GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   What are you paying for Health Insurance (USA Only) (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1117511)

_Richard_ 08-06-2013 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sperbonzo (Post 19748335)
BTF3K.... Have you looked at the methodology of the "study" that found the US 37th? It put a weighting of over 50% on how similar care was across the board in a given country. This meant that systems that have universally CRAPPY healthcare ranked higher than the US, even when the US's worst care was better than their average care.

Just FYI..... Look it up for yourself.



As for the $10 aspirin, blame mandated insurance coverage terms by the states. It isn't about "allowing" hospitals to charge that much, it's about forcing insurance to cover EVERYTHING, thus removing free market from controlling prices. In places like Panama, for instance, people get insurance that only covers the really big catastrophic stuff. Everything else is paid in cash. Thus people actually pay attention to what things cost and will not go to a provider that charges too much. Subsequently, prices are a fraction of what they are in the US.





.



speaking of looking shit up yourself.. this kinda makes '$10 aspirin' seem rather vanilla for these folks.

Naughty-Pages 08-06-2013 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 19747224)
Yeah, heaven forbid someone turn a profit on the medical degree they paid for or all the time they spent in school.

I think you meant, heaven forbid someone pulls in a couple million a year as a high paid insurance executive (pharm exec, hospital administrator, hospital board member) and have 6 multi-million dollar homes with personal staff/maids/butlers and then pay Bean Counters to figure out how to provide life saving healthcare to their customers just so they can keep their private jet fueled up and ready to go.

The problem is not the doctors, it's Big Pharm and Insurance companies denying care to attain what most would agree are clearly unreasonable profits.

Barry-xlovecam 08-06-2013 11:57 AM

No problem, I am sure all you guys that are promoting pay as you go healthcare have $100,000 in cash that you are willing to spend in a year or two if you get seriously ill -- right or wrong, that is what it may cost you.


baddog 08-06-2013 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naughty-Pages (Post 19748637)
I think you meant, heaven forbid someone pulls in a couple million a year as a high paid insurance executive (pharm exec, hospital administrator, hospital board member) and have 6 multi-million dollar homes with personal staff/maids/butlers and then pay Bean Counters to figure out how to provide life saving healthcare to their customers just so they can keep their private jet fueled up and ready to go.

I am relatively confident that if that is what I meant I would have worded it to say that.

punker barbie 08-06-2013 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naughty-Pages (Post 19748637)
I think you meant, heaven forbid someone pulls in a couple million a year as a high paid insurance executive (pharm exec, hospital administrator, hospital board member) and have 6 multi-million dollar homes with personal staff/maids/butlers and then pay Bean Counters to figure out how to provide life saving healthcare to their customers just so they can keep their private jet fueled up and ready to go.

The problem is not the doctors, it's Big Pharm and Insurance companies denying care to attain what most would agree are clearly unreasonable profits.

I coudlnt agree more with this statement:thumbsup

The average doctor who graduates from medical school is easily $100k in debt from student loans and that is low balling it. Not to mention the extremely low pay they receive as residents and pulling 100 hours a week.

Naughty-Pages 08-06-2013 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 19748680)
I am relatively confident that if that is what I meant I would have worded it to say that.

Come on baddog! Are you sure? it could have just been a typo. lol :1orglaugh

Quote:

Originally Posted by punker barbie (Post 19748684)
I coudlnt agree more with this statement:thumbsup

The average doctor who graduates from medical school is easily $100k in debt from student loans and that is low balling it. Not to mention the extremely low pay they receive as residents and pulling 100 hours a week.

that combined with ridiculously high malpractice insurance...

DavieVegas 08-06-2013 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juicy D. Links (Post 19746781)
Myself and my brothers are on a business plan and it just got jacked to $554/ individual per month....

NY - Long Island region


50/75 Doctor Primary / Specialist...


:helpme:helpme:helpme:helpme:helpme


crazy shit......

Wow. I have united health care. I pay $97 a month full coverage. They pay 80% and i pay 20%. $35 o pay when visiting doctors.

