Britons rally to defend their healthcare system
suds mcduff
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-britain-health15-2009aug15,0,2736574.story
"Severely disabled scientist Stephen Hawking declared, "I wouldn't be
here today if it were not for the NHS," pointedly rebutting claims by
Los Angeles-based Investor's Business Daily that he "wouldn't have a
chance" of surviving here in his homeland because of treatment-rationing."
"In addition to defending the NHS from conservative critics in the U.S.,
some in Britain have now gone on the offensive, expressing incredulity
that the U.S. boasts of being a superpower while leaving tens of
millions of its people uninsured.
"The United States lies between Costa Rica and Slovenia in the World
Health Organization's ranking of healthcare systems . . . which puts
them in 37th place," Keith Hopcroft, a doctor, wrote in the Sun's
commentary piece. "The U.K.? 18th. I rest my doctor's case."
TravIsGod
> http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-britain-health15-...
>
> "Severely disabled scientist Stephen Hawking declared, "I wouldn't be
> here today if it were not for the NHS," pointedly rebutting claims by
> Los Angeles-based Investor's Business Daily that he "wouldn't have a
> chance" of surviving here in his homeland because of treatment-rationing."
>
> "In addition to defending the NHS from conservative critics in the U.S.,
> some in Britain have now gone on the offensive, expressing incredulity
> that the U.S. boasts of being a superpower while leaving tens of
> millions of its people uninsured.
>
> "The United States lies between Costa Rica and Slovenia in the World
> Health Organization's ranking of healthcare systems . . . which puts
> them in 37th place," Keith Hopcroft, a doctor, wrote in the Sun's
> commentary piece. "The U.K.? 18th. I rest my doctor's case."
37th? It's amazing that everybody in the world comes here when they
need a heart procedure or an MRI or really any kind of surgery. You
know, because our system sucks.
The WHO is full of shit. We patch together gunshot and auto accident
victims that would be left to die in Costa Rica or Slovenia. This
just highlights the absurdity of the progressives and liberals when
they say shit like this.
Trav
suds mcduff
> On Aug 16, 9:03 am, suds mcduff <sudsmcduff19...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-britain-health15-...
>>
>> "Severely disabled scientist Stephen Hawking declared, "I wouldn't be
>> here today if it were not for the NHS," pointedly rebutting claims by
>> Los Angeles-based Investor's Business Daily that he "wouldn't have a
>> chance" of surviving here in his homeland because of treatment-rationing."
>>
>> "In addition to defending the NHS from conservative critics in the U.S.,
>> some in Britain have now gone on the offensive, expressing incredulity
>> that the U.S. boasts of being a superpower while leaving tens of
>> millions of its people uninsured.
>>
>> "The United States lies between Costa Rica and Slovenia in the World
>> Health Organization's ranking of healthcare systems . . . which puts
>> them in 37th place," Keith Hopcroft, a doctor, wrote in the Sun's
>> commentary piece. "The U.K.? 18th. I rest my doctor's case."
>
> 37th? It's amazing that everybody in the world comes here when they
> need a heart procedure or an MRI or really any kind of surgery. You
> know, because our system sucks.
---Sure, their rich come here...our middle class go to India and Costa
Rica...
>
> The WHO is full of shit. We patch together gunshot and auto accident
> victims that would be left to die in Costa Rica or Slovenia.
-----Suuuuure they would...
This
> just highlights the absurdity of the progressives and liberals when
> they say shit like this.
----In England, even conservatives are defending the NHP....
Herbert Cannon
>>> "The United States lies between Costa Rica and Slovenia in the World
>>> Health Organization's ranking of healthcare systems . . . which puts
>>> them in 37th place," Keith Hopcroft, a doctor, wrote in the Sun's
>>> commentary piece. "The U.K.? 18th. I rest my doctor's case."
>>
>> 37th? It's amazing that everybody in the world comes here when they
>> need a heart procedure or an MRI or really any kind of surgery. You
>> know, because our system sucks.
>
> ---Sure, their rich come here...our middle class go to India and Costa
> Rica...
>
go there? Does Costa Rica have more CT scanners and MRI machines than we do?
Gee that is funny I dont of a single soul that has gone to Costa Rica or
India for that matter. Please fill us in on why people are flocking to Costa
Rican and Indian medicine.
>> The WHO is full of shit. We patch together gunshot and auto accident
>> victims that would be left to die in Costa Rica or Slovenia.
>
> -----Suuuuure they would...
They need to go get some of that Indian alternative medicine. Tell us about
the surgeries these countries perform. Tell us about their medical schools.
>
> This
>> just highlights the absurdity of the progressives and liberals when
>> they say shit like this.
>
> ----In England, even conservatives are defending the NHP....
In England there are no real conservatives.
Stanley Moore
Stanley Moore
Nothing can be more conservative than a monarchy and a landed aristocracy.
So yes the UK has many true conservatives. Your definition of conservatism
is flawed. Resistance to change is the definition, holding to the old ways.
Landed aristocracy, titles, and fealty to a monarch is the height of
conservatism. Maybe even the divine right of kings. The Brits are hidebound
in a tradition stretching back millenia. That is conservative. Take care
--
Stanley L. Moore
"The belief in a supernatural
source of evil is not necessary;
men alone are quite capable
of every wickedness."
Joseph Conrad
TravIsGod
> Rica...
Refresh my memory as to where those doctors went to school and did
their residencies...
> ----In England, even conservatives are defending the NHP....
They're defending their video cameras on every corner too...that the
type of government you want, nice and liberal, huh?
Trav
~M~
news:h69047$bnn$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> "The United States lies between Costa Rica and Slovenia in the World
> Health Organization's ranking of healthcare systems . . . which puts them
> in 37th place," Keith Hopcroft, a doctor, wrote in the Sun's commentary
> piece. "The U.K.? 18th. I rest my doctor's case."
It's good to know the UK has doctors that are so satisfied with mediocrity
that they hold and 18th place ranking as some sort of license to brag. You
are a fucking retard.
--
"I believe that all government is evil, and that trying to improve it is
largely a waste of time."
