Health care - thanks for reading this +++ : -) +++
in [Golf]
|
From: William Clark on 14 Sep 2009 22:07 In article <iaona5d4p8hao3iakooafi8q28thul8uvg(a)4ax.com>, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 21:14:10 -0500, Lloyd Parsons > <lloydparsons(a)mac.com> wrote: > > >In article <ijpla5lo3hhrobi9mjhuf2f1jlg7p8bsr9(a)4ax.com>, > > Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:47:27 -0400, BAR <Screw(a)You.Com> wrote: > >> > >> >Wrong. Obama has not released a copy of his birth certificate that was > >> >issued at the time of his birth. McCain and Palin lost the election and > >> >are not the President or Vice-President. > >> > >> I'm not sure how it became public but records of the evaluation McCain > >> received after his release from the POW camp are known. His score, a > >> very superior 133. Not quite Mensa material, but close. > > > >I don't remember anyone saying that McCain was stupid. Old and senile > >possibly?? :) > > > If you stay active in your old age you can still cogitate quite well. > BTW, JFK took a Otis IQ test as part of his high school admission and > scored a rather modest 119. > > I guess the question is do you really have to be very smart to be a > good President? Although I've never been able to find any objective > measures, Jimmy Carter is reported to be very smart. He was training > to be nuclear engineering officer when he left the Navy. For the most > part, nuclear engineers are pretty smart. Smart or not, Carter wasn't > a very successful President. However, I have to admit that he had a > lot of bad luck as well. Gosh, Jack, tell us how smart you have to be to get into "Columbia", why don't you? We are waiting.
From: William Clark on 14 Sep 2009 22:08 In article <G9GdndBa2dChSzPXnZ2dnUVZ_gJi4p2d(a)giganews.com>, BAR <Screw(a)You.Com> wrote: > William Clark wrote: > > In article <w5edncU81pgSaTvXnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, > > BAR <Screw(a)You.Com> wrote: > > > >> William Clark wrote: > >>> In article <avWdnRXtA44cqTvXnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, > >>> BAR <Screw(a)You.Com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> William Clark wrote: > >>>>> In article <1LCdnfuIP_N85TjXnZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, > >>>>> BAR <Screw(a)You.Com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> William Clark wrote: > >>>>>>> In article <2t-dnd7SI-IajDjXnZ2dnUVZ_hdi4p2d(a)giganews.com>, > >>>>>>> BAR <Screw(a)You.Com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> William Clark wrote: > >>>>>>>>> In article <7gj3dgF2pmajpU1(a)mid.individual.net>, > >>>>>>>>> "dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>>>>> news:4aa4523f$0$4954$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 17:24:04 -0700, dene wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>>>>>>> news:4aa44eac$0$4939$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 16:53:33 -0700, dene wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:4aa3e396$0$4943$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 11:32:46 -0400, Jack Hollis wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06 Sep 2009 14:43:39 GMT, Carbon > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:18:28 -0400, Jack Hollis wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06 Sep 2009 02:38:47 GMT, Carbon > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In Canada if you're sick and you need expensive care, you > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it, period. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Canadians get it all right, but not the way they think. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Canada's health care rationing kills. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spare me the bullshit. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From the Canadian Supreme Court decision July, 2005. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Delays in the public system are widespread and have > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sometimes grave, consequences," wrote Chief Justice Beverley > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> McLachlin and Justice John Major. "Inevitably where patients > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have life-threatening conditions, some will die because of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> undue > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> delay in awaiting surgery." > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I assume that this decision came after a long trial with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expert witnesses followed by a period of deliberation. Now > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the greatest legal minds in Canada say that the Canadian > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> health > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> care system results in people unnecessarily dying, then who > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> am > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I, or you for that matter, to disagree. