laid off we’d also probably lose everything including our house! So, no, > having him laid off to prevent us from having to pay medical bills doesn’t > work very well! (LOL) > So right now we are paying out about $300 a month in medical bills. Most > everybody is getting 50 and some getting 25 per month. It’s a lot of money > for us. That is also why I don’t want to incur any more bills. For instance > if I go to a Rheumy it will probably be $180 up front and then blood work > $300? and who knows what else. See the problem? > On the other hand having no insurance gave us the freedom to choose who we > wanted and to make sure my husband is getting the very best care. Most > insurance plans limit you to only certain types of medical treatments and to > only certain facilities and doctors. We got to use one of the best > pulmonologists in the area when he needed a pulmonologist. Now that my > husband is battling cancer we were able to choose one of the best radiation > oncologists on the east coast and still use the local radiation oncology > department for a portion of his treatment so that he did not have to travel > 4 hours a day for treatment. He was able to continue working and really was > only a few minutes late for work daily for 5 weeks. Time he could make up at > lunch without losing his 40 hours. This was a better alternative to us than > using the more standard treatment for this type of cancer; surgery and six > weeks of lost wages while home recuperating. > So really it is a trade off. We have the bills but we also got exactly the > type of treatment we wanted from the people and facilities we chose. His > work is not interrupted. So he will continue to be the main income provider. > And with this superior treatment I should have him around for another 30 > years or more! > Of course there is one other thing we could do. Bankrupt. Not something I > would even want to consider but it is a last resort. People do it. > As long as we have income I will continue to pay the bills. It has taken > almost 2 years but I just about have the pulmonologist paid off. When the > bill hits zero it will free up another $50/month I can put towards another > bill. > So what if one of us gets sick again? The bills get stacked/combined etc. > Our local hospital cannot deny treatment as long as we are faithfully paying > on our bills. It has something to do with ethics. > We do ask the doctors to prescribe generic or cheaper brands if possible. > And fortunately neither one of us is on any daily meds, not including my > naprosyn. So the Rx problem is usually a limited one time item. > How do we do it? We don’t make a whole lot of money. I think we would easily > be considered the working poor these days. We own our house (well, the bank > does-LOL) in a beautiful Historic neighborhood. We drive reasonably decent > cars. And we live pretty ordinary lives. That means we don’t go away on > fancy vacations, I don’t go shopping as a hobby, we don’t have cable TV,etc. > What is often considered normal in some households would be pure luxury > here. Our big panic right now is wondering if the 28 year old AC unit will > work this summer as we cannot afford $6,000 to replace it. It is not > considered fixable because it is too old. (Window units? Not supposed to > have them in a Historic District)  It wasn’t supposed to work last year but > it did. So who knows. > I still think we are better off without insurance. At least we can chose our > doctors and treatments. Now, you also know why I work. > Sorry this is so long. > Bev

Response:

I truly understand the situation that you are in with wanting and getting the best medical care regardless of the cost! Also I thought that I would mention if you ever did decide to file bankruptcy you would be in good company.  Look at all of the major national chain stores that had to do so!  I also understand that you want to pay the bills as long as you can regardless of the bill tightening that had to go with it.  We do what we have to do to survive in this life. That is great that George has not had to miss work with his illness and treatments.  But you would figure it out if he did have to! Do take care of yourself too!!! Will add your a/c to my prayers for you and George.  When it rains it usually pours. My sister-in-law owns a house in a Historical area of El Paso and she has to be very careful of what she can do to the house also especially the outside of it. Here’s wishing that someone buys you a lottery ticket and you hit the big one! Hugs, Sherry "Beverley" <pottings…@sybercom.net> wrote in message

