Heartwrenching stuff. I personally don’t understand what in the world people who robotically chant “tax cuts” think how that can solve situations like this when the answer has to be government investment to kick the economy back into gear.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
DHL Story On 60 Minutes
January 25th, 2009
91 Comments
This is an astounding story and it really makes this whole “economic downturn” seem a lot more tangible to everyone else.
A few months ago, Dell computers sent me a DHL return shipping label the day before they went out of business. I went to take it to a DHL drop box at Office Max and they turned me away because DHL had gone out of business the day before. The next day I had to sent it with UPS. I was ticked off for the inconvenience of having to wait an extra day. I see now that the collapse of DHL is so much worse for other people.
The whole country will be sure to keep this town in their hearts.
I know a little more about this story than the average person. For personal reasons, I paid a little attention to DHL’s rise and fall in the past few years.
DHL is owned, fully, by Deutsche Post World Net. It’s a private company that took over the German post office several years ago. DHL was a regional courier company on the west coast and Hawaii that DPWN bought out in 2001 and 2002.
IN 2004, DHL announced that it was going to have a major expansion within the US and take on FedEx and UPS directly. They sank several billion dollars into the effort, challenging the two domestically-owned shipping companies on their own turf.
(Including a funny ad featuring a FedEx and a UPS driver greeting each other cordially at a railroad crossing, then being crestfallen when the train turns out to be loaded with red and yellow DHL trucks. But I digress.)
And they failed.
Last fall, they announced that they were ending most of their US delivery services.
This is what happens in the world. Companies try things. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes they fail.
And the bottom-end workers, who paradoxically are the most dependent on the company and have the least invested, end up suffering when they do fail.
The DHL story is not unique. This is not the first time it’s happened, nor is it the last. In this case, a German company tried to break into a very competitive American market, and the American companies defeated them. Bad news for DHL’s employees, good news for FedEx and UPS.
Heartbreaking for the people who worked for DHL? Yes. Cause for a major revamping of how we do business in the US? No.
J.
”Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that, no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenue to balance the budget – just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits.
”In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low – and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now.”
Whoever it was that said that must’ve been a complete numbskull, I guess.
I watched that story as well, and it really points out how we’re all living on the edge.
Then I went on to read how the republicans are already blocking the stimulus package. What a crock. If the years of the “republican revolution” have proven anything, it’s that trickle down does not work.
If President Obama can help us out of this mess, he’ll really prove his mettle, but I sincerely hope that congress and my fellow citizens are up to the task as well.
The Republican fantasy world is a place like Dubai– a tax haven with few actual citizens built on top of a playground for the rich populated by migrant workers desperate for anything they can get that affords more money then is available in their home countries. Tax havens, however, are only possible as parasites riding on the back of the “real economy” as represented by places like the USA.
The problem is not that DHL’s plans failed (though I quite liked DHL). The problem is that so many in our political establishment are so ignorant as to address every economic disaster we confront with a call to cut taxes. It’s a dishonest opportunitistic attempt to exploit a crisis to get what you want.
For those who are honest/deluded about their obsession with tax cuts as a solution to every problem, it does no good to tell people and communities in crisis, “what we are going to do to help is to cut taxes for other people and then, as a possibleside effect, you might find some kind of benefit years down the road.”
Heartbreaking for the people who worked for DHL? Yes. Cause for a major revamping of how we do business in the US? No.
After a surprisingly error free description of the situation, Jay Tea, you still somehow reach the same old conservative conclusion. Nobody’s buying it anymore because more and more people are facing situations like this:
The ups and downs of the business cycle should not determine whether someone has access to decent medical care in this country. No matter how well or poorly your company does, one should have to choose between groceries and seeing the doctor.
I hope Republicans do keep insisting that nothing needs to be done to remedy the kind of situation that Diana Smith now finds herself in.
It’s a sure way to keep Republicans out of office for years to come.
Fafaroo, you’re right. It shouldn’t. But “decent” is a very vague word. I know that if I had a major medical crisis (not my chronic condition), I’d rather be uninsured in the US than in Canada or Great Britain, where it’s “free.”
Of my last five employers, two went out of business, one went bankrupt, and one closed down operations in my state. My current one is doing kind of roughly, but I’m not too worried at this point. (No matter how stupid the higher-ups seem to be on a fairly regular basis, and how broken the business model is in parts.)
I never said that the plight of the DHL employees is a good thing, nor that we shouldn’t do what we can to help them. What I was trying to say was that DHL failed because of their own bad decisions, and it’s usually best to let failing companies fail. There are usually very good reasons why they failed, and bailouts usually don’t address those reasons.
The DHL jobs are gone. They ain’t coming back any time soon. The best we can do is to help the workers — retraining, loans to those who want to start up their own businesses, maybe even tax breaks for companies to create jobs in the area. The key element, though, is to NOT make them directly dependent on the government, but to encourage the private sector to do it.
In the meantime… there is one tiny silver lining here. Those DHL vehicles were some of the fugliest things on the road. Good riddance to the red and yellow rolling eyesores.
J.
The best we can do is to help the workers — retraining, loans to those who want to start up their own businesses, maybe even tax breaks for companies to create jobs in the area.
Let me give you a preview of that now: OMG OMG OMG BIG GOVERNMENT! SOCIALISM! OMG OMG! EL RUSHBO!
The key element, though, is to NOT make them directly dependent on the government, but to encourage the private sector to do it.
Nobody wants to make anyone dependent on the gov’t, but conservatives try to block any move for the government and make a slippery slope argument. Every time. And then the situation gets really bad and… the gov’t has to step in.
It seems to me that a large company, or a few smaller ones, could go to that Ohio town, known to have 9000 eager workers. and get started.
If no private company can or is willing to do this, the government can’t do anything useful.
Part of that town’s problem is how Airborne DHL got the airfield at well below market value in the first place, and tried to build a business from that that was unsustainable.
The history of Airborne Express is instructive–50 years of slow continuous profitable growth (a brief outline is on wikipedia); and the collapse of DHL’s purchase and attempt at greatly expanded US domestic operations is a textbook case of business failure that will be studied long after we’re all dead.
This was not government’s fault (perhaps the **German** government has some fault in it, but not the US), and government could never have “fixed” it, and cannot now. This is a case of a business failure.
”In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low – and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now.”