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude 08-06-2013 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sperbonzo (Post 19748209)

And here is the study that's cited:

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploa...r-turn-2012.pd

Fraser Institue is a capitalist apologist libertarian crank tank... :2 cents:

Quote:

Never mind the details: Fraser Institute's a leader in press release production
BY DAVID J. CLIMENHAGA | APRIL 8, 2013

TORONTO -- According to a press release issued last week by the Fraser Institute, which is one of Canada's leading producers of press releases, government employees earn more on average than equivalent private sector workers.

One is tempted to respond by shouting, "It's the market, Stupid!"

After all, when you're comparing qualified professionals doing important public service work to unskilled workers in the retail sector, as the Fraser institute seems to be doing in this slapdash and amateurish "study," one would expect the market to set higher rates of pay for the workers with skills and necessary qualifications.

What's more, one would also expect the Fraser Institute?s extremely well-compensated "researchers" to understand the concept of the market above all things -- since it's the alleged superiority to market solutions for everything, the facts notwithstanding, that is quite literally their raison d'etre.

Indeed, the market was exactly what they pleaded in their own defence when they were exposed on the day of their latest press release as highly paid hypocrites by an Ottawa Citizen blogger, who noticed in a U.S. tax return that a dozen Fraser Institute staff members are compensated in the comfortable six figures for their tireless market proselytizing, and that their founder and "senior fellow" is paid more than the Prime Minister of Canada!

But never mind that blind alley, because in fact the Fraser Institute?s "analysis" in this "study" and all the others exactly like it -- as has typically been the case with output of this organization over the past 38 years of its existence -- is full of apples-to-oranges comparisons, deceptive omissions and intentional ignorance designed to achieve the propaganda goals of its corporate paymasters.

So while it might be accurate to say public employees have a marginal edge in earnings over their private-sector counterparts in most provinces, the Fraser Institute's claim that public employees in Canada are paid on average 12 per cent more is almost certainly bogus.

The conclusion is based on labour force data for a single month (April 2011) and appears not to have taken occupation into account at all -- PhD statisticians make more than 7-Eleven clerks, quelle surprise! The study doesn't account for the level of government that employs the workers. It provides no figures on what the actual wages the group's researchers are looking at are -- just its magic "12% Delusion." I could go on, but why bother?

When a Canadian Union of Public Employees researcher did a better study using census data in 2011 -- I know, I know, CUPE's a public sector union and has a dog in the fight -- he found the difference between Canadian public and private sector workers in 2011 to be less than 1 per cent.

CUPE used census data and looked at 500 different detailed occupations to find, first, that there isn't much of a difference between public and private sector pay when the same jobs are compared honestly, and, second, that what difference exists is explained by the fact there's a much smaller wage gap for women in the public service than the private sector.

Indeed, back home in Alberta, when the Fraser Institute trotted out the same analysis of Alberta public employees' pay and claimed Alberta public employees earn 10 per cent more than their private sector counterparts, a more detailed analysis using the data form the long-form census showed Alberta public employees earn an average 2 per cent less than their private-sector counterparts doing the same or similar work.

I guess that?s why the Fraser Institute's friends in the federal government were so anxious to get rid of that long-form census!

What's actually shocking about the Fraser Institute's latest claims is, given the difference in the marketability of the skills needed by a public sector shrunken to its bare essentials and those wanted by the de-skilled private sector, that the pay gap is so small.

But then, the Fraser Institute's job isn't really to provide honest comparisons. As has been said in this space before, its "researchers" are nothing more than full-time propagandists and unregistered lobbyists, paid to produce this nonsense and pass it off as legitimate, peer-reviewed research. Thanks again to their friends in the federal government, they are bankrolled by all of us through the organization's charitable status while its many technically prohibited political activities are winked at by the thoroughly politicized Canada Revenue Agency.

The Fraser Institute purports to be a "think tank" -- or, as it risibly puts it on its website, "Canada?s leading public policy think tank."

