Think First

If The Shoe Fits...

Thu, 29 Mar 2012 21:56:40 -0500

A couple of mothers at our kid’s school were offended that my wife called statements made by some other parents insensitive and tactless. The other parents were concerned that so much time was being spent with average or below-average that their “gifted” and “advanced” children weren’t getting enough attention and being challenged enough. There aren’t any special opportunities in K-3 for gifted children to explore their potential. There apparently are for the later grades, but not K-3.

Simply put, what they said absolutely was insensitive and out of line. In my opinion, one of the most common and egregious mistakes people make in their arguments is missing the real issue. In this case, the real issue is a lack of resources. Our school district, like most, has limited resources. When your resources are limited, you have to make choices about what is most important and you can’t afford to cut back on. If you’re smart, that means you cut back on the extras, going without some of the luxuries so you can keep the heat on. It would not have been out of line at all for those parents to say that they would like more opportunities for gifted children to achieve their potential. Who wouldn’t want that for their children? For whatever reason though, they felt the need to blame the other children rather than the lack of resources. They went from looking like a good parent, wanting only the best for their child, to a selfish piece of shit. Yeah, let’s let those normal or struggling kids fall by the wayside so your kid can sprout wings and fly like an angel.

I’ve got a crazy idea. Maybe if their kids is so gifted, they could get involved in their kids’ education, make sure they’re challenged, and reach their full potential. It’s not the state’s job to make sure your kid is all that they can be, it’s yours as a parent. The state is there to do the most good it can for the most people it can, providing all children with the best education baseline that its’ resources can provide. If your 5-year-old displays a gift for reading, rather than bitching about my autistic kid holding yours back, maybe you could yours down to a library if you can find time in your busy schedule.

I was a gifted child and there were times I felt it wasn’t fair that the average kids seemed to get more attention than I did, but I could have sought out challenges and my parents could have taken a greater interest in challenging me. It wasn’t the fault of those other kids that I didn’t apply myself. On the other hand, my 5yo daughter is autistic, and although she excels at a great many things, she needs greater attention with some things than other kids do. With that extra attention, she has avoided falling behind and is thriving. Let’s flip back again by looking at my 3yo son who is already beginning to read. The psychologists put him on the autistic spectrum too, but let’s just say that the spectrum covers a lot of ground, and they also say that he’s likely gifted. In either case, I am very grateful for what the school does for them, but ultimately take responsibility as their father to make sure that they get what they need to succeed in life.

What's Good for the Goose...

Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:03:03 -0500

In my opinion, a government that cannot mandate people purchase health insurance they can afford has no business mandating hospitals treat those unable to pay.

It's okay for me to say it, but not you.

Tue, 27 Mar 2012 23:05:50 -0500

That seems to be the gist of what this non-thinker has to say in response to Geraldo Rivera’s explanation/apology regarding his remarks about Trayvon Martin’s death.

Although a black preacher may warn his congregation or a black father may tell his son that we live in a society where they can be singled out, where they’re going to have to defend themselves against the racism that exists in America, it is not for you to go out on the most Conservative news network and say something insensitive and enabling on a show that you know promotes the most negative stereotypes. To go in front of them is dramatically different than a black or Latino father telling his son to ”watch out, the world is still full of racism and you’re at risk.”

So because Geraldo isn’t black, and what seems more important, because he works for Fox News, he apparently isn’t allowed to say what Mr. Simmons, the source of quote, implies that he is allowed to say.

The media seems to be talking out of both sides of their mouths on this, as usual. On one hand, your a racist if you suggest that a person’s appearance can contribute to such a situation. On the other hand, you can pretty much say just that as long as you’re black. I just read an article in Time magazine, written by a black man, that said, “I’m not saying you can’t wear what you want, but your clothes are a red herring.” They both carefully skirt around the underlying implication that your choice of clothing does affect what others think of you. I find it laughable that people are saying that it doesn’t or even that it shouldn’t. People want what they wear to affect what others think of them. Why else is there even such an industry as fashion? Why else would so many people spend so much on things that have no utilitarian benefit over things that are a fraction of the price? Does Lady Gaga dress like a freak show because it’s more comfortable? Do pro athletes wear all that bling because it helps their game performance? Come on!