A couple of quick questions, Dennis: What was the top marginal tax rate at the time? And according to the “tenets” of the Laffer Curve, why does it matter?
Jay writes “The DHL story is not unique.”
No, but the horrendous Bush/Republican economy of January, 2009 is. And we’re going to need to take historic measures to pull out of it.
The “tax cut” mantra doesn’t work any longer Jay, because people who don’t have a job (and therefore no income) don’t benefit at all.
Unemployment is over 7%. Speaking personally, I had to move abroad last year to find a decent job. For all the bitching and moaning about “turning America into Europe,” it was a Republican Congress and president who have given us a France and Germany-sized unemployment rate.
And now, once again, Democrats have to clean up a Republican mess caused by reckless deregulation and an addiction to Federal spending.
Income tax rates are the lowest they’ve ever been historically. And we’re fighting two wars right now. The top tax bracket during WWII was about 90%.
But these are Republicans for you — “deficits don’t matter,” until your children, your grand-children, and your great grand-children have to pay them off. Or more likely, China takes us over when they decide to call in all of our bad debt.
Thank you Dick Cheney!
The key element, though, is to NOT make them directly dependent on the government, but to encourage the private sector to do it.
Except the private sector won’t do it. Do you think John Thain wants to give up any money to the plebes? Or Hank Paulson? They want to hog it all. You do know that job creation under Smirk was the worst it has been in ages(and that was even before the downturn really hit), right? Why do you think Republicans and CEO’s of a lot of companies hate unions? Why do you think they outsource jobs?
>But these are Republicans for you — “deficits don’t matter,” until your children, your grand-children, and your great grand-children have to pay them off.
Huh? This from the cheerleaders of Medicare and Social Security? Who do you think is going to pay for their ever increasing costs? Someone other than our children and grand-children?
The Repubs certainly showed they weren’t interested in keeping spending in line, and I see no evidence that the Democrats are any more interested. Actually, both parties are kind of consistent here – when they are out of power, being fiscally responsible is important and necessary, when they are in power, that was just talk to get elected. Makes me miss the Clinton years – the combination of a Democratic president and a Republican Congress seems to have kept each other in check enough that domestic fiscal policy wasn’t the mess that it was during the Bush years and looks to be shaping up to be during the coming Obama years.
“both parties are kind of consistent here”
Except Republicans claim lowering spending as one of their ideological planks. They are liars.
“Makes me miss the Clinton years”
Amen, brother. But let’s give our new president some time to fix the Republican mess. In my lifetime, a Democratic president means a soaring economy and a balanced budget. This is why my fingers are crossed for Obama and his success.
But “decent” is a very vague word.
Uh, I think more to the point we can all agree that the difference between “decent” and “none” is most definitely not vague.
While your playing amateur semanticist, Jay Tea, I would suggest that the word “dependent” is one that conservatives like to throw around a lot without a lot of concern about its accuracy.
National health care would make people “dependent” on the government in about the same way I’m “dependent” on the government when I call the fire department to put out a freaking fire. If only there was some kind of private fire department I could pay a monthly fee to! Then I’d be so independent and free!
…I’d rather be uninsured in the US than in Canada or Great Britain, where it’s “free.”
I’m curious, Jay Tea, have you ever been to Canada to Great Britain?
Jaim: funny how the economy really started tanking after 2006 — you know, when the Democrats took both Houses. But I’m sure that was just a wild coincidence.
Fafaroo, I’ve never had a major health crisis in Canada or Great Britain. But I have had one while uninsured in the US. I was admitted to the hospital, my life was saved,I was treated very well, and a few months later got the hefty bill. I stalled for a while, then negotiated a settlement with them.
At no point was I denied care, or treated any less because of my inability to pay.
Having read the horror stories from Canada and the UK about rationing of health care, lengthy waits for tests and procedures, patients having to leave the country for critical procedures because they can’t wait, bureaucrats deciding that certain people don’t “deserve” treatment because the costs to the state outweigh the benefits to the patients, and so on, I’ll stick with the US system.
J.
Funny how Republicans controlled all branches of government from 2001 to 2006 and we got: a) bigger government, b) more intrusive government brushing aside niceties like the Bill of Rights, c) failed government that allowed a major American city to die and d) an economic crisis that is, by some accounts, worse than the Great Depression of the 1930’s.
Democrats could only do so much in the face of horrible Republican malevolence and incompetence.
But don’t you worry your little head Jay. Adults are back in charge now.
” I was admitted to the hospital, my life was saved,I was treated very well, and a few months later got the hefty bill. I stalled for a while, then negotiated a settlement with them.”
So in other words, you accepted care and stuck the hospital with a bill it couldn’t collect in full. Hope the next person denied care because you wouldn’t pay the full bill fared ok. Lucky you have Democrats to insist that hospitals take people who are in critical need regardless of ability to pay, huh? Or else we wouldn’t be reading your stupid comments.
Which major city would that be, Jaim? The one that had a Democratic mayor and governor who fell apart in the crisis? Ever heard of the Ray Nagin Memorial Bus Park?
And “by some accounts,” you mean which exactly? The closest thing to the Great Depression I’ve seen is how Obama is looking to try some of FDR’s ideas — which did exactly nothing to revive the economy, and in some cases prolonged the misery.
I remember the last time “grownups” like these were in charge. That was in the days of Jimmy Carter — the Misery Index, Iran Hostage Crisis, malaise, gas lines. Ah, the good old days…
J.
What EL said. Are you still paying the debt to the hospital? Because in Canada or England you wouldn’t be.
Not that their systems are perfect, but they’re much better than ours in America.
IMO, American healthcare is OK if you have a good health insurance plan. Then again, people are denied simple procedures when a middle-man decides it’s too expensive. It’s a broken system — health decisions made by office workers rather than doctors. Utterly insane. Don’t believe me? Ask an American doctor. They tend to hate it more than anyone else.
In terms of the market collapse, both percentage-wise and in sheer dollars, this crisis is indeed worse than 1929.
I was trying to be nuanced about it, but I keep forgetting you’re at the reading level of a first grader. My bad.
And when an American city suffers a natural disaster, I take it you first ask yourself “Gee, if it’s a Democratic mayor then fuck them.”
That’s the thing Jay — Americans are sick and tired of divisive Republican bullshit. We don’t believe that a major city should be punished simply because the president belongs to a different party then the majority of that city’s voters.