news:ucarjl26uflm8f@corp.supernews.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Since this seems to keep cropping up I decided I’d start a new thread and > see what happens. Having no insurance is not easy. Plans vary in the USA > often depending on what an employer has available. > If you really are poor you do get help, Medicaid. And with Medicaid often > comes some other help in the form of housing assistance and food stamps. The > amount varies depending upon which State within the USA you live. > Most folks do have insurance. I don’t know the numbers but I do know there > is a very high percentage of folks that do not have any insurance.  Of > course the nice thing would be to have enough money to be considered self > insured! But many folks are sitting in a position much like ourselves, > employers offer insurance but we cannot afford the premiums (monthly > payments). Insurance where my husband works would be over $400/month. That > is a big chunk of money for us so we declined insurance. > Then George got sick seriously sick, not once but twice. First was not quite > 2 years ago. He had a lung infection. The medical bills for that staggered > to almost $8,000. During that bout of sickness upon routine examination and > blood work it was discovered he had another problem. They said it needed to > be investigated further when we had the chance. So about a year later we > returned for an additional exam and biopsy. Cancer! > This time the bills are mounting to what we expect will be about $35,000 for > cancer treatment, alone. How, do we pay it? Slowly. Every month we pay small > amounts to each medical bill. Our biggest bill right now is to the local > hospital. They do something called stacking the bills where others are > combining them into one account. So for instance, we pay $50/month to the > one hospital. They credit one of the bills until that one disappears and > then start with the next bill.  Quite honestly at that rate it will take us > 18 years to pay off the bill. > The big hospital where my husband is going for his cancer has a different > set-up but it is probably better for us. They combine all the actual > hospital bills into one account and all the doctors associated with the > hospital into another account.  So that is another $100/month, $50 to each > account. > But you have to get on the phone to the billing offices and beg for payments > that fit the budget. They will work with you!! But then you have to stick > with what you promise. I have promised $25 to several bills but pay $50, > knowing if I do have a problem one month I can drop it down to the $25. > I’m still paying the pulmonologist from 2 years ago and every once in a > while another odd bill floats in because some radiologist read a chest X-ray > or cat-scan. Or some lab/pathologist charges us for some sort of blood work. > Often these little bills can just totally foul up our payment system mostly > because they are unexpected and usually several hundred dollars. > My often foggy little brain has to really try hard to keep up with > everything. We got one bill in for almost $3,000 for a pathology report. > REPORT!!!! The pathology lab was less than $300. Naturally, I got on the > phone about that one and it seemed to vanish. I think someone made a mistake > and hit too many zeros while typing in the bill. It’s a wee bit harder > because I am the only one looking at  what we are being charged for and I > have to understand the charges or I pick up the phone and don’t let up until > I understand the charges. > The good thing is not one of these bills have interest charged on them. So > each payment does reduce the balance. If I quit paying somebody I’d get into > big trouble fast. If something comes up I could probably skip a month if I > asked first. Communication is very important with billing offices. > The strange thing is – if my husband were to lose his job today most of > these bills would vanish as we would fall under Medicaid and they will back > pay up to 3 months of medical bills incurred. Of course if he were to be > laid off we’d also probably lose everything including our house! So, no, > having him laid off to prevent us from having to pay medical bills doesn’t > work very well! (LOL) > So right now we are paying out about $300 a month in medical bills. Most > everybody is getting 50 and some getting 25 per month. It’s a lot of money > for us. That is also why I don’t want to incur any more bills. For instance > if I go to a Rheumy it will probably be $180 up front and then blood work > $300? and who knows what else. See the problem? > On the other hand having no insurance gave us the freedom to choose who we > wanted and to make sure my husband is getting the very best care. Most > insurance plans limit you to only certain types of medical treatments and to > only certain facilities and doctors. We got to use one of the best > pulmonologists in the area when he needed a pulmonologist. Now that my > husband is battling cancer we were able to choose one of the best radiation > oncologists on the east coast and still use the local radiation oncology > department for a portion of his treatment so that he did not have to travel > 4 hours a day for treatment. He was able to continue working and really was > only a few minutes late for work daily for 5 weeks. Time he could make up at > lunch without losing his 40 hours. This was a better alternative to us than > using the more standard treatment for this type of cancer; surgery and six > weeks of lost wages while home recuperating. > So really it is a trade off. We have the bills but we also got exactly the > type of treatment we wanted from the people and facilities we chose. His > work is not interrupted. So he will continue to be the main income provider. > And with this superior treatment I should have him around for another 30 > years or more! > Of course there is one other thing we could do. Bankrupt. Not something I > would even want to consider but it is a last resort. People do it. > As long as we have income I will continue to pay the bills. It has taken > almost 2 years but I just about have the pulmonologist paid off. When the > bill hits zero it will free up another $50/month I can put towards another > bill. > So what if one of us gets sick again? The bills get stacked/combined etc. > Our local hospital cannot deny treatment as long as we are faithfully paying > on our bills. It has something to do with ethics. > We do ask the doctors to prescribe generic or cheaper brands if possible. > And fortunately neither one of us is on any daily meds, not including my > naprosyn. So the Rx problem is usually a limited one time item. > How do we do it? We don’t make a whole lot of money. I think we would easily > be considered the working poor these days. We own our house (well, the bank > does-LOL) in a beautiful Historic neighborhood. We drive reasonably decent > cars. And we live pretty ordinary lives. That means we don’t go away on > fancy vacations, I don’t go shopping as a hobby, we don’t have cable TV,etc. > What is often considered normal in some households would be pure luxury > here. Our big panic right now is wondering if the 28 year old AC unit will > work this summer as we cannot afford $6,000 to replace it. It is not > considered fixable because it is too old. (Window units? Not supposed to > have them in a Historic District)  It wasn’t supposed to work last year but > it did. So who knows. > I still think we are better off without insurance. At least we can chose our > doctors and treatments. Now, you also know why I work. > Sorry this is so long. > Bev

