Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 07:26 In article <e4614$454b8ce0$4fe77ae$1746(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> In article <454B3D79.250DEEA6(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: >>>>> >>>>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>The last thing I'd fancy after a long flight is shopping ! >>>>>> >>>>>>I observed this behaviour when we went to China. Our tour >>>>>>groups were upper middle class people. We arrived at the >>>>>>Great Wall and the shopaholics turned left to go into the >>>>>>store while we turned right to go on the Great Wall and walk >>>>>>a little bit of it. These people never saw the Great Wall. >>>>>> >>>>>>They went half-way around the world and didn't even bother to >>>>>>look at a remarkable feat of the human species. >>>>> >>>>>Americans ??? >>>> >>>>Not all were. I think this had more to do with people who had >>>>new money. It was certainly a lesson to me about people who >>>>don't know how work gets done. >>> >>>I can't imagine what goes through their minds. >> >> >> Oh, I can imagine. A good example is this thread. > >You betcha. New money, such as it is. I still haven't been able to put a name to it and I've been trying. My latest is royalty; these were the people who trained from birth on how to run things. People with "new money" only seem to know how spend it rather than make stuff. However, I don't have this nailed down. It's like that game whackamole; just when you think you've got something figured out, up pops a new wrinkle to blast all your conclusions out of the water. That's what happens when you deal with people thingies; computers are so much saner. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 07:31 In article <emjpk25anvf6hrb1l8gk7fk078jo3tda7n(a)4ax.com>, Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 16:53:03 +0000, the renowned Eeyore ><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >>unsettled wrote: >> >>> Jamie wrote: >>> > Eeyore wrote: >>> >> Spehro Pefhany wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> if you're in the market for a $5K+ >>> >>> watch, there are only a few places worldwide that are comparable >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Why would anyone spend that much on a watch ? I can't figure it. Aside >>> >> from >>> >> bragging rights of course ! >>> >> >>> >> Graham >>> >> >>> > you can't figure it out? why does that >>> > not surprise me? >>> >>> Easy things are difficult for our camel jockey. >> >>So do tell why a $5k watch makes sense. >> >>Graham > >Dunno, but after a few weeks living in HK you start to feel like you >need one. Peer pressure? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 07:48 In article <a6apk29i8itd2uc18o83hqm1o63ghm0c2p(a)4ax.com>, Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: >On Sat, 04 Nov 06 13:34:16 GMT, the renowned jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >.. >> >>REally? > >For shopping, it's recommended to avoid the entire Tsim Tsa Tsui >tourist ghetto with all the unmarked prices on plastic-wrapped >electronics and brightly-lit rip-off high pressure shops. They >regularly pull all kinds of shenanigans. It's not worth the risk, and >even if you save a few percent (perhaps just the sales tax) they might >sell you a used item for a new price, swap items while they are >wrapping it up, sell you something with a useless warranty etc. The >fixed price shops like Fortress and City Chain are nothing special in >price or selection, IMO, although if you're in the market for a $5K+ >watch, there are only a few places worldwide that are comparable >(South Florida maybe comes close). Price aside, you might find later >models of shoes, cameras or watches than you would elsewhere. I like >the big Japanese-run department stores in Causeway Bay for >miscellaneous items. There are some fun electronics (parts and tools) >shops in the Shum Shui Po working class district. Thanks for the write up :-). > >>How about labor? Can you still buy stuff cheaper >>if the thingie involves labor? I'm thinking of custom-made >>suits and shoes. > >HK has a GDP per capita that is almost as high as the US average, and >downtown commercial and office (and residential) rents that are >comparable to, or higher than, Manhattan. C. bought a very nice >custom-tailored suit from a famous HK ladies' place about 20 years ago >(three fittings, IIRC it took about a week), and some expensive copies >of a shirt for her dad. Most of the tailors there seem to be Indians >these days and are aiming more down market and hard sell. That has changed. One of the options of our 3-day stay before getting on a boat was to see a tailor. I bought JMF two suits. The suits were promised to be delivered before we left for the boat. And they did. They must have had a hundred, if not more, people sewing night and day to do that kind of service. After JMF wore those clothes, he no longer hated getting dressed up because they were so comfortable to wear. That left only me who didn't care for dressing up ;-). > You can >probably still save a bit, if you know where to go, but hotels are not >especially cheap, They weren't cheap back then (1985) either. >so if you have to stay an extra few days you'd >better save a a fair bit of money). A lot of HK residents seem to pop >over the border to the "wild west" Shenzhen