I realize that’s hard for you to realize, but get used to it.
IMO, the current Republican economic collapse has a number of similarities to 1929, but a lot of differences as well. What’s clear is that things are very bad for Americans and we need government to take some measures to clean up the disaster of hyper-deregulation. More bluntly, we’re spending a billion dollars a week in Iraq to prop up an anti-American government. That money would be better spent at home. Or at least, not spent at all.
And when an American city suffers a natural disaster, I take it you first ask yourself “Gee, if it’s a Democratic mayor then fuck them.”
No, when an American city suffers a major disaster, I say “man, I hope that mayor does his job — he’s the one on the scene, he knows the city and the situation best.” Then, I say “if the mayor blows it, I hope the governor steps up and marshals the resources of the state to help the people.” Finally, I say “I hope the federal government does everything it can to back up the people on the ground, on the scene, with helping the people in the disaster.”
Nagin fell apart. He was an absolute failure.
Blanco fell apart. She dawdled and hemmed and hawed while Rome burned.
The federal response was actually better than historically could be expected. The Navy and Coast Guard came right up in Katrina’s wake. FEMA was on the scene within days — far better than their response to Homestead, Florida when it was hit with a hurricane.
Nagin’s failures were the stuff of legend. Whole parking lots full of buses flooded. Mass desertions by the police. Inadequate plans for disasters. Years of money steered away from disaster preparation and into pork and patronage.
He was re-elected. At this point, I feel a bit about New Orleans as I do about Gaza — “you chose your leaders, you live with them.”
…and this STILL has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Just what would you do for the DHL workers? I’ve said what I support.
Put up, Jaim. Just for once in your misbegotten life, put up.
J.
I imagine they’ll apply for dirty librul unemployment benefits, and they should damn well get them. Americans are hurting right now, and to some extent, government is the answer, at least in the short-term. Help these people out. Give the money to them instead of a failed military occupation in Iraq.
I can say that with a straight face. You can’t. Doesn’t jibe with your bizzaro-world Ayn Rand fantasies.
Jesus, Jaim. The only thing keeping you from being the ultimate empty vessel is that you’re so full of shit.
You mentioned unemployment. I didn’t, because I considered it a given. It’s insurance; you pay in when you work, you collect when you don’t. That’s how it’s SUPPOSED to work.
I also mentioned retraining, entrepeneur loans, and incentives for new businesses to come in. I dunno how you missed me mentioning them, unless you’re so full of shit that you can’t see anything besides brown.
You want to “give” them money. That’s nice, short-term. But does that help them long-term? No. That just makes them dependent on those who gave them the money. My suggestions are aimed more at helping them regain their self-sufficiency.
And is there ANYTHING you can’t try to turn into an argument about Iraq? You remind me of an old Far Side cartoon about a guy studying to be a veterinarian. He found Chapter 8 very simple — it was how to treat various problems of horses. The left column was a list of ailments and conditions. The right column was all the same: “shoot.”
It seems that every single problem the US currently faces was all caused by Iraq, and will magically be cured if we just pull out yesterday.
Are you really that fucking shallow?
I forgot who I was talking to. Yes, you are.
J.
“It seems that every single problem the US currently faces was all caused by Iraq, and will magically be cured if we just pull out yesterday.”
It sounds a lot like the con mantra that all the disasters in the economy can only be solved by more tax cuts. Only your statement is a strawman and mine is Republican policy.
“You want to ‘give’ them money. That’s nice, short-term. But does that help them long-term? No. That just makes them dependent on those who gave them the money. My suggestions are aimed more at helping them regain their self-sufficiency.”
Quite literally, you have given no clues as to how folks in this small town can recover, other than “Wait for a new business to open up and hire them.”
Given the current credit and capital crunch, there aren’t a lot of people with the means to start new companies. This is the time for America to step in and extend unemployment benefits to people who have been working 40+ hours/week and need a helping hand. (Do you even have real job yourself? Can you understand what it means to get up every day and work? Honestly, I don’t think you do.)
So yes, I want to give them money. People who work hard and have been slammed by this Republican-made crisis, yes, they should get some help. Until they can find a better job. With an understanding that this is what will get them through until they find a better situation.
You brush spittle from your lips and tell me I’m shallow, but the fact is you’re the one who wants to keep repeating the stupidity of the 2001-2008 Republican failure. You’re the one who thinks it’s better to spend American tax money in Iraq than here in our home country. You’re the one who praises the magical mystery of the free-market while having personally benefited from a medical procedure that by your own admittance you couldn’t fucking afford to pay for.
You are the one who fails. You are the one who is out of touch. You are the one who hates America. You are the one who will be ignored (except when you troll a liberal blog and wonder why nobody appreciates your retarded genius). You are the one who can’t grok the fact that America is still a great nation, despite what you and your Republican party have done to it.
Apparently, Jaim, you didn’t read my 9:44 comment. So to spare you having to scroll back up, I’ll reprint the key point:
The DHL jobs are gone. They ain’t coming back any time soon. The best we can do is to help the workers — retraining, loans to those who want to start up their own businesses, maybe even tax breaks for companies to create jobs in the area.
“We” being, of course, the nation — through the federal government. I realize that makes you look like an ass, but I can’t help that.
Oh, and Jaim, on your discussion of my hospital stay, a few things:
1) It’s “by my own admission,” not “my own admittance.” The hospital did the admittance.
2) By law, I could have simply filed bankruptcy and dissolved the debt. Instead, I negotiated with them and ended up paying them 75% of the total charges.
That is how the American system works. No one in distress can be denied medical care, even if they don’t have insurance or a job like I lacked at the time. (And I was most likely within 24 hours of dying.) I was admitted, treated, and released. Later, I had to deal with the expenses — and it was my bill. No one else was liable for my ailment, and I didn’t expect anyone else to pick up the tab for me. If I hadn’t paid it, then the hospital would have written it off as “charitable” and taken it off their taxes.
I’m not overly proud of that, but I’m not going to deny it, either.
The American system has its problems, but I’ve yet to see or hear of a better alternative.
And back to the DHL workers, who were the original impetus for the article — you say “give them unemployment for as long as they want and need it!” I say “give them the unemployment to which they are entitled, offer them retraining, offer them loans to start their own businesses, and offer businesses incentives to move to the area and hire them.” (Although that last is why DHL chose that area in the first place.)