- H.L. Mencken
Herbert Cannon
maligning it. Their news papers are full of NHS horror stories. Britons have
been buying private health insurance? Why are they buying private health
insurance? The lady was "appalled" that her words, about her mother "dying
of cancer" because she "could not get treatment" were used in a lobbying
effort. The other lady said the lack of pap smear signed her "death warrant"
I am certainly glad the Brits love their medical care through NHS. I love it
too. I love it cause it is in Britain and not here.
I mean what is not too love? Here it is the British system that Dump is
touting:
1. The British govt has poured money into it to make it work. Now 90 billion
a year and that is pounds.
2. Exactly what was the big problem - why waiting times. There is a bit of
wait to get the appointment with the primary care Dr. Guess what he is the
gatekeeper. Cannot see a specialist unless he lets you. He is the cost
control in the system. Makes one wonder is he a bean counter or a Doc.
3. Emergency care is supposed to be pretty good, but there can be a "bit of
a wait." How long can you wait for emergency care? Hope that is not arterial
bleeding.
4. Elective care, hip replacements, heart operations ( my god they describe
heart operations a elective care) is "rationed by queues." Ah ha the first
rationing method. Queues that means a long time. Why it used to be18 months
to get a new hip. After 10 years of working on it, they have managed to get
that down to less than six months and for most people three months. Here it
took my friend - one week. I mean how long can you run around with a broken
hip. You are bed ridden. I wonder how long the heart surgery takes?
5. Now here is the real rub - when you get the waiting times down some other
parts of the system get ignored and fall by the wayside. That is the nature
of centralized ( govt ) control.
6. The Doctors are unhappy in NHS. Awww - why woud that be. Nothing like
going to an unhappy Doc. Apparently the hospital docs are unhappy cause they
are told what to do by managers, constantly given targets, and they are
constantly under pressure. Nothing like a rushed Doc with a hell of a
bedside manner.
7. Oh, best of all, a GP makes the same thing as highly, trained, skilled
surgeon. Now there is real incentive for improvement. Everybody makes the
same salary. Nothing like incentives to get more training and improve your
skills.
8. The Brits complain they get better treatment for their pets when they
take them to the vets. You get an immediate appt and it is all very
effecient. Of cours you have to pay for it. Now there is novel concept. You
actual have to pay for something. And the service is much more user
friendly. NHS is charity and you are treated as a charity case? Maybe paying
for it makes you less likely to clog something up with frivolous visits.
Sort of like deductibles? Frivilous. Like lawsuits ( no tort reform in the
US medical system - oh that is right Obama is a lawyer - but I digress).
9. It has to use a an artificial system to try and make itself effiecient.
Like " quality points " for GPs, so they can earn more. Yup you heard
right. Monoply anyone?
10. It is does a bad job with preventive care. Because there is a high level
of hospitlization for diabetic patients when there should not be. It just
does not deal with chronic conditions well.
11. The politicians are scared to death of meddling with the system. Anyone
makes a suggestion and the Labor Prime Minister says, " Oh the Honorable
gentleman wants to impose the American for profit system." So everyone shuts
up on any common sense measures and improvements. Nasty old capatlist
Americans.
12. You can go to specialist and circumvent the whole system. However, you
( gasp) have to pay him. Now there is an interesting rub, unlike Canada
which makes that illelegal they allow the docs to have a private practice.
The NHS is so good they allow the Docs to have a private practice. Why the
rich can opt out. Dump you are not going to like that and Obama certainly
does not - he wants that progressive Canadian system.
13. Drugs are rationed. Different drugs are available in different places
cause that is locally determined. If you live in Scotland you can get more
cancer drugs than you can in England. Now how fucked up is that?
14. In fact some local councils ( the drug dispensers ) have more money than
others. See the Brits trying to be fair and give more money to imporervished
areas ( that is rampant socialism at play). They do this because the health
is worse in these areas. Does it improve the health - of course not. Why?
Because health is a matter of diet, excercise, good genes, etc. But hey that
is progressive thinking for you. Fact is it just does not work.
15.Drugs are rationed. In fact, there is a very determined medicine when
treating elderly. They get the shaft. Once you are 80 they say, " limited
resources, we will focus on young people, people of working age." Go die.
Better save some money for medicine in your old age. Wait it is rationed you
cannot get it anyway.
16. NICE - National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence rations
drugs. They have to be cost effective to be approved. Cost effective? Got a
rare disease? I have a friend with one. Go die. Happens all the time. Cancer
drugs are very expensive. My friend has very rare cancer. Sorry those
medicines are not cost effective. Go die.
17. Britain does not put a lot of money in Medicines. They like to cut the
drug bill. The docs the nurses they get salary raises. The pharmacy gets the
royal shaft.
18. Older patients have no rights - go die.
19. They had to introduce pseudo market conditions to try and improve
hospital services. ( Yeah more pseudo markets ). The hospitals now have to
compete with one and another for govt funds. ( Compete now there is
something Americans like to do) Imagine that - psuedo market conditions.
They must be pseudo capatalists. They compete to survive. Bad hospital goes
out of business. Supposedly. None have. Brits like local hospitals ( who
doesnt). So basically the British govt does not know what to do with bad
hospitals. That does not seem to be working out to well for them. We all
know what happens in a free market when you fuck up. You are out of
business. The bureaucrats are not there to save you. Capatalism is a very
efficient way of delvering services - just look at supermarket.
20. A choose and book system was started for hospitals. You can choose among
five hospitals. So now you get to check the waiting list.
21, They are still using paper records. Yeah you heard right. They are just
beginnng to automate patient records. Hell, my GP has a laptop and taps into
it when I see him.
Now you see why I love British medical care. I love it cause it is in
Britain and the British can keep it.
To be fair American medicine has problems too. However, we have better
solutions than Nannism. We have markets that are not pseudo we need to use
them.
Obama care is going to take the 80% of America that is recieving good care
and the 20 % of America that is recieving adequate care and make it so that
100 % of America recieves inadequate care. He wants to copy Canada's single
payor system and that is worse than the one above. He wants total govt
control and promises to cut the cost of your medical care. That is you get
shitty medical care through govt rationing. Results less Docs and less
nurses. Less and less care. Wake up America.
Dump next time you post bullshit do some research and dont use the LA times.
Hell that state is bankrupt because of progressive thinking. Just look at
( Dont call me Maam) Boxer, (You are un American) Pelosi, and ( Gimme Your
Gun) Feinstien and you have really progressive thinking. I have a friend
that just got back from California. He said the tourists welcome centers
were closed and the roads were terrible. Use some other paper rather than a
liberal Californication one.