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess things didn't work out on rec.sport.soccer, huh? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice diversion, Carbs, but why don't you address Jack's cite. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I have addressed Jack's bullshit ad nauseum in the past. Done > >>>>>>>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>>>> that. > >>>>>>>>>>>> Then don't criticize what he says. > >>>>>>>>>>> Why the hell not? He's already worn this newsgroup out. There are > >>>>>>>>>>> plenty > >>>>>>>>>>> more. > >>>>>>>>>> I don't care about other newsgroups. If you want to refute > >>>>>>>>>> Hollis's > >>>>>>>>>> views > >>>>>>>>>> and cites, counter them with your own cites, or perhaps ignore him > >>>>>>>>>> completely. Trying to toss him from this NG is low class. You > >>>>>>>>>> are > >>>>>>>>>> better > >>>>>>>>>> than that. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> -Greg > >>>>>>>>> Why don't you ask him about his experience as a "student" at > >>>>>>>>> Columbia? > >>>>>>>>> See if that is consistent with his other BS. > >>>>>>>> Are you asking about Obama's undergraduate transcripts? We would all > >>>>>>>> like to see them. I'm sure Obama was a charity case when he was > >>>>>>>> "accepted" at Harvard Law and Obama's undergraduate transcript from > >>>>>>>> Columbia will provide the proof. > >>>>>>> Of course you are sure. Your vast experience of the US university > >>>>>>> system > >>>>>>> tells you that, doesn't it? Or do you just have a huge chip on your > >>>>>>> shoulder because Obama go to go to Columbia (unlike Hollis) and > >>>>>>> Harvard, > >>>>>>> and you never got to college? > >>>>>> "becasue Obama go to go to Columbia" what the hell does this mean? > >>>>>> Doesn't it suck when the apple bites back. > >>>>> It means because Obama got to go to Columbia, and you didn't. Or > >>>>> anywhere else. > >>>> That must be a special form of the Queen's English. > >>> Well, it is no surprise that it is beyond your comprehension skills. > >>>>>> You still didn't address the issue of Obama's undergraduate > >>>>>> performance > >>>>>> at Columbia. All evidence points to Obama getting into Harvard due to > >>>>>> who he knew and not what he knew. > >>>>> "All evidence"? Then I am sure you can produce a cite to "all > >>>>> evidence", > >>>>> can't you? I look forward to seeing this "evidence", which seems to me > >>>>> to amount to nothing more than the fact that Obama is black, and > >>>>> therefore in your mind cannot possibly have the intellectual make up to > >>>>> get into an Ivy League school. Or is this the second coming of the > >>>>> birthers? > >>>> Obama is 1/2 black and 1/2 white. > >>> Obama is African-American. Get used to it. > >> Then I am European-American. > >> > >>>>>> Wrong again Billy I attended college. I never received a degree but, I > >>>>>> attended college. > >>>>> "Attended" but got no degree? That puts you on an even lower rung than > >>>>> Palin. She at least got something after six community colleges and > >>>>> small > >>>>> universities, albeit a degree in communications. Wow. > >>>> Me and Bill Gates. > >>> Really. > >> Neither of us finished college. > > > > But Bill Gates got into Harvard to begin with. > > > > You? > > You never know do you? I am 100% certain on this one.
From: gray asphalt on 14 Sep 2009 22:57 "Alan Baker" <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote in message news:alangbaker-11DAC3.11383011092009(a)news.shawcable.com... > In article > <b25c49e6-dbc2-4522-8e5b-b77bdbbbf12e(a)j4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, > johnty <johnty1(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> On 10 Sep, 19:56, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: >> >> > >> > It would help if it wasn't the Cuban government. >> > >> > Socialist "paradises" are not known for their... ...candor... ...in >> > such >> > matters. >> > >> >> Unlike Capitalist governments, eh? > > Yup. > > Because it's very hard to tell lies with a press that can expose them. Capitalism to a large extent is based on lies through advertising. And it's demoralizing to the public to be treated as one line on a balance sheet instead of as human beings. Nike submitted a brief, or whatever it's called, saying that it was their first amendment right to lie about sweat shops. The FDA has to force drug companies to list harmful side effects of drugs and it's not always done correctly. It seems like the American dream is to own a business and make a lot of money no matter what the cost to human values ... I don't know if the white collar crooks buy a house with a picket fence and raise their kids with the money they cheat the rest of us out of .... oh don't forget that many of them create jobs that the workers can feel guilty about doing. The American dream - to work for a clever bunch of crooks, buy a home and then lose it to another bunch of crooks in the banking business with the same greedy mindset as the ones you work for. And don't forget "Greed is Good".
