more EE Times nonsense
in [Design]
|
From: Bill Sloman on 23 Apr 2010 17:59 On Apr 23, 9:49 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 12:02:03 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com > wrote: > > >On Apr 23, 6:40 am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> On Apr 23, 1:57 am, John Larkin > > >> > It's not the same kind. The Pelosi-Obama health plan was designed to > >> > fail. > > >> What makes you think that - apart from your habit of proclaiming > >> propositions that what you'd like to be true? I've not seen any such > >> claim from a trustworthy commentator. > > >> > As it will. <snipped James Arthur's predictable opinions about Obamacare - ti isn't as if it had any factual content> > It's outrageous that they did nothing about medical liability costs, > generic drugs, or the two huge insurance company goodies: antitrust > exemption and state-by-state licensing. Since your politicians are regulary bought and paid for by moneyed interests prepared to buy enough TV advertising to get them re- elected, it was also predictable. > This *will* cause insurance rates to zoom up, which is why the > insurance companies didn't mind it much. After they zoom, the Dems > will blame the insurance companies for "greed" and knife them in the > back. It's a designed-to-fail strategy. You keep forgetting that that the US health care busniess is horribly inefficient - costing half again as much per head as the French and German equivalents, which cover everybody and deliver rather better public health statistics. Obama can expect to force them into saving loads of money as he manoeuvres the US system into looking more like its French and German equivalents. It's not all that difficult to make an extravagantly wasteful system more cost effective when you've got a couple of superior systems to copy. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: Bill Sloman on 23 Apr 2010 18:08 On Apr 23, 9:20 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > On Apr 22, 7:57 pm, John Larkin wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 14:45:06 -0700 (PDT),Bill Slomanwrote: > > >On Apr 21, 6:02 pm, John Larkin > > >The Nazi's - like the Tea Party loonies - portrayed themselves as anti- > > >socialist. The particular Tea Party lunacy that I find particularly > > >unattractive is their argument that Obama's cautious move towards > > >Bismark's universal health insurance is some kind of step towards a > > >dictatorial totalitarian socialist state. Britain, France and Germany > > >all have appreciably more comprehensive national medical insurance > > >schemes, and manage to maintain representative democratic governments > > >- why do the Tea Party nitwits imagine that a less comprehensive > > >version of the same kind of health cover is going to turn the USA into > > >some kind of Orwellian nightmare? > > > It's not the same kind. The Pelosi-Obama health plan was designed to > > fail. As it will. Then they will blame the insurance companies and > > doctors for "greed" and ratchet up the taxes, control, and failure. As > > "The Great Society" laid waste to American cities, Obamacare will lay > > waste to health care. > > > It's not as if they did anything that will make health care more > > available or more affordable. > > HHS released an estimate today. Where? Their web-site doesn't show any such release. http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/2010.html > Since the thing was rammed thru > without Democrats even reading it, no one had a chance for responsible > review before. A responsible review which you can't actually point to? Where did you get your misinformation? <snipped the claims about the imagined estimate> -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: Bill Sloman on 21 Apr 2010 11:43 On Apr 20, 1:13 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 09:16:00 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >On Apr 19, 4:26 pm, John Larkin > ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 03:16:16 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >On Apr 18, 5:38 pm, John Larkin > >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 04:15:27 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >> >On Apr 16, 6:38 pm, John Larkin > >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:47:34 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >> >> >On Apr 14, 2:01 am, John Larkin > >> >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:00:49 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >On Apr 13, 9:58 pm, John Larkin > >> >> >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:49:50 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >On Apr 13, 6:39 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Apr 13, 11:14 am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Apr 13, 6:00 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > On Apr 13, 2:31 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > wrote: <snip> > >> >> His "collaboration" was apparently naiive and innocent. He was pretty > >> >> much an American anyhow, so his popularity in post-war UK is sort of > >> >> moot. > > >> >He did become an American citizen in 1955. Like Lindbergh, his Nazi > >> >taint was weak enough not to upset American opinion. > > >> Gosh, you are one nasty piece of work. > > >And the Tea Party movement represents an attractive aspect of modern > >America? > > The question is, as usual, irrevant, but the answer is emphatically > yes. The Tea Party movement resemble the Nazi's in being right-wing nitwits, and believing in any number of things that don't happen to be true. It took the Nazis a couple of decades to progress from believing in right-wing nonsense to the extent of beating up people whose ethnic origins they didn't like, to beleiving in it to the extent that they tried to exerminate everybody who fitted that particular description. The Tea Party loonies aren't yet talking about "final solutions", but since they start off out of touch with reality, one - and in this case - you, should worry about how far their unrestrained and irrational prejudices could take them. It's not such an irrelevant question as you'd like to think, but since what you think is pretty much defined by what you'd like to be true, you can be expected to have some trouble accepting this. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: John Larkin on 21 Apr 2010 12:02 On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 08:43:39 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On Apr 20, 1:13�pm, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 09:16:00 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >On Apr 19, 4:26�pm, John Larkin >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 03:16:16 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >On Apr 18, 5:38�pm, John Larkin >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 04:15:27 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >> >On Apr 16, 6:38�pm, John Larkin >> >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:47:34 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >On Apr 14, 2:01�am, John Larkin >> >> >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:00:49 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >On Apr 13, 9:58�pm, John Larkin >> >> >> >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:49:50 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Apr 13, 6:39 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Apr 13, 11:14 am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Apr 13, 6:00 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > On Apr 13, 2:31 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > wrote: > ><snip> > >> >> >> His "collaboration" was apparently naiive and innocent. He was pretty >> >> >> much an American anyhow, so his popularity in post-war UK is sort of >> >> >> moot. >> >> >> >He did become an American citizen in 1955. Like Lindbergh, his Nazi >> >> >taint was weak enough not to upset American opinion. >> >> >> Gosh, you are one nasty piece of work. >> >> >And the Tea Party movement represents an attractive aspect of modern >> >America? >> >> The question is, as usual, irrevant, but the answer is emphatically >> yes. > >The Tea Party movement resemble the Nazi's in being right-wing >nitwits, and believing in any number of things that don't happen to be >true. It took the Nazis a couple of decades to progress from believing >in right-wing nonsense to the extent of beating up people whose ethnic >origins they didn't like, to beleiving in it to the extent that they >tried to exerminate everybody who fitted that particular description. > OMG, the inevitable Nazi thing. The Tea Party types (and I'm not one of them) are on average better educated and better off than the average American, and not particularly racist. There are black, asian, and hispanic TPers. A lot of the Nazi and racist stuff is in fact generated by provocateurs, of which there are organized groups who try to publicly distort what is basically a traditional American libertarian movement. >The Tea Party loonies aren't yet talking about "final solutions", but >since they start off out of touch with reality, one - and in this case >- you, should worry about how far their unrestrained and irrational >prejudices could take them. Their reality is that we have too much government, and it is largely inefficient, corrupt, and debilitating. They are mostly correct. > >It's not such an irrelevant question as you'd like to think, but since >what you think is pretty much defined by what you'd like to be true, >you can be expected to have some trouble accepting this. Truth is my business. I'm fairly good at it. You have no business, so your beliefs can drift all around, unguided by real-world feedback. Mostly you just like to be mean. John
From: dagmargoodboat on 21 Apr 2010 14:26
On Apr 21, 10:43 am, Bill Sloman <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > On Apr 20, 1:13 pm, John Larkin > > > > <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 09:16:00 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >On Apr 19, 4:26 pm, John Larkin > > ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 03:16:16 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >On Apr 18, 5:38 pm, John Larkin > > >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> >> On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 04:15:27 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >> >On Apr 16, 6:38 pm, John Larkin > > >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> >> >> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:47:34 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >> >> >On Apr 14, 2:01 am, John Larkin > > >> >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:00:49 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >On Apr 13, 9:58 pm, John Larkin > > >> >> >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:49:50 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > >> >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >On Apr 13, 6:39 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Apr 13, 11:14 am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Apr 13, 6:00 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > On Apr 13, 2:31 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > > wrote: > > <snip> > > > >> >> His "collaboration" was apparently naiive and innocent. He was pretty > > >> >> much an American anyhow, so his popularity in post-war UK is sort of > > >> >> moot. > > > >> >He did become an American citizen in 1955. Like Lindbergh, his Nazi > > >> >taint was weak enough not to upset American opinion. > > > >> Gosh, you are one nasty piece of work. > > > >And the Tea Party movement represents an attractive aspect of modern > > >America? > > > The question is, as usual, irrevant, but the answer is emphatically > > yes. > > The Tea Party movement resemble the Nazi's in being right-wing > nitwits, and believing in any number of things that don't happen to be > true. Naturally, only a Nazi could think that a government spending over 160% of its annual income is unsustainable, or that $1T+ annual deficits projected for the entire next decade could possibly be any sort of problem. Only a Nazi could tally up the estimated debt service on the resulting national debt, and decide that's a problem. Only a Nazi could see that government--any government--is powerless to produce anything, they can only take money from some groups and give it to others, losing a large percentage it in the process. Or that, equally as giving money to one group creates employment, that requires taking it from others, destroying even more jobs in the areas whence the money was gleaned. And only a Nazi could possibly foresee that, inevitably, and soon, a new, massive tax will be proposed as the final solution to excessive spending. > It took the Nazis a couple of decades to progress from believing > in right-wing nonsense The Nazis were socialists, promoting themselves as a union^H^H^H^H^Hworker's rights party. > to the extent of beating up people whose ethnic > origins they didn't like, to beleiving in it to the extent that they > tried to exerminate everybody who fitted that particular description. You're describing the President, who's told us that doctors hack off limbs and cut out tonsils, for money, that we should hate insurance companies, bankers, oil companies, and pretty much anyone he disagrees with. Hate and envy, never substance. He just doesn't kill them, that's the difference. That's change you can believe in. -- Cheers, James Arthur |