Response:

Since this seems to keep cropping up I decided I’d start a new thread and see what happens. Having no insurance is not easy. Plans vary in the USA often depending on what an employer has available. If you really are poor you do get help, Medicaid. And with Medicaid often comes some other help in the form of housing assistance and food stamps. The amount varies depending upon which State within the USA you live. Most folks do have insurance. I don’t know the numbers but I do know there is a very high percentage of folks that do not have any insurance.  Of course the nice thing would be to have enough money to be considered self insured! But many folks are sitting in a position much like ourselves, employers offer insurance but we cannot afford the premiums (monthly payments). Insurance where my husband works would be over $400/month. That is a big chunk of money for us so we declined insurance. Then George got sick seriously sick, not once but twice. First was not quite 2 years ago. He had a lung infection. The medical bills for that staggered to almost $8,000. During that bout of sickness upon routine examination and blood work it was discovered he had another problem. They said it needed to be investigated further when we had the chance. So about a year later we returned for an additional exam and biopsy. Cancer! This time the bills are mounting to what we expect will be about $35,000 for cancer treatment, alone. How, do we pay it? Slowly. Every month we pay small amounts to each medical bill. Our biggest bill right now is to the local hospital. They do something called stacking the bills where others are combining them into one account. So for instance, we pay $50/month to the one hospital. They credit one of the bills until that one disappears and then start with the next bill.  Quite honestly at that rate it will take us 18 years to pay off the bill. The big hospital where my husband is going for his cancer has a different set-up but it is probably better for us. They combine all the actual hospital bills into one account and all the doctors associated with the hospital into another account.  So that is another $100/month, $50 to each account. But you have to get on the phone to the billing offices and beg for payments that fit the budget. They will work with you!! But then you have to stick with what you promise. I have promised $25 to several bills but pay $50, knowing if I do have a problem one month I can drop it down to the $25. I’m still paying the pulmonologist from 2 years ago and every once in a while another odd bill floats in because some radiologist read a chest X-ray or cat-scan. Or some lab/pathologist charges us for some sort of blood work. Often these little bills can just totally foul up our payment system mostly because they are unexpected and usually several hundred dollars. My often foggy little brain has to really try hard to keep up with everything. We got one bill in for almost $3,000 for a pathology report. REPORT!!!! The pathology lab was less than $300. Naturally, I got on the phone about that one and it seemed to vanish. I think someone made a mistake and hit too many zeros while typing in the bill. It’s a wee bit harder because I am the only one looking at  what we are being charged for and I have to understand the charges or I pick up the phone and don’t let up until I understand the charges. The good thing is not one of these bills have interest charged on them. So each payment does reduce the balance. If I quit paying somebody I’d get into big trouble fast. If something comes up I could probably skip a month if I asked first. Communication is very important with billing offices. The strange thing is – if my husband were to lose his job today most of these bills would vanish as we would fall under Medicaid and they will back pay up to 3 months of medical bills incurred. Of course if he were to be laid off we’d also probably lose everything including our house! So, no, having him laid off to prevent us from having to pay medical bills doesn’t work very well! (LOL) So right now we are paying out about $300 a month in medical bills. Most everybody is getting 50 and some getting 25 per month. It’s a lot of money for us. That is also why I don’t want to incur any more bills. For instance if I go to a Rheumy it will probably be $180 up front and then blood work $300? and who knows what else. See the problem? On the other hand having no insurance gave us the freedom to choose who we wanted and to make sure my husband is getting the very best care. Most insurance plans limit you to only certain types of medical treatments and to only certain facilities and doctors. We got to use one of the best pulmonologists in the area when he needed a pulmonologist. Now that my husband is battling cancer we were able to choose one of the best radiation oncologists on the east coast and still use the local radiation oncology department for a portion of his treatment so that he did not have to travel 4 hours a day for treatment. He was able to continue working and really was only a few minutes late for work daily for 5 weeks. Time he could make up at lunch without losing his 40 hours. This was a better alternative to us than using the more standard treatment for this type of cancer; surgery and six weeks of lost wages while home recuperating. So really it is a trade off. We have the bills but we also got exactly the type of treatment we wanted from the people and facilities we chose. His work is not interrupted. So he will continue to be the main income provider. And with this superior treatment I should have him around for another 30 years or more! Of course there is one other thing we could do. Bankrupt. Not something I would even want to consider but it is a last resort. People do it. As long as we have income I will continue to pay the bills. It has taken almost 2 years but I just about have the pulmonologist paid off. When the bill hits zero it will free up another $50/month I can put towards another bill. So what if one of us gets sick again? The bills get stacked/combined etc. Our local hospital cannot deny treatment as long as we are faithfully paying on our bills. It has something to do with ethics. We do ask the doctors to prescribe generic or cheaper brands if possible. And fortunately neither one of us is on any daily meds, not including my naprosyn. So the Rx problem is usually a limited one time item. How do we do it? We don’t make a whole lot of money. I think we would easily be considered the working poor these days. We own our house (well, the bank does-LOL) in a beautiful Historic neighborhood. We drive reasonably decent cars. And we live pretty ordinary lives. That means we don’t go away on fancy vacations, I don’t go shopping as a hobby, we don’t have cable TV,etc. What is often considered normal in some households would be pure luxury here. Our big panic right now is wondering if the 28 year old AC unit will work this summer as we cannot afford $6,000 to replace it. It is not considered fixable because it is too old. (Window units? Not supposed to have them in a Historic District)  It wasn’t supposed to work last year but it did. So who knows. I still think we are better off without insurance. At least we can chose our doctors and treatments. Now, you also know why I work. Sorry this is so long. Bev

