Medicare - What the Fudge?

[Foxrac]

And I replied. Read the bill. Specific answers are contained therein.

She means that she want see link about what included in bill.

 

[C.C.Sinned]

She means that she want see link about what included in bill.

no


Reba wants jillio to provide the information from the bill not a link

 

[Foxrac]

no


Reba wants jillio to provide the information from the bill not a link

I did means it, any bill that explained about Medicare fraud situation in link, also I need source too.

 

[jillio]

In other words, you either can't or won't answer me.

Got it.

Nope. Just going on the assumption that you would be one of those people who inform themselves from the source rather than simply accepting someone else's answer. The answers are there. Too many people around here trying to state what the bill says without ever having read it and relying on less than accurrate information as a result that can be eaily disputed. The cuts and pastes have gotten out of control. The information is available. Access it.

 

[jillio]

no


Reba wants jillio to provide the information from the bill not a link

The bill provides all the information itself. It is quite easy to access. If one wants answers regarding what the bill says, one needs to go to the bill itself.

 

[Reba]

Nope. Just going on the assumption that you would be one of those people who inform themselves from the source rather than simply accepting someone else's answer.

If someone makes a statement I expect him or her to be willing to back it up with a source. If someone requests that I provide a source I'm glad to do it. It's not an unreasonable request. Since I asked for something specific I expected a specific reference that I could read so I could from whence that reply came.

The answers are there.

You expect me to know which lines out of the thousand pages there that a poster used as a basis for his or her post?

What's wrong with a poster simply linking to the specific section? What's the big deal? If the answer is there, why not share it?

[/QUOTE]Too many people around here trying to state what the bill says without ever having read it and relying on less than accurrate information as a result that can be eaily disputed. The cuts and pastes have gotten out of control.[/QUOTE]
Then you should be happy to point out the corrections.

The information is available. Access it.

Sorry, I don't take orders from you.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

The bill provides all the information itself. It is quite easy to access. If one wants answers regarding what the bill says, one needs to go to the bill itself.

Wow...

You sound like my professor, the one that specialize in Latin America... Heh. He would mention concepts from certain manuscripts, codex and documents in class, then if someone ask, he just go "go and read it for yourself." At least that how I was exposed to German expressionism, surrealism (or better known as Dadaism), Troskyism, libertarianism and a few other movements. :P

Best.professor.ever. Only because he didn't indoctrinate his students with opinions and encourage them to read for themselves. I just wish other people do the same-- rather than relying on the news.

 

[Jiro]

Nope. Just going on the assumption that you would be one of those people who inform themselves from the source rather than simply accepting someone else's answer. The answers are there. Too many people around here trying to state what the bill says without ever having read it and relying on less than accurrate information as a result that can be eaily disputed. The cuts and pastes have gotten out of control. The information is available. Access it.

The bill provides all the information itself. It is quite easy to access. If one wants answers regarding what the bill says, one needs to go to the bill itself.

but it is not an unreasonable request. by that logic - the judge would ask for a reference to legal precedent but the lawyer would say - "it's in the legal library. all you have to do is read it."