In fact, as noted above, about the only category in which it can honestly claim to be a Canadian leader is in the production of press releases.

So far in the first 98 days of 2013, the Fraser Institute has issued 21 news releases. That's one roughly every four and a half days for those of you without a calculator.
In 2012, the Vancouver-based organization published 54 releases, better than one every week.

Astonishingly, virtually all of them touted research that found "market solutions" always work better than public services. The few that didn't announced appointments and awards designed to give the "institute" its faux academic image, or that the University of Pennsylvania has ranked it the "top think tank in Canada."

Please! If this is top work, you really have to wonder about either the mushrooms they put in the omelets they serve in University of Pennsylvania?s cafeteria! Either that or the sophomoric efforts of all those other think tanks.

The Fraser Institute achieves this volume of press release production in part by recycling the same shoddy research over and over again into new press releases.

So the same meretricious research on which last Thursday's dubious claim that Canadian public sector workers enjoy a 12-per-cent premium over workers in the private sector, for example, was trotted out at least three times before -- for Alberta on Jan. 22, British Columbia on Jan. 24 and Ontario on Feb. 20.

In each case, the media picked up the story with naïve credulity and ran it without a word of reaction or criticism by experts in the field or opponents of the Fraser Institute's views.
Next: How the Fraser Institute always manages to get it news releases to run in the media without opposing comments.
:stoned

ADG

Grapesoda 08-06-2013 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sperbonzo (Post 19746990)
Family plan just went from $623 a month up to $835 a month, and in October we will be getting the estimated rate increases for next year when Obamacare really starts to ramp up.




.

you'll love this then: congress got so upset about going onto Obama care they broke the law basically to get themselves and staff excepted BUT it's good enough for you :thumbsup

VikingMan 08-06-2013 08:52 PM

None of the people I met college who were pre-med gave a flying fuck about anyone's health. All they cared about was the prestige and money that came with being a Dr. :2 cents:

sperbonzo 08-07-2013 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude (Post 19749151)
Fraser Institue is a capitalist apologist libertarian crank tank... :2 cents:



:stoned

ADG

So here we have an opinion piece written by an author that thinks that a study done BY THE UNION ITSELF regarding the pay of it's own government workers is just fine, but that the other study is hopelessly biased and unfounded....

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

If the irony of that doesn't strike you at all, then you have no sense of humour.




:helpme:1orglaugh



.:)

Juicy D. Links 08-07-2013 06:51 AM

my doctor touches my balls every time

Sly 08-07-2013 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VikingMan (Post 19749422)
None of the people I met college who were pre-med gave a flying fuck about anyone's health. All they cared about was the prestige and money that came with being a Dr. :2 cents:

Man is self-serving. Even those that seem altruistic. It may not be money, but it is something driving that individual to do what they are doing. Self-loathing, guilt, etc.

"Hoping" that there are millions of altruistic intelligent doctors and researchers willing to dedicate their lives to medicine will land us with a whole lot of dead people.

Bryan G 08-07-2013 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 19747764)
I don't know for sure, but I would imagine a doctor in Australia makes more than a low or unskilled worker. Same with doctors in Canada, France, etc.

Please tell me you are kidding????

Zeiss 08-07-2013 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 19747764)
I don't know for sure, but I would imagine a doctor in Australia makes more than a low or unskilled worker. Same with doctors in Canada, France, etc.

No, in Bulgaria... I remember doctors were given ~200 eur per month. Sad.

baddog 08-07-2013 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sperbonzo (Post 19749899)
So here we have an opinion piece written by an author that thinks that a study done BY THE UNION ITSELF regarding the pay of it's own government workers is just fine, but that the other study is hopelessly biased and unfounded....

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

If the irony of that doesn't strike you at all, then you have no sense of humour.




:helpme:1orglaugh



.:)

and Canadian

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 19749945)
"Hoping" that there are millions of altruistic intelligent doctors and researchers willing to dedicate their lives to medicine will land us with a whole lot of dead people.