To top it off, I see another article on globalgrind.com by it’s Editor-In-Chief, Michael Skolnik, saying that, “White People, You Will Never Look Suspicious Like Trayvon Martin!” Are you serious? I’ve come across people of every color I know of that struck me as scary, dangerous types. I’ve also come across people of every color I know of that didn’t intimidate me whatsoever. A man in clean clothes that fit him and not making any effort to intimidate those around him is not going to get labeled as a threat by me, regardless of his color. A man with his pants halfway down his ass, making every effort to intimidate all those around him, is absolutely going to get labeled as a threat by me.

Obviously, there is such a thing as racism, but we’ve gotten in the habit, ironically in my opinion, of labeling judgements, even those based on experience and perfectly natural intuition, as racist if applied to certain people. The clothing issue in this case is no different than it is when it comes to women and rape. Wearing trashy clothing is in no way an excuse for someone to rape a woman, but you can be damn sure I’m going to discourage my daughter from every wearing such things. I’ll discourage her first and foremost because she should have more self-respect than that, but also because there are bad people out there that do bad things and to act like there aren’t is just plain naive.

Overreaching indeed.

Sat, 17 Mar 2012 23:16:00 -0500

Overreaching indeed.:

Hate is a very strong word and one that gets used all too much these days. Those who don’t like to be judged seem to be getting awfully comfortable doing so to others.

Public Workers Are Playing The Wrong Game

Sat, 10 Mar 2012 14:57:25 -0600

They’re playing checkers and others are playing chess.

I’ve read a lot of articles and letters to the editor, and the ones supporting the workers are missing the elephant in the room and I believe they’re just digging themselves a hole with public opinion. The arguments I continually see made are that:

That’s the way it’s always been, so that’s the way it should stay.
We don’t do it for the money. We love our jobs and do them because we care about you and your families.
We provide your families with safety and your precious children with a good education. That should be worth a lot to you.
Those benefits are part of our pay so you’re cutting our pay.
Those benefits aren’t part of our pay. We graciously took them in lieu of extra pay when the economy was tough.

I agree with some of it and some if it I don’t, but none of it matters because the one fact that none of it changes is that we can’t afford it. Until you change that, arguing about it is pointless. Basic math tells us that if you don’t have enough money to pay your bills, you either have to cut costs or increase your income. It may not be your jobs to do either, but you better believe that your jobs depend on it.

So far, the unions’ approach has been a colossal blunder in my opinion. They continue to rely solely on our appreciation of their services and how little they’re compensated. For a lot of people though, I think playing the underpaid card rings a little hollow these days and may come off as a sign of how out of touch with “the rest of us” they may be. As much crap as we give the 1% for living in a different world, the public workers are coming off as living in a world of their own as well.

When people found out how “little” many public workers make and that turns out to be a lot more than a lot of those people, and a lot of those same people pay much, much more than 12% of their benefits, it was like Bugs Bunny put a carrot in Elmer Fudd’s shotgun and watching him pull the trigger. They’ve managed to make an enemy of many of those whose support they arguably need the most. This has become a fight between groups who should be allies. We should be fighting together against things like corporate welfare and tax loopholes that allow the rich to pay far less than the rates that some would argue are too low to begin with.

I appreciate their services very much, support them in many ways, but I won’t support them by taking a double-hit so they can avoid a single. I certainly will not support them by voting for a recall of a fairly elected official who has only done what he said he would.

Why are they silent?

Wed, 07 Mar 2012 00:18:33 -0600

Thousands of ordinary women across the country have been writing letters, sending e-mails, leaving phone messages, and buttonholing state and national lawmakers in support of cheaper contraceptive methods and greater access to abortion.

