Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 9 Nov 2006 09:02 In article <toednYmJ4tKD0c_YnZ2dnUVZ8qqdnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eiskun$8qk_002(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <eiq575$qnu$4(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>In article <eiprjo$8ss_003(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>In article <einool$7gj$10(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >>>> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>>>In article <eikp37$8qk_001(a)s1014.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>In article <QqSdnTiCZpUVWtHYRVnyuQ(a)pipex.net>, >>>>>> >>>>>>Neither will work efficiently nor deliver service on demand. You >>>>>>have to plan how to be sick or have somebody do it for you. That >>>>>>is why people who are very ill have to have a patient advocate. >>>>>>These were not needed before this medical insurance business >>>>>>became a right instead of a benefit. >>>>>> >>>>>>Canada's system does not work for a certain class of services. >>>>>>People who need those services were able to come to the US and >>>>>>get them in a timely manner. When the US converts to a >>>>>>single payer system, like Canada, the Canadians and the USians >>>>>>who need these services will have to go to another country >>>>>>whose medical infrastructure will provide. >>>>> >>>>>Right now, a number of Americans are going to ... India for medical >>>>>care. >>>>>Care to explain why? >>>> >>>>Because our medical system is changing to a national health run >>>>by many chiefs. Since all that paper pushing has to be funded, >>>>monies are going to bureaucracies rather than infrastructure >>>>and labor. The workers are now union; so that adds to labor costs. >>> >>>What? The people who fill out paperwork at insurance companies? No way. >>>Unions have few such clerical workers as members. >> >> Workers are those who do the actual delivery of service...the ones >> that count. > >So the clerical workers aren't workers then? Are you posting this from 1886? I think you are doing this misreading on purpose. If so, why do you do so? > >>> >>>>All access to medical help is done through insurance company >>>>doors. >>> >>>These people are going to India because (1) they don't have insurance and >>>American medicine costs too much, or (2) their insurance won't cover what >> they >>>need to have done. >> >> Especially the second reason. That is a harbinger of what will >> happen if the system becomes a national entity run by the >> government bureaucracies. > >Really? How do you work that out? Experience. /BAH
From: lucasea on 9 Nov 2006 09:07 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eiv9ff$8qk_002(a)s839.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <4550A244.5D8F131F(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> > >>> >> Then he didn't mix with the usual US types. He only saw a slice >>> >> of US. >>> > >>> >What are 'the usual US types' ? >>> >>> To get a genuine idea on the least amount of time, grocery stores >>> can provide that infomation. A better place is the farms. >> >>What percentage of the population live on farms ? >> >>I'd prefer pubs / bars. >> > > Everyone who doesn't live in cities. Where did you get this silly notion? Something like only 5% of the population is still involved in farming, but 95% of the population doesn't live in cities. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 9 Nov 2006 09:09 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eiva46$8qk_005(a)s839.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <4550A28F.B40C659F(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> In addition, people burn the wood that is laced with arsenic. >> >>What kind of wood is laced with arsenic ? > > Any wood you want to prevent termintes from eating. Not any more, at least not new wood. Eric Lucas
From: jmfbahciv on 9 Nov 2006 09:08 In article <WSl4h.9674$r12.933(a)newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eisl7r$8qk_003(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <45509E5D.4D41A4DD(a)hotmail.com>, >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >>>> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>> >>>> >Right now, a number of Americans are going to ... India for medical >>>> >care. >>>> >Care to explain why? >>>> >>>> Because our medical system is changing to a national health run >>>> by many chiefs. Since all that paper pushing has to be funded, >>>> monies are going to bureaucracies rather than infrastructure >>>> and labor. The workers are now union; so that adds to labor costs. >>>> All access to medical help is done through insurance company >>>> doors. Doctors are no longer small business[wo]men and the business >>>> is no longer a local business. >>> >>>Now would you care to explain why ppl are going to Indai for medical care >>>? >> >> Because the decisions of treatment is no longer done at the >> doctor-patient level; > >What are you on about? I went to the doctor with a headache the other day, >and between us, we decided that I needed a few days of antibiotic to cure my >sinus infection. And because the doctor told me this was necessary, the >insurance company paid for it. And what if the insurance company didn't approve it? Would you still get the medicine? Would you be able to buy the medicine? How long would it take you to convince people to make out the prescription if you didn't have insurance? /BAH
From: lucasea on 9 Nov 2006 09:12
<jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eivamt$8qk_008(a)s839.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <BM14h.8314$B31.7002(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:eiq0h1$8qk_012(a)s900.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <dGS3h.5355$7F3.3682(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, >>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>"krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message >>>>news:MPG.1fb9bd1d862e8abb989ab0(a)news.individual.net... >>>>> >>>>>> Dry wood burns very cleanly. >>>>> >>>>> It still stinks to hell. >>>> >>>>Not if you're using a good, modern wood stove, and good dry >>>>(particularly >>>>hard) wood. >>>> >>>> >>>>> I burn some in a fairly efficient stove, >>>> >>>>It's not just efficiency, it's also related to pollution control >>>>devices. >>>> >>>> >>>>> but unless there is a wind blowing it's a mess. It stinks if it's >>>>> still, >>>> >>>>Not if you're using a good, modern wood stove, and good dry >>>>(particularly >>>>hard) wood. >>> >>> How do you make everybody do this? >> >>Why your desparate need to "make everybody do" things. Why not just let >>them make their own decisions, and you make yours? > > Because there are never "do not burn" stamps on wood filled > with arsenic. Because there isn't any pollution controls > on burning wood. The ones who "sin" the worst are those > who are rabid anti-smokers of cigarettes, consider the need > for oil to be a mortal sin, and are against nuclear power plants. > > Yet these people have no problems with filling a whole neighborhood > with smoke and arsenic. This is another example of perfection > of inability to think. Why do you presume that it is the anti-smokers who burn pressure-treated lumber illegally? That is a rather illogical, quite misanthropic, and *very* disingenuous assumption. Eric Lucas |