.
Herbert Cannon
"Stanley Moore" <smoo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2PydnSAG5K5WDhXX...@giganews.com...
Ummm that was called the Middle Ages and little beyond. Sort of started
fraying with the Magna Carta. We left. Mostly good for the tourist trade
now. I liked watching the changing of the guard at Buckingham palace.
Newspaper were all bitching about how may pounds it took to maintain the
royal family. Fascinating place to visit.
> So yes the UK has many true conservatives.
Not since Margret Thatcher. Must be why the Labor Govt is so strong. So many
conservatives voting it in.
Your definition of conservatism
> is flawed.
Mark Levine, " Liberty and Tyranny." Page one.
Resistance to change is the definition, holding to the old ways.
> Landed aristocracy, titles, and fealty to a monarch is the height of
> conservatism. Maybe even the divine right of kings. The Brits are
> hidebound in a tradition stretching back millenia. That is conservative.
> Take care
That is your definition of conservative cause I dont see any " conservative
Amercans" advocating appointing and annnointing a King much less a " landed
gentry." In fact exactly the opposite .
Exactly what is your definition of liberalism - total govt control?
> --
>
Herbert Cannon
"~M~" <~M~@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3_udnXwbUJXHJxXX...@giganews.com...
> "suds mcduff" <sudsmcd...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:h69047$bnn$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> "The United States lies between Costa Rica and Slovenia in the World
>> Health Organization's ranking of healthcare systems . . . which puts them
>> in 37th place," Keith Hopcroft, a doctor, wrote in the Sun's commentary
>> piece. "The U.K.? 18th. I rest my doctor's case."
>
> It's good to know the UK has doctors that are so satisfied with mediocrity
> that they hold and 18th place ranking as some sort of license to brag. You
> are a fucking retard.
>
>
Herbert Cannon
Herbert Cannon
The WHO is full of shit. We patch together gunshot and auto accident
victims that would be left to die in Costa Rica or Slovenia. This
just highlights the absurdity of the progressives and liberals when
they say shit like this.
You simply do not understand progressive thinking. After Katrina the
progressive New Orleans police force ( 1/3 of it deserted the city before
the hurricane), working under the progressive administration, tried to
take all the decent citizens guns in New Orleans. They even wrestled one old
lady for hers. Looked like it might have belonged to Daniel Boone too.
You see they were trying to make the streets safe for the thugs who had
guns. Now that is progressive thinking.
Those initials of NOPD stand for Not Our Problem Dude.
Stanley Moore
Our nation was founded by a bunch of guys wanting radical change from the
old Europe. That attitude stuck. Interesting to note that liberals always
win. Conservatives always lose. Someone once said that in the US the
Socialist Party platform of 1900 had a number of aims and all of them are
now in effect here. Such common ideas like overtime pay, 40 hour workweeks,
sick pay, employer paid health insurance, social security, even women's
suffrage were once the sole province of the liberal wing in politics with
the conservative wings opposing all of them.
No conservative in politics today would even think of trying to roll back
these ideas so deeply ingrained they are in the polity. Conservatives never
win in the long run, else we would still be riding to work in horse drawn
carriages instead of automobiles with seat belts and airbags, both of which
were vehemently opposed by conservatives.
By the way I do not consider the Republican party to be all that
conservative despite their appeals to the "base". Take care
Herbert Cannon
They wanted the english govt out of their business, period. They wanted
freedom and a republic. They did not want autocratic govt control by a
monarch. Today's " liberals" want exactly what the founders fought against.
" A govermnent big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take all
you have." Thomas Jefferson.
Who supported communism? Liberals are conservatives? It was the liberals of
the day who embraced Marx and the disaster of communism that killed even
more than Hitler.
You are clinging to old definitions and old times.
That attitude stuck. Interesting to note that liberals always
> win.
I see you have not read any Islamic history have you. They were the
conservatives of their day. They put the biggest superpower here that has
ever been here. The Mongols also. Of course, what you call conservative I
call radical. When England was an empire was it conservative or liberal?
Perhaps you had better define "winning?"
Conservatives always lose.
I love the word " always." It is so easy to win an argument when someone
uses it. Like General Motors won with its union demanded "liberal" pay and
benefits? It went belly up even after being rescued by the " liberal"
government. Is that an example of "always" winning?
Someone once said that in the US the
> Socialist Party platform of 1900 had a number of aims and all of them are
> now in effect here. Such common ideas like overtime pay, 40 hour
> workweeks, sick pay, employer paid health insurance, social security, even
> women's suffrage were once the sole province of the liberal wing in
> politics with the conservative wings opposing all of them.
Your idea of conservative and radical is confused. It is a common practice.
Liberals refer to the Iranian Ayatollahs as conservative. I refer to them as
radical.
No one objects to making the workplace humane. Especially after the book "
The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair. What they opposed was too much govt
interference. Govt has a habit of going too far and wanting too much power.
So called liberals today want govt to be everything and have total control.
Over regulation. Your education ( they do not like home schooling or
vouchers -no competition for them), your medicine ( interesting isnt it that
the Briitish had to introduce competition into their National Health Service
to try and improve it - something a free market does automatically), your
ownership ( gun control), your ability to make choices ( cars - go count the
gas efficient cars on the highway right now - peoples' choices in a free
market move much faster than govt regulation). It tries to subsitute
itself for free markets and necessary competition. Very inefficient. That is
then so called "liberal agenda." It is not "liberal" at all. .
Times and definitions change. For instance, OT pay was introduced to try
to encourage hiring during the depression. Now it is used because it is
cheaper than hiring someone. Other packages ( paid health insurance, sick
pay, vacations) are now used to attract a competent workforce and used as
recruiting tools by corporations. They are considered competitive edges in
many instances. However, when liberal unions demand too much - you are no
longer competitive. Times change and so do definitions. I have an idea some
of these ideas would make our so called liberal founders appalled. Times
change.
Hell the Swiss did not give women the vote until 1970 and they are not what
I would call conservative.