But I have to ask — where in these recent debates are the voices of ordinary men? Why aren’t we hearing publicly even now from husbands who are not ready to have children they would have to support? Or from boyfriends who do not have the means to support a child?

I support providing cheap access to contraceptives. I cannot support greater access to abortion, but I won’t get into that discussion at this point. I believe it’s a discussion that is separate altogether than the one of contraception and need not be shackled to it. One of the biggest problems in politics in my opinion is this “all or nothing” mentality. Issues and the bills that make their way through Congress as a result should stand on their own or not all. I support it in the same way that I support providing access to clean needles to drug addicts. Quite simply, it’s cheaper than the alternative. Contraceptives has the added bonus that I don’t want innocent children to suffer for someone else’s lack of responsibility. So let’s talk about supporting cheap access to contraceptives. First though, I’d like to analyze the phrase “cheap access to contraceptives”.

The author of the article fails to include the adjective cheap in a picture caption that uses the phrase, “attacks on access”. Saying access is being attacked is misleading in my opinion. Access in general is not being attacked. Quite frankly, I think it’s a bit misleading to even say that cheap access is being attacked. Considering the average cell phone bill ($73 according to J.D. Power recently) is significantly more than the average cost of birth control pills ($15-$50 according to Planned Parenthood). How many teenage and college-aged girls do you see without cell phones? Priorities anyone?

Now let’s dig deeper. Let’s get back to talking about how issues should stand on their own. Is this is an issue of birth control or not?

If it isn’t a birth control issue, but rather a women’s reproductive health issue because of all the beneficial side effects of some forms of birth control, then why do we call it birth control? Birth control medication seems to be one of the few that gets a pass to market themselves for their off-label use. I for one am all for getting insurance companies to cover things in a more logical manner. What they do and don’t cover is some serious voodoo. Even if they cover it, the spider webs of network vs out-of-network amongst other things means they pretty much cover whatever they want. A perfect example is my daughter who is autistic. Wisconsin law mandates that insurance cover autism therapy. My insurance covers it, but I’ll probably never get a dime from them for it. How do they get away with this? It’s easy really. They may have to cover it, but they don’t have to let any providers in their network, so I’ll be paying every last nickel I can squeeze out of my own pocket with my $12,000 out-of-network deductible that is separate from my in-network deductible (a nice trick they all seem to be pulling in recent years).

Maybe that’s why “ordinary” men are so silent. There are a lot of injustices when it comes to health care. You’ll have to forgive me if I’m not full of as much righteous indignation as you that you might have to cut back your data or texting plan to cover something that is rarely, if ever, medically necessary. There are plenty of people facing far greater injustices with health care that aren’t getting nearly as much attention.

On the other hand, maybe “ordinary” men aren’t buying that it’s not birth control issue. In that case, they’re probably saying to themselves the same thing I am, “Society tells us to keep it in our pants and you’re the ones who don’t want double-standards, so keep ‘em zipped ladies.”

Good Will Hunting - Do You Know How Easy This Is for Me? I can...

Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:24:27 -0600

Good Will Hunting - Do You Know How Easy This Is for Me?

I can relate to this all too much and all too often.

Cause and Effect

Sat, 03 Mar 2012 23:37:07 -0600

While reading this article about a Miami valedictorian facing deportation, a statement jumped out at me and spurred this post:

“She’s a good citizen, besides being a brilliant girl,” said North Miami Senior High School administrator Larry Jurrist, who added he can’t understand why the judge decided to deport the girls.

Back that train up. She’s not a citizen and that is precisely why the judge decided to deport her and her sister. When it comes to immigration law, about the only thing anyone does seem to agree on is that it’s a mess. However, it is still the law. Should it matter that she gets good grades? Maybe, maybe not, but obviously it does for a lot of people and I’m not going to attempt to answer that question because it’s not relevant as far as I’m concerned. What is relevant is what the law is and isn’t. Don’t break the law and wonder why — you know why. Disagree with, protest it, change it, but don’t act like it doesn’t exist.