Response:

Question:

Wander do anyone use Pastel Partner Accounting software and know if theres any pastel users newsgroup forum where users can exchange ideas, tips, problems, or experiences. I’m currently using Pastel Partner V5.2i and pleasure to share my experiences with the Pastel Partner V5.2.

Response:

Shane, !……the best thing is to go to the Pastel web site and join their groups

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Wander do anyone use Pastel Partner Accounting software and know if theres any pastel users newsgroup forum where users can exchange ideas, tips, problems, or experiences. I’m currently using Pastel Partner V5.2i and pleasure to share my experiences with the Pastel Partner V5.2.

Response:

Question:

(Standing & Applauding) Yo, Elizabeth – You da’ Bomb! Excellent post! Tony   Pam:   Your experience is becoming increasingly common for large to small organizations.  Even huge organizations with major distribution networks like Amway have had to address some of these same issues.   See my specific comments in italics below.   Elizabeth Paulsen, President   Cascade e-Commerce Solutions, Inc.   http://www.bizincome.net     I am the Accountant of a small mfg. co with mainly wholesale sales.   We     have a web site up and running.  We want to begin looking at processing     retail sales from the web.  Several issues need addressing and I was     wondering if anyone else has faced these similar issues.  We are using     Macola Software.     1.  current sales are all on net 30.  Invoices are created and mailed     several days after shipping the mdse.  (retail web would be on the spot     invoice generation)   You can keep the net 30 standard for wholesale and use http://www.authorize.net for credit/debit card online realtime orders and http://www.chexpedite.net for online realtime check orders.  Both these systems are secure and result in an instant automatic electronic invoice/receipt to the customer with instant automatic electronic notification of the sale to your business.     2.  processing the payment.   We will have to buy credit card equipment and     establish a process of internal controls to handle the sale.  We  accrue our     income and there will be a  few days before electronic funds are available     from visa/mc.   No new equipment is required for either authorize.net or chexpedite.net and authorize.net can be used for phone, fax and in person orders as well as online orders.  You’re right in suggesting that new internal controls will be needed, but both services have online realtime reporting of transactions so you actually know when funds have cleared your account.  One new control you will want if you go with chexpedite for online check is that you will want to set a shipping policy of 3 to 5 days following sale so that you can be sure funds have cleared before shipping.  Funds usually clear for both services within 48 hours.     3.  keeping our wholesale customers happy with the fact that we are entering     into the retail arena.  We do not want to hurt them, but we are getting     calls to fill orders which we currently refer to our distributors.   I’ve seen businesses go several directions with this –1. is to continue to refer each direct order to the distributor in the nearest zipcode by sending the nearest distributor an e-mail or phone or fax message that states that if they do not respond to your organization within one business day stating that they will handle the order you will fill it automatically from corporate, 2. another approach is to set policy that your internet site and phone center will first suggest that the customer work through a local distributor and provide them with the distributor’s contact information and then if the customer still wishes to order directly to corporate then the customer will need to click through to another page or be transferred to another phone number, 3. redefine your product line with which items will be distributed through distributors and which will be marketed on-line, 4. process the orders through corporate but give the distributor a cut.  You may also want to consider giving a price break to your wholesale customers that your retail customers won’t be able to access.   Not knowing much about your current commitment to your distributors it’s hard to know which specific approach you should take.  Hopefully, I’ve given some ideas that will help in your evaluation.   Feel free to contact me directly via e-mail with any questions or call me at 206.244.9092.     I welcome any comments     thanks     Pam