From: gray asphalt on 14 Sep 2009 23:03 "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:4aa99067$0$23946$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:53:32 -0700, Alan Baker wrote: >> In article <4aa982dc$0$23953$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >> Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 18:29:50 -0700, Alan Baker wrote: >>>> In article <4aa822a4$0$23940$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, >>>> Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:02:06 -0700, Alan Baker wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Once again, that sounds very well in theory, but in practice >>>>>> *government* bureaucracies are far heavier than business ones. >>>>> >>>>> Can I ask how you know this, in practice? Because my brother-in-law >>>>> actually did practice medicine both in the US and in Canada, and he >>>>> says the US system is much more expensive for doctors because a) he >>>>> needed more staff to deal with insurance companies, and b) he also >>>>> had to pay large sums for malpractice insurance. Was his experience >>>>> wrong? >>>> >>>> No. But his experience doesn't address my point. >>> >>> Your point was that in practice government bureacracies are far >>> heavier than business bureaucracies. My brother-in-law's experience >>> with the US healthcare system was the opposite mainly due to the >>> requirement of having to deal with dozens of different insurance >>> companies. In the Canadian system there is only one type of >>> paperwork. >> >> No, that's wrong. >> >> His experience is that *his* workload was less. > > Correct. His experience was an MD in both the US and Canadian systems. > According to Greg, there are something like 1300 insurance health > insurance providers in the States. It is not like my brother-in-law was > one unlucky doctor in Oregon. The largely private US health insurance > bureaucracy is inefficient (read: more expensive) for doctors, for > patients, for everybody. It's a mess. > > It is not always true in practice that government bureaucracies are less > efficient that business bureaucracies. We need a national, privately owned co-op that figures premiums on actuarial tables instead of "return on investment". How hard can it be for a bunch of us to get together and sign up for such a company, promising to buy insurance from this co-op when it becomes available? If we build a group they will come. And if the government is willing to subsidize pre-existing illness members, all the better and I sure don't mind spending a little to get basic insurance for the poor, expecially veterans, children, mentally ill, disabled, elderly, mothers with underage children, who else ... ?
From: BAR on 14 Sep 2009 23:11
William Clark wrote: > In article <G9GdndNa2dCdSjPXnZ2dnUVZ_gJi4p2d(a)giganews.com>, > BAR <Screw(a)You.Com> wrote: > >> William Clark wrote: >>> In article <4LGdnQusqJFTyzXXnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, >>> BAR <Screw(a)You.Com> wrote: >>> >>>> William Clark wrote: >>>>> In article <l5uca5d39v9sqb069e2dkooaruvri6es2i(a)4ax.com>, >>>>> Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 08 Sep 2009 06:30:26 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> His SAT and LSAT scores would be very interesting. You can get a >>>>>>>> pretty good idea of IQ from both of those scores. I wonder why he >>>>>>>> hasn't released them. >>>>>>> For the same reason that he didn't release his birth certificate to >>>>>>> those birther loons: there is no upside to pandering to retards. >>>>>> Actually he did release his birth certificate. >>>>> It is in the public records. He didn't have to "release" anything. >>>> He did not release a copy of his original birth certificate that was >>>> issued at the time of his birth. There is a difference. >>> No there is not. Sorry, but at least I accept that this is all you have. >> Yes, there is a difference in the types of birth certificates that were >> provided in 1961 and the ones provided now. I have more familiarity with >> birth certificates issued in 1961 than you. > > Right, well too bad you got this one wrong. The only available > certificate has been produced time and time again, but morons like you > just can't stand a black man being President. "The only available certificate has been produced." I can get one just like Obama's too or I can get a copy of the true original certificate of my birth. In fact I have certified copies of both. Funny thing is they don't look the same. One is printed on funny colored paper and the other is a negative image a record recored at the time of my birth. Hmmmm. |