Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: unsettled on 14 Nov 2006 20:47 YD wrote: > So, have the lot of you reached a consensus, does jihad need > scientists or not? > > - YD, just throwing some spanners in the works. We ned to send them the brits participating in this thread.
From: JoeBloe on 14 Nov 2006 20:51 On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 18:21:11 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: >Democracy is no guarantee of industrial success. China is far from an industrial success. Practically every technology they have currently was given to them or they stole it. They got their steel works and knowledge of steel from Russia. Were it not for their war machine, they would be even further recessed in time than the idiots we are fighting now are. China's war machine is what made China great long before the prosperity of Hong Kong or Taiwan flourished.
From: Eeyore on 14 Nov 2006 20:57 JoeBloe wrote: > On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 18:21:11 +0000, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > > >Democracy is no guarantee of industrial success. > > China is far from an industrial success. Practically every > technology they have currently was given to them or they stole it. You could convincingly argue that's quite a coup ! Quite a success indeed. Graham
From: Don Bowey on 14 Nov 2006 21:39 On 11/14/06 3:44 PM, in article 455A54C5.408450FE(a)hotmail.com, "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > T Wake wrote: > >> "Don Bowey" <dbowey(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> What if the 20 year old person trying to live on >>>> minimum wage needs health care. How can s/he afford it? >>>> >>> >>> Many doctors will write off the cost of care for people who cannot afford >>> to >>> pay, and start them off with free "samples" of meds. It's rare to hear of >>> someone who is refused the help of a doctor. On the other-hand, a Dr. >>> doesn't have to accept a patient who is abusive or has a known habit of >>> lieing to the Dr. >> >> Fair one, but the system still relies on doctors treating people "out of the >> goodness of their hearts." > > This used to happen in the UK too before the NHS. It wasn't considered to be a > very satisfactory arrangement. > > Graham > > Not satisfactory to whom? Screw them. If it satisfies the doctor's wish to make someone well, that's enough.
From: Don Bowey on 14 Nov 2006 21:45
On 11/14/06 3:59 PM, in article kulkl2t5du1ohjr36o1sc00lvnrkq5q64v(a)4ax.com, "Ben Newsam" <ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk> wrote: > On Tue, 14 Nov 06 13:39:12 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> You are still assuming that there exists a GP who takes new patients. > > Yes. Why not? There always should be, as long as the population > doesn't expand unexpectedly. > >> I ask my question again but I'll try to rephrase so that you get it. >> >> If no GPs are taking new patients, what do you do if you are >> legitimately unhappy with the doctor you are assigned to. > > An extremely unlikely scenario. Extremely unlikely. If that were to > happen, then you would obviously have to wait. It's never happened to > me. Then you are fortunate. Incompatibilities between doctors and patients is not rare, and is (without prejudice) grounds for change. There must be good communications originated and accepted by each of them. |