Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 16 Nov 2006 11:20 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> > >> >Shame you don't have a nationalised health service really, isn't it? > >> > >> It is getting there. The reason there aren't local doctor > >> offices is that they are all collected and put into a big > >> office building. These centers get fewer and fewer as > >> the companies who run them consolidate. > > > >Over here those 'companies' running the practices of 6 or 8 or more and their > >support team are owned by the doctors themselves. > > Like I have been saying, you are still at the small business model. > That is rapidly changing in the US. Doctors can't afford to own > their own practices anymore. It's not the case here nor do I see any likelihood it will be. The NHS happily allows doctors to practice individually if they so wish. Graham
From: Eeyore on 16 Nov 2006 11:23 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Ben Newsam <ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk> wrote: > >>>On Sun, 12 Nov 06 12:40:15 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>Why are the same medicines more expensive in the USA ? > >>>> > >>>>We pay the development costs. > >>> > >>>What about drugs from Roche or Clin-Midy and so on? > >> > >> > >> Sigh! We pay the development costs. If Roche didn't include > >> theirs in US prices, they'ld sell a lot more drugs. > > > >What's not discussed in this thread is the fact that > >the manufacturers have been advertising on US TV for > >some time now that if you can't afford the medicines > >you need you should contact them because they have > >programs to assist those living in poverty needing > >their products. > > Those have existed all along. It does seem odd that > the drug companies are started to adverstise these on > TV when the Drug Medicare Bill became law. I find the idea of advertsising prescription drugs to the general public rather bizarre. Graham
From: Eeyore on 16 Nov 2006 11:26 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > >rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... > >> krw wrote: > >> > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... > >> > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> > > > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > >Well, Eeyore, this would belie the assertion that she lives too far > >> > > > > from a population center to get decent DSL. > >> > > > > >> > > > I live in a town. There is no DSL line strung. > >> > > > You people are starting to get really annoying. > >> > > > >> > > DSL comes down an ordinary telephone line ! > >> > > >> > Only if you're within 17K' of the CO. > >> > >> I make that just a fraction over 3 miles. > > > >I'm about four miles from the CO according to the crow. How the > >telco snakes things is another issue. On the line that went back > >to the CO I couldn't get better than about 26K. The other one went > >to a SLC in the neighborhood and I could get 49-53K reliably on > >that line. DSL was still unavailable. > > > >> It works over longer distances overr here, albeit not flat out. > > > >It falls off fast. They're not willing to even try it. > > I'm talking to you both--towns are trying to get themselves > wired. It will be a few years (I think it will be years and not > months) before the laws and permissions and telcos and FCC > sort all of this out). America trails here in that case. British Telecom reckon 99.4% of the UK population now has access to ADSL. Many larger towns also have cable broadband. Graham
From: Eeyore on 16 Nov 2006 11:30 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> > >> >I know you meant long term planning, but earning minimum wage does not > >> >lend > >> >itself to that kind of living. People have to eat. They have to pay bills. > >> >They have to be able to save for a deposit. They have to live somewhere > >> >while they are waiting to buy their house. Etc. > >> > >> You don't have to borrow. The Portuguese around here make it a > >> family affair. Everybody in the extended family works, and then > >> they buy a house for cash. No borrowing. Now the family has > >> a house to live in and they begin to save for the next house. > >> Eventually everybody has their own house. > > > >And if you don't have a large extended family ( most ppl don't ) what then ? > > There are many ways to accomplish things. It does require setting > a prioity list. If you want to buy a house, you don't spend money > on buying pu-pu platters every night. Once agin you fail to address the question and instead intimate that ppl who can't buy houses are in that position becasue they buy the wrong kind of food !!! I'm tiring of your stupidity and failure to address the real issue. How does a low wage family afford a house ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 16 Nov 2006 11:31
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > > >>>When you are earning $200 per week, how much can you spare to pay off a > >>>mortgage? What duration are US Mortgages? How much of a deposit is > >>>normally > >>>put down? > >>> > >>>I know you meant long term planning, but earning minimum wage does not > >>>lend > >>>itself to that kind of living. People have to eat. They have to pay bills. > >>>They have to be able to save for a deposit. They have to live somewhere > >>>while they are waiting to buy their house. Etc. > >> > >> You don't have to borrow. The Portuguese around here make it a > >> family affair. Everybody in the extended family works, and then > >> they buy a house for cash. No borrowing. Now the family has > >> a house to live in and they begin to save for the next house. > >> Eventually everybody has their own house. > > > >Once again, you extrapolate from an extremely unusual case, to everybody in > >the country. And by the way, how recent was this Portuguese family affair > >thing done? I'll posit that you're also in the habit of extrapolating from > >45 years ago to the present, and I'll just say that the real estate market > >(and the economy as a whole) is a *very* different thing than it was 45 > >years ago. > > AFAIK, they're still doing this and will continue as long as > emigration continues. Which is fine for these Portuguese but what about everyone else who doesn't have an extended family ? Graham |