“What I have worked for since I was 4 years old - to live the American dream. And I feel like I earned it,” she said.

No, you didn’t, not legally anyways, and that’s all a judge should consider when sitting on the bench. You may feel like you’ve earned it, but your feelings don’t change the facts of the matter.

On a side note, I cannot ignore a pet peeve of mine — the misuse of the term literally:

“Can you imagine that? Literally putting a postage stamp on her forehead and send her packing,” Michael Wildes, a professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, said about the case.

Really? They’re going to literally put a postage stamp on her forehead, eh? This guy is a professor at a law school no less and he says something that stupid? Serenity now!

An Attack on Women, or not?

Sat, 18 Feb 2012 23:20:18 -0600

I just read a blog post about how religious institutions not wanting to cover birth control as part of their health care is an attack against women. I’ll refrain from sourcing the blog post to try and avoid the cyber-bullying that goes on for anyone that doesn’t goose-step nicely for the twitterverse.

In an effort to combat your tunnel vision, let me start by saying that I have no problem with insurance covering birth control. It doesn’t offend me in any way or bother me really. However, it’s a choice of whether or not to cover medically unnecessary services that I believe they are within their right to make.

I would like to examine some of the statements she made. Let’s start with this:

If the institution has female employees they should not be able to say which ailments/conditions/medications/etc. they are willing to pay for. That is discrimination.

Heres’ the thing: every employer and/or insurance company picks and chooses what ailments/conditions/medications/etc. they want to cover to some degree, or at least they can. My insurance doesn’t cover Tamiflu, or at least our last plan didn’t; I’m not sure about our current plan/carrier. My daughter was diagnosed with swine flu a couple years ago when we all seemed to think it was going to strike down the human race. So were told it pretty serious and she needed this to combat this potentially life threatening illness. Again, my insurance didn’t cover it. I paid for it out of pocket. Was it not medically necessary? I asked my insurance that. That wasn’t the problem. It didn’t matter if it was medically necessary, it wasn’t included in my plan they said. People have some serious illusions about how insurance actually works. Most people seem to think, “I’m sick, my doctor said I need something, I’ve got insurance, I’m covered.” Oh, and don’t’ get me started on the difference between covered and paid. Trust me, there can be a big difference.

She follows that with:

Believe me, if this was about paying for erectile dysfunction meds or prostate exams, the guys would be allllll over that.

Here’s the thing, you just named a dysfunction and an exam that is checking for cancer. For most women, birth control is not medically necessary. You don’t need it, and yet most insurance pays for it anyways. There may be some rare exceptions, but you’re generally not going to DIE without it. You don’t have to have sex, believe it or not. It’s a choice. You want to preach about pro-choice, I’m all for supporting your right to make choices, but I’m not going to support the rest of us sharing in the consequences of your choices.

Here’s another choice snippet:

Why do we as women sit there and allow men to tell us what to do with our own bodies???

Nobody is telling you what to do with your body, they’re just saying they’re not going to support your choices. You can go fuck the whole town for all they care, but there are consequences to that. Now I completely understand that it is probably in society’s best interest to help you avoid an unwanted kid because it’s going to cost us a lot more to support that consequence since it’s not one that decent people are willing to ignore. We don’t care so much if you die in a ditch, but we’re not going to let you do that to an innocent child just because you couldn’t keep your pants on. Unless that is, you’re saying that you can’t keep your pants on. If that’s the case, should we start giving pedophiles and such a pass? I mean, whether you believe it or not, the argument has been made that such things are a sickness, a compulsion that cannot be controlled.

This is just another example of people tossing around their opinion of what they seemingly believe to be their God-given rights. The Ten Commandments is short as is the Bill of Rights. In my opinion, any list of rights or rules that applies to everyone period should be short lest you infringe upon those of others. People don’t have a right to much in this world. They sure do think they’re entitle to a lot of shit though.