You wanna give them fish. I wanna give them some fish, and teach them to fish on their own. You want to subsidize and extend their dependency. I want to speed their regaining of independence. You’re all about the handout. I’m pushing for the hand up.
Sorry that doesn’t fit your stereotypes and preconceptions of me, but I don’t recall ever granting you the right to define both your side of the argument and mine — and it ain’t my fault you can’t read and think at the same time.
J.
I can’t believe Jay Tea let this pass from Oliver:
“Nobody wants to make anyone dependent on the gov’t”
The fact that the conversation immediately took a turn to Universal Health Care broke noone’s irony meter?
SaveFarris, I am hanging my head in shame. I guess my irony meter was pre-broken.
J.
Um… no, that’s not what I meant. What I meant was… uh… I deliberately ignored that so you would have something to contribute, Farris. I didn’t want you to feel left out, so I carefully and deliberately ignored that particular low-hanging fruit. Yeah, that’s the ticket!
J.
My goodness Jay, you’re a really stupid guy. That’s your biggest problem, although I’m glad you got the health care you needed otherwise.
“No one in distress can be denied medical care, even if they don’t have insurance or a job like I lacked at the time.”
True. But in Canada or England or any other first-world country, you also wouldn’t be in debt for the rest of your life unless you win the Lotto.
“Apparently, Jaim, you didn’t read my 9:44 comment.”
That’s because I don’t take you very seriously and don’t hang on every shite anti-American comment you make.
“give them unemployment for as long as they want and need it!”
I literally didn’t say that. This is why your shitty blog gets no traffic and you resort to trolling a semi-successful blog here. Unemployment benefits should be taken in order to find new work. I’ve never had to take them myself, but I understand why some people do.
Government can help people out in the short term (like it did giving you the medical treatment you needed). It’s certainly a better expenditure than propping up pro-Iranian, anti-American regimes like the one we now have in Iraq.
As for the workers in Ohio, I hope things work out for them. Hopefully with some government aid they’ll land on their feet and get back to earning income. I mean, by your own admission, you got a government handout in the form of payment for an operation you couldn’t afford. And here you are, braying and puking and pissing yourself as the ultimate example of Republican hypocrisy.
Serious question, Jay:
Why do you hate America, after all it’s done for you?
“That is how the American system works. No one in distress can be denied medical care, even if they don’t have insurance or a job like I lacked at the time. (And I was most likely within 24 hours of dying.) I was admitted, treated, and released. Later, I had to deal with the expenses — and it was my bill. No one else was liable for my ailment, and I didn’t expect anyone else to pick up the tab for me. If I hadn’t paid it, then the hospital would have written it off as “charitable” and taken it off their taxes.”
You didn’t pay it, you negotiated a settlement after service was rendered. What do you think the hospital did with the rest of the bill? Wrote it off, which meant they reduced their tax liability. Which means that the taxpayer made up the difference between what you wanted to pay and what the bill was. You’re welcome.
Not to mention that most that are in your position wouldn’t even need emergency care if they were able to go to a doctor beforehand. Unfortunately, most unemployed people can’t afford the cost of preventative medicine.
EL, I’m not going to go into the details of my medical history, but preventive medicine would not have done a damned bit of good for me. I was utterly asymptomatic until about three days before I showed up at the ER. Essentially, a genetic switch got tripped and I was fucked. And will remain fucked until it kills me, or something else gets to me first.
Yes, the taxpayers ended up soaking up a portion of my bill. And since then, over a dozen years ago, I’ve paid my taxes and helped pick up the tabs of others who were in my position. Hell, in one year alone I pay more in taxes than the hospital wrote off for me.
That’s not a complaint. That is how the system works today, and I think that it has its flaws, but it’s far better than the proposed alternative — the “single payer” system that quite possibly would have killed me back in 1994.
And Jaim, if you’re going to ignore what I say and instead only address what you THINK I mean and what you wish I said, then there really isn’t any point in discussing anything at all with you? Or should I simply say “go fuck yourself” and ignore you?
J.
“Yes, the taxpayers ended up soaking up a portion of my bill. And since then, over a dozen years ago, I’ve paid my taxes and helped pick up the tabs of others who were in my position. Hell, in one year alone I pay more in taxes than the hospital wrote off for me.”
I agree, universal health care is a win for America. Glad you finally saw the light.
Fafaroo, I’ve never had a major health crisis in Canada or Great Britain.
That didn’t exactly answer my question, Jay Tea. Have you ever been to Canada or Great Britain?
EL, you’re right. Universal health care is a win for America, and has been for some time.
But that’s not what you mean. You mean “universal health care paid for by someone else.” Or, more honestly, “universal health care paid for by everyone else.”
How’s that working in Hawaii? or Canada? Or Great Britain?
Thanks for playing, our hostess has some lovely parting gifts, including a year’s supply of Turtle Wax. Unfortunately, the Food Police made us get rid of the Rice-A-Roni, the San Francisco Treat, because it’s too unhealthy.
J.
How’s that working in Hawaii? or Canada? Or Great Britain?
Jay Tea, have you ever been to these three places?
JT ought to read information from other places than wingnut blogs. In fact, the health care system in Canada and the UK is very highly rated by its users. Don’t know about Hawaii though.
“But that’s not what you mean. You mean “universal health care paid for by someone else.” Or, more honestly, “universal health care paid for by everyone else.”
Like for example the people that subsidized your emergency bill when you were unable to pay the full amount. You can thank your liberal legislators who required the hospital to take you anytime.
JT ought to read information from other places than wingnut blogs. In fact, the health care system in Canada and the UK is very highly rated by its users.
My point exactly in asking Jay Tea whether he’s ever been to the UK or Canada.
You don’t have to have been to these countries to know how their health care system operates but if you have this image of Canadians or Britons dying the streets because they can’t get emergency medical treatment you have no idea what reality is.
That is how the American system works. No one in distress can be denied medical care, even if they don’t have insurance or a job like I lacked at the time.
Jay Tea, I have a couple of other questions for you as well.
Is it your contention that people can be turned away from emergency rooms in Canada or the UK because of their condition?
Do you have health insurance now and does it cover your pre-existing genetic condition?
you have this image of Canadians or Britons dying the streets because they can’t get emergency medical treatment
In my vision, the dead in the streets are French.
