Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#7161
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Dan Gates <dgates@kellerengineering.com> wrote in message news:<rIednSDS8OzmM02iRVn-iw@magma.ca>...
> Bill Funk wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:55:00 -0500, Dan Gates
> > <dgates@kellerengineering.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Let me just add:
> >> Can US
> >>
> >>
> >>Infant mortality/ 1,000
> >>live births 5 7
> >>
> >>Prob. of dying/1,000
> >>Age 5, Males 6 8
> >>Age 5, Females 5 8
> >>
> >>Age 15-59, Males 104 148
> >>Age 15-59, Females 59 85
> >
> >
> > Point out, while you're at it, that these figures say absolutely
> > nothing about health care, one way or another.
> >
>
>
> They certainly must, because to listen to any number of Americans, life
> is so tough up here what with the cold and snow and the high taxes and
> the low dollar and the poor productivity and the poor democracy, our
> lives are much harder to live, we should have much poorer life expectancies.
>
> The figures cited are pretty standard measures of health care efficacy.
> Since the US and Canada are so similar, demographically, health care
> must be the difference.
The 'conservative' point of view; healthcare has nothing to do with
keeping people alive, its only function is as an investment vehicle;
and a single payer government sponsored nonprofit healthplan would
louse that up for them, so what's the point of keeping people healthy
and alive longer?
> Bill Funk wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:55:00 -0500, Dan Gates
> > <dgates@kellerengineering.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Let me just add:
> >> Can US
> >>
> >>
> >>Infant mortality/ 1,000
> >>live births 5 7
> >>
> >>Prob. of dying/1,000
> >>Age 5, Males 6 8
> >>Age 5, Females 5 8
> >>
> >>Age 15-59, Males 104 148
> >>Age 15-59, Females 59 85
> >
> >
> > Point out, while you're at it, that these figures say absolutely
> > nothing about health care, one way or another.
> >
>
>
> They certainly must, because to listen to any number of Americans, life
> is so tough up here what with the cold and snow and the high taxes and
> the low dollar and the poor productivity and the poor democracy, our
> lives are much harder to live, we should have much poorer life expectancies.
>
> The figures cited are pretty standard measures of health care efficacy.
> Since the US and Canada are so similar, demographically, health care
> must be the difference.
The 'conservative' point of view; healthcare has nothing to do with
keeping people alive, its only function is as an investment vehicle;
and a single payer government sponsored nonprofit healthplan would
louse that up for them, so what's the point of keeping people healthy
and alive longer?
#7162
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Dan Gates <dgates@kellerengineering.com> wrote in message news:<rIednSDS8OzmM02iRVn-iw@magma.ca>...
> Bill Funk wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:55:00 -0500, Dan Gates
> > <dgates@kellerengineering.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Let me just add:
> >> Can US
> >>
> >>
> >>Infant mortality/ 1,000
> >>live births 5 7
> >>
> >>Prob. of dying/1,000
> >>Age 5, Males 6 8
> >>Age 5, Females 5 8
> >>
> >>Age 15-59, Males 104 148
> >>Age 15-59, Females 59 85
> >
> >
> > Point out, while you're at it, that these figures say absolutely
> > nothing about health care, one way or another.
> >
>
>
> They certainly must, because to listen to any number of Americans, life
> is so tough up here what with the cold and snow and the high taxes and
> the low dollar and the poor productivity and the poor democracy, our
> lives are much harder to live, we should have much poorer life expectancies.
>
> The figures cited are pretty standard measures of health care efficacy.
> Since the US and Canada are so similar, demographically, health care
> must be the difference.
The 'conservative' point of view; healthcare has nothing to do with
keeping people alive, its only function is as an investment vehicle;
and a single payer government sponsored nonprofit healthplan would
louse that up for them, so what's the point of keeping people healthy
and alive longer?
> Bill Funk wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:55:00 -0500, Dan Gates
> > <dgates@kellerengineering.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Let me just add:
> >> Can US
> >>
> >>
> >>Infant mortality/ 1,000
> >>live births 5 7
> >>
> >>Prob. of dying/1,000
> >>Age 5, Males 6 8
> >>Age 5, Females 5 8
> >>
> >>Age 15-59, Males 104 148
> >>Age 15-59, Females 59 85
> >
> >
> > Point out, while you're at it, that these figures say absolutely
> > nothing about health care, one way or another.