Compensation: A Matter of Perspective

Sat, 07 Jan 2012 18:36:17 -0600

When you think of what you get paid, do you consider your benefits? How do you differentiate between pay and benefits to begin with? Have you ever gotten a job offer like this?

“We’ll pay you $90,000 per year

$55k in money paid directly to you
$20k for health insurance
$10k for retirement
$5k for several other benefits”

If you have, I’d love to hear about it. I certainly never have. I’ve never seen a job listing like that either. I see things like:

Competitive salary
Health Insurance
401/k with company matching up to 3%
2 weeks of vacation your first year
8 paid holidays per year

Okay, maybe if you’re being offered a job as CEO of a major corporation you might get offered $X million in stock options or whatever, but you’re playing a different game than the vast majority of us so I’m not counting you.

I would argue that about the only one who looks at it from the first perspective is an employer and only when the bills come in for that matter. It’s been a bit of a hot button issue where I work as health insurance costs have sky-rocketed and employees have been asked to shoulder more of the burden. I completely understand that, from my employer’s perspective, they have to pay more money to have me work there, plain and simple.

Maybe compensation should start being pitched from the first perspective. “I’m going to pay you $90k/year and here are some benefits that are available to you and they cost X amount right now and typically go up about X% per year.” Then it would be like any other cost of living going up. I didn’t all of a sudden get paid more when the price of gas went through the roof, so why should I get paid more when health insurance goes up? As I write that, I start to think to myself who stands to benefit from these costs being essentially hidden from much of the public? I suspect the outrage from the public towards corporate America would be even greater if they directly felt the pain of the rising costs of benefits. Instead, people with employer provided health insurance and retirement take it for granted for the most part. It’s just something we get, like Labor Day off. That way, the insurance companies have made it into a fight between employer and employee, not them vs the employer and employee on the same team.

One of the most striking examples of this is the fight between teachers and the “rest of us” in Wisconsin. Yes, it’s more than just teachers, but it’s basically about the teachers. This post is a result of an article on Forbes essentially about how teacher’s pensions were part of their pay and not some sort of handout, so by asking them to put part of their pay into is really asking them to take a cut in pay. I now wonder if that’s where things went wrong in the first place. When the airlines were going bankrupt - okay, so when aren’t the airlines going bankrupt - the unions make concessions in the form of pay freezes, pay cuts, benefit cuts, all to keep their jobs. In our case though, we didn’t ask our workers to take a cut in pay for the good of many. We went out there and painted a picture of greedy teachers living in their ivory towers, unwilling pay their fair share. Then we told them we were cutting their pay and we told ourselves that we were actually cutting back on lavish bonuses basically. These aren’t Wall Street bankers getting $10 million bonuses when their customers were losing their life savings. A good teacher is worth their weight in gold. We all know there are serious problems with our education system, but there’s a lot right with it too. Where would we be without it? It’s certainly not going to get any better by working against each other.

All Else Being Equal... But It's Not

Sat, 24 Sep 2011 00:48:02 -0500

Yet another article in the fight over ~~teachers~~ unions. I amended that opening statement because I think the fight really is far more with the unions than teachers. Given recent events here in Wisconsin, I absolutely feel that the unions really only care about preserving their own existence and will throw their members under the bus without hesitation if they think it will help that.

In my opinion, the problem with this article is the same problem with so many others: it’s a commercial disguised as journalism and skews reality by being selective with information and making apples to oranges comparisons.

It makes me wonder if the union actually paid the writer for the piece, if she’s just that bad of a writer, or if she’s just that out of touch with reality. It may actually add up to people living in metro areas. I can’t say since I don’t, but I know it won’t add up to many of us country bumpkins, which there are quite a few of. The biggest factor not brought up in the piece in my opinion is the difference in cost of living between Brooklyn and say, rural Wisconsin where I live. The woman given as the primary example in the article has a $75,000 salary but gives the impression that she has to have a second job just to survive. In what strikes me as a contradiction to that, she goes on to say, “When I hear about what teachers are making in Arizona or Texas, I think New York City is in a different place that that, and it’s the union that’s fought for us to be in that place. At least for me, it’s something I’m grateful for.” So, she has to have a second job but seems happy with her salary? Um, okay. The average household income around here, let alone individual income, is nowhere near that, not to mention that there will be no pension waiting for most of us when we retire and most of us pay a significant portion of our benefits.