Seriously, Farris, you should get an updated talking point. That one is stale. I don’t even have to mouse over the link to know what you’re getting at anymore.
That happened how long ago?
Duros, it happened a hell of a lot more recently than my hospital stay. And because you call it a “talking point” doesn’t reduce its applicability.
The system, as it works now, worked for me. When I was in need of treatment I couldn’t afford, I was treated anyway. Later, when I could pay back the majority of it, the hospital accepted it. And as a karmic attempt to balance the scales, I have been a blood donor — I’m one donation from my seventh gallon. (Note to self: see if I can get in this Wednesday after work.)
J.
Shorter JT: I got treated so f–k everyone else.
In my vision, the dead in the streets are French.
From that story:
The issue there is not the availability of health care but the health care system’s lack of preparedness for an unprecedented heat wave.
Can we link to this story, then, the next time you want to tell us that an unprecedented blizzard in New York is evidence that Al Gore is wrong?
And Jay Tea, if the system worked for you that time, great. Their others for whom a huge emergency room bill would be catastrophic in itself. How about them? Second, how exactly does your story prove your not dependent on the government for your health care? As others have pointed out, if not for an act of Congress you would not have had access to emergency medical treatment in the first place. Doesn’t that make you dependent on the government?
And Jay Tea, you did not just argue that the US system worked for you. You compared it to the systems of Canada and the UK, which you are convinced would have left you for dead on the street in front of the ER. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that emergency room care can be denied in those countries because of a patient’s condition?
Feel free to provide it anytime you like.
But the system’s lack of preparedness is itself an availability issue. And the heat wave was by no means “unprecedented”: temps got up to 104. Or, as Arizonians call it, Spring.
The only reason I link to blizzards as evidence that “Al Gore is Wrong” is because folks on your side of the aisle link to stories like these to say that “Al Gore is RIGHT!!!” Anecdotal evidence is disprovative either way, but that hasn’t stopped the Green Police from using it for the past 30 years. Conservatives doing it in return merely points out the hypocracy.
And to answer Duro’s question, it happened *AFTER* “Mission Accomplished”, which is still referenced every night on a certain “news”cast. So apparently, it hasn’t been THAT long…
The[re are] others for whom a huge emergency room bill would be catastrophic in itself. How about them?
I think he’s saying they should just ignore it and it will take care of itself?
Shorter predictable Farris: “Look over there!”
Conservatives doing it in return merely points out the hypocracy.
Yes, but not in the way you think it does.
Conservatives doing it in return merely points out the hypocracy.
…which…proves…your side is right?
No, it merely points out that you’re (again) merely trying to muddy to waters.
Perhaps you should also link to flat-earthers. Or Creation “Scientists.” You konw, for balance.
It’s a damn good thing the Party of Palin is on the downswing. We’d surely be fucked (worse) if that weren’t the case.
But the system’s lack of preparedness is itself an availability issue. And the heat wave was by no means “unprecedented”: temps got up to 104. Or, as Arizonians call it, Spring.
What’s normal in Arizona is not normal in Paris. Do you really need this explained to you?
Apparently you do as you can’t be bothered to read stories you link to:
The real issue here is not access to health care but access to air conditioning in French homes, which has as much to do with culture and architecture as anything else. That problem was compounded by the fact that there is very little public awareness of how to stay cool and hydrated during heat waves, because the country is, by and large, not accustomed to them. And yes, hospitals also lacking in air conditioning.
And the heat wave was by no means “unprecedented”: temps got up to 104. Or, as Arizonians call it, Spring.
And Save, since you feel it’s appropriate to compare the whether in Arizona with the weather in France, I have to ask you too, have you ever been to France?
In general, I’m always curious whether a lot of right wing hacks have ever even been to the countries they attack as being socialist hell holes.
“Shorter JT: I got treated so f–k everyone else.”
Exactly. What’s so forehead-slappingly crazy about a guy like Jay is that here he is, arguing that the DHL workers should just hope and pray another private employer comes along and hires them (with this credit market, it ain’t going to happen) and that any unemployment benefits would be filthy dirty socialism.
And yet, Jay literally had his life saved, by his own admission, by getting treatment he couldn’t afford, and that was subsidized by his fellow tax-payers.
Unbelievable. I’ve honestly never encountered such a glaring example of cognitive dissonance.
And as a talking point, feel free to google “Life Expectancies By Nation.” If Canada and France are so bad with their nationalized medicine (or South Korea, where I currently live) why do they live longer, on average, than Americans do?
SaveFarris: “The only reason I link to blizzards as evidence that “Al Gore is Wrong” is because…”
You are an idiot. That’s why you do that.
We have literally reams of scientific data backing us up, you have freak snow storms. (By the way, freak weather is predicted by global warming, so they don’t help your side.)
Data that shows the globe is warming up when compared to literally 100,000 years of temperatures is not anecdotal.
Jaim says: “Shorter JT: I got treated so f–k everyone else.”
What’s insane about this is living with universal health care means people have access to care before it becomes and emergency while it is easier to treat. Easier and cheaper.
Universal health care saves money and it saves lives. But people like J.G.Thayer don’t want it, because it goes against their political philosophy.
I’m going to chime in again with something personal, since JT did.
My brother was a right-wing, libertarian, pull yourself by your bootstraps Republican. He became seriously ill in his early 20’s and needed regular doctor’s visits and medication. Unfortunately, he had no insurance. Instead of availing himself of charity and government alternatives (which were few, he lived in a Southern state), he decided to practice what he preached and purchased medical services when he could afford them, which wasn’t often. Because of this, his treatments were only a band-aid and no replacement for long-term care. He never was able to be on a regular schedule for medicine because he couldn’t afford the several hundred dollars per month that they cost. Unfortunately, he didn’t qualify for Medicaid because he worked.
March 2001, he went into the hospital because an emergency room doctor ordered him to. He never came out. His heart had weakened to such a point because of the years of deferred care that he died.
JT types would say that he was stupid not to seek out free alternatives, and on one level he is right. But he didn’t do so because he had few options for free health care and no options for consistent health care. He just hoped, like most people, that the next day he would have a better job which had insurance.
A universal health care system would have allowed my brother to seek the care he needed with dignity, regardless of his ideology. So when I hear people like JT saying “the system works” and “I’ve got mine” all I have is a hearty F–k you. Because instead of my brother getting married and having kids, he is dead.
