I'm not a lawyer, but it strikes me that this could be exactly what is happening. The ambulance company's insurance wouldn't pay the hospital directly, they aren't health insurance. So instead, the cyclist's health insurance footed the initial bill. Then they went after the cyclist for his deductible/copay/whatnot. Now he has to get the money from the ambulance company. If this was vehicle on vehicle violence, he would have gone to his auto insurance, who would have in turn went after the ambulance company's insurance, but he might not have auto insurance or auto insurance might not be willing to get involved because he wasn't driving. So he has to go direct to the company. Wouldn't be shocking if the company pushed off any non-legal petitions from him because he doesn't have the name weight of an insurance company with lawyers on retainer, so now he is seeking a legal remedy. Insurance doesn't just work always, there is often a degree of negotiating and litigation involved in these exchanges, especially if one party disagrees with another on matters of liability
Sconrad122
Connections Puzzle #515
🟨🟨🟨🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟦
🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟦🟦🟦🟦
🟪🟪🟪🟪
On the one hand, yes. On the other hand, Dearborn was not going to be sufficient to make up the difference here, and I'm skeptical you could even extrapolate that trend out to Arab Americans across the country and come out with a different outcome. Post pandemic inflation and the billionaire capture of all of our communications and media decided this election years ago
- 🟪🟩🟪🟪
- 🟪🟪🟪🟪
- 🟩🟩🟩🟩
- 🟨🟨🟨🟨
- 🟦🟦🟦🟦
This is a real shame. I love having Wordle and Connections as part of my wakeup routine before I get into work-brain mode. If only management weren't so greedy and just negotiated with their workers for a fair contract, I wouldn't have to deprive myself of these things. I hope the strike gets the workers everything they deserve for the good work they do
12x GW*km at 9x the price is better than 1:1 performance/cost scaling. Obviously labor price and other factors make it not apples to apples, but that doesn't seem like an awful scaling price premium
You asked a question (where have Kamala and Trump been?). I answered in what I believe was a relevant manner to the topic at hand and is a salient rebuttal of your "observation". I don't see how your claim to not care is relevant, you're going to have to explain that one to me. For the record, I'm not the person you were replying to, nor have I watched a single episode of Maddow
We are maybe talking past each other? You responded to a comment asking where Jill Stein was the last 4 years, which is a question attached to the argument that her lack of efforts in the off years is evidence that she is not running a serious candidacy. You responded by asking what about the two big party candidates offseason's actions, implying that you believe their actions are deficient under a similar line of critique. I pointed out that they did campaign to increase the standing of their platform and their party through lower level elections in the off years, which seems like a pretty strong rebuttal to the implication that they are not actively working to promote their positions throughout government. Perhaps you can explain why you view that as irrelevant
Literally, they were both out campaigning for their party's candidates in elections in 2021, 22, and 23
... Your ballot was 74 pages? How? My city makes a big deal when we have to use the back of the 1 sheet of 11x18 paper. Granted we have off year elections in our state, so things are a little more divided, but that's a long way from a 74 page short story of a ballot
This passive language bullshit is so obvious sometimes. "Oh, I wonder what the cyclist did to get run over? And that poor SUV driver getting charged for murder because of this event, Paris is really going off the deep end finding ways to attack innocent drivers." And yet, per the article, the SUV driver ran down the cyclist in a fit of road rage. That sounds an awful lot like an active choice by the driver, not some passive circumstance that the headline implies. If this person got angry and attacked someone with a knife, and the victim died, the headline wouldn't be "Knife owner charged with murder after person stabbed". But use the "right" weapon and all of a sudden we put the kiddie gloves on
I think it is less. And more than 20% share is more. As in, we do left handed, and we also have a significant portion of our network that is multi track and therefore abides by that convention. As opposed to somewhere that is just left handed, but doesn't have a mature/extensive use of that convention because their network is smaller/sparser