So here’s the thing. Are they living on easy-street? Maybe not, but the fact is that it’s a damn bit better living than many have, so it’s going to be difficult for many to muster up any sympathy. As the middle-class erodes, those no longer in it naturally resent those still managing to hang on to it. Now, in the middle of New York city, $75k probably doesn’t go as far it does here, so they may already be amongst those who have lost their grip on the middle-class. In that case, they’re probably feeling quit unappreciated for the critically important service they provide the public. The article states that the average teacher salary in the US is $39k and roughly $45,500 in the city, which I can only assume is in reference to New York city in this context. That’s not quite a 17% increase. I suspect the cost of living in New York city is a heck of a lot more than 17% more than here. She actually talks about a maximum salary of slightly more than $100k as if it’s paltry, and maybe it is in the “city” for all I know, but it sure as hell isn’t here. She doesn’t talk about any of that though. For what it’s worth, a quick Google search led me to a site that claims that $39k where I live is roughly equivalent to just over $70k in New York city.

So maybe this concept of teachers as a “collective” is at the heart of the problem. The cost of living in one locale could be almost twice another’s, and yet they don’t get paid anywhere near twice as much. Then there’s the issue of merit based pay. Why is pay based on a damn spreadsheet essentially? Why shouldn’t someone really good at their job be recognized and rewarded for that? A person’s internal drive to make the world a better place only goes so far.

I’m not claiming to have all the answers, or even any of them, but it’s something to think about.

How not to be constructive 101

Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:39:08 -0600

I don’t know the “whole” story here, and quite frankly, nobody seems to for that matter. All I’m able to find on this whole state budget proposal fiasco is a bunch of vitriolic propaganda like the ad above. However,I certainly don’t like the way people are responding to this. I don’t care if you think the proposal is good or bad, this is not a civilized, mature, or intelligent way to respond. It’s what gives unions a bad name and just makes people go, “See what I mean? They need to be taken down a notch.”As much as I’m tempted to write endlessly about the dangers of a society where too much of the population is dependent on the state for its livelihood and what that means for the rest of us, I’d simply like to mention one particular thing I found disgusting. “News” organizations quoting the governor’s “threat” to use the national guard are throwing in [sic] and … way too much to pass the smell test. If you have to paraphrase and omit that much, my gut tells me you’re intentionally misleading people.

Converting iTunes music to MP3s

Wed, 12 Jan 2011 08:34:35 -0600

I noticed a few people having problems getting their music to players that presumably do not handle AAC format files, so I thought I would type up a little how-to.

Music purchased from the iTunes store is an M4A file. They’re similar to MP3s and playable by iPods and many other players, but they use AAC encoding instead of MP3.

If the player only handles MP3s, you will need to convert the music. To do that, you need to make a change in the iTunes preferences. Where that is will depend on your version of iTunes and if your in Windows or if you are on a Mac. The current version of iTunes is 10.1.1 for both Windows and Mac, so I will cover those.

On a Mac, Preferences are always under the application’s main menu, which is always the first menu on the top left of your screen, just to the right of the Apple logo, and is the title of application. In Windows, the Preferences is under the Edit menu.

Once you are in Preferences, the first tab is the General tab, and towards the bottom you will see a button labeled Import Settings…. After clicking on that, you should see a drop-down for Import Using: and Setting:. Change Import Using to MP3 Encoder. It should automatically change Setting to High Quality (160 kbps), which is fine. Now click on the OK button, and then OK again.