>
> No conservative in politics today would even think of trying to roll back
> these ideas so deeply ingrained they are in the polity. Conservatives
> never win in the long run, else we would still be riding to work in horse
> drawn carriages instead of automobiles with seat belts and airbags, both
> of which were vehemently opposed by conservatives.
Bah it is the liberals who cry and want to equalize everything. They would
keep buggywhip manufacturers in business if were not for conservatives
insisting on a free market. My example of the two dojos still stands. One
does not cater to its students with better hours and good instructions. The
other does. The liberals want to tax the good dojo and give money to the bad
one so it can stay in business and not go bankrupt. You eventually sink into
a third rate nation. That is not what I call winning.
>
> By the way I do not consider the Republican party to be all that
> conservative despite their appeals to the "base". Take care
The Republican party may be in big trouble for ignoring the base. The "
silent majority" and Reagans appeal won landslides. I would like to stay and
play but the demands of today. " Liberty and Tyranny " by Mark Levine. I
distinguish between conservative and radical. That is why the liberals have
to say " radical right" and attempt to slander the conservatives with it.
Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican so was Lincolin..
The dog from that film you saw
>
>
> Not since Margret Thatcher. Must be why the Labor Govt is so strong. So
> many conservatives voting it in.
>
>
with that one comment you signal yourself out as someone who doesn't know a
lot about the uk.
the labour ( note the spelling correction ) party it currently hated in the
uk and it's an open secret that at the next election they will be crushed by
the conservatives.
--
Gareth.
that fly...... is your magic wand....
Stanley Moore
>
> "Stanley Moore" <smoo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:waOdnddF_OQS_RTX...@giganews.com...
>> Socialist Party platform of 1900 had a number of aims and all of them are
>> now in effect here. Such common ideas like overtime pay, 40 hour
>> workweeks, sick pay, employer paid health insurance, social security,
>> even women's suffrage were once the sole province of the liberal wing in
>> politics with the conservative wings opposing all of them.
>
> No one objects to making the workplace humane. Especially after the book "
> The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair. What they opposed was too much govt
> interference. Govt has a habit of going too far and wanting too much
> power. So called liberals today want govt to be everything and have total
> control.
No one may object NOWADAYS to the 40 work week, overtime pay, paid vacation,
child labor laws, or even women voting BUT all the conservatives of the past
did indeed object to those things. Businessmen far and wide said those
things if instituted would bring the republic down. It didn't. I consider
myself conservative but I know you cannot push against the river.
Conservatives want to hold on to the past but that cannot be done.
Conservatives wanted to light their homes with whale oil as it was the tried
and true method of the past not the newfangled petroleum. That was the 19th
century. In the 21st century something new will have to come along. A
conservative wants to maintain the past and since that cannot be done that
is why I say conservatism always loses. If you were a true conservative you
would use parchment scrolls to communicate ideas not usenet newsgroups.
Child labor in sweatshops, property owning male voting, long workweeks with
no benefits and no overtime were all conservative points. These ideas passed
by and conservatives of today think nothing of accepting these as a matter
of course when little more than a century ago they were radical ideas. What
are radical ideas now will in coming centuries be taken as a matter of
course. That is the way the world works.
~M~
> Conservatives wanted to light their homes with whale oil as it was the
> tried and true method of the past not the newfangled petroleum.
Oh, so it's the liberals that got the whole global warming thing started.
--
"An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a
cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup."
- H.L. Mencken
Herbert Cannon
>
> "Herbert Cannon" <hcan...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:vpeim.144863$FP2....@newsfe05.iad...
>>
>> "Stanley Moore" <smoo...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:waOdnddF_OQS_RTX...@giganews.com...
>> Someone once said that in the US the
>>> Socialist Party platform of 1900 had a number of aims and all of them
>>> are now in effect here. Such common ideas like overtime pay, 40 hour
>>> workweeks, sick pay, employer paid health insurance, social security,
>>> even women's suffrage were once the sole province of the liberal wing in
>>> politics with the conservative wings opposing all of them.
>>
> SNIP
>> No one objects to making the workplace humane. Especially after the book
>> " The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair. What they opposed was too much govt
>> interference. Govt has a habit of going too far and wanting too much
>> power. So called liberals today want govt to be everything and have total
>> control.
>
> No one may object NOWADAYS to the 40 work week, overtime pay, paid
> vacation, child labor laws, or even women voting BUT all the conservatives
> of the past did indeed object to those things. Businessmen far and wide
> said those things if instituted would bring the republic down.
History only repeats itself if we do not learn from it./
It didn't. I consider
> myself conservative
And you are saying you consider yourself a loser.
but I know you cannot push against the river.
Which means you have learned from the past.
> Conservatives want to hold on to the past but that cannot be done.
> Conservatives wanted to light their homes with whale oil as it was the
> tried and true method of the past not the newfangled petroleum. That was
> the 19th century. In the 21st century something new will have to come
> along. A conservative wants to maintain the past and since that cannot be
> done that is why I say conservatism always loses.
No, your definition is flawed, a conservative wants prudent change
If you were a true conservative you
> would use parchment scrolls to communicate ideas not usenet newsgroups.
No you would not.
>
> Child labor in sweatshops, property owning male voting, long workweeks
> with no benefits and no overtime were all conservative points.
"Were." A lot of those items you cited were to help stimulate the economy;
not to make the workers' life better. Many of them did nothing for the
economy. If the depression had not happened how many of these things would
have taken place. My bet is many would have happened naturally. Now the
argument that WW II stimulated the economy is used for massive spending (
Keynes ) which is really no more than printing money. Many say that will
cause hyperinflation. If it does, we will no it was not prudent wont we.
These ideas passed
> by and conservatives of today think nothing of accepting these as a matter
> of course when little more than a century ago they were radical ideas.
So was revolt against a monarchy and abolishment of slavery. Slavery in the
south of the U S was not much different than being a worker at the time that
happened.
What
> are radical ideas now will in coming centuries be taken as a matter of
> course. That is the way the world works.
> Take care
> --
Perhaps. However, the world, for the most part, has been ruled by Monarchs
and Dictators. We may slip back into that mode also or we may blow ourselves
up. No one can predict what the future holds.
Stanley Moore
<G> Well, fighting a brave rearguard action. Something like Roncevaux,
Thermopylae or the Alamo. All of which were heroic defeats. Conservatives
fighting to prevent what they considered undesirable change.