> >
>
>
> They certainly must, because to listen to any number of Americans, life
> is so tough up here what with the cold and snow and the high taxes and
> the low dollar and the poor productivity and the poor democracy, our
> lives are much harder to live, we should have much poorer life expectancies.
>
> The figures cited are pretty standard measures of health care efficacy.
> Since the US and Canada are so similar, demographically, health care
> must be the difference.
The 'conservative' point of view; healthcare has nothing to do with
keeping people alive, its only function is as an investment vehicle;
and a single payer government sponsored nonprofit healthplan would
louse that up for them, so what's the point of keeping people healthy
and alive longer?
#7163
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<a792tv8mi10hnb81t8m95rec59p2bbl2ef@4ax.com>. ..
> On 5 Dec 2003 09:59:45 -0800, gzuckier@yahoo.com (z) wrote:
>
> >Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<4tgpsv0qjj3fk9mq5t2goiuibmpnu8k64r@4ax.com>. ..
> >> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 05:17:32 GMT, "David J. Allen"
> >> <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Reminds me of my experience in a country a few years ago that had "free"
> >> >(i.e., rationed) medical care for all. The demand for care outstripped the
> >> >supply and the only people who got decent medical care were the people with
> >> >money, who could pay for a private doctor. Everyone else had to go wait in
> >> >line at the clinic and hope for decent care.
> >>
> >> Well, Hillary's solution would have fixed that; any doctor caught
> >> giving care outside the approved system would be liable to legal
> >> prosecution, with penalties including fines, jail time & loss of
> >> license.
> >> A true utopia.
> >
> >Better now. Only doctors doing 'Partial Birth Abortions', whatever
> >those may be, get fines, jail time & loss of license. Much better.
>
> "whatever those may be..."?
> You use it as an example, but don't know what it is?
Well golly, I just can't seem to find anything by that name in the CPT
book. I suggest you try to send a letter to your healthcare insurer
asking if they reimburse for a 'Partial Birth Abortion' and see what
kind of answer you get.
> On 5 Dec 2003 09:59:45 -0800, gzuckier@yahoo.com (z) wrote:
>
> >Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<4tgpsv0qjj3fk9mq5t2goiuibmpnu8k64r@4ax.com>. ..
> >> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 05:17:32 GMT, "David J. Allen"
> >> <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Reminds me of my experience in a country a few years ago that had "free"
> >> >(i.e., rationed) medical care for all. The demand for care outstripped the
> >> >supply and the only people who got decent medical care were the people with
> >> >money, who could pay for a private doctor. Everyone else had to go wait in
> >> >line at the clinic and hope for decent care.
> >>
> >> Well, Hillary's solution would have fixed that; any doctor caught
> >> giving care outside the approved system would be liable to legal
> >> prosecution, with penalties including fines, jail time & loss of
> >> license.
> >> A true utopia.
> >
> >Better now. Only doctors doing 'Partial Birth Abortions', whatever
> >those may be, get fines, jail time & loss of license. Much better.
>
> "whatever those may be..."?
> You use it as an example, but don't know what it is?
Well golly, I just can't seem to find anything by that name in the CPT
book. I suggest you try to send a letter to your healthcare insurer
asking if they reimburse for a 'Partial Birth Abortion' and see what
kind of answer you get.
#7164
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<a792tv8mi10hnb81t8m95rec59p2bbl2ef@4ax.com>. ..
> On 5 Dec 2003 09:59:45 -0800, gzuckier@yahoo.com (z) wrote:
>
> >Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<4tgpsv0qjj3fk9mq5t2goiuibmpnu8k64r@4ax.com>. ..
> >> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 05:17:32 GMT, "David J. Allen"
> >> <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Reminds me of my experience in a country a few years ago that had "free"
> >> >(i.e., rationed) medical care for all. The demand for care outstripped the
> >> >supply and the only people who got decent medical care were the people with
> >> >money, who could pay for a private doctor. Everyone else had to go wait in
> >> >line at the clinic and hope for decent care.