How, select the music you want to convert. You may find it easier to add all the music you want to convert to a playlist first so that you can simply go that playlist and select all rather than accidentally releasing the Control/Shift/Command key while trying to select multiple songs and having to start over. Once you have the music you’d like to convert selected, go to the Advanced menu and click on Create MP3 Version. If you are currently in a playlist, the new files will not show up there, so go back to Music in the LIBRARY on the top left of the window.

There are a number of ways to sort out the files you create from the originals. The easiest may be to simply sort by Date Added since they will have just been added to the library. This cannot be done in Grid View, so make sure you have the 1st, 2nd, or 4th button selected amongst the 4 view buttons just to the left of the search box at the top right. If the Date Added column is not showing up, you can add it by going to the View menu, selecting View Options…, and then check the box for Date Added. You may also want to check the Kind box here as well so that you can see which files are MP3 without guessing. I wouldn’t advise leaving these files in your library permanently since they are essentially duplicates. Do what you need to do with them, drag them to your Desktop, whatever, and then delete them from your music library.

They were ahead of their time!

Mon, 14 Jun 2010 07:43:28 -0500

They were ahead of their time!

Health Care Reform

Mon, 03 May 2010 16:04:33 -0500

I was just wondering if somewhere in that monstrosity of a bill there was anything about requiring care providers to bill patients in a timely manner?

Have you ever gotten a bill from a provider like six months after the date of service and then they have the stones to put “Upon receipt” as the Due Date? The hospital and clinic here do this all the time. You don’t get a bill for months and months and then they practically call you a deadbeat the first time you’re hearing anything about it.

I’ve learned to keep an eye online to claims submitted to my insurance. I usually get an Explanation of Benefits for services long before I get a bill from the provider. We’ve gotten burned in the past because of what I believe is an intentional lag on the part of the provider. By the time you get your bill, you’ve gone in a half dozen more times, only to find out that this particular provider is considered “out of network” or that you’ve reached the annual limit for that particular service. Silly you for not knowing that a “unit” of service was a pathetic 15 minutes, meaning that you already burned through the 40 units (10 hours) of physical therapy allowed per calendar year and you’re responsible for the half a dozen hours at over $250/hour that you’ve received before you finally got anything that would have given you a heads up that you were going to get hosed. Hospitals deal with these insurance companies all the time, and yet they’d have us believe that they don’t know damn well what’s going to end up in the patient’s lap. It’s like making a deal with the devil. We’ve gotten to the point of seeking pre-authorization for services that don’t even technically need it, but then you also need to make sure you cover all your bases; is this in-network?, is there a limit of number of visits per year?, etc. If you don’t ask, they won’t tell. They want to keep you as ignorant as possible so that you’ll slip up. The providers aren’t going to do anything to discourage you from racking up as many charges as possible, and the insurance company certainly doesn’t want you to understand your policy enough to fully utilize everything it has to offer.

That reminds me of another bullshit trend in insurance lately - separate deductibles for in network and out of network. It’s not enough anymore that they only pay 80% or so for out of network, but now I have another $3000 deductible to reach before they pay a nickel. This isn’t often an issue, but small practices providing more specialized services are much less likely to be in-network.

Children can sense evil. ;-)

Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:33:47 -0500

Children can sense evil. ;-)

Forced unionization of day care providers in Michigan. Ah, the...

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:31:45 -0600

Forced unionization of day care providers in Michigan.

Ah, the land of the free…

hates: juliasegal: gerbert: Rad-Dudes.com This photo makes...

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:29:03 -0600

hates:

juliasegal:

gerbert:

Rad-Dudes.com

This photo makes me feel like I am not doing enough with my life

iPad

Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:38:29 -0600

HAL-9000: What is going to happen?
Dave: Something wonderful.
HAL-9000: I’m afraid.
Dave: Don’t be. We'll be together

(thx Laurian Gridinoc)

hates: So adorable! I am inspired. I can see it now…...

Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:44:04 -0600

hates:

So adorable!

I am inspired. I can see it now… Maggie as Princess Zelda and Sam as Link.