GernBlansten

Brent, let me get this straight. The scouts should be in full uniform to pay homage and respect for the adults who put in so much time and money into the program. Who is the uniform for again?

I can't see how offering Americans a choice is restricting freedom? If you don't like the government "OPTION", don't take it. Isn't freedom wonderful? Whereas restricting my ability to make claims against others who have potentially harmed me is a direct assault on my freedom. I just can't figure you conservatives out. You are so full of contradictions.

So you are with me then Scoutldr, tort reform takes freedom away from Americans.

Besides the fact that tort reform can only happen at the state level, if it would have reformed healthcare so much more efficiently, why didn't the Republicans do it while they had the power? Do we really want to remove or restrict the freedom of the people to seek compensation from corporate malfeasance? Doesn't seem very American.

Single payer by 2013? WOOOO HOOOOO! Bring it on baby!

What? What section is the Death Panels in? You mean to tell me there won't be any Death Panels?

Wow. I wonder how FoxNews is going to run with this, being they've had 24/7 coverage on the War on Fox for the past week. Hey, did anyone catch Obama's tribute to the fallen soldiers returning to the airplane hanger at 4AM yesterday? Gotta be something to nitpick him on that too.

The lawyers claiming LFL is not associated with BSA is laughable. That would be like saying NBC is not associated with GE.

SR, you make an interesting point. What if we made camping mandatory (min nights per year), or advancement mandatory (up or out). Would our program be stronger? Perhaps. Nationally mandated uniforming would be a good start. Letting units (or the boys) decided what's important and not having any national standards is what causes this hand wringing. It separates us, not brings us together.

Brent, If your observations are accurate, BSA should not walk, but run to mandatory uniforming. We need to increase participation and do everything in our power to reverse the decline in membership.

In the case of the marching band uniform, yes the youth loathe them. Too dated, garish and ornamental. Sound familiar? They wear them only during the performance and immediately stripped off at the first opportunity. In fact, our marching band only wears them for competition performances and during home football games half times. Probably 10 times a year. But they don't wear them during practices or meetings. They don't wear them when doing non-marching activities like pep band. Not when they audition for chair selection. They don't even wear them at the end of season banquet. Heck, they don't even wear them for our county fair parade anymore. They do have to wear their band t-shirts though.

There is a very simple solution to this conundrum. Lobby national to change the requirements for each rank to include "Present yourself to your board of review in a complete and correct official BSA uniform." If enough scouters make enough noise, they will listen. National seems to change the requirements almost annually. Why not just slip this one in too. It would help their bottom line too. But the real question would be, would this increase or decrease participation in BSA? Does the uniform draw the boy to scouting? Or would it drive those away who want a more informal program? As it stands, the sport/marching band uniform analogy just doesn't work. You must purchase/lease the uniform to participate in those activities. If you don't, you sit out. Until BSA does the same thing, you simply can't apply that comparison.

For $7/year, you can add SAR rescue insurance to your SPOT coverage. That includes any expenses SAR charges to pull your butt out of the fire. Pretty cheap considering what SAR and government is doing to people who venture into the wilds these days.

Search and Rescue has mixed feelings on these devices. Sure, you could just "punch out" and call for help when you really don't need it. But with these devices, if SAR is activated , they can pinpoint your position and effect a very efficent and safe rescue. Without these devices, it will take far more resources and money to just find you.

Found on the interweb.... In 1974 the Mormon doctrine of discrimination against blacks brought the Boy Scouts into a serious confrontation with the NAACP. The Boy Scouts of America did not discriminate because of religion or race, but Mormon-sponsored troops did have a policy of discrimination. On July 18, 1974, the Salt Lake Tribune reported: "A 12-year-old boy scout has been denied a senior patrol leadership in his troop because he is black", Don L. Cope, black ombudsman for the state, said Wednesday. Mormon 'troop policy is that in order for a scout to become a patrol leader, he must be a deacon's quorum president in the LDS Church. Since the boy cannot hold the priesthood, he cannot become a patrol leader.' " Shortly before Boy Scout officials were to appear in Federal Court Friday morning on charges of discrimination, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued a policy change which will allow black youths to be senior patrol leaders, a position formerly reserved for white LDS youths in troops sponsored by the church. An LDS Church spokesman said Friday under the "guidelines set forth in the statement, a young man other than president of the deacons quorum could (now) become the senior patrol leader if he is better qualified". - (Salt Lake Tribune, August 3, 1974). Mormon President Spencer W. Kimball "had been subpoenaed to testify" in the suit (Ibid., Oct. 23), but on Nov. 7, 1974 the Tribune reported: "A suit claiming discrimination against blacks by the Boy Scouts of America was dismissed Wednesday in federal court...all parties to the suit..signed an agreement stating the alleged discrimination 'has been discontinued.'"