Same thing happened to a co-worker of mine when I was in the restaurant business. He was 41.
EL, my sympathies on your loss. I wish your brother had been a smidgen less dedicated to his principles and sought the help he needed. It appears his problem was a little slower-moving than mine was; it hit me hard and fast, but I lucked out with minimal long-term damage.
You’re not likely interested in my sympathies — I understand that — but I offer them nonetheless. If he was a conservative as you say, and you’re as liberal as you are, it speaks a great deal about both of you that you maintained your relationship despite your differences.
This might sound a little callous, and I apologize for it, but he had his choices, he made them, and he stood by them. That has to merit some respect — even if the consequences were tragic.
My opposition to radically reworking the health care payment system is based on the fact that I do not believe that the changes will make things any better, and in fact will make them worse. It will put at least a part of the management of health care in the hands of government bureaucrats, who will be in charge of deciding what moneys go where. And I have almost no faith in government bureaucrats to make such judgments.
In the end, it all comes down to money. That’s an ugly truth, but an undeniable one. Health care costs money, and that money has to come from somewhere. The more separation there is between the patient and the cost, the less sense of responsibility the patient will feel about controlling costs. And the more levels of bureaucracy between the patient and the cost, the more likely the bureaucrats will simply look at the numbers (after all, the numbers are right there in front of them; the patients and the providers are simply more numbers) and process matters however they see fit to meet their budget goals.
I pay for my insurance now, and every November I weigh very carefully which option I will take. (My employer offers, at last count, four tiers of coverage, with plenty of other options.) Each year, the plans seem to cost a bit more and over a bit less. And each year, I try to balance what I can afford as a deduction and what I can afford out of pocket.
If I didn’t have that hundred bucks or so taken out of every paycheck, that’d be nice. But I wonder how much higher I would pay in taxes to the government.
And as much as I’ve railed against my insurance company, I feel comfortable knowing that I have a better chance of winning an argument with them (or, at least, getting a straight answer out of them) than I would with some drone in the Department Of Health and Human Services.
I’ve dealt with federal bureaucracies too many times to have a better opinion of them.
But back to the original subject… anyone have any ideas what to do about the DHL workers besides “go on unemployment, and when that runs out we’ll give you more?” To use a hoary old cliche’ (but nothing else seems to fit as well), that’s all about giving them fish. My suggestions are closer to teaching them to fish.
J.
“To use a hoary old cliche’ (but nothing else seems to fit as well), that’s all about giving them fish. My suggestions are closer to teaching them to fish.”
They know how to fish. Problem is that the pond has been drained.
As far as the rest of your screed, I don’t remember you being so concerned about how much Iraq would cost. Maybe that’s because that was killing brown people, rather than keeping them alive.
Actually, EL, it was about freeing brown people. You seem to be content to let brown people suffer under brutal tyrannies and ignore genocidal psychopaths. If it was all about “killing brown people,” you asshole, then we could have simply pulled a Saddam (or, if you prefer, a Soviet Union or Cambodia or China) and simply wiped out everyone who looked at us funny.
We didn’t. We don’t. And when some of ours do, we punish them.
Abu Ghraib should be a badge of honor for the US. Some troops went rogue and violated rules of conduct (and decency). They were investigated and punished. And the story was first broken by the Army itself, when it released details of the matter.
When was the last time a non-Western nation publicly put its own troops on trial for such things?
Take your bullshit racism accusations and shove them up your non-color-specific ass, EL. The only colors that matter in my opinion of you are yellow (making accusations that you have no ability to back up) and brown (the shit you’re so full of).
J.
You seem to be content to let brown people suffer under brutal tyrannies and ignore genocidal psychopaths.
If I may interject, this is tripe, and you know it. Did this comment time travel from late ‘02/early ‘03? It’s not EITHER you support tyranny OR you support setting a country on fire, and you damn well know it.
That said, EL, it’s an equally fallacious oversimplification to say cons were looking forward to ‘killing brown people,’ IMO.
It will put at least a part of the management of health care in the hands of government bureaucrats, who will be in charge of deciding what moneys go where. And I have almost no faith in government bureaucrats to make such judgments.
Right now, part of the management of health care is in the hands of private sector bureaucrats who are in charge deciding what monies go where. What’s the difference?
If I didn’t have that hundred bucks or so taken out of every paycheck, that’d be nice. But I wonder how much higher I would pay in taxes to the government.
But don’t you get it? Instead of that $100 going to an insurance company with many different tiers of coverage, that $100 would go into the tax system that would give you and everyone else effective health care.
“That said, EL, it’s an equally fallacious oversimplification to say cons were looking forward to ‘killing brown people,’ IMO.”
Maybe, but its a feature not a bug for many on the right. Did accomplish its objective of making that piece of garbage JT go ballistic though.
“But don’t you get it? Instead of that $100 going to an insurance company with many different tiers of coverage, that $100 would go into the tax system that would give you and everyone else effective health care.”
Actually, $100 is just a small portion of the cost. The employer picks up quite a lot of the premium. The savings could wind up in our paychecks.
I do get it, Duros. Right now, I have a CHOICE about the degree of coverage I have. And I live with the consequences of that choice. It’s a form of freedom to me.
I also don’t accept that the health care would automatically be “effective” if we resort to a single payer.
If I don’t like my insurance plan, I can try to get my employer to change the provider. I can recruit my colleagues to join me. Or I can decline the coverage entirely, get my own coverage, or go without. (A lot of young people do that, and most of them get by without it.)
If it’s part of my taxes, I don’t have those options.
I can’t even sue the government without its consent if they screw up.
It’s not that I don’t understand your arguments, Duros. I just don’t come to the same conclusion.
The difference is, your way requires me to forfeit my beliefs and participate in your plan, despite my opposition. It deprives me of my choices cited above. In order for your plan to work, I have to participate.
No thanks. I’d rather not.
Feel free to set up your own health insurance co-op, though, and recruit all the people you like. If it looks like it’ll be better than what I have, I might even sign up, too.
Just don’t take away my right to choose my own health care and health insurance options.
J.
If I don’t like my insurance plan, I can try to get my employer to change the provider. I can recruit my colleagues to join me. Or I can decline the coverage entirely, get my own coverage, or go without. (A lot of young people do that, and most of them get by without it.)
