$153,000 For a Rattlesnake Bite

[Baruch]

A copperhead took up residence in my wood shed a couple of years ago.  I killed him, but it was an ugly affair with a lot of thrashing and showing of fangs.  I thought I could just whack him with a hoe, but they are strong and not prone to get cut in half.  I pinned him down with a shovel, then grabbed another shovel and kept jamming it against his neck until after a long battle, his head came off.

Too bad you didn't do that to Congress ... I keep thinking of that early American flag ...

[Cavebear]

A copperhead took up residence in my wood shed a couple of years ago.  I killed him, but it was an ugly affair with a lot of thrashing and showing of fangs.  I thought I could just whack him with a hoe, but they are strong and not prone to get cut in half.  I pinned him down with a shovel, then grabbed another shovel and kept jamming it against his neck until after a long battle, his head came off.

Sadly, I went through the same experience once.  And no one who has never tried to kill a snake knows how hard it is to kill one.  I nailed that cottonmouth into the ground with a sharp spade, and even loppers wouldn't cut its head off (it literally splipped between the blades).  It finally took many jumps on the sharpened spade blade to kill it. 

I tossed the body in the storm drain.  And even today local herpetologists swear there have never been cottonmouths here.  I should have kept the body.

[Jason78]

Shiranu what is the alternative? Do you want to force people to charge less for their services by force?

If profiteering from an unlucky persons suffering isn't criminal it's certainly ethically dubious.

If a tow truck towed your car off the motorway and then charged you £10K for a new fan belt you'd be pissed off and rightly so.

[Cavebear]

If profiteering from an unlucky persons suffering isn't criminal it's certainly ethically dubious.

Well, that IS what the insurance companies do.  I think you have to give them some profit for organizing the insurance pool...  It takes people and equipment and they have to get paid...

[Jason78]

Well, that IS what the insurance companies do.  I think you have to give them some profit for organizing the insurance pool...  It takes people and equipment and they have to get paid...

I'm not saying that these people shouldn't be able to make a living.  But do they have to be run as for-profit entities?   Why not run them as mutual societies?  Why not regulate industries such as this so that people are definitely getting what they are paying for and getting value for money for it?

[SGOS]

Well, that IS what the insurance companies do.  I think you have to give them some profit for organizing the insurance pool...  It takes people and equipment and they have to get paid...

FWIW, a former insurance executive I met had just bought a business for himself.  I can remember just one comment, and I can't even remember the context.  All I remember was, "You don't have to be smart to make money in insurance."

[Cavebear]

I'm not saying that these people shouldn't be able to make a living.  But do they have to be run as for-profit entities?   Why not run them as mutual societies?  Why not regulate industries such as this so that people are definitely getting what they are paying for and getting value for money for it?

That is positively Communistic.  And why not apply that idea to all public service businesses?  USMcDonald's Big Macs, $1.50...  Never mind thye cost.  Everyone gets a few.  Open only Sunday noon to 1 pm.

[Cavebear]

FWIW, a former insurance executive I met had just bought a business for himself.  I can remember just one comment, and I can't even remember the context.  All I remember was, "You don't have to be smart to make money in insurance."

I understand that.  You just need a database and a spreadsheet.  Figure the expenses and add 10%.  Like printing money.

[SGOS]

I'm not saying that these people shouldn't be able to make a living.  But do they have to be run as for-profit entities?   Why not run them as mutual societies?  Why not regulate industries such as this so that people are definitely getting what they are paying for and getting value for money for it?

The US the government has decided it's best to open their offices to private contractors.  I've seen it in the Forest Service.  Most everything that was done by the Forest Service at one time, is now bid out to private contractors, with the role of the FS to put one person in charge of oversight.  So getting into a business that competes with private enterprise goes contrary to government philosophy, which has traditionally been to get out of the business to encourage the private sector.  That's fine, until the company decides the way to success is to gouge the taxpaying consumer.

