Will TTD operations be impacted by Knott's incident?

I'd like to sincerely apologize to the PB community for opening that can of nerd-worms. ;)

CougarFan said:
I myself can not get health insurance due to a heart condition.

Well gosh, when I turn on the TV, everyone says our health care system is perfectly fine. Maybe you're not doing it right.

What does that even mean Jeff. I wasn't complaining. I can get health coverage through the state but I would pay through the nose for it. If I feel that it is a high priority then I will make appropriate allocations for it. I will not, however, endorse any government run health care. I would rather go without then pay for someone else's care when they could afford it. For those that absolutely cannot afford it I would gladly pay a tax to make sure they can get proper care. That is how I feel about that.

Edit:

On another note my brother was involved in a car accident when he was in highschool. The accident was the fault of another motorist. Both of them had State Farm as their insurance companies. Because my brother was already covered by Exxon, State Farm wanted my parents insurance to cover the medical cost. In order to force State Farm to pay what they were responsible for, my parents had to attain a lawyer. The lawyer inturn sued for damages. State Farm ended up settling with my brother, and ended up paying More than what they would have if they would have just payed the bills.

There is one thing in Obama's bill I do like. People can buy private insurance without worrying about pre-existing conditions, which is something that bars me from obtaining coverage. This also keeps many others from getting proper care.

I had a similar experience with car insurance companies over what would be a somewhat petty sum of money in the overall scheme of things. My only thoughts are if you have to fight that hard to get what's due to you for a relatively minor bill, I can't imagine what people must go through trying to get these profit driven companies to pay for expensive things like surgeries and cancer treatment. I suppose that's why so many people who do have insurance still end up going bankrupt when they get really ill.

With that being said, I like how everyone has interpreted "government option" to mean that the government is going to entirely take over the health care industry. It couldn't be further from the truth. At best it will only introduce some competition to the private sector, which is badly needed. If it's as terrible as conservatives claim it will be, it'll fail and the private companies will be unscathed.

Anyway, my apologies for dragging this topic even further off track. Just needed to get that out there.

This is America, Ralph. We don't want your factual, reasonable and well-spoken thoughts on health care. Go paint a swastika on a sign or something.

;)

CougarFan said:
There is one thing in Obama's bill I do like. People can buy private insurance without worrying about pre-existing conditions, which is something that bars me from obtaining coverage. This also keeps many others from getting proper care.

This is one spot I'm torn on. Now, if you have had insurance and lose it due to job loss, then yes, the new insurance company should not be able to deny you for pre-existing conditions.

But if you've never had insurance, didn't make attempts to see doctors or maintain preventative care, why should an insurance company that you've paid no premiums too suddenly have to pick up your cancer treatments?

There needs to be some way to allow people in the first scenario to maintain coverage while blocking those who would abuse the system via scenario #2.

Because its what they're in the business of doing? Call me crazy, but given the incredibly massive profits they've been reaping for decades, I don't think its unreasonable to expect these companies to take a moderate loss here and there when it comes to pre-existing conditions.

And exactly what preventative care does one seek out to avoid getting cancer? You were a smoker, so by your own measure, you're abusing the system.

But really, that's a moot point, John. With universal care, we'd all be paying premiums (or some equivalent) going forward. Your "abuse" concern only applies to the transition between what we have now, and the universal system.

I have an idea. How about those people who are opposed to a public option, they don't have to ever use it. Promise. Cross my heart. And those people who are in favor of a public option, well, they can.

Problem solved.

Like I said, its an issue I'm torn on, so I'm not convinced one way or the other is the right way to go.

And as for cancer, while not "preventable" the treatment is certainly more likely to work and much cheaper the earlier it is caught. But if you're not going to the doctor regularly you're not going to catch something early. I do agree that issue would be moot should we go to a Universal system, but I'm not entirely convinced I would want the government running that (their track record isn't exactly stellar).

The system is broken, and it does need fixing, so don't get me wrong on that.

Our health insurance system is screwed up but nothing that is being proposed will fix it. The problem with costs is that neither the provider nor the consumer of the servicer knows the cost of the service being provided. Next time your doctor orders a test, ask him or her how much the test costs. Its highly unlikely they will have a clue. Where else does that happen? Can you imagine going to buy a car and neither the salesperson nor you as the customer knows the price of what you are buying?

In places where there is actual price competition, prices for health care have come down. Look at laser eye surgery. Initially it was $5000+ per eye. Now, its $1500 to $2500 for both eyes. Why did the price come down when the price of just about everything else medical related is going up? Because insurance doesn't pay for it and people shop around. Thats what happen when you have actual competition.

We should have catastrophic coverage only which would cover major health problems. For garden variety stuff we should pay on our own. Doctors will be forced to compete because people will know what they are paying. And people will get to decide if they want to incur the cost of the service. Maybe they will take a non-medical option instead of popping pills if they have to pay the full cost of the pills, the office visit, etc. when with insurance, the $30 copay makes the decision too easy.

If you think healthcare costs a lot now, wait until its free.