:thumbsup

Tommy The Twink 08-07-2013 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juicy D. Links (Post 19749925)
my doctor touches my balls every time

faggot :2 cents::2 cents::2 cents:

Bladewire 08-07-2013 12:35 PM

$267 a month for me - Monarch Beach, California.

85/15 tests/labs until $1,000 deductible paid

$25 Doctor / specialist visits

Preventative care free: flu shots, cancer screenings, annual physicals, STD tests, etc.

RX deductible $250 then generic refills $4 brand name refills $40

California PCIP insurance , just transferred to Federal PCIP this month (Obama Care). Above data is for the new Federal PCIP I pay.

What was my pre-existing condition that qualified me? High Blood pressure 5 points over norm and not having insurance for the previous 6 months.

I have an awesome doctor. I didn't even know about PCIP until my doctor recommended it because I didn't have insurance at the time (didn't feel I needed it) She filled out a form, gave it to me to mail in with first months premium, I did, and that was that!

boneprone 08-07-2013 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Heron (Post 19748222)
256/month 1500 deductible. Dental is part of that too. Single 30 yo male. BCBS
Really not too horrible so I'm waiting for the healthcare law to fuck me.

That's pretty damn good. Which company is this?

Naughty-Pages 08-07-2013 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boneprone (Post 19750481)
That's pretty damn good. Which company is this?

he said BCBS.

Barry-xlovecam 08-07-2013 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squirtit (Post 19750438)

California PCIP insurance , just transferred to Federal PCIP this month (Obama Care). Above data is for the new Federal PCIP I pay.

I have the same insurance but the premium is $427 a month ( age related no doubt). Same situation the State PCIP grant was not refunded.

I was uninsurable at any price before the "Obamacare" -- I am probably alive today, or not an invalid, and still a taxpayer (since 1970) because of it.

That is an unsubsidised price BTW and may be indicative of the new pricing requirements of "Obamacare"

Bladewire 08-07-2013 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 19750667)
I have the same insurance but the premium is $427 a month ( age related no doubt). Same situation the State PCIP grant was not refunded.

I was uninsurable at any price before the "Obamacare" -- I am probably alive today, or not an invalid, and still a taxpayer (since 1970) because of it.

That is an unsubsidised price BTW and may be indicative of the new pricing requirements of "Obamacare"

Damn that's steep! One thing they didn't tell me is that after paying my previous PCIP's $1,500 deductible and finally getting things at a good price, after they switched to Obama care I have to pay the $1,000 deductible again. Previous deductible erased.

Diomed 08-07-2013 05:26 PM

Funny,

since posting this thread I just got a letter in the mail saying that my rates are probably going to go up because of the obama thing.

But Obama Care saved my dads life.. he had no insurance, and got prostate cancer.. applied, and they accepted. He would be dead now if it wasn't for that coverage.

So if my rates do go up.. I will have to be ok with it. God bless Obama.

venus 08-07-2013 09:56 PM

wow, some of you have some crazy deductibles...

United Health Care, $1,500 , they pay 80%, I pay $793 a month for 2 adults and 2 kids
kids well checkups annually are free, immunizations free, flu shots free .. its a PPO policy so I choose my own doctors..would never get a HMO policy..to restrictive.

Eschaton 08-08-2013 01:07 AM

New York has had the most expensive health insurance plans in the country for over 20 years. In '93 they required insurance companies accept any and everyone regardless of pre-existing condition.

The result was insurance cost a fortune and no one ever bought it until they got sick.

Now, Obamacare supporters are saying rates in NY are dropping. This is misleading because it's only dropping for individuals who purchase a health care plan on their own. That's less than 20k people. Most get insurance through their employers -- not on their own. You see the same sort of misleading talk going around the country. It's nice for the people with pre-existing conditions or other misc. scenarios but for the vast majority of people: rates are going up and will keep going up.