> >>
> >> Well, Hillary's solution would have fixed that; any doctor caught
> >> giving care outside the approved system would be liable to legal
> >> prosecution, with penalties including fines, jail time & loss of
> >> license.
> >> A true utopia.
> >
> >Better now. Only doctors doing 'Partial Birth Abortions', whatever
> >those may be, get fines, jail time & loss of license. Much better.
>
> "whatever those may be..."?
> You use it as an example, but don't know what it is?
Well golly, I just can't seem to find anything by that name in the CPT
book. I suggest you try to send a letter to your healthcare insurer
asking if they reimburse for a 'Partial Birth Abortion' and see what
kind of answer you get.
> On 5 Dec 2003 09:59:45 -0800, gzuckier@yahoo.com (z) wrote:
>
> >Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<4tgpsv0qjj3fk9mq5t2goiuibmpnu8k64r@4ax.com>. ..
> >> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 05:17:32 GMT, "David J. Allen"
> >> <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Reminds me of my experience in a country a few years ago that had "free"
> >> >(i.e., rationed) medical care for all. The demand for care outstripped the
> >> >supply and the only people who got decent medical care were the people with
> >> >money, who could pay for a private doctor. Everyone else had to go wait in
> >> >line at the clinic and hope for decent care.
> >>
> >> Well, Hillary's solution would have fixed that; any doctor caught
> >> giving care outside the approved system would be liable to legal
> >> prosecution, with penalties including fines, jail time & loss of
> >> license.
> >> A true utopia.
> >
> >Better now. Only doctors doing 'Partial Birth Abortions', whatever
> >those may be, get fines, jail time & loss of license. Much better.
>
> "whatever those may be..."?
> You use it as an example, but don't know what it is?
Well golly, I just can't seem to find anything by that name in the CPT
book. I suggest you try to send a letter to your healthcare insurer
asking if they reimburse for a 'Partial Birth Abortion' and see what
kind of answer you get.
#7165
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<a792tv8mi10hnb81t8m95rec59p2bbl2ef@4ax.com>. ..
> On 5 Dec 2003 09:59:45 -0800, gzuckier@yahoo.com (z) wrote:
>
> >Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<4tgpsv0qjj3fk9mq5t2goiuibmpnu8k64r@4ax.com>. ..
> >> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 05:17:32 GMT, "David J. Allen"
> >> <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Reminds me of my experience in a country a few years ago that had "free"
> >> >(i.e., rationed) medical care for all. The demand for care outstripped the
> >> >supply and the only people who got decent medical care were the people with
> >> >money, who could pay for a private doctor. Everyone else had to go wait in
> >> >line at the clinic and hope for decent care.
> >>
> >> Well, Hillary's solution would have fixed that; any doctor caught
> >> giving care outside the approved system would be liable to legal
> >> prosecution, with penalties including fines, jail time & loss of
> >> license.
> >> A true utopia.
> >
> >Better now. Only doctors doing 'Partial Birth Abortions', whatever
> >those may be, get fines, jail time & loss of license. Much better.
>
> "whatever those may be..."?
> You use it as an example, but don't know what it is?
Well golly, I just can't seem to find anything by that name in the CPT
book. I suggest you try to send a letter to your healthcare insurer
asking if they reimburse for a 'Partial Birth Abortion' and see what
kind of answer you get.
> On 5 Dec 2003 09:59:45 -0800, gzuckier@yahoo.com (z) wrote:
>
> >Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote in message news:<4tgpsv0qjj3fk9mq5t2goiuibmpnu8k64r@4ax.com>. ..
> >> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 05:17:32 GMT, "David J. Allen"
> >> <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Reminds me of my experience in a country a few years ago that had "free"
> >> >(i.e., rationed) medical care for all. The demand for care outstripped the
> >> >supply and the only people who got decent medical care were the people with
> >> >money, who could pay for a private doctor. Everyone else had to go wait in
> >> >line at the clinic and hope for decent care.
> >>
> >> Well, Hillary's solution would have fixed that; any doctor caught
> >> giving care outside the approved system would be liable to legal
> >> prosecution, with penalties including fines, jail time & loss of
> >> license.