As far as regulating such companies, that's a dirty word in American politics today.  The watchword is deregulation, because if large corporations don't have to abide by inconvenient rules they make more money.  It's a two edged sword, however.  We deregulated banking, and look what happened.  Deregulation assumes corporations will act with some integrity.  The problem is that they don't.  Integrity gets in the way of profits.  And the measure of a company's success is profits.  The goal of the game is to get all the money.  The eventual end result is economic anarchy.

[Cavebear]

The US the government has decided it's best to open their offices to private contractors.  I've seen it in the Forest Service.  Most everything that was done by the Forest Service at one time, is now bid out to private contractors, with the role of the FS to put one person in charge of oversight.  So getting into a business that competes with private enterprise goes contrary to government philosophy, which has traditionally been to get out of the business to encourage the private sector.  That's fine, until the company decides the way to success is to gouge the taxpaying consumer.

As far as regulating such companies, that's a dirty word in American politics today.  The watchword is deregulation, because if large corporations don't have to abide by inconvenient rules they make more money.  It's a two edged sword, however.  We deregulated banking, and look what happened.  Deregulation assumes corporations will act with some integrity.  The problem is that they don't.  Integrity gets in the way of profits.  And the measure of a company's success is profits.  The goal of the game is to get all the money.  The eventual end result is economic anarchy.

Too much today is about "where's the money"?  I spent half my time in the Federal Government fending off companies who though we were the cow there to give them free milk.  On the contracts I DID get forced to allow and oversee, they squacked like strangled ducks if I actually enforced the terms of the contract. 

It was like "HOW DARE YOU!"

I never met a contractor how didn't have to be watched kill a cat sitting over a Nip leaf.  And you know who got choked most of the time?  ME!

[Gilgamesh]

If profiteering from an unlucky persons suffering isn't criminal it's certainly ethically dubious.

If a tow truck towed your car off the motorway and then charged you £10K for a new fan belt you'd be pissed off and rightly so.

Of course I would be pissed. That's why I'm for socialised medicine.

Still doesn't change the fact that the government butting in to forbid you to decide for yourself what your services are worth is inherently immoral.

[Gilgamesh]

I'm not saying that these people shouldn't be able to make a living.  But do they have to be run as for-profit entities?   Why not run them as mutual societies?  Why not regulate industries such as this so that people are definitely getting what they are paying for and getting value for money for it?

That is positively Communistic.

Medicine is regulated. All industry is regulated.

jesus help me

[Baruch]

Too much today is about "where's the money"?  I spent half my time in the Federal Government fending off companies who though we were the cow there to give them free milk.  On the contracts I DID get forced to allow and oversee, they squacked like strangled ducks if I actually enforced the terms of the contract. 

It was like "HOW DARE YOU!"

I never met a contractor how didn't have to be watched kill a cat sitting over a Nip leaf.  And you know who got choked most of the time?  ME!

You failed ;-(  Thousands of companies get billions of dollars every year in direct payment of services and goods (I get a small part).  And the under the table stuff is worth trillions every year (Black Economy).  Government only decides how to be bribed, not to not be bribed (contracting agents who get subsequent jobs per revolving door in the industry they regulated or did business with).  The rules limiting revolving doors are toothless, particularly at the corporate director level.

[Baruch]

If profiteering from an unlucky persons suffering isn't criminal it's certainly ethically dubious.

If a tow truck towed your car off the motorway and then charged you £10K for a new fan belt you'd be pissed off and rightly so.

You should be pissed at being ripped off.  But that is how a lot of people make their money, unethically.  And government works with the crooks.

[Shiranu]

Still doesn't change the fact that the government butting in to forbid you to decide for yourself what your services are worth is inherently immoral.

But not as immoral as letting people profiteer off of the literal life of others, so gotta take the lesser of two evils.

That said, I disagree that there is anything immoral or unethical about a government doing it's job, which is to ensure that societies work together for the greater good and everyone is taken care of to the best of the state's ability.

When you talk about "free handouts"... that is literally the purpose of having a government, if you want to use that term "free handout" as loose as you did. If the government didn't provide basic necessities, then it would be worthless.