>
> but I know you cannot push against the river.
>
> Which means you have learned from the past.
>
>> Conservatives want to hold on to the past but that cannot be done.
>> Conservatives wanted to light their homes with whale oil as it was the
>> tried and true method of the past not the newfangled petroleum. That was
>> the 19th century. In the 21st century something new will have to come
>> along. A conservative wants to maintain the past and since that cannot be
>> done that is why I say conservatism always loses.
>
> No, your definition is flawed, a conservative wants prudent change
>
Most conservatives of my acquaintance feel NO change is prudent. My father
for instance was a true conservative (though he taught us kids about pushing
the river). Until the end of his life he did as much as he could to preserve
the old ways. He kept his stock certificates in a safe deposit box and
mailed them in when he wanted to sell. I bet most folks under 60 have never
seen a stock certificate. He had a trifling dispute with Sears and for 40
years never bought a thing from them. He pinched every penny until it
screamed. He kept up a Victory Garden 50 long years after the war effort was
needed. He was a tolerant man but hated school integration. That was
conservative.
So many of today's "conservatives" seem angry and intolerant, trying to push
their private religious values onto others while using their homes as ATMs,
"eating their seedcorn" as my Daddy would say, buying things they do not
need, electing politicians who have no desire to cooperate to solve our
problems (a fault of the liberals as well). I do not feel the Republican
Party of today is not conservative.
> If you were a true conservative you
>> would use parchment scrolls to communicate ideas not usenet newsgroups.
>
> No you would not.
>>
My point is that change is inevitable and inasmuch as conservatism is
dedicated to preservation of the ways of the past it is a losing
proposition. I do think the role of conservatives should be to guide the
future by being prudent and trying to hold onto the best practices of the
past. For instance I believe that an old fashioned Classical education is a
good thing but nowadays it is disdained as reading "Dead White Guys". Many
of today's young are woefully unaware of history. They have no sense of what
happened in the past and why and what we can learn from the painful
experiences of our ancestors.
Can we fight a rearguard action against a rising tide of Islam? How do the
acts of Roland or Leonidas or Travis apply to today? Does your average 20
year old even know those names? Many people cannot find Iraq, Iran, Korea,
or Afghanistan on a map. Most have no idea of what numbers mean. One
million? Billion? Trillion? Do they know that borrowed money must be repaid?
My father the conservative hated debt and when he bought a houst in 1965 he
paid off the 30 year mortgage in 10 years. He thought the 6% interest was
usurious. Yet the "conservatives" of today think nothing of paying 27% on
their credit card balances while the politicians urge them to spend and
consume to help the economy.
A friend says I am so old I have a tail because I am a dinosaur. I do
cherish the past for all its faults but those of today who claim to be
conservatives seem not to know the meaning of the word. Take care
suds mcduff
> "Herbert Cannon" <hcan...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:VJ%hm.101591$YU5....@newsfe21.iad...
>>>>> "The United States lies between Costa Rica and Slovenia in the World
>>>>> Health Organization's ranking of healthcare systems . . . which puts
>>>>> them in 37th place," Keith Hopcroft, a doctor, wrote in the Sun's
>>>>> commentary piece. "The U.K.? 18th. I rest my doctor's case."
>>>> 37th? It's amazing that everybody in the world comes here when they
>>>> need a heart procedure or an MRI or really any kind of surgery. You
>>>> know, because our system sucks.
>>> ---Sure, their rich come here...our middle class go to India and Costa
>>> Rica...
>>>
>> Really our middle class go to India and Costa Rica?
---Yup, our working class with no insurance....certain procedures are
1/3 the cost...
How many go?
---Look it up...
Why do
>> they go there?
-----Many procedures can be 1/3 the cost of the US...
Does Costa Rica have more CT scanners and MRI machines than
>> we do?
----They have them....at less cost....
Gee that is funny I dont of a single soul that has gone to Costa
>> Rica or India for that matter.
----You need to read a little more....your associated probably have govt
health insurance....
Please fill us in on why people are
>> flocking to Costa Rican and Indian medicine.
-----Indian and Costa Rican medical proceures are Western....
suds mcduff
----You can't reason with Herbistry, you should know that by now....
suds mcduff
>> ---Sure, their rich come here...our middle class go to India and Costa
>> Rica...
>
> Refresh my memory as to where those doctors went to school and did
> their residencies...
----Doesn't matter...they return to their countries and perform sugical
procedures at up to 1/3 the cost, including airfare....
>
>> ----In England, even conservatives are defending the NHP....
>
> They're defending their video cameras on every corner too...that the
> type of government you want, nice and liberal, huh?
----They don't hate the NHP, regardless of what lying regressives claim...
Herbert Cannon
>
> ----You can't reason with Herbistry, you should know that by now....
Describes you to a T, turning over your entire life to the govt, and it aint
purty either:
http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Tyranny-Conservative-Mark-Levin/dp/1416562850
Herbert Cannon
> Stanley Moore wrote:
>> "Herbert Cannon" <hcan...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:VJ%hm.101591$YU5....@newsfe21.iad...
>>>>>> "The United States lies between Costa Rica and Slovenia in the World
>>>>>> Health Organization's ranking of healthcare systems . . . which puts
>>>>>> them in 37th place," Keith Hopcroft, a doctor, wrote in the Sun's
>>>>>> commentary piece. "The U.K.? 18th. I rest my doctor's case."
>>>>> 37th? It's amazing that everybody in the world comes here when they
>>>>> need a heart procedure or an MRI or really any kind of surgery. You
>>>>> know, because our system sucks.
>>>> ---Sure, their rich come here...our middle class go to India and Costa
>>>> Rica...
>>>>
>>> Really our middle class go to India and Costa Rica?
>
> ---Yup, our working class with no insurance....certain procedures are 1/3
> the cost...
It usual is when you dont have much to work with.
>
> How many go?
>
> ---Look it up...
I will take that as I dont really have the slightest idea of what I am
talking about.
>
> Why do
>>> they go there?
>
> -----Many procedures can be 1/3 the cost of the US...
Must be because they dont have anything to do the procedures with.
>
> Does Costa Rica have more CT scanners and MRI machines than
>>> we do?
>
> ----They have them....at less cost....
