Re: OT: Layoff Letter

No. In this context 'tax' is a euphemism for organized theft where it is argued that if you have enough thieves to 'out vote' the victims then theft is 'legal', just as a 'democratic majority' could 'vote' to enslave a minority, or exterminate the 'inferior races', or establish an official religion and outlaw all others, or silence dissent and ban 'untruthful' books.

It's what the founding fathers feared as the "tyranny of the majority" and why they insisted on a Constitution that limited 'government powers' and what 'the majority' could do with them.

If you are admitting to it then apparently so.

What's illegal worker insurance? Or 3rd party claims insurance? These are foreign to me.

Here, we don't toss out illegals for not having insurance. We don't toss them out at all, mostly. And if they drive uninsured (most) and cause harm (disproportionately common), little happens, if anything.

The Obama plan isn't health insurance at all. It's subsidized medical care (different from health, and different from insurance), with hidden taxes to make it look cheaper.

Health insurance is exercising, brushing your teeth, and eating right. It ain't perfect, but it ups your chances a bunch.

-- Cheers, James Arthur

OK. They do need some explanation but the concepts are simple.

If you employ someone (even *illegally* as some rich expats tend to do for cleaners and gardeners) then you are automatically liable for any injuries that they suffer on their way to work upto and including death in a car crash. Belgian roads are pretty dangerous with a mix of "priorite a droite" and normal junctions. You will also be sued by the state for employing illegal worker(s) if you get caught as well.

The other is if for example you fail to clear the path in front of your house of snow or a workman falls off your roof and is injured they can sue you. Belgians think nothing of suing neighbours this way.

Belgium only throws them out because they have been made bankrupt due to failure to have purchased appropriate insurance to cover what are almost unlimited liabilities. The rules are clear enough and explained in great detail in the expat secondment notes. Napoleonic code has some pretty draconian measures that you need to be aware of as a expat.

Most of the civilised world consider it entirely normal to treat the sick - only in America is it normal only to treat properly only those with sufficient funds to pay for treatment. The USA is also populated now with vastly overweight unfit hypochondriacs which doesn't help.

It is actually cheaper to treat people early rather than leave minor ailments until they become critical life threatening emergencies that even the US health industry is not quite callous enough to ignore.

You will recall that one of my UK coworkers was in a dispute with his US medical insurers over neonatal care that nearly killed his newborn child because the local hospital lacked the right facilities and they would not call in a helicopter until they were sure they would get paid.

Again these things are considered normal in the ROW.

=20

=20

I'd like to add a personal story to this, to strengthen your argument on this point. I posted the story here, back in

My brother was almost refused care at a full care hospital (if you want names, here it is: Meridian Park, just off of the Nyberg Rd exit of I5, south of Portland and Tigard -- it is on a size scale with the biggest hospitals in a metro area of about 2 million people.)

It was an emergency, as he'd swallowed broken glass and was in severe pain by the time of arrival at the hospital. But he had no insurance and those at the desk simply refused to let him even talk to a doctor about it. They told him he would have to leave and find another hospital (the nearest would be about 20-25 minutes drive.) It was only because there was an attorney in the waiting room, who overheard the discussion, stood up and then told the receptionist that he would personally bring suit against the hospital unless they helped my brother see a doctor right away, that they capitulated and let him speak to a doctor.

When I got down there (later), the doctor told me that if it had been as little as another hour, my brother would certainly have been dead. They got to him in time. But only because of the efforts of a good samaritan who luckily happened to be there at the right time.

Jon

If we aren't careful, we'll catch up with Europe in that sad race.

America is the undisputed world leader in fat unfit hypochondriacs.

The majority of Americans are now overweight with only a minority having what is considered a normal healthy body weight.

My goal is to die of a heart attack, a stroke, cancer, and kidney and liver failure, all at the same time. Anytime after 85 YRs

You left out "choosing your parents carefully" which helps a whole lot more.

In fact that isn't health insurance at all. Insurance is about sharing risk, not minimising it.

Sensible insurers would adjust their tariffs to match the individual risks they are insuring but the problem of doing this with health insurance is that most of the risk is determined by your choice of parents. Most societies figure that it makes more sense to spread the costs evenly (or load the rich a bit because they can afford it) rather than relying on the free market to optimise the distribution of health care.

There are several arguments for taking this approach. The argument that ought to appeal to an economic flat-earther like you is that it turns out to be cheaper to cover everybody.

People who think in terms of social equity use other arguments, but you wouldn't understand them.

One argument that you might understand, if you thought about it, is that health care also serves as a society-wide protection system against epidemics, where it works a whole lot better if everybody thinks that they are covered. Plagues kill people from every walk of life, and the well-off who have mastered enlightened self-interest want to spend enough money on keeping the poor healthy to prevent them becoming "Typhoid Marys" of one sort or another.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

ace.

er

Then you'd better move to Monaco.

tells us that that the only country where more than half the population survives past 85 - they survive on average for 89.68 years.

Even there, it probably only the women who have a better than even chance of surviving past 85.

I'm moving back to Australia in a month, where average age of death is apparently 81.90 - which puts us nineth on the list.

The US is 50th, with an average life expectancy of 78.49 year.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

help.

sad race.

having

liver

See:

"Monaco levies no income tax on individuals. The absence of a personal income tax in the principality has attracted to it a considerable number of wealthy 'tax refugee' residents from European countries who derive the majority of their income from activity outside Monaco."