Response:

…a small mfg. co with mainly wholesale sales..want to begin processing retail sales from the web. …  We are using Macola Software. 1.  current sales are all on net 30.  Invoices are created and mailed several days after shipping the mdse.  (retail web would be on the spot invoice generation) 2.  processing the payment… credit card …

You might consider BigStep.com since they are apparently going to be the first web storefront integrated with a webledger.  I hate to keep harpin’ on it but when all this stuff starts to come together, it’s going to be more widely recognized. It would be worthwhile to have a look at Bizfinity and any other "monolithic" website that has both a webledger and a web storefront, and the assortment of other horizontal functions that all industries need (payments, billpayment, payroll etc. )..  Some pundits are saying these integrated/monolithic one-stop, turnkey webhost are going to be the winners, in the end.   But I doubt it, in fact, these sites really scare me.  I fear you’ll end up with mediocre everything, nothing best of breed. There is a lot of evidence that a free competitive industry with diverse providers will produce the best solutions in the end. McCleary at USI has been most eloquent explaining all that stuff. By the way it has lately become pretty clear that the various EAI and XML integration servers and MOM vendors are doing a lot of the backend integration between the heterogeneous BSPs.  It has been too simplistic to think that native XML and XSLT etc would be adequate for any given BSP or webledger to be able to integrate with any other.  The June 13 edition of Business20 on the newsstands right now has a good article on page 90 on this topic, by Kim Girard, way to go Kim!  yowza!  magnum opus. Todd * Todd F. Boyle CPA    http://www.GLDialtone.com/ * XML accounting, WebLedgers, ASPs, GL dialtone, whatever it takes

Response:

Pam: Your experience is becoming increasingly common for large to small organizations.  Even huge organizations with major distribution networks like Amway have had to address some of these same issues. See my specific comments in italics below. Elizabeth Paulsen, President Cascade e-Commerce Solutions, Inc. http://www.bizincome.net I am the Accountant of a small mfg. co with mainly wholesale sales.   We have a web site up and running.  We want to begin looking at processing retail sales from the web.  Several issues need addressing and I was wondering if anyone else has faced these similar issues.  We are using Macola Software. 1.  current sales are all on net 30.  Invoices are created and mailed several days after shipping the mdse.  (retail web would be on the spot invoice generation)

You can keep the net 30 standard for wholesale and use http://www.authorize.net for credit/debit card online realtime orders and http://www.chexpedite.net for online realtime check orders.  Both these systems are secure and result in an instant automatic electronic invoice/receipt to the customer with instant automatic electronic notification of the sale to your business. 2.  processing the payment.   We will have to buy credit card equipment and establish a process of internal controls to handle the sale.  We  accrue our income and there will be a  few days before electronic funds are available from visa/mc.

No new equipment is required for either authorize.net or chexpedite.net and authorize.net can be used for phone, fax and in person orders as well as online orders.  You’re right in suggesting that new internal controls will be needed, but both services have online realtime reporting of transactions so you actually know when funds have cleared your account.  One new control you will want if you go with chexpedite for online check is that you will want to set a shipping policy of 3 to 5 days following sale so that you can be sure funds have cleared before shipping.  Funds usually clear for both services within 48 hours. 3.  keeping our wholesale customers happy with the fact that we are entering into the retail arena.  We do not want to hurt them, but we are getting calls to fill orders which we currently refer to our distributors.

