Patrick.net

Follow
Befriend
7 threads
18 comments
Followed by 0
Following 0
Ignored by 0
Ignoring 0
Ignore I-man
Aliases
In United States
Registered Aug 12, 2010

I-man's most recent comments:

• On 4 Jan 2012 in Landlord's duties to maintain house, I-man said:

  I think we all agree that the repairs should be done ASAP but in this case, the tenant has a very rigid definition. In the case of the dryer failure, the dryer was 20 yrs old and the belt snapped. The tenant called an appliance repair place who quoted him a couple of hundred bucks to show up right away. The landlord said that they preferred to replace it since it was so old but it might take a couple of days to have it delivered and installed/ The tenant got irate because that wasn't quick enough. In the case of the garage door, he got a quote for $69 plus parts to be done immediately. The landlord said they'd like to look at it because this was the second time it broke in a couple of months. Tenant gets all irate because he wants it done that day and landlord says to go ahead. Turns out, the repair guy doesn't show for a couple of days and the $69 was just to look at it. Parts and labor came to over $200. They also raised a stink when they moved in because the garage door opener wasn't working. It turned out that it became unplugged when moving boxes were stacked up against the outlet. No apologies either. Also, when they moved in, they claimed that the electrical in the kitchen was bad because the breaker kept popping. Again, they demanded (it's never a request, always a demand) the kitchen be rewired and they had guy who would do it for a few grand. It turns out they were plugging a toaster,a microwave, and a fridge into one 20A circuit because they didn't want to move the toaster to the other side of the counter.

• On 22 Jun 2011 in buying a first House in these horrid economic times., I-man said:

  Once people get over the idea of a house being an investment, it's as easy to justify as buying a car. Many people buy cars every few years and accept the fact that their trade-in is worth thousands of dollars less than they paid. I once bought a three-year-old Saab for about half it's MSRP and by the time I sold it three years later, it had declined $30k from the original price! So if we accept that our mortgage payment is a fixed cost for many years and that at some point, we may have to sell at a minimal gain or even a loss, it's no big stretch to justify the purchase.

  Of course, in purely economic terms, it may make more sense to rent for all the well known reasons. But the same can be said for buying a car. Some argue that car ownership is a waste of money and that we should take public transportation or that we should buy a used car and keep it until it dies, etc.. True, but if someone accepts they're going to lose money overall but it's worth the convenience or luxury or whatever, then all is good.

  Basically, we are human and we don't live our lives by what is quantitatively best for us, but what makes us happy.

• On 16 May 2011 in Why Healthcare Costs So Much, I-man said:

  Paralithodes says

  If the consumers do not need to worry about paying for something, then it is not “business, pure and simple.”

  How so? Supply and demand. Everyone involved in the medical field is trying to maximize their profit and as long as there's someone (i.e. the insurance companies or the government) willing to pay, there's no reason to lower the price as long as there's a demand.Paralithodes says

  Your analogy is irrelevant because

  a) Even the business-travel consumers are closer to the point of cost impacting them, which is why most companies do not have such an open ended, no expense limit approach to lodging as you imply in your analogy, and as you acknowledge, companies can change their behavior (e.g., non-essential travel + additional lodging rules) when trying to watch overall expenses,
  b) There is still a huge market for hotel consumers who are paying ** directly out of their own pocket, and not simply expensing their lodging to some ethereal third party except for a token co-pay.**

  a) As long as the company pays their hotel fee, the traveler doesn't question the cost. As long as the insurance company or government pays the tab, the patient isn't going to question the cost.
  b) In my analogy, there are virtually no self-paying lodgers.

  The healthcare market is dominated by third-party payors. The insurance companies pass the costs on to the insured. The government passes the cost on to the taxpayers. The insurance companies can't band together and agree to limit what they're willing to pay because of anti-trust laws. The government can and does set a limit but it's heavily influenced by the healthcare lobby and the voters so it doesn't go very far. The whole thing continues until people can't afford the insurance premiums or the government can't afford to borrow more money and then it collapses.