Wealth is HIGHLY correlated to life expectancy.

Jon

d race.

...

ving

liver

And to whom do you attribute that completely inaccurate observation? It mus= t be predicated on being a member of the sedentary population. You obviousl= y never lived in the country or the mountains. There are plenty of men who = live to nearly 100 and spent a lifetime doing menial low paying labor, but = they were well nourished and lived free of the toxins of industrialized soc= iety. Heck, some of them are still procreating at 85, and many don't even b= egin regular doctor visits until their mid-70s. And these people were far f= rom living the health nut lifestyle, smoking and drinking, eating lots of r= ed fat marbled meat, butter, cream, sugar, etc.

Like hell. You have obviously have never been self-employed. You would lucky to take home so much as half of it, with about 15% going to various social security items and about 30% in income taxes at that level. Then there is various State taxes, get the picture?

Maybe not yet, what is the difference between your gross pay and your = take home? The self-employed have to pay all the employer taxes as well out = of the same gross. Maybe now you can figure it out. Finally how much capital investment is tied up in owning all those franchises? They = aren't cheap, how is that paid for?

?-)

lp.

sad race.

as...

having

d liver

..

It's not inaccurate, but it does conflate a lot of different effects.

suggests that it's true from nation to nation and within at least one nation - Canada.

obviously never lived in the country or the mountains. There

l low paying labor, but they were well nourished and lived

l procreating at 85, and many don't even begin regular doctor > visits unti= l their mid-70s. And these people were far from living the health nut lifes= tyle, smoking and drinking, eating lots of red

Which doesn't really tie up with the observation that life expectancy is lower in the rural area of Canada.

Education level correlates positively with both health and income, and may explain a lot of the positive correlation between wealth and life expectancy.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

help.

t sad race.

cs.

s.as...

y having

and liver

r...

s.

is

u obviously never lived in the country or the mountains. There

ial low paying labor, but they were well nourished and lived

ill procreating at 85, and many don't even begin regular doctor > visits un= til their mid-70s. And these people were far from living the health nut lif= estyle, smoking and drinking, eating lots of red

There is a much more extensive report here:

They don't explicitly break anything down by income, they use a much broade= r measure of socioeconomic status. In too many cases there is no clear caus= e and effect relation between income and health. The strongest influence on= life expectancy is education level.

help.

race.

having

liver

obviously never lived in the country or the mountains. There

low paying labor, but they were well nourished and lived

procreating at 85, and many don't even begin regular doctor > visits until their mid-70s. And these people were far from living the health nut lifestyle, smoking and drinking, eating lots of red

measure of socioeconomic status. In too many cases there is no clear cause and effect relation between income and health. The strongest influence on life expectancy is education level.

Personally, I can't imagine wanting to live to be 90. Various relatives have managed it, but it didn't do them much good.

It's really sad to see people trying desperate measures to try to keep Mom or Dad (or themselves) around, when there's no prospect of returning to health or even freedom from pain.

Life on Earth is short.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

sage

n't help.

that sad race.

driacs.

tates.as...

ority having

ney and liver

order...

years.

en

ath is

. You obviously never lived in the country or the mountains. There

menial low paying labor, but they were well nourished and lived

e still procreating at 85, and many don't even begin regular doctor > visit= s until their mid-70s. And these people were far from living the health nut= lifestyle, smoking and drinking, eating lots of red

/hus/hus11.pdf#fig32

oader measure of socioeconomic status. In too many cases there is no clear = cause and effect relation between income and health. The strongest influenc= e on life expectancy is education level.

Wait until you get to 89 before you make up your mind.

Compared with what alternative? Religion promises eternal life singing in the heavenly choir, but there's some uncertainty about the working conditions.

But in the US there's no legal alternative.

Finite, in any event.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

essage

esn't help.

in that sad race.

ondriacs.

-states.as...

inority having

idney and liver

nkorder...

even

death is

on?

s.

ne

on. You obviously never lived in the country or the mountains. There

ng menial low paying labor, but they were well nourished and lived

are still procreating at 85, and many don't even begin regular doctor > vis= its until their mid-70s. And these people were far from living the health n= ut lifestyle, smoking and drinking, eating lots of red

cy

and

fe

ta/hus/hus11.pdf#fig32

broader measure of socioeconomic status. In too many cases there is no clea= r cause and effect relation between income and health. The strongest influe= nce on life expectancy is education level.

Not everyone dies in excruciating pain from disease. It seems the older peo= ple get, the better the chance of drifting away peacefully in their sleep. = Also, a person's perception of time seems to be relative to their cumulativ= e total in life, so that a year here or there to an 80-something has about = as perceived duration as a few months to a 30-something. But all this is go= ing to end soon, people will be able to transition into brand new cloned bo= dies in their 20s every few years or so, or the bodies they have will becom= e ageless. Death by aging will be a thing of the past.

help.

race.

having

and liver

obviously never lived in the country or the mountains. There

menial low paying labor, but they were well nourished and lived

still procreating at 85, and many don't even begin regular doctor > visits until their mid-70s. And these people were far from living the health nut lifestyle, smoking and drinking, eating lots of red

measure of socioeconomic status. In too many cases there is no clear cause and effect relation between income and health. The strongest influence on life expectancy is education level.

My mother died at 95 but was able to take care of herself, in a retirement home (most meals prepared and housecleaning services) until the last year. She lived alone in her own home until after 85.

No reason to want to shorten it.