and get clothes made, >where labor is maybe 1/5 the cost. Quality of everything from fabric >to thread to "notions" should be specified, AFAIUI (or bring your >own). There's a truly appalling 8 or so story shopping mall called >"Lo Wu Commercial Centre" that's just across the SAR boundary from the >KCR terminus. Extremely aggressive touts, grossly overinflated asking >prices and dubious merchandise, but deals are possible for the canny. >There are a couple of entire floors of tiny shops with seamstresses >and a few larger places that do foot massage and pedicures. I avoid >that place like the plague (and the whole (relatively) crime-ridden >main train station area).. there are much nicer shopping experiences >to be had in the several downtown districts such as Dongmen >(pedestrian mall featuring mostly ladies clothing and accessories). >Sadly, there is little in the way of guidebooks for English-speakers. >The MIXC mall by the Shun Hing square (in Shenzhen, one of the top 10 >tallest buildings in the world) is huge, and quite up market but >there's nothing much you couldn't find in Beverly Hills, Toronto or >Paris. If I want to buy an $1100 B & 0 wired telephone I don't need to >go to China...) A full Olympic style skating rink on the 5th or 6th >floor (quite expensive to use, several times what I normally pay). I don't remember getting pressured to buy stuff. But I was so hungover from serious jetlag everything was seen through a fog of exhaustion. > >>> Compared to >>>more socialist places such as the US and Europe and China their >>>taxation regime is remarkably favorable, particularly to the well-off. >> >>If you want your country to be successful and thrive, you have >>to be kind to your wealthy. >It also helps when your defense is entirely covered by someone else >(Britain or now China), there's only one level of government (and it's >benign paternalistic/autocratic and well-run), an excellent and >uncorrupted legal system, I'm beginning to think that this is a key item for long-term stability. Even in China, people always knew where the lines were drawn. I don't know about all this; I'm still working on it. >and when the government has a back door way >of raising funds by releasing parcels of extremely expensive land >through auctions. Then you can afford to have almost all health care >covered by the government, extensive and high-quality bus, subway and >ferry public transit, good schools and universities, government >planning and subsidy of top business priorities, a fine police force, >tough environmental standards, 15-16% top income tax rates, no sales >taxes (aside from a few items like gasoline, cigarettes, autos and >alcohol), generous deductions for lower income people, no mandatory >payroll deductions, even more generous deductions for the rich, and to >exempt capital gains, interest income, and offshore business profits >from any taxation whatsoever. I don't why a lot of people can't see that redirecting all money from investment into government coffers eventually stops the source of the government's income. I think people in my state are going to elect a governor who will make Dukakis seem fiscally responsible and fiscally conesrvative, just by comparison. I don't understand why people keep wanting to fix what ain't broke, just because it's a change. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 08:16 In article <454C99F1.B208F5A0(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >So all you're doing here is criticising the failings of your current system. >> >Quite so. It needs radical overhaul. >> >> To go to a single payer system implies an expansion of the Medicare >> system. So a national health insurer will not work well. > >The use of the word *so* implies some cause-effect relationship which you have >failed to show. I'm sorry but simple assertions based on political doctrine count >for nought. You are unbelievable. I'm getting to the point were I'm awestruck by your ability to not-think. If a person botches a chore of digging a ditch in your backyard, would you really hire him to build a Panama Canal and expect it to work? > > >> Congress even did something sensible and passed an extraordinary >> insurance. The youngsteres who ran AARP caused their subscribers >> to get it repealed. > >I know nothing about this. Then learn. People do not want to pay for insurance either, especially if the insurance is prudent and make sense. > > >> >It's rare here to find a doctor who *doesn't* do NHS work. >> >> Is his license tied to volunteering? > >Licence ? You mean his qualification as a doctor. That's dealt with by the BMA ( >British Medical Association ) as it always has been. > >Most doctors here simply work for the NHS since it's the largest health care >employer in the land. There's no compulsion to do so and you can work in private >practice to or even both, just like any other job. I smell union here. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 08:31