Suuuuuure they do. Dump we have more of those than Canada has. You know the
country that Obama wants to emulate in health care with a single payor
system.
> Gee that is funny I dont of a single soul that has gone to Costa
>>> Rica or India for that matter.
>
> ----You need to read a little more....your associated probably have govt
> health insurance....
My associates have all kind of insurance. I suppose you know hundreds of
people that have run down there for treatment and operations?
>
> Please fill us in on why people are
>>> flocking to Costa Rican and Indian medicine.
>
> -----Indian and Costa Rican medical proceures are Western....
As opposed to Eastern? Gee that explains why Taiwan and Japan have such
world class medicine. They are not western. You really dont have an inkling
of what you are talking about.
>
Herbert Cannon
">
> ----They don't hate the NHP, regardless of what lying regressives claim...
Must be why their newspapers are full of horror stories about it.
Herbert Cannon
>>> No one may object NOWADAYS to the 40 work week, overtime pay, paid
>>> vacation, child labor laws, or even women voting BUT all the
>>> conservatives of the past did indeed object to those things. Businessmen
>>> far and wide said those things if instituted would bring the republic
>>> down.
>>
>> History only repeats itself if we do not learn from it./
>>
>> It didn't. I consider
>>> myself conservative
>>
>> And you are saying you consider yourself a loser.
>
> <G> Well, fighting a brave rearguard action. Something like Roncevaux,
> Thermopylae or the Alamo. All of which were heroic defeats. Conservatives
> fighting to prevent what they considered undesirable change.
Undesirable change is by definition undesirable. Not all change is good.
Conservatives should have spoken more strongly against deriatives, CDOs and
CMOs. Those were certainly innovations that proved themsevles to be
disasters. The old way would have been the banker , who gave you a mortgage,
knew you, he knew where you worked, he knew how much you made, you were a
part to the community; and he was not going to risk the financial health of
the community. Instead we got the new fangled ideas about finance and then
disaster.
Themoplyae and the Alamo allowed the wars to be won. They were battles not
wars.
>> but I know you cannot push against the river.
>>
>> Which means you have learned from the past.
>>
>>> Conservatives want to hold on to the past but that cannot be done.
>>> Conservatives wanted to light their homes with whale oil as it was the
>>> tried and true method of the past not the newfangled petroleum. That was
>>> the 19th century. In the 21st century something new will have to come
>>> along. A conservative wants to maintain the past and since that cannot
>>> be done that is why I say conservatism always loses.
>>
>> No, your definition is flawed, a conservative wants prudent change
>>
>
> Most conservatives of my acquaintance feel NO change is prudent.
That is interesting because I walk with a conservative every day that wants
some radical change. He wants to abolish social security and medicare. He
has ideas about what to replace them with. I know conservatives that believe
self defense is a basic right. But today you can easily have to spend
upwards of $25,000 defending yourself legally, if you defend yourself.
They would like to change this.
It is not change they are against. It is allowing the govt to become too
powerful and not using market mechanism to solve many problems. The Wall
street journal has run some really good editorials about health care. For
instance, one of the reasons that health insurance is so expensive is that
it is not allowed to sold across state lines. Allow this and the price comes
down as the risk is spread over a larger group. Also people need to be
educated about deductibles something Obama want to lower. Lowering merely
encourages frivilous visits to the doc. Insurance is to protect you against
a catastrophe not a hangnail.
My father
> for instance was a true conservative (though he taught us kids about
> pushing the river). Until the end of his life he did as much as he could
> to preserve the old ways.
You would have to define the old ways. I bet he allowed you to get small pox
vaccination, measles, polio, tetanus, and anti biotics when you were sick.
By your own definition a conservative who was " always" against change would
not allow you to have modern medicines. Did he take you to the witch doctor
or shaman, or to the pediatrician or gp?
My father was very conservative. He was a depression era person. He was
conservative and frugal with his money. However, he did not like people who
would not avail themselves of modern medicines ( he was a scientist). When I
was a kid we had a few religious sects in the back woods that were strange.
He hated them for being so idiotic about denying modern medicine.
He kept his stock certificates in a safe deposit box and
> mailed them in when he wanted to sell.
Was he a depression era person? This would not have been too strange for
them. Remember they saw all the banks fail. In fact my father once told me
that if the banks looked like they were going to fail to get in line and
withdraw my money. There is a book that describes two economist who came up
with a sure fire way to make money in the financial markets. The both were
Nobel prize winners. Only there was a flaw in their model. It did not go far
enough back in history. So when their fund went belly up they lost billions
I bet most folks under 60 have never
> seen a stock certificate.
I have. But I am over 60. A friend of mine had some he wanted to sell years
ago. I bought them and forwarded them to my broker. Good company to.
He had a trifling dispute with Sears and for 40
> years never bought a thing from them.
Yes. But that is simply being crotchety. I used to think my father
complained too much. Then I realized that if I ordered a steak well done and
they served it to me rare. It was my money and I wanted what I wanted.
He pinched every penny until it
> screamed.
I knew a lot of people that did that. My father did that. Today we are not
encouraged to save and that is very bad. I asked my father one time what he
was saving so assidiously for. He said a " rainy day." It dawned on me that
we do have "rainy days" and we should put money aside to tide us over until
the weather improves. Read " The New Empire of Debt" that ought to scare
you. Now few save and those that get in trouble expect the govt ( you and
me) to bail them out.
I had an adopted aunt who was a packrat. We used to tease her. One day she
looked at us and said, " You have to understand, I watched my parents lose
everything but the shirts on their backs." She was depression era person.
Another thing you did not find these people doing was job hopping. They
placed a much greater value on their jobs than we do today.
He kept up a Victory Garden 50 long years after the war effort was
> needed.
There is nothing wrong with that. If I had the space here, I would have a
garden. My wife has a garden. She grew up on a farm. 40% of all vegetables
consumed during WW II came from victory gardens. I think we would be a lot
better off if people spent time on gardening instead of all the time,
effort, and gas wasted on cutting their lawns. My wife's gandfather lived in
a small town. In his backyard were chickens, turkeys, pigs, and a garden. If
a hurricane came, he did not need the govt to hand out mres. He merely went
in the backyard, cut somebody's head off, plucked or skinned them, cooked
them and ate them. He was a pharmacist. Those people believed in being very
self sufficient. We recently renovated his old house. One thing I noticed
was how small the closets were. Then it dawned on me. They did not own a lot
of clothes. No need for big closets.
