Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Nov 2006 09:42 In article <45659BD4.C4D74C51(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: >> > >> >> >> >> Have you considered that people should plan ahead? >> > >> >Have you considered that we don't live in an ideal world ? >> >> I know it isn't ideal. Because of this fact, no national >> social program will deliver satisfactory service efficiently. >> It will deliver the minimum and that's all. > >You just keep saying this with no factual basis. > >The truth is that the NHS ( a national social prgramme ) does deliver a good >service very effectively. I'd call it better than a minimum too but it is for >sure essentially 'no frills'. It services a small geographic area with a uniform economy, a uniform governement, and a uniform political base of assumptions. >In comparison the US system fails to deliver as much at a far greater cost. You are comparing a mom and pop store with a conglomerate. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Nov 2006 09:45 In article <4565A585.A452E295(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: >> > >> >> I hope he finds something that he would pay his >> >> employer so he can do the work. >> > >> >You think ppl should pay for the 'privilege' of working now ? >> >> Some of us worked at places where we would have been happy >> to pay to work. > >I rather think that's simply a turn of phrase only ! We had an itch that could only be soothed by doing the work we did. It was a feature that somebody was willing to pay us for it. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Nov 2006 09:49 In article <ek37ho$2pn$2(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <4cb81$45647cf4$4fe77c5$17514(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>Ken Smith wrote: >[....] >>> No, this is not right. It is if nonproductive government spending plus >>> other nonproductive spending gets too large that this happens. The money >>> used for things like the miltiary and a fraction of what is used for >>> health care fall into this class. It doesn't really matter if the >>> spending is public or private if only matters that it is nonproductive >>> spending. Much of the spending that goes on in Los Vegas is dollar for >>> dollar as much of a drag as any other. Right now there is a large amount >>> of nonproductive spending in the healthcare system. You pay for this if >>> you buy a US made product in a US store. This drives down the economy. >>> The NHS model eats up less money and thus is less of a drag on the >>> economy. >> >>"Nonproductive spending in the healthcare system..." >> >>What happens to the money? Someone destroys it? > >It isn't the money so much as the wealth. Money is a "score keeping >system" used to allow the flow of wealth through the economy. I am >pointing this out because increases in the money supply can happen in >times of stagflation where wealth is in fact decreasing. > >The money spent on paying people to push needless paper The paper is needed. It is the physical representation of which step the process is at. (And, no, I can't write this one any clearer; I would appreciate a translation of it if possible). <snip> /BAH
From: Eeyore on 23 Nov 2006 10:00 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> > > >> >> Have you considered that people should plan ahead? > >> > > >> >Have you considered that we don't live in an ideal world ? > >> > >> I know it isn't ideal. Because of this fact, no national > >> social program will deliver satisfactory service efficiently. > >> It will deliver the minimum and that's all. > > > >You just keep saying this with no factual basis. > > > >The truth is that the NHS ( a national social prgramme ) does deliver a good > >service very effectively. I'd call it better than a minimum too but it is for > >sure essentially 'no frills'. > > It services a small geographic area with a uniform economy, a > uniform governement, Actually, in Scotland the NHS is administered by the Scottish parliament. > and a uniform political base of assumptions. It's true that both the political right and left agree on its value ! > >In comparison the US system fails to deliver as much at a far greater cost. > > You are comparing a mom and pop store with a conglomerate. In population terms the USA's only 5 times bigger. Similar schemes to the NHS exist all over Europe with a far greater population than the USA. Graham
From: Eeyore on 23 Nov 2006 10:04
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >hill(a)rowland.org wrote: > >> Winfield Hill wrote: > >> > Michael A. Terrell wrote: > >> >> Winfield Hill wrote: > >> >>> Winfield Hill wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> 4200 postings and still going strong. Amazing. > >> >>> > >> >>> Wow, now 7200 posts and still going strong. And most > >> >>> of the posts were under the original subject title. This > >> >>> must be some kind of a record. Certainly it's a stress > >> >>> test for the Google Groups web-page display code, etc. > >> >> > >> >> Never have so many, said so much, about so little! ;-) > >> >> > >> >> I heard of one long flame war that passed 10K posts, > >> >> but I never found out which newsgroup. > >> > > >> > We passed 9000 on the 14th, and are now within 100 posts > >> > of 10,000. Keep up the good work guys, you can do it! > >> > >> Google Groups is having a little trouble with this long thread. > >> The message-heading list said there were 9999 posts, so > >> I hoped to make the 10,000th post, but upon loading all the > >> article references in the left sidebar, it showed more than > >> 10,050 posts, so I missed the opportunity. > >> > >> But, good job guys and gals, over 10,000 posts, and still > >> going strong. And still on topic more or less. I've only > >> read a smattering of the posts here and there, and there's > >> a minimum of flaming SFAICS. Nice to see. > > > >Yes, we've found a flaw with google groups. > > > >The summary page seems incapable of displaying any number > 10,000 ! The > >honour of the 10,000th post goes to T Wake btw. > > What number does it show? On the summary page for the group it says " 9999 new of 10000 T Wake (91 authors) ". On opening the thread.... � Start of topic � Older Messages 1 - 10 of 10081 Newer � End of topic � Graham |