If it’s part of my taxes, I don’t have those options.
Jay ID Tea certainly lives in a fantasyworld of his own design.
First off, his employer isn’t likely to change providers based on Jay ID Tea’s desires. The vast majority of employers are extremely limited as to what kind of plan they can afford or wish to pay for.
Getting your own? Not unless you want to pay far more for far less.
As for going without–good luck. Anyone with half a brain will tell you going without insurance is a bad, bad idea.
Basically, Jay ID Tea is telling us affordable, effective health insurance is a bad idea because it’s paid by taxes. He rather have no flexibility, pay more for less, or go without and roll the dice he doesn’t get sick or injured.
Jay, I suggested education vouchers for the DHL workers. “Teaching them how to fish” costs money too.
As for health care in America, my diagnosis remains that you are insane. And what’s worse, a big-time hypocrite. But you’re welcome for my tax dollars having saved your life.
Jaim, you’ve already admitted that you don’t respond to what I say, but what you wish I said and what you think I really mean. And now you are making up stuff about what you say.
Jay, I suggested education vouchers for the DHL workers.
I searched the page for “education” and “voucher,” and neither showed up.
I re-read every one of your comments. You spouted 7 anti-Republican talking points comments before you even mentioned the DHL workers. And the few times you could be bothered to mention them, you talked about unemployment benefits and vague references to giving them money.
At no point did you mention education vouchers. The closest to that was my own mention of retraining. Despite your stating that you suggested it, you never did. Not once.
The phrase “lying sack of shit” seems crass, but somehow appropriate.
So, just where did you mention education vouchers? I just poked through your own “shitty little blog,” and there’s no mention of it there, either.
Oliver posts a very poignant story about a whole town that’s getting hammered economically. Where is the vaunted liberal compassion? Where are the ideas on helping out these people?
Nah, the best thing to do with these people is to use them as a club to blame Bush all over again. No matter that it doesn’t do a thing to help them; blaming Bush makes you feel better, and that’s all that matters, right?
As I read elsewhere earlier… I think I now understand what the vaunted “classless society” is all about.
J.
I mentioned it in the Mortgage thread in which you brought up the DHL stuff. And I also mentioned that it’s not an easy situation, and there’s no magical answer to bringing jobs back given the current environment. But getting people re-trained for other fields wouldn’t hurt, and it would be a worthwhile investment in terms of getting people employed again, and therefore paying taxes and buying stuff and re-igniting the economy that your president managed to destroy. To be blunt: it would be a better expediture of tax dollars than, say, occupying and propping up a pro-Iranian country somewhere in the middle east.
This is better advice than your own vaunted “wait for another company to open up and hire them” logic.
And thanks for driving traffic to my blog. And again, you’re welcome for using my tax dollars to keep yourself alive. You might think of it as horrible socialism, I simply think of it as part and parcel of living in an advanced, modern nation.
You might not have noticed, Jaim, but it’s been liberals who’ve been blocking educational vouchers — at least for children.
It also apparently escaped your notice that I never said anthing like “wait for another company to open up and hire them.” I specifically said we should offer assistance in new companies starting up, as well as established companies to expand or relocate.
You know, it’s too bad you’re such a frothing idiot. You’d probably agree with my ideas here if they were presented by anyone else. But you’ve got that fucked-up brain of yours that takes what I say, translates it into what you think I am saying that best suits your stupid prejudices and stereotypes, and then you go off on your tangents about what I never said and never would say.
I swear, I could post a blank comment and you’d go berserk denouncing that. I only have to show up; you make up whatever you want me to say, then argue against it.
J.
I’m talking about job retraining, dipshit. A very specific need in times like these, especially with regards to the American manufacturing sector (I realize this wasn’t DHL’s line of business). But thanks for trying to change the subject yet again. This is, of course, what you mistake for “argument.”
So, how about offering assistance for new companies starting up? Give them all the tax breaks in the world, and they aren’t going to do so right now. Do you have even a basic grasp of economics? Companies don’t make an investment and open up when there’s a credit crunch, not to mention a horrible economic downturn in general. If a company opens, who’s going to buy their stuff or purchase their services when the Bush economy has left unemployment at a staggering 7%?
As for me frothing at the mouth, I’m content to let our posts speak for ourselves in this thread (and others). You’ve got some really nasty cognitive paradoxes going on in your hateful little mind. You troll a liberal blog for lord knows what reason. You admit that government assitance saved your life and then go on to argue that nobody else shold get government assitance, evar.
As someone else suggested, you really do seem to hate yourself.
I do get it, Duros. Right now, I have a CHOICE about the degree of coverage I have. And I live with the consequences of that choice. It’s a form of freedom to me.
I also don’t accept that the health care would automatically be “effective” if we resort to a single payer.
Okay, lemme put it this way. If you could get the same coverage that Ted Kennedy gets at no additional cost to you – in fact saving you money that you would be paying to a private provider, would you take it?
My stepdaughter had 3 separate visit to the ER over the holidays. All 3 times she got IV fluids and medication for intense nausea. We just got the bills the other day.
$5,700.
Duros, my sympathies. And you mentioned Ted Kennedy just to set me off, right?
Seriously… I probably would accept that.
It reminds me of a joke I heard recently:
Why can nobody please a woman?
Because nobody has a dick made of chocolate that ejaculates money.
Ted Kennedy… sorry, I can’t do it.
The health care provided for United States Senators is an incredible premium service. It’s top-notch, and I’m sure is incredibly expensive. And that’s setting aside bureaucratic expenses — I’d be surprised if they even have co-pays for doctor’s visits and prescriptions.
So I doubt that my premiums would cover Senatorial-level coverage.
Earlier today, in another thread, I mentioned aphorisms. One of the truest ones I’ve discovered is Robert Heinlein’s TANSTAAAFL principle — There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.
Even if you eliminated every bit of the bureaucratic expenses involved in health care (and I don’t think that’s possible), at the core of any national health insurance (even if it’s “just” single-payer), it eventually boils down to limiting what medical professionals make. And I have deep, philosophical, principled, and pragmatic objections to what resorts to wage controls for medical professionals.