In article <QqSdnTiCZpUVWtHYRVnyuQ(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eihvvg$8ps_003(a)s792.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <eifrq5$irb$1(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>In article <eifh4b$8qk_008(a)s820.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>In article <5Gn2h.3659$B31.3651(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, >>>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:eicp5g$8qk_014(a)s950.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>>> In article <454952A9.54CB1E21(a)hotmail.com>, >>>>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>unsettled wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Eeyore wrote: >>>>>>>> > unsettled wrote: >>>>>>>> >>MooseFET wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>unsettled wrote: >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>>>Where there's national health insurance, which is universal >>>>>>>> >>>>in any given country, where does the money come from? From >>>>>>>> >>>>the unemployed, perhaps? >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>>It also comes from the employers but less money is required so >>>>>>>> >>>the >> US >>>>>>>> >>>employers who provide health insurance are placed at a >>>>>>>> >>>disadvantage. >>>>>>>> >>>In the US health care costs about 60% more than in Canada so US >>>>>>>> >>>employers are at a disadvantage to that degree. >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>>There is some compensating advantage in that in Canada, you have >>>>>>>> >>>to >>>>>>>> >>>spend hugely on heating so your workers don't freeze to death on >>>>>>>> >>>the >>>>>>>> >>>shop floor. >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>I really love this. You actually think you're getting >>>>>>>> >>something for nothing. >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > No. >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > It's less expensive the 'socialist' way. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hoodwinked. Bwahahahahahaha. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Never. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It's a simple fact. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>USA 2003 $1.7 trillion. >>>>>>>( $5666 per head of population ) >>>>>>>http://www.kaiseredu.org/topics_im.asp?imID=1&parentID=61&id=358 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>UK NHS budget ?76.4 billion. >>>>>>>( ? 1273 per head of population ) >>>>>>>http://www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/PressReleases/PressRelea se >> s >>>N >>>>ot >>>>>> ices/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4127292&chk=HDOR9C >>>>>>> >>>>>>>And of course in the USA it's only those with health insurance who get >>>>>>>proper >>>>>>>treatment. >>>>>> >>>>>> Wrong. I have insurance. I have no access to treatment unless >>>>>> I get "permission" from the primary care physician to whom I've >>>>>> been assigned. If you are already ill with an untreatable disease >>>>>> you have no access unless the PCP is cooperative. Mine isn't and >>>>>> nobody will take new patients who are already ill. >>>>> >>>>>Yes, we know, the current US system is broken--it's what we've been >>>>>saying. >>>>>Please do try to focus. >>>> >>>>It is broken because insurance now pays for everything. The purpose >>>>of insuranance has been defeated. People used to take out car >>>>insurance for extraordinary expenses; this does not include paying >>>>for the oil changes. >>>> >>> >>>But preventative health care saves money in the long run, so insurance >>>companies have started paying for it. >> >> Sure. But preventative health care does not apply to the needs of >> the old and the dying. > >I am not sure what your position on this is. You defend the US healthcare >system Then you haven't read what I wrote. I think it sucks. There is no longer any delivery of services when needed. The biz has changed to specialized cut&paste with administrators assigning each page of text piecemeal. The medical practioners have become unionized and don't know it by handing all their business controls over to the government-approved bodies. > yet highlight how it is failing. Go back and read. > >>>Auto insurance doesn't cover damage from low oil, just accidents, so your >>>analogy isn't correct. >> >> I don't know how to explain the analogy so you would understand what >> I'm talking about. > > >I suspect you are trying to say that people are insured for the big problems >but expected to pay for routine care and maintenance. Health care is still >not the same. What we are talking about is the same. You expect daily maintenance services to be done by other people for free. The only way to get this work without paying them cash is to 1. have it insured so the insurance company pays them or 2. have the government control and run the payouts and allotting of services. Neither will work efficiently nor deliver service on demand. You have to plan how to be sick or have somebody do it for you. That is why people who are very ill have to have a patient advocate. These were not needed before this medical insurance business became a right instead of a benefit. Canada's system does not work for a certain class of services. People who need those services were able to come to the US and get them in a timely manner. When the US converts to a single payer system, like Canada, the Canadians and the USians who need these services will have to go to another country whose medical infrastructure will provide. Best guess...the nearest country who can deliver quality services would be Cuba (if they get their act together). The current country is Mexico but I haven't heard how well these clinics do. /BAH |