You dad was merely being self sufficient. One thing I do like is fresh
vegetables. When we are staying in that small town we go out to where a
fellow has a produce farm and buy up some fresh veggies. If I lived there I
would have a large garden in the backyard.
He was a tolerant man but hated school integration.
What people disliked here was bussing kids so the schools would be
intergrated. And it has turned out that was stupid. What has happened is
that the public schools are 95% minority here and the whites have either
fled to mostly white parishes or go to private schools here. It did not
work. Point is -it was done wrong but no one will admit it.
That was
> conservative.
No that was racial. There were a lot of people upset about it. I cant really
label them. Most did not do anything stupid.
>
> So many of today's "conservatives" seem angry and intolerant, trying to
> push their private religious values onto others while using their homes as
> ATMs, "eating their seedcorn" as my Daddy would say, buying things they do
> not need,
I dont know where here is but you and I must know different conservatives. I
am not buying into a lot of what Obama is pushing. A stimulus bill unread,
everything being racial, a huge number of victims, a cap and trade bill that
is inane etc. It is about power and control and not for the better. My buddy
who is a nuc and chemical engineer thinks cap and trade is insane.
electing politicians who have no desire to cooperate to solve our
> problems (a fault of the liberals as well).
I have better reps then. But there are a lot of them that are interested in
their own self aggrandizement. We just had one congressman convicted on 11
of 15 counts. He was a democrat.
I do not feel the Republican
> Party of today is not conservative.
I am sorry I do understand the statement. Are you saying the Republican
party is not conservative or that it is?
>
>
>> If you were a true conservative you
>>> would use parchment scrolls to communicate ideas not usenet newsgroups.
>>
>> No you would not.
>>>
>
> My point is that change is inevitable and inasmuch as conservatism is
> dedicated to preservation of the ways of the past it is a losing
> proposition.
Depends on the ways. If you read " The Lessons of History" by Will and Ariel
Durant you will see a statement in the book that says ( I am paraphrasing)
do not ignore the customs, traditions of your society for they are the
wisdom of past generations. I feel we tear down the fence before we find out
why people put it up. The we find the cows eating our garden.
I do think the role of conservatives should be to guide the
> future by being prudent and trying to hold onto the best practices of the
> past.
No argument from me.
For instance I believe that an old fashioned Classical education is a
> good thing but nowadays it is disdained as reading "Dead White Guys". Many
> of today's young are woefully unaware of history.
Amen.
They have no sense of what
> happened in the past and why and what we can learn from the painful
> experiences of our ancestors.
Very True.
>
> Can we fight a rearguard action against a rising tide of Islam?
Good question. The fight with Islam is not new. It has been going on since
the 6th century. I know a great deal about this because I have studied it a
lot. Most people do not know how bitter the struggle has been. Read "1453,"
God's Crucible," " White Gold - the extraordinary story of Thomas Pellegrew
and Islam's One million white slaves," and "Empires of the Sea." Most people
do not how extensive this struggle was with the Islamic conquest.
How do the
> acts of Roland or Leonidas or Travis apply to today? Does your average 20
> year old even know those names? Many people cannot find Iraq, Iran, Korea,
> or Afghanistan on a map. Most have no idea of what numbers mean.
What you are complaining about is our education system and its failure to
motivate people to learn. I have heard horror stories from teacher both
public and private. The book " Mega Trends" made a statement that this is
the first time in history that our children will be less educated than our
parents. Makes one wonder what the technicians, docs, etc will come from to
run our society. I think the young may too much forgranted now and expect
life to be too easy.
One
> million? Billion? Trillion? Do they know that borrowed money must be
> repaid? My father the conservative hated debt and when he bought a houst
> in 1965 he paid off the 30 year mortgage in 10 years.
My father bought his house for cash. There was no credit.
He thought the 6% interest was
> usurious. Yet the "conservatives" of today think nothing of paying 27% on
> their credit card balances while the politicians urge them to spend and
> consume to help the economy.
Again, now saving for a rainy day. Read " Empire of Debt" that will scare
you. We have encouraged people to irresponsibly buy houses they could not
pay for and then bailed them out. What kind of lesson is that?
>
> A friend says I am so old I have a tail because I am a dinosaur.
Well damn all my friends have the same feeling. I tell them then a T Rex.
I do
> cherish the past for all its faults but those of today who claim to be
> conservatives seem not to know the meaning of the word. Take care
Ok that may be true.
Herbert Cannon
>
> ----You can't reason with Herbistry, you should know that by now....
He does not have to, he is a conservative unlike you, and we agree on most
things. It is merely a matter of semantics and definitions.
Stanley Moore
>
> electing politicians who have no desire to cooperate to solve our
>> problems (a fault of the liberals as well).
>
> I have better reps then. But there are a lot of them that are interested
> in their own self aggrandizement. We just had one congressman convicted on
> 11 of 15 counts. He was a democrat.
>
> I do not feel the Republican
>> Party of today is not conservative.
>
> I am sorry I do understand the statement. Are you saying the Republican
> party is not conservative or that it is?
>>
>>
conservative.
It seems we are much alike at least in our choice of parents. Daddy and
Mother were born in 1913 which made them 20 in 1933 so as young people
starting out they were in a Great Depression. Also Daddy grew up on a farm
in northern Texas which was in an agricultural depression about a decade
before 1929. My grandparents had 9 kids to deal with on the proceeds of a
dirt farm. Daddy said they never felt poor because everyone they knew was in
the same boat as they were. <G> He did own his own farm so was indeed better
than sharecroppers or those who owed their farms to the predatory banks.
WHen you only get paid once a year at harvest time when you have to pay off
your loans to the bank for seed and supplies (no crop insurance in those
days or federal subsidies) you become careful with money.