In Massachusetts, they imposed a mandatory health care law. And it’s already hurting the state. (Er, commonwealth, if anyone’s feeling particularly anal, but “state” is easier to type, so I’m sticking to it.) They’ve had to add more money to the budget for covering people signing up for the state’s plan. They’ve developed a shortage of primary care physicians as suddenly everyone needs to find one and sign up. And doctors are packing up and leaving the state — I know of one medical practice that relocated about ten miles, from Andover, Massachusetts to Salem, New Hampshire, purely to get out of the Bay State and its onerous regulations and taxes.
So yeah, if I could get the coverage of a US senator for what I pay now, I’d most likely take it. I’d also like a chocolate dick that ejaculates money. I just don’t think either is possible.
J.
“There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch”
Except, you know, the ONE THAT SAVED YOUR GODDAMN LIFE.
“In Massachusetts, they imposed a mandatory health care law. And it’s already hurting the state.”
Bullshit. Neutral sources please. Most reports have said the experiment has been a success, even if it rubs your ideology the wrong way. (And nice to dodge the fact that it was a Republican governor who set the stage for this system to come into effect.)
And no doubt doctors make a lot. But under our current system the CEO’s of HMO’s make even more. Cut them out of the picture and we can start talking affordable health-care for all Americans.
Please spare us any more of your stupidity Jay. Please. If we can afford a billion dollars a week in Iraq, we can afford a basic health-care system that provides some time of coverage to all working Americans.
Oh, but now a Democrat is president again, so it’s all about fiscal responsibility.
time = type
Jaim, you’ve already established that you don’t debate me, you simply make up things you wish I’d say and then rebut them. Since I’m not really needed in your hissy fits about me, I’ll just ignore you and let you go on wetting the carpet.
Except to point you in the direction of seeing just how Massachusetts’ health plan came to be (here’s a hint: Romney did little more than decide to ride the tiger instead of being eaten by it; the Massachusetts legislature has been over 85% Democratic since long before Romney took office), and point you to the Boston Globe (not exactly a conservative source) and its coverage of how the plan has played out. Nearly everything I ever wrote about that I took from Globe articles. If they have to admit the problems it’s having, then you can pretty much bet that the real problems are considerably worse.
J.
Shorter Jay: I got my help, but nobody else should. Ever.
Jay, you define the worse aspects of America, the ones we’re trying to eradicate as we take our country into the 21st century.
But thanks for playing once again.
Links on the Massachusetts situation:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91427522
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/07/03/143530.aspx
And hey, Jay’s favorite, FOX:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,390961,00.html
Obviously not perfect, but nothing can be given the outrageous costs involved in medical care these days. But intelligent people might look to MA and see a program that could work even better, given time and more thought.
Again Jay, glad to know you’re healthy now. By your own admission, you needed a hand-out and you got one at a critical juncture. Just not sure why it is you have so much contempt for fellow Americans who might need similar support in the near future.
Why do you hate your fellow Americans and selfishly take from the rest of us without giving anything back?
Jaim, I said I was tired of arguing with you, because you ignore what I say and instead argue things I don’t say.
From the Boston Globe, December 23, 2007:
Boston Globe, January 24, 2008:
So, if the Massachusetts plan goes national, who will the federal government turn to for assistance?
Blogger “Giacomo,” of Joust The Facts, who is also a doctor, July 25, 2007:
American Medical News, December 22, 2008:
From your own TNR link:
Daily News Tribune, Waltham, MA, October 7, 2008:
Argue with them for a while. I’m tired of your delusions, dipshit.
J.
We just got the bills the other day.
$5,700.
Forgot to mention; she’s 20 years old and has no insurance. One of those young healthy kids going without.
And you mentioned Ted Kennedy just to set me off, right?
No, not really. He’s a Senator and he’s sick and using his federally funded, one-payer health insurance.
I wouldn’t mind a piece of that.
Even if you eliminated every bit of the bureaucratic expenses involved in health care .., at the core of any national health insurance …, it eventually boils down to limiting what medical professionals make.
Why? How so? Doctors still get paid. I think it more boils down to how much a doctor or medical supplier can charge. That shit needs to be reined in. $600 for an IV Saline bolus?
C’mon.
here’s a hint: Romney did little more than decide to ride the tiger instead of being eaten by it;
Was that back when he was flipping or flopping?
Just read all those quotes, Jay. None of them say doctors aren’t getting paid, except possibly Giacomo who says he isn’t getting reimbursed as much as he used to because more patients are either on state of MA insurance or HMO’s
All of the quotes you provide point to a shortage of doctors, not an inability to “git mo’ money.”
Patients are waiting more than a month to see their family physicians or internists,
What is this, fucking Canada?!
Why? How so? Doctors still get paid.
Generally in the neighborhood of $50-60,000/annually. Oh woe, woe is them.
In Australia, because of their dual public/private system, it’s anywhere from 60-150K.
“Blogger named Giacomo”
Go to bed, Jay. You’ve been judged and found wanting by this entire thread.
And please continue to take care of your health, even if it means you need another hand-out. That’s what people in advanced societies do — they take care of one another.
“My opposition to radically reworking the health care payment system is based on the fact that I do not believe that the changes will make things any better, and in fact will make them worse. It will put at least a part of the management of health care in the hands of government bureaucrats, who will be in charge of deciding what moneys go where. And I have almost no faith in government bureaucrats to make such judgments.”
As opposed to now when health care is left in the hands of corporate bureaucrats, whose only job is to maximize profits.
At least government bureaucrats are there to ‘promote the general welfare’ of the people.
By the way, I live under universal health care, and it’s the doctors who make the decisions here, not bureaucrats.
for those of you who know nothing about the business of DHL you should not be talking. No DHL has not gone out of business and is not leaving the US. Yes, DHL has stopped doing domestic shipping due to a declining market. DHL is still and will be for a long time to come the leading internationl shipping company in the world. as for the employees that are no longer with the company well that was something that needed to be reduced, again due to the economy. all of the affected employees recieved severence and assistance in creating a resume as well as finding a new job. if one or more of these people decided not to use the FREE service that was provided by the company they say screwed them over then that is their own fault. today 1/30/09 is the last day that a domestic shipment can be sent with DHL for account holders so as for the people saying that they were not able to send their dell shipment that was false. if you were provided a DHL EZ return or pre paid air waybill from dell then there would have been no problem sending it out. again for the people who like to comment on company changes and procedures who do not work for them remember to just butt out if you are not wanting to get the facts.