The government's track record is just fine with health care. As evidenced by the moranic signs that read: I Don't Want the Government Taking Over My Medicaid!!!

Hell, our government representatives have government-run health care, and they all seem fine. Same for the military.

djDaemon said:
.

And exactly what preventative care does one seek out to avoid getting cancer? You were a smoker, so by your own measure, you're abusing the system.

Actually, you can reduce your risk of getting cancer by maintaining a healthy diet, exercising, and avoiding tobacco products.
The American Cancer Society estimates that up to 50% of cancer deaths can be attributed to tobacco use, poor eating habits, overweight and obesity, and physical inactivity.

That is not preventative care in the context being discussed.

Ensign Smith said:
I have an idea. How about those people who are opposed to a public option, they don't have to ever use it.

Or pay for it? :)

"Free for everyone. Paid for by our tax dollars."

Interesting timing for the Knott's incident to occur and this discussion to come up.

I was just talking about the Intamin launch cables and my concerns about TTD with other guests while in line for MF labor day weekend.

I dont' fear much, but I don't ride TTD anymore because I don't think it is safe.

Safe is of course a relative term, and the odds of getting injured or worse on an intamin rocket might well be 1 in a million or better, but the record concerns me.

As others have mentioned, the Kingda Ka incident its first year would have mutilated and very possibly killed riders had the train not been empty. MF has had two snaps that I know of, and I saw the mangled track after the labor day 2001 incident. MF's cable undoubtedly undergoes much less stress than TTD. Now Xcelerator has a catastrophic cable failure, and that launch system is much less powerful than TTD's.

My understanding is... after the TTD cable shrapnel incident a few years back, CP replaces the cable at regular intervals as preventative maintenance. Not to mention frequent inspections. Yet even after these measures were implemented, we have another major cable failure at a CF park.

My point is this. It is obvious that the Intamin rockets were not designed to and/or are not capable of containing cable failures. It is also obvious that after several years of operating intamin rocket launches, CF and Intamin have not been able to eliminate cable failures, despite applying lessons learned and regularly replacing cables.

Sooner or later, another cable failure will occur, and sooner or later someone is going to get FUBAR by a cable. And I wouldn't be surprised if it is sooner.

I would bet if someone did a statisical probability analysis, the odds of major injury or death due to cable failure on an Intamin rocket would be way higher than the odds of a injury/death from any other ride system in the park... even if these odds are still somewhat remote in the relative sense of the word.

I would be surprised if we don't see major injury/death from a launch system failure on one of these rides within the next 10 years.

I suspect that if the investment in the ride were closer to that of Vertigo, as opposed to $25 mil, that this ride would have met the same fate by now.

I quit riding TTD a few years ago. I won't even sit in the grandstand or walk anywhere near the launch track.

I'll be the one to say you're putting too much thought into this. If you say that you know the odds are great (which they are) but refuse to ride it because you think it's unsafe, then you must not trust the odds. It sounds a bit contradictive to me. The last cable incident on dragster was during a test run and that was mid last year. They go over the condition of the track more than you think. It's not like they want it to happen. Heck I'll say on here for the first time that I was on a train that soon after it launched and I got off, I found out that the cable had frayed. The thing was I was in front AND I felt the jolt. Did I rethink myself about riding Dragster? No, I've now been on it over 200 times since that day and I've never ever felt in one bit of danger.

To put Dragster on such a high threat alert and not put Millennium on just as much of an alert is also a bit arrogant in my opinion. I've talked to many people who tell me just how devastating a cable snap would be on Millennium. Which by the way is a much thicker grade than Dragster but hauls a larger load a longer distance.

I could go on and on about how safe Dragster is in sooo many aspects but I'm just going to start repeating myself. I've been assured by a certain person in maintenance, that Dragster is one of the safest rides with the precautions they take.

But if you're you're really that paranoid to the point where you wont even go near Dragster, then I guess there's no helping you.

Oh and I'd hardly call Xcelerators cable incident major or catastrophic. What's really troubling is the issue with the seat.

CougarFan said:
What does that even mean Jeff.

I was making a joke. Being ironic, if you will. Pointing out the absurdity of people who think health care reform is unnecessary.

Of course, I'm not suggesting anything proposed is the right answer, either.

Its too bad that too many times people in that second group get lumped in with those in the first.

I think all coasters at Cedar Point are unsafe. I do not think that anyone should ever ride them or go anywhere near any of the lines for them. At least on days that I visit. ;)

Seriously, everyone has their own comfort level. If you feel a ride is unsafe or have any other concerns about riding it, I think you shouldn't ride. Its probably not worth it. And that decision is up to each one of us.

Ok Jeff. I guess it will take some time to learn your sense of humor. I too make jokes on here that people think of as serious comments. Hopefully we can learn each others sense of humor.

You are right, the current plan will not fix the insurance situation. Walt is also right when he says that it will be all of us that pay for those who pick the public option because of our tax dollars. The real problem is that those who take that option probably do not pay income tax due to low income. A paradox it truly is.