Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 26 Nov 2006 12:48 "Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:phineaspuddleduck-2757BF.16232326112006(a)free.teranews.com... > In article <44qdnccZZ7DjIfTYnZ2dnUVZ8s-dnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> >> ARe you talking about denizens of this thread? >> > >> > It boils down to the simple fact he really doesn't >> > know what he's talking about. >> >> Really? Do you? It was an apt comment for him to make at the point it was >> made - unless you are talking about KRW as it seems, in which case - yes, >> you are correct. > > Unsettled has a unrequited love affair after I plonked him. > You seem to attract stalkers. It must be your aftershave.
From: T Wake on 26 Nov 2006 12:52 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ekcf5f$8ss_003(a)s1173.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <4569A930.C59A51E2(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: >>> > >>> >> Are you assuming that the only way people can get "good medical >>> >> treatment" is through a government-controlled entity? >>> > >>> >Absolutely not, yet the evidence is that the current US system > 'encourages' >>> >inefficiency and overcharging so it's become too costly for many to get > the >>> >health care they deserve. >>> >>> Who decides who deserves what? The patient? The politican >>> who is buying votes? The bureaucrat who you just pissed off? >> >>In the NHS the doctor(s) determines your treatment. > > After, and only after, permission is granted by the government. > Those doctors have a list of things they can't do....that's > what you've told me. Yes some things are illegal. For instance, the doctor can not force a patient to have an abortion. Do you think they should be able to? In the US, does the government pass legislation saying which drugs are legal to use and which medical practices are legal? You are somewhat confused here and the strawmen you are creating are bad, even for your normal standards. Trying to imply that the rules saying what can and cant be done is the same as governmental control is comical. >>> And yet, you are talking about health care. The politicians >>> in this don't talk about that; they talk about insurance >>> as something everybody deserves. >> >>Is it actually real insurance or notional insurance ? > > It is what our politicians mean when they advocate national > health _insurance_ which also means a single-payer system. There is a difference. It is sad that the greatest nation on Earth is unable to provide for it's population in the way other, lesser, nations can. I suspect it is more down to ignorance on behalf of a vocal minority than anything else though.
From: lucasea on 26 Nov 2006 12:52 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ekc910$8qk_004(a)s963.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <45699770.B6957F47(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >>> >rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >>> >> krw wrote: >>> >> > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >>> >> > > krw wrote: >>> >> > > > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >>> >> > > > > krw wrote: >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > > you'd likely be all for nationalizing the oil companies >>> >> > > > > > too. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > What would be the point of that ? >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > It makes as much sense as nationalizing health care; none. Why >>> >> > > > don't you nationalize food production while you're at it? >>> >> > > >>> >> > > Who said anything about nationalisation ? >>> >> > >>> >> > What exactly do you think *NATIONALIZED* Health Care is? >>> >> > >>> >> > Dumb donkey! >>> >> >>> >> The NHS *does not* nationalise all health care. >>> >> >>> >> Private practice continues and GPs run their own practices >>> >> essentially > as >>> >> they like. They simply receive a salary from the NHS. >>> > >>> >If they receive a salary from the NHS, their practices *have* been >>> >nationalized. They're no longer in control of their business. >>> >Sheesh! >>> > >>> There is something more important here. He cannot conceive >>> of a medical distriubtion system that isn't completely >>> controlled by the national government. >> >>You're utterly wrong. >> >>The government doesn't control the 'medical distribution system' as you >>call > it. >>There is private practice too as I keep telling you. > > But only your upper, upper class are allowed to use those > services. How long do you think it will take some socialist > to use that as a class warfare tool? And how long do you think it will take before we have full-blown class warfare in the US because of lack of access to any form of health care by all but the most wealthy? Eric Lucas
From: T Wake on 26 Nov 2006 12:58 "Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:phineaspuddleduck-9DE902.17170926112006(a)free.teranews.com... > In article <qogjm2h2o3omue5is96u5d5ceut4bndgjc(a)4ax.com>, > John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: > >> By and large, yes. >> >> If I hire a contractor to put a new roof on my house I will expect >> him to put a new roof on my house. >> >> Similarly, I expect that your government, if it's funding the health >> service, expects certain norms of competence to be exhibited by the >> contractors (doctors) it hires. Also, I'm sure there are certain >> basic rules laid down by the government which the health service, >> itself, must follow, which _is_ control. Am I wrong? > > Isn't everyone then, by that standard. > Yes, which is why it is an incorrect analogy being brought in to try and "scare monger." If you hire a contractor to put a new roof on the house, you do not "control" the contractor. You establish the work required and let them get on with it. You do not run the contractors business, you have no say over what staff work there and you have no say over what happens _outside_ the terms of the contract. It does cut both ways though, if as some people assert, the NHS is a government run organisation at every level then so are all the companies which the US government contracts work out to. Now, do people want to assert that they are inefficient and socialist?
From: T Wake on 26 Nov 2006 13:00
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:phineaspuddleduck-38FB89.17195026112006(a)free.teranews.com... > In article <3nhjm2ha1kmf138hudg13m1se507goduit(a)4ax.com>, > John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: > >> That's not the point. >> >> The point is we have 50 little countries, we've all agreed to live >> under a set of rules designed to keep the federal government our >> servant instead of our ruler, and we've been living under those >> rules and fine-tuning them for almost 250 years. You all only came >> out from being under someone's thumb maybe 200 years ago, and you're >> only just now starting to get used to it. Look at what amounts to >> the United States of Europe. Why are you only now starting to >> emulate our system? Because you wanted to hold on to the last >> vestiges of what you had for as long as you could. In other words, >> it took about 200 years to wean you away from a monarchial system >> where your cradle to grave existence was pretty much planned for you >> and there was little you could do about it. > > That is probably the worst precis of European history I have ever read. > Talk about my country right or wrong... > On in the case of the above "wrong." Its funny seeing people drone on about subjects they really do know nothing about. |