1 - 10 Next
Most people don't carry insurance for their pets. I can't speak for small animal coverage because I've never used it, but I am familiar with equine insurance. Two big things they have that human health insurance companies don't:

1) Competition across state lines.

2) Insurance company does not act as middle man between patient and care provider. Owner seeks care from vet and pays the bill. Owner submits claim to insurance and receives reimbursement in accordance with policy. Insurance may - or may not - contact vet for verification of claim, but otherwise the insurance company and vet have no interaction with one another. Once upon a time, human insurance worked this way, too.

Of course at this point it would...
Global warming is a religion. It is tragic that these misguided people attacked their own children in their suicidal panic over what most of us now know is a scientific hoax. However, it won't surprise me if this is merely the first incident with more to come.
I only carry mortality insurance on my horses. The major medical policy generally costs more than I spend and doesn't cover routine care. But the point is the model. I've had a horse laid up at one of the best equine hospitals in the nation (late night arrival met by 8-person trauma team, 3 days in ICU, 2 weeks observation and continued care) and it was significantly less expensive than the pre-adjusted cost of my husband's 2-day hospital stay for kidney stones. Meanwhile, the facilities and equipment were quite comparaple to one another... other than one being super-sized to meet the needs of 1200-lb patients.

Prior to all this medicaid, medicare, insurance crap prying directly into healthcare, many people didn't carry...
That was weird... half eaten post! My comment was... Or they're at the court-ordered visitation with a substance-addicted parent while legal custody battles drag out. Not all families are perfect. There are indeed situations in which giving a child a cell phone facilitates keeping them safe. Otherwise, I agree that children in general are over-indulged with cell phones, tv, technology in general. But it would inaccurate and naive to assume that all parents who give their kids phones are over-indulgent or caving in to "I want".
>>And why do you feel that a person carrying one is safer? Either your kids are at home, in school, at another kid's house, or at a store or playground you have given them permission to go to. Do your kids get lost? <
In response to:

Self-Esteem, Self-Destruction

2ManyHorses Wrote: Mar 04, 2010 6:42 PM
I don't know how elementary education works on the inside. From the outside, from a parent's perspective, no child left behind means no child gets ahead.

I have a straight-A 5th grader who spends most of her classroom time tutoring other children. She thought it was fun at first, but now she complains about boredom and having to wait on everyone else while she doesn't get to learn.

My kindergartner is a different matter. He's already been identified by the GT coordinator for his brightness. However, his teacher sends home note after note complaining that he's too active. He's polite, cooperative, and gets along well with other children, but he has trouble sitting still to complete worksheets. Hence, she feels we...
In response to:

Self-Esteem, Self-Destruction

2ManyHorses Wrote: Mar 04, 2010 1:21 PM
Self-esteem is overrated. Besides, some of the kids who do the best actually have some of the lowest self-esteems (they're perfectionists; perfectionism fixates on failures, not successes) while some of the kids who do the worst have the highest self-esteems.

I do not understand jumping rope without ropes. Competition is underrated. FoxNews just put out an article last week that athletic and competitive children do better academically. SHOCKER! (Not.) I'm guessing those kids also have more involved parents, hear "no" more often, and have learned to work through failures to get what they want. And getting back to jump ropes, if they don't trip on it, they'll never learn to skip it. Tripping is part of learning to skip...
In response to:

KBH

2ManyHorses Wrote: Mar 04, 2010 10:41 AM
I imagine there were a lot of votes on this for the simple fact that energy is a BIG deal in Texas. Then again, I work in oil & gas in the Houston area, so it's only natural the topic would come up in my little realm. Maybe it's not so important to others. Are you siding with Carillo and his claim that name made all the difference? Frankly, I read up on both, noted the conservative support thrown Carillo's way, and still voted Porter. Let's just see what the little guy can do.
In response to:

KBH

2ManyHorses Wrote: Mar 03, 2010 3:46 PM
Can we stop referring to Medina as "the" TEA Party candidate? She gave herself that title, and the media ran with it. There was no official TEA Party Candidate. Further, Perry ran away with the bulk of TEA Party support.
In response to:

Kids as "young adults"

2ManyHorses Wrote: Dec 01, 2009 11:37 AM
My husband and I prefer the term "adult in training" when it comes to our kids. Ultimately, the parents job is to train a responsible adult beginning from infancy. Childhood is brief, and too many parents try to hold onto it. Fact is, the kiddo is going to fly the coop around the age of 18 whether s/he is ready or not... so s/he better be ready!

Sexualizing children is a different subject all together. I think the author is confusing the label "young adult" with sexual exposure that is occurring at younger and younger ages. Sex is not synonymous with maturity. Sexual knowledge does not make one wiser or more mature or more independent. This is the fallacy of secular society. In my observation, children these days are...
1 - 10 Next