I’ve seen businesses go several directions with this –1. is to continue to refer each direct order to the distributor in the nearest zipcode by sending the nearest distributor an e-mail or phone or fax message that states that if they do not respond to your organization within one business day stating that they will handle the order you will fill it automatically from corporate, 2. another approach is to set policy that your internet site and phone center will first suggest that the customer work through a local distributor and provide them with the distributor’s contact information and then if the customer still wishes to order directly to corporate then the customer will need to click through to another page or be transferred to another phone number, 3. redefine your product line with which items will be distributed through distributors and which will be marketed on-line, 4. process the orders through corporate but give the distributor a cut.  You may also want to consider giving a price break to your wholesale customers that your retail customers won’t be able to access. Not knowing much about your current commitment to your distributors it’s hard to know which specific approach you should take.  Hopefully, I’ve given some ideas that will help in your evaluation. Feel free to contact me directly via e-mail with any questions or call me at 206.244.9092. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I welcome any comments thanks Pam

Response:

Retail and wholesale order entry, web based: Check out: http://www.parabase.com – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am the Accountant of a small mfg. co with mainly wholesale sales. We have a web site up and running.  We want to begin looking at processing retail sales from the web.  Several issues need addressing and I was wondering if anyone else has faced these similar issues.  We are using Macola Software. 1.  current sales are all on net 30.  Invoices are created and mailed several days after shipping the mdse.  (retail web would be on the spot invoice generation) 2.  processing the payment.   We will have to buy credit card equipment and establish a process of internal controls to handle the sale.  We accrue our income and there will be a  few days before electronic funds are available from visa/mc. 3.  keeping our wholesale customers happy with the fact that we are entering into the retail arena.  We do not want to hurt them, but we are getting calls to fill orders which we currently refer to our distributors. I welcome any comments thanks Pam

Before you buy.

Response:

I am the Accountant of a small mfg. co with mainly wholesale sales.   We have a web site up and running.  We want to begin looking at processing retail sales from the web.  Several issues need addressing and I was wondering if anyone else has faced these similar issues.  We are using Macola Software. 1.  current sales are all on net 30.  Invoices are created and mailed several days after shipping the mdse.  (retail web would be on the spot invoice generation) 2.  processing the payment.   We will have to buy credit card equipment and establish a process of internal controls to handle the sale.  We  accrue our income and there will be a  few days before electronic funds are available from visa/mc. 3.  keeping our wholesale customers happy with the fact that we are entering into the retail arena.  We do not want to hurt them, but we are getting calls to fill orders which we currently refer to our distributors. I welcome any comments thanks Pam

Response:

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – My friend who has prancreatic Cancer for 1 year now is recomanded to use Hydrazine Sulfate by G.P. who also practice alternative medicine. This drug’s positive effect on Cancer was written by Linda Clark. I just wonder if anyone else could provide me with more information about this drug. Does it work with Leucovorin and 5-Fu? Thank you. Please reply to    Hydrazine, according to the more honest "Alternative medicine" supporters does not kill cancer cells, but may improve appetite. It can be given as an adjunct to conventional chemotherapy, but I have not seen much in the way of positive responses. If your friend tries the drug, she should check her weight (over a six week minimal trial) to see if the hydrazine is really improving her appetite as shown by documentable weight gain.

Hydrazine Sulfate: A life-Saving Drug by Dr Whitaker, M.D. Hydrazine sulfate, a drug that costs about a dollar a day, reverses the devastating weight loss called cachexia (ka-KEK-sia) that kills most cancer patients. This simple chemical, developed in 1969 by Dr. Joseph Gold, director or the Syracuse Cancer Institute, works in half of all the patients who take it. Yet more than two million cancer patients starve to death yearly because the National Cancer Institute (NCI) continues its 20-year suppression of this life-saving drug. Meanwhile, doctors at the Petrov Institute of Oncology in St. Petersburg treating 1,000 patients with hydazine sul-fate report long-term survival even in those with lymphatic cancer, the type that killed Jacqueline Onassis. Good news is that the U.S. General Accounting Office is investigating NCI’s conduct of these studies and may iniate a re-valuation of hydrazine sulfate. For more information on obtaining hydrazine sulfate, send $10 to the Cancer Control Society, 2042 No. Berendo St., Los Angeles, CA 90027, 213/663-7801.