Just in time for Halloween. Some scary words and phrases to keep us on the edges of our wits. I do love this time of year. BOOOOO!

It's teaching them business sense. Spending money on a policy that will provide you no benefit is not being thrifty.

One fundamental decision point when buying any kind of insurance is to only buy a plan with a deductible you are able to pay. If its greater than your ability to pay it, the policy becomes worthless. Now, can a one time hit of $5000 put you into bankrupcy? Of course it can. Especially when you are young and haven't accumulated wealth. Many young adults live paycheck to paycheck with little more than 2 months expenses in their savings accounts. They rent apartments and lease cars or drive clunkers. Now, throw in a $5000 medical bill they can't settle. They don't have anything they can sell to get cash or secure a reasonable loan. Hospitals and doctors don't setup payment plans. They sell their bad debt to collection agencies. The collection service will slap a whopper interest penalty on it and start litigation if a payment plan isn't worked out to their favor. Now couple that with an illness or injury that keeps the worker from earning. Where is the money coming from to service this new debt? The collection agency will continue to hound the debtor, searching for any assets or family who will help, all the while racking up more charges. The amount will spiral out of control. Finally, the debtor will have no choice but to throw in the towel and declare bankrupcy. Its a vicious cycle, repeated millions of times in America. A high deductible plan works great for me as I'm healthy and have the money to pay it if I need to. It protects my assets above that amount. It makes sense. It wasn't a very good plan for me when I was 20.

Come on Merlyn. If they had a time machine they would have gone back and submitted birth notices into the Hawaiian newspapers to prove his legitimacy.

Absolutely Brent. I'd help my son out until I became bankrupt myself. It may come to my doorstep. My son is Type 1 diabetic. If in OJ's shoes, he'd be unable to get healthcare on his own. But look at this from the perspective of a young adult, fully emancipated and without the safety net of a well off parent to pull them out of a financial disaster. Would you recommend that they pay an insurance company $1200 for the pleasure of spending the first $5000 of their cash for health care, in the hope of protecting yourself from additional expenditures above the 5 grand? Especially when your net worth is below that? It just doesn't make financial sense. Like it or not, bankrupcy is a financial option when bad things happen. It gives you a fresh start. It relieves you from the debt you've acquired. Sure, there are downsides to it. But when faced with the crushing debt of a long term illness, your only option is bankrupcy. 60% of bankrupcy is caused by illness. See a problem there? Got a solution to that? I do.

If OJ had assets to protect and collateral he could use to get a loan to pay the first $5000, you might have a point. I doubt a young, entry level fellow, just starting out has that kind of ability to get a loan to even pay the deductible. Especially if his illness/injury is keeping him from working. The plan simply won't help him. Any medical situation that will cost him any more than his deductible will have already drained his meager resources, forcing him into bankruptcy. This policy is of no value to him. His best bet is save his money in a health savings account and hope to stay healthy long enough to get a position that offers him healthcare.

Thanks for that Brent. Its about what I was expecting. So lets do a little financial analysis on OJ options. He can fork out $1200/year for a policy that no doubt does not cover pre-existing conditions and more than likely also requires a co-pay for visits. It also probably is an 80/20 after the deductible is met. The first $5000/year comes out of OJ's pocket even after he's paid the premium. For someone in his situation, a $5000 medical bill will likely wipe him out. The policy doesn't kick in until after that. And the bills will still keep coming. So what would be the benefit of this plan for someone like OJ? With or without this policy, he's in deep yogurt financially.

Brent, If you are curious, just spend your lunch hour tomorrow calling insurance companies to get a quote on coverage. Claim you are a 22 year old male, working part time as an EMT and looking for a high deductable policy. Get back to us on what you find.

SPOT is definitely not fragile. In fact I lost mine while glissading down a mountain peak. I had it clipped to the top of my pack when we summited. I activated the OK button on the summit and left it clipped on the outside to send its message. We then dropped into a couloir and glissaded down about 2000 ft. When I stood back up to remove the SPOT, it was gone. A few non-scoutlike words and we continued our decent. At the trailhead while enjoying some beverages, another climbing team came down asking if anyone lost a SPOT. Still working fine. I've had mine for about 6 months and am on the original lithium batteries. My only complaint is you never know if the message gets through until you get home to check your email. Some messages just don't get through due to signal strength or no passing satelites when you transmit.

I have a SPOT and used it on our Bissett NTiers trek. Put every scouts parent on the email distribution. Every night after setting up camp, I'd send a message. About 70% got through. But the parents really appreciated it. Is it necessary, absolutely not. But neither is GPS or cell phones.