I sympathize with anyone who's dealing with medical problems (as I have my own) but "insurance" is called insurance for a reason. You don't wait til your house burns down then buy home insurance.

There was a time when health care was actually affordable, when most costs were paid out of pocket. That was long ago when the Government was never involved and before medicare/medicaid started distorting everything.

Barry-xlovecam 08-08-2013 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eschaton (Post 19751041)

There was a time when health care was actually affordable, when most costs were paid out of pocket. That was long ago when the Government was never involved and before medicare/medicaid started distorting everything.

I remember it as a child -- people were bankrupted when they got sick and then they died. The average live expectancy of Americans has increased 10 years since 1960 just before the time when Medicare was enacted. So by distorted you mean we spend too much keeping people alive?

I guess that extra 10 years is too expensive for you -- remember what you said today on your death bed and tell them to pull your plug.

The are other industrialized countries that the average citizen lives 5 to 10 years longer than Americans do. Apart from our fast-food eating habits contributing to this -- every one of those countries has some form of universal health care.

Universal access to preventative medicine saves lives, and more importantly, can preserve the quality of life.

Really, most of us would be better off paying a 6% to 10% tax for universal heath care, full access without deductibles, and stop relying on for-profit insurance benefits that we pay directly for or our employers offer as a benefit ( that we really pay for with lower salaries. Businesses and their employees realize a tax free pass through of most employer paid health benefits -- what the stink really is about is the 40% tax on "Cadillac Plan" health benefits that corporate executives have had to pay since 2011 -- enter the Koch Brothers and their wannabes ... don't drink the Kool Aid! Their arguments are self-centered horeshit.

Social Security and Medicare has changed America -- in 1935 when the Social Security Act was passed people made the same sort of arguments but the fact is that the average life expectancy in America in 1935 was about 60 years today is near 79 years live expectancy today.

My mother turned 91 last month she is collecting on the long-term care insurance that she has paid $250,000+ in premiums on for over 35+ years for long-term home care now -- the cost of home care, and in the worst case a nursing home will eat that premium expenditure up in a 3 years maybe. Most people end up old and dying is some bad situation bankrupt on Medicaid supplemental assistance to Medicare after the use all their assets paying for care then they qualify for benefits that are little more that warehousing dying people.

Maybe, they should just voluntarily go out to the woods woth a blanket and no food to die like the Native Americans did ( at 45 usually )? That is not how our modern society works. I can't just hand my mother a blanket and point to the path to the woods.

But don't worry, the Koch Brothers will go out in grand style while all their mouthpieces die early deaths. They don't give a shit -- they have the money to pay for the best in life and for top-end end-life care.

Sly 08-08-2013 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by venus (Post 19750941)
wow, some of you have some crazy deductibles...

United Health Care, $1,500 , they pay 80%, I pay $793 a month for 2 adults and 2 kids
kids well checkups annually are free, immunizations free, flu shots free .. its a PPO policy so I choose my own doctors..would never get a HMO policy..to restrictive.

Higher deductible = lower rate. Do the math on your family and the higher deductible could save you a decent amount of money.

Barefootsies 08-08-2013 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 19751297)
Higher deductible = lower rate. Do the math on your family and the higher deductible could save you a decent amount of money.

:2 cents:

arock10 08-08-2013 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 19751248)
I remember it as a child -- people were bankrupted when they got sick and then they died. The average live expectancy of Americans has increased 10 years since 1960 just before the time when Medicare was enacted. So by distorted you mean we spend too much keeping people alive?

I guess that extra 10 years is too expensive for you -- remember what you said today on your death bed and tell them to pull your plug.

The are other industrialized countries that the average citizen lives 5 to 10 years longer than Americans do. Apart from our fast-food eating habits contributing to this -- every one of those countries has some form of universal health care.

Universal access to preventative medicine saves lives, and more importantly, can preserve the quality of life.

