Mass.acre!
in [Golf]
|
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 25 Jan 2010 08:47 On Jan 25, 8:13 am, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio- state.edu> wrote: > In article > <66c6dafd-b068-4892-80b1-2d161c41c...(a)m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, > > > > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > On Jan 24, 12:23 pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > > wrote: > > > In article <MPG.25c536ae94ae9c53989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > In article <wclark2-38BD28.15204023012...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > > > > state.edu>, wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > > > > > > In article <MPG.25c4f87bb230d53989...(a)news.giganews.com>, > > > > > BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > In article <cq9ml5127hejfuftu8c85v5t4p4jr0d...(a)4ax.com>, > > > > > > how...(a)brazee.net says... > > > > > > > > On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 07:56:19 -0500, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> That's how insurance works. > > > > > > > >> That's how hospitals work when they bill you to pay for their > > > > > > > >> treatment of those without money. > > > > > > > > >> What do you propose to change this? > > > > > > > > >I am not compelled, at the point of a gun, to buy health > > > > > > > >insurance. > > > > > > > > True. But if you choose not to buy health insurance, and get > > > > > > > into a > > > > > > > serious accident, they won't verify this before calling for flight > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > life, getting you to a hospital, and saving your life. (They also > > > > > > > won't check to see if you have the means to pay). They will save > > > > > > > your life, and we will pay. > > > > > > > I should be billed for the services I received. Everyone receiving > > > > > > services in from any business should pay for those services and if > > > > > > the > > > > > > do not pay for the services they receive they should be arrested for > > > > > > theft or sued. > > > > > > So health is just a business, is it? Why isn't education "just a > > > > > business", then? You are not being billed for the services you receive > > > > > there, you are being subsidized by the entire community, including > > > > > those > > > > > that will never take advantage of the education system. > > > > > Does OSU make a profit off of their students? Does OSU charge more than > > > > the actual expenses? If yes, then they are a business. In the business > > > > of selling education. > > > > No, and no. State universities are subsidized by state taxes, and from > > > the overhead on external research funds. Tuition only accounts for about > > > 40% of the university budget. So, we can charge the economic rate in > > > fees and tuitions, and then almost none of Ohio's citizens will be able > > > to afford to go to college. Go read the Morrill Act and see what the > > > intention of those wiser than you was. > > > > > > > Again, why are medical services different from all other services > > > > > > when > > > > > > it comes to paying for the services you receive. > > > > > > Are you paying for your children's education? Oh, yes, by taxes. > > > > > I'm not paying yet. I am saving and I am saving quite a bit. I figure I > > > > will need about $30,000 a year saved up for each kid and then there will > > > > be about $1,500 a month out of pocket costs to me. Damn kids want to go > > > > to Ivy league schools. > > > > You are not paying for their high school education? Surely you have them > > > in private schools or home schooled, just on principle. You know, > > > personal responsibility and all that. > > > Absolutely untrue. Private colleges can easily stay in business > > charging effectively about $200.00 per credit hour. Get rid of the > > deadwood faculty, the excess administration and excess physical plant > > and it's no problem. People should *ALWAYS* be able to choose public > > vs private in any situation, and either have the public subsidy follow > > the *PEOPLE'S* choice, or fund public schools exclusively as a > > function of the number of students, with the allocation per student > > rigidly attached to the cost per student in private schools. > > You can only do that if you eliminate research in the sciences and > technology. It's way too expensive for tuition only revenue streams, > which is why relatively little of it in these fields is done in the > private schools. Private schools like Harvard? Education is one thing, research another in any event.
From: BAR on 25 Jan 2010 09:06 In article <6bc68dda-a56e-4442-be1a- d716ae5c749f(a)n7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, frostback2002(a)att.net says... > > > > You can only do that if you eliminate research in the sciences and > > technology. It's way too expensive for tuition only revenue streams, > > which is why relatively little of it in these fields is done in the > > private schools. > > Private schools like Harvard? Education is one thing, research another > in any event. > > Isn't Harvard's current endowment at such a high level that it could afford, even with its recent losses, to stop charging tuition and it wouldn't adversely affect its ability to operate in perpetuity?
From: assimilate on 25 Jan 2010 14:52 On 24-Jan-2010, William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > Personally, I'd be very happy if there were no public schools, > > including colleges, no Medicare, no Social Security and no public > > housing. Then you can get rid of NPR and the NEA. > > > > The government has no business spending taxpayer money on any of these > > things. > > And go back to living in mud huts. Good idea. sorry, but that you think one follows the other puts the quality of that Oxford Education in doubt. -- bill-o
From: assimilate on 25 Jan 2010 15:02 On 24-Jan-2010, William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > Carbon thinks that if someone doesn't have health insurance that they > > don't have health care. In reality people in the US without health > > insurance have access to much better health care than anyone in > > Canada. > > So someone with no health insurance can just pop in to see a family > doctor when they feel something coming on? BS. sure, pay cash! -- bill-o
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 25 Jan 2010 16:19
On Jan 25, 3:02 pm, assimil...(a)borg.org wrote: > On 24-Jan-2010, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > > > Carbon thinks that if someone doesn't have health insurance that they > > > don't have health care. In reality people in the US without health > > > insurance have access to much better health care than anyone in > > > Canada. > > > So someone with no health insurance can just pop in to see a family > > doctor when they feel something coming on? BS. > > sure, pay cash! > > -- > bill-o Which is true, however in Canada you can't just pop in and get service at a given health care provider, even if you do pay cash! |