Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 17 Nov 2006 21:26 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > >> You still do not understand how the US works. Would it be > >> possible to push your UK approach through the EU and have > >> all members accept it? > > > >It's hardly needed since the member countries have decent arrangements of > >theirown already. > > You are not answering the question. It's a tricky question to answer. Impossible even as asked. In a hypothtical case the best answer is that I think it would be possible - indeed there may be no need to 'push' for it since these nations have shown a desire to have inclusive health care already. Certainly the former Eastern Bloc countries would *expect* an 'NHS' type system. > >I recognise it may not be easy to deak with the issue in > >the USA but that's not a reason to not even try. > > People are trying. A single payer isn't working. I think that's because the current US model of that kind of system has too many flaws. > >The best place to start is by examining the idea > >seriously ! > > People have. A national single payer won't work. My assertion is that it *can*. That may mean sacrificing some white elephants in the process though. Graham
From: Eeyore on 17 Nov 2006 21:58 unsettled wrote: > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > You underestimate them. These people buy things. They also > > are quite aware about x costing more than y. > > They made the news. Over the past few days they were standing > in line waiting at store doors for the release of the latest > Sony game platform. Other than making sure they had enough > money for the purchase, I don't think they have any grasp > of value. Betcha if you asked them how many had health > insurance..... A Play Station probably costs about the same as one month's health insurance. One is within their means, the other isn't. Graham
From: Eeyore on 17 Nov 2006 21:59 unsettled wrote: > Take care of the pennies and the dollars will take care > of themseves. No they don't. It's a neat way of dodging the issue so it comes as no surprise you'd use it.. Graham
From: Eeyore on 17 Nov 2006 22:01 unsettled wrote: > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > >>>I don't have a com port. > >> > >>On a 486 ? You normally have 2. What does your modem connect to ? > >> > >>That would be astonishingly unusual ! Where does the mouse go ? > > > > > > Serial ports. > > It seems to have begun with some terminals which labelled > their RS232 ports with the logo "com". COM is what they're called in DOS ! As in COM1, COM2, COM3, COM4. The parallel ports are LPT1, LPT2, LPT3 also see PRN. Graham
From: Eeyore on 17 Nov 2006 22:02
unsettled wrote: > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > >>>A single-payer in the US cannot have that; it is too big--3000 miles > >>>wide 1700 miles long. You cannot administer distribution system > >>>using a small business model while keeping the decisions central. > >> > >>Then how do the likes of FedEx and DHL function *worldwide* ? > > > > > > They cannot deliver individual service. They do not repackage, > > recolor, nor remake the package nor the contents. There is > > no comparision to carrying a package from point A to point B > > and fixing a single individual's ailment. > > I don't know what DHL does but FedEx uses a lot of contractors. > Lost or delayed packages incurr some costs which they pay > instead of trying to manage the entire system themselves > from a central point. The NHS employs contractors too. Graham |