Really, most of us would be better off paying a 6% to 10% tax for universal heath care, full access without deductibles, and stop relying on for-profit insurance benefits that we pay directly for or our employers offer as a benefit ( that we really pay for with lower salaries. Businesses and their employees realize a tax free pass through of most employer paid health benefits -- what the stink really is about is the 40% tax on "Cadillac Plan" health benefits that corporate executives have had to pay since 2011 -- enter the Koch Brothers and their wannabes ... don't drink the Kool Aid! Their arguments are self-centered horeshit.

Social Security and Medicare has changed America -- in 1935 when the Social Security Act was passed people made the same sort of arguments but the fact is that the average life expectancy in America in 1935 was about 60 years today is near 79 years live expectancy today.

My mother turned 91 last month she is collecting on the long-term care insurance that she has paid $250,000+ in premiums on for over 35+ years for long-term home care now -- the cost of home care, and in the worst case a nursing home will eat that premium expenditure up in a 3 years maybe. Most people end up old and dying is some bad situation bankrupt on Medicaid supplemental assistance to Medicare after the use all their assets paying for care then they qualify for benefits that are little more that warehousing dying people.

Maybe, they should just voluntarily go out to the woods woth a blanket and no food to die like the Native Americans did ( at 45 usually )? That is not how our modern society works. I can't just hand my mother a blanket and point to the path to the woods.

But don't worry, the Koch Brothers will go out in grand style while all their mouthpieces die early deaths. They don't give a shit -- they have the money to pay for the best in life and for top-end end-life care.

what you said

venus 08-08-2013 07:30 AM

you only save money if you don't get sick.
My horses vet, her family moved to a high deductible, a year later he was diagnosed with cancer, so every year they had to pay the 10,000$ deductible, then they had to pay any part the insurance would not, he died 2 months ago after a 2 yr fight, he was 39 yrs old.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 19751297)
Higher deductible = lower rate. Do the math on your family and the higher deductible could save you a decent amount of money.


sperbonzo 08-08-2013 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 19751248)
[INDENT]I remember it as a child -- people were bankrupted when they got sick and then they died. The average live expectancy of Americans has increased 10 years since 1960 just before the time when Medicare was enacted. So by distorted you mean we spend too much keeping people alive?



]

Sorry, but that isn't really accurate. Actually, the vast majority of people had insurance, either through their employer, (which started during WWII as a way to attract people to a job, since there were wage and price controls), or privately. The huge difference between then and now, is that states did not mandate what the insurance carriers had to cover, so people generally just got insurance plans for the catastrophic things, and paid cash for the rest..... which meant that they shopped around, and this kept prices way down.

What changed is when the governments started telling insurance companies that if they wanted to be in business they HAD to cover a long list of services that had previously been paid in cash by people who watched what they were paying. People stopped paying attention to costs, and they went through the roof.



:2 cents:



.

Barry-xlovecam 08-08-2013 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sperbonzo (Post 19751372)
Sorry, but that isn't really accurate. Actually, the vast majority of people had insurance, either through their employer, (which started during WWII as a way to attract people to a job, since there were wage and price controls), or privately. The huge difference between then and now, is that states did not mandate what the insurance carriers had to cover, so people generally just got insurance plans for the catastrophic things, and paid cash for the rest..... which meant that they shopped around, and this kept prices way down.

.

Insurance, in many cases paid by large companies, as part of their Union contracts was how the general population became familiar with health insurance. As a consequence, smaller businesses offered it to be competitive with large firms.

I remember when my father changed jobs, he was a tool and die maker, machine builder, and pattern and mold maker -- the new shop was larger and offered benefits. Health insurance was uncommon before Union Contracts with negotiated benefits -- that occurred in the early 1960s for most workers. You are quoting the exception rather than the rule. (Off the talking points list?)

I remember as a child my parents sitting at the family dinning table lamenting over how to pay the doctor bills for me and my sister we were 7 and 4 respectively. The doctor's office gave you a statement and you paid on the never ending balance -- that was life in the early 1960s and it wasn't all Ozzie and Harriet or Father Knows Best let me assure you -- I lived it as a child.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123