All Daddys kin were very prudent with money and at least that rubbed off on
me. I saved between 15 and 20% of my gross income for most of my working
life so when I was downsized a year ago I was able to retire at 60. My
year's severance is up next month and I shall be able to live at my current
consumption rate for the indefinite future so that when the rainy day came I
have a good umbrella. At least as long as cancerous inflation doesn't set in
which is my great fear. I remember President Carter rejoicing one time when
he proclaimed proudly the inflation rate had dropped to 10% ! Yikes. I was
trying to find work in the recession of 1973-74 and it seems times were
worse then than now,
I am a Republican but am more interested in fiscal prudence than what I call
the "theocracy crowd" of the right. I have no use for the religionists of
any stripe, neither Islam nor Christianity are productive ideals. So
naturally I do not like the loud loons like Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter or
Beck. I do like the guys like O'Reilly who seems sensible to me. I worked as
a chemist for a large chemical company for most of my career. It seems we
are pretty similar. Take care
Herbert Cannon
>
> "Herbert Cannon" <hcan...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:IRIim.146319$zq1.1...@newsfe22.iad...
>>
>> electing politicians who have no desire to cooperate to solve our
>>> problems (a fault of the liberals as well).
>>
>> I have better reps then. But there are a lot of them that are interested
>> in their own self aggrandizement. We just had one congressman convicted
>> on 11 of 15 counts. He was a democrat.
>>
>> I do not feel the Republican
>>> Party of today is not conservative.
>>
>> I am sorry I do understand the statement. Are you saying the Republican
>> party is not conservative or that it is?
>>>
>>>
> A typo with a double negative. I do not feel the Republicans are truly
> conservative.
Yes I knew people who were conservative who simply did not vote in the last
election.
> It seems we are much alike at least in our choice of parents. Daddy and
> Mother were born in 1913 which made them 20 in 1933 so as young people
> starting out they were in a Great Depression.
My father and mother were born around 1902.
Also Daddy grew up on a farm
> in northern Texas which was in an agricultural depression about a decade
> before 1929.
Mine did not grow up on a farm. But in cities. My grandfather had been a
farmer and my father always did like that life style although he was not a
farmer. He watched his father lose his store in the depression. He had built
up quite a business.
My grandparents had 9 kids to deal with on the proceeds of a
> dirt farm. Daddy said they never felt poor because everyone they knew was
> in the same boat as they were.
That is what one would call dirt poor today. My wife's father was much the
same. He went to high school with only a biscuit and a sweet potato to eat.
She was raised on a farm.
<G> He did own his own farm so was indeed better
> than sharecroppers or those who owed their farms to the predatory banks.
> WHen you only get paid once a year at harvest time when you have to pay
> off your loans to the bank for seed and supplies (no crop insurance in
> those days or federal subsidies) you become careful with money.
>
> All Daddys kin were very prudent with money and at least that rubbed off
> on me. I saved between 15 and 20% of my gross income for most of my
> working life so when I was downsized a year ago I was able to retire at
> 60.
Unusual rate of savings. Sound like you are chip off the old block.
My
> year's severance is up next month and I shall be able to live at my
> current consumption rate for the indefinite future so that when the rainy
> day came I have a good umbrella. At least as long as cancerous inflation
> doesn't set in which is my great fear. I remember President Carter
> rejoicing one time when he proclaimed proudly the inflation rate had
> dropped to 10% ! Yikes. I was trying to find work in the recession of
> 1973-74 and it seems times were worse then than now,
I suggest you read " The Ascent of Money" by Niall Ferguson or type in
pbs.org and then " The Ascent of Money " and watch the documentary based on
the book. It is well done. Pay attention to episodes 3 and 4 and what
happened in Chile and Argentina.
>
> I am a Republican but am more interested in fiscal prudence than what I
> call the "theocracy crowd" of the right.
Personally I think the religious right is much overblown by the press. Who
is that? People who go to church on Sunday? People who do not believe in
abortion?
I have no use for the religionists of
> any stripe, neither Islam nor Christianity are productive ideals.
If you mean the radicals, we agree. Radical Islam is the worst though. It
kills you if you leave the religion and kills you if criticize it.
I know some pretty good bible thumpers and they are not overbearing at all.
I work with one that is a evangelical and I did not know that for years. He
said he would talk about it if asked. He said simply they believe in the
bible. He has never talked about religion. He doe run around trying to
witness people.
I am not a church goer or a bible thumper; but I have to disagree with you
there. I watched the churches here provide food, shelter, and clothing
faster than local, state, or federal govt to evacs from Katrina. They really
responded rapidly. People tend to forget many of the evacs got out on their
own and had nowhere to go. The motels and hotels were all filled up. We met
people who had been sleeping in their cars and parks. The local paper here
had a big editorial on the unsung heroes of Katrina which were the churches.
They opened their doors to everyone. After seeing that, I am less likely to
be a critic of churches. National news about Katrina was generally wrong and
was wrong many months after the hurricane. That is when I became convinced
that national news is populated by morons. As the commander of Delta force
in Afghanistan said, 75% of all news stories that came out of Afghanistan
were wrong.
So
> naturally I do not like the loud loons like Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter or
> Beck.
I rarely get a chance to watch them. When Beck is on I am out walking. I get
a laugh from some of Coulter's funny sayings; but have never read any of her
books. Limbaugh is on the radio during the day and unless I am driving
somewhere I have no reason to listen to the radio. I may alternate between
pbr and Hannity at those times which are rare. We have a black guy here who
has a local show that is conservative. He is very good. Hannity is on when I
am at the gym and I read between excercises so I do not listen to the radio.
I do like the guys like O'Reilly who seems sensible to me.
Yes I have several friends who tell me he is good. He is highly educated. I
have never read his books.
I worked as
> a chemist for a large chemical company for most of my career. It seems we
> are pretty similar. Take care
At least in parents. Both of ours were depression era.
TravIsGod
> TravIsGod wrote:
> >> ---Sure, their rich come here...our middle class go to India and Costa
> >> Rica...
>
> > Refresh my memory as to where those doctors went to school and did
> > their residencies...
>
> ----Doesn't matter...they return to their countries and perform sugical
> procedures at up to 1/3 the cost, including airfare....
You don't appear to understand how that's possible.
It is because the society's cost structure is far cheaper. That is
because they do not have a leviathan socialist government voraciously
taxing the shit out of them.
You moron progressives need to figure out why your bullshit seems to
cost so much.
> ----They don't hate the NHP, regardless of what lying regressives claim...
Did I ever say that they did?
Britain is going into the tank anyway, who FUCKING CARES about their
health care system?
Trav