> >> A true utopia.
> >
> >Better now. Only doctors doing 'Partial Birth Abortions', whatever
> >those may be, get fines, jail time & loss of license. Much better.
>
> "whatever those may be..."?
> You use it as an example, but don't know what it is?
Well golly, I just can't seem to find anything by that name in the CPT
book. I suggest you try to send a letter to your healthcare insurer
asking if they reimburse for a 'Partial Birth Abortion' and see what
kind of answer you get.
#7166
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote in message news:<vsvrp5idlfb350@corp.supernews.com>...
>
> And yet, again, bus loads of people come to the US from Canada to have
> procedures like this performed at their own expense raher than wait 6 months
> for it in Canada. Your claims do not explain why these people are not
> receiving the free care you boast of.
Who? Where? I can't afford an angioplasty without a health plan paying
for it, can you? Why are there so many Canadians who can? Are they
that much richer than Americans? I've been asking this question for a
year and nobody can come up with anything concrete. It's just another
rightwing myth.
On the other hand, there are certainly Americans going to Canada to
get pharmaceuticals, and in some cases cheaper medical care; and also
to Mexico.
>
> And yet, again, bus loads of people come to the US from Canada to have
> procedures like this performed at their own expense raher than wait 6 months
> for it in Canada. Your claims do not explain why these people are not
> receiving the free care you boast of.
Who? Where? I can't afford an angioplasty without a health plan paying
for it, can you? Why are there so many Canadians who can? Are they
that much richer than Americans? I've been asking this question for a
year and nobody can come up with anything concrete. It's just another
rightwing myth.
On the other hand, there are certainly Americans going to Canada to
get pharmaceuticals, and in some cases cheaper medical care; and also
to Mexico.
#7167
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote in message news:<vsvrp5idlfb350@corp.supernews.com>...
>
> And yet, again, bus loads of people come to the US from Canada to have
> procedures like this performed at their own expense raher than wait 6 months
> for it in Canada. Your claims do not explain why these people are not
> receiving the free care you boast of.
Who? Where? I can't afford an angioplasty without a health plan paying
for it, can you? Why are there so many Canadians who can? Are they
that much richer than Americans? I've been asking this question for a
year and nobody can come up with anything concrete. It's just another
rightwing myth.
On the other hand, there are certainly Americans going to Canada to
get pharmaceuticals, and in some cases cheaper medical care; and also
to Mexico.
>
> And yet, again, bus loads of people come to the US from Canada to have
> procedures like this performed at their own expense raher than wait 6 months
> for it in Canada. Your claims do not explain why these people are not
> receiving the free care you boast of.
Who? Where? I can't afford an angioplasty without a health plan paying
for it, can you? Why are there so many Canadians who can? Are they
that much richer than Americans? I've been asking this question for a
year and nobody can come up with anything concrete. It's just another
rightwing myth.
On the other hand, there are certainly Americans going to Canada to
get pharmaceuticals, and in some cases cheaper medical care; and also
to Mexico.
#7168
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote in message news:<vsvrp5idlfb350@corp.supernews.com>...
>
> And yet, again, bus loads of people come to the US from Canada to have
> procedures like this performed at their own expense raher than wait 6 months
> for it in Canada. Your claims do not explain why these people are not
> receiving the free care you boast of.
Who? Where? I can't afford an angioplasty without a health plan paying
for it, can you? Why are there so many Canadians who can? Are they
that much richer than Americans? I've been asking this question for a
year and nobody can come up with anything concrete. It's just another
rightwing myth.
On the other hand, there are certainly Americans going to Canada to
get pharmaceuticals, and in some cases cheaper medical care; and also
to Mexico.
>
> And yet, again, bus loads of people come to the US from Canada to have
> procedures like this performed at their own expense raher than wait 6 months
> for it in Canada. Your claims do not explain why these people are not
> receiving the free care you boast of.
Who? Where? I can't afford an angioplasty without a health plan paying
for it, can you? Why are there so many Canadians who can? Are they
that much richer than Americans? I've been asking this question for a
year and nobody can come up with anything concrete. It's just another
rightwing myth.
