Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 13 Nov 2006 07:22 In article <RbudnZ0isIZD2srYnZ2dnUVZ8sOdnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:ej73t9$8qk_006(a)s851.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <v76dnSNVabJ4h8vYnZ2dnUVZ8v2dnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:ej4hah$8ss_014(a)s977.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <45537045.AC5FCFC6(a)hotmail.com>, >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Something approaching 20% of the people in our country can't afford >>>>>> any >>>> sort >>>>>> of health care. To say that "ain't broke" is one of the most morally >>>> bereft >>>>>> statements I've heard in a very, very long time. Congratulations, >>>>>> you've >>>>>> demonstrated the lack of a conscience along with a lack of a brain. >>>>> >>>>>BAH may not be aware that it was a social conscience that drove Britain >>>>>to >>>> look >>>>>at the possibility of a National Health Service. >>>> >>>> Britain is a single country and has a "small" acreage. The US >>>> is 50 "countries" span a quarter hemisphere. >>> >>>So what? >> >> You people honestly can't see the difference? > >No. You are trying to imply that the size of the US prevents a single >organisation running anything with effectiveness, efficacy, and efficently and with common sense. No it cannot. To provide something for everybody requires only minimum equal disbursements to be "fair". >- this is not the case. On the contrary, the >size and population of the US would give a nationalised health care system >phenomenal economies of scale. Exactly. Corruption would be rampant. Even more than it is today with the US' parital implementation of an NHS. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 13 Nov 2006 07:24 In article <45575045.594C7E30(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> >> >> Britain is a single country and has a "small" acreage. The US >> >> is 50 "countries" span a quarter hemisphere. >> > >> >So what? >> >> You people honestly can't see the difference? > >It's a bigger country physically.. > >How do you think it would make a business less efficient ? Is FedEx in Europe >more or less efficient / profitable than in the USA for example. > For medical treatments to be the most effective, the treatment has to be done at a personal level. What you recommend will put all treatment at a production line scale. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 13 Nov 2006 07:26 In article <xcL5h.3508$Sw1.2625(a)newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:ej73t9$8qk_006(a)s851.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <v76dnSNVabJ4h8vYnZ2dnUVZ8v2dnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:ej4hah$8ss_014(a)s977.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <45537045.AC5FCFC6(a)hotmail.com>, >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Something approaching 20% of the people in our country can't afford >>>>>> any >>>> sort >>>>>> of health care. To say that "ain't broke" is one of the most morally >>>> bereft >>>>>> statements I've heard in a very, very long time. Congratulations, >>>>>> you've >>>>>> demonstrated the lack of a conscience along with a lack of a brain. >>>>> >>>>>BAH may not be aware that it was a social conscience that drove Britain >>>>>to >>>> look >>>>>at the possibility of a National Health Service. >>>> >>>> Britain is a single country and has a "small" acreage. The US >>>> is 50 "countries" span a quarter hemisphere. >>> >>>So what? >> >> You people honestly can't see the difference? > >You make some vague assertions about lack of availability, based upon >who-knows-what wacko assumptions. Of course we can't see the difference as >applies to a nationalized health care system. Oh, and by the way, Canada >spans just as much area as the US. And they hop the US border to get the medical care. /BAH
From: Eeyore on 13 Nov 2006 07:36 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >krw wrote: > >> ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk says... > >> > On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:41:23 -0500, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > >> > > >> > > The fact is that some jobs > >> > >aren't worth "minimum wage". > >> > > >> > Are you saying that you consider some jobs to be so menial that you > >> > would actually pay someone less than enough to live on to do them? > >> > >> You read better than I thought. Believe it or not, there are > >> people who don't need a job to "live", though they may need a job > >> to learn work skills or pay for a date on Saturday night. > > > >Eh ? > > He, as I am, think it's important that kids learn how to work > and earn money. It's good training for the time when they > are supposed to do this. I can't disagree with that for sure ! > Instead you socialist types are > trying to keep all adults in childhood with a nonentity, called > govnerment, makes all the decisions of living and life style > for you. You are entirely mistaken. I've been self-employed for 21 years for example. That doesn't sound very socialist to me ! > This is anathema to a lot of people in the USA; however, > this allergy appears to be getting cured rapidly. Your view of Europe is once again in error. Graham
From: unsettled on 13 Nov 2006 07:36
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <2c2ba$455743de$49ecffa$23510(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >>>In article <a687d$4557300e$49ecffa$23098(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > > <snip> > >>>You are wrong. Some, if not all, are science and/or engineering >>>trained. I'm trying to figure out how thinking that is used to >>>working analytically, makes such spectacular thinking leaps. >> >>We disagree. > > > <gasp>!!!!! What are we supposed to do now? ;-) Heck, I dunno, get into a flamewar like everyone else? Pass. :-) |