On the other hand, there are certainly Americans going to Canada to
get pharmaceuticals, and in some cases cheaper medical care; and also
to Mexico.
#7169
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Ty5zb.44$rE3.32@twister.socal.rr.com>...
> Now you're going over the edge. Extreme environmentalists have written a
> check against science that has insufficient funds to cash. A true scientist
> would not entangle himself with left wing politics and recognize the
> limitations of the current state of science. There's a nexus between
> extreme environmentalism and anti-capitalist/anti-corporate politics. You
> can see it in the anti-corporate, anti-global trade demonstrations. You can
> see it in the Kyoto protocol. You can see it in the Green party platform.
>
> Lefties have been waving around the terms "moral" and "science" in a whole
> new way, redefined to fit their points of view and replace traditional
> definitions. The argument on global warming and what to do about it would
> be more productive if it only were just a scientific discussion.
Interesting syllogism.
Most climatologists, geologists, etc. agree with the general concept
of manmade global warming, though disagree on details, and this model
and its implications are an issue to leftists (among others).;
Leftists demonstrate against corporations.
Therefore, climatologists, geologists, etc. who find results that
support manmade global warming are politically motivated.
> Now you're going over the edge. Extreme environmentalists have written a
> check against science that has insufficient funds to cash. A true scientist
> would not entangle himself with left wing politics and recognize the
> limitations of the current state of science. There's a nexus between
> extreme environmentalism and anti-capitalist/anti-corporate politics. You
> can see it in the anti-corporate, anti-global trade demonstrations. You can
> see it in the Kyoto protocol. You can see it in the Green party platform.
>
> Lefties have been waving around the terms "moral" and "science" in a whole
> new way, redefined to fit their points of view and replace traditional
> definitions. The argument on global warming and what to do about it would
> be more productive if it only were just a scientific discussion.
Interesting syllogism.
Most climatologists, geologists, etc. agree with the general concept
of manmade global warming, though disagree on details, and this model
and its implications are an issue to leftists (among others).;
Leftists demonstrate against corporations.
Therefore, climatologists, geologists, etc. who find results that
support manmade global warming are politically motivated.
#7170
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Ty5zb.44$rE3.32@twister.socal.rr.com>...
> Now you're going over the edge. Extreme environmentalists have written a
> check against science that has insufficient funds to cash. A true scientist
> would not entangle himself with left wing politics and recognize the
> limitations of the current state of science. There's a nexus between
> extreme environmentalism and anti-capitalist/anti-corporate politics. You
> can see it in the anti-corporate, anti-global trade demonstrations. You can
> see it in the Kyoto protocol. You can see it in the Green party platform.
>
> Lefties have been waving around the terms "moral" and "science" in a whole
> new way, redefined to fit their points of view and replace traditional
> definitions. The argument on global warming and what to do about it would
> be more productive if it only were just a scientific discussion.
Interesting syllogism.
Most climatologists, geologists, etc. agree with the general concept
of manmade global warming, though disagree on details, and this model
and its implications are an issue to leftists (among others).;
Leftists demonstrate against corporations.
Therefore, climatologists, geologists, etc. who find results that
support manmade global warming are politically motivated.
> Now you're going over the edge. Extreme environmentalists have written a
> check against science that has insufficient funds to cash. A true scientist
> would not entangle himself with left wing politics and recognize the
> limitations of the current state of science. There's a nexus between
> extreme environmentalism and anti-capitalist/anti-corporate politics. You
> can see it in the anti-corporate, anti-global trade demonstrations. You can
> see it in the Kyoto protocol. You can see it in the Green party platform.
>
> Lefties have been waving around the terms "moral" and "science" in a whole
> new way, redefined to fit their points of view and replace traditional
> definitions. The argument on global warming and what to do about it would
> be more productive if it only were just a scientific discussion.
Interesting syllogism.
Most climatologists, geologists, etc. agree with the general concept
of manmade global warming, though disagree on details, and this model
and its implications are an issue to leftists (among others).;
Leftists demonstrate against corporations.
Therefore, climatologists, geologists, etc. who find results that
support manmade global warming are politically motivated.