Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
I am really sorry to hear about your father, but the problem here is
not one of private versus public payment. An insurance company would
do the same -- as happened to my own father.
The problem is causing the health care system to focus on costs rather
than care. This is not inherently the case with single payer systems,
whether that is a facility based private HMO, like Kaiser, or a
facility-based government system like VA. But cost-cutting as the
sole value is the ONLY value in our current insurance system.
I am a republican and a free-market conservative. However, for the
same reasons that I don't want the street in front of my house -- a
natural monopoly -- to be privatized, I don't think health care
payment should be either. Doctors should decide care -- not with the
insurance company's gun at their head and hand in their pocket -- but
with good medical practice. That might have saved your father; I am
quite sure it would have mine.
One way to do this, and I am sure there are others, is to have
government payment, but of private doctors who are not government
employees. Political pressure can be put on the system to provide
care, not just cost-cutting.
There is no current way to to do the same to the HMO"s and insurers.
As a side note, because your message was about care, not money, this
also would probably cost society a lot less, maybe even in taxes but
certainly in total societal costs, than is currently the case, and it
would make our businesses more competitive on a global scale. (The
cost reductions come from lower pension, court, worker's compensation,
insurance overhead, hospital and doctor billing and related expenses.)
Once again, I am sorry to hear about your father's passing from poor
health care -- as a fellow sufferer from the same thing, I empathize.
One may disagree with Lloyd on a lot of things, but on the potential
benefits of government payment to health care he is right.
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:22:53 -0500, "Douglas A. Shrader"
<dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bqq8jt$ikt$7@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <vsv15g1jlv50f8@corp.supernews.com>,
>> "The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >news:a1Lzb.3199$WT6.3101@twister.socal.rr.com.. .
>> >>
>> >> "Daniel J. Stern" <dastern@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> >> news:Pine.SOL.4.44.0312031922420.21202-100000@alumni.engin.umich.edu...
>> >> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Canada's healthcare system sucks.
>> >> >
>> >> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American
>> >living
>> >> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is
>*vastly*
>> >> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
>> >> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the
>> >Canadian
>> >> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare
>needs
>> >of
>> >> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
>> >> >
>> >> > DS
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> That's great. My experience in a French system was that it did fine
>for
>> >> everyday stuff: bandages, pain killers, antibiotics. Even then it
>could
>> >be
>> >> a littel scary depending on the doctor you see. I was in an accident
>and
>> >> hurt my hand and wrist. No big deal, but I was rushed to the hospital
>in
>> >a
>> >> scary ambulance ride (for sprain wrist!) and then when I got there,
>they
>> >> took my vitals and then took care of my hand. All went well enough
>until
>> >> the doctor saw my pulse rate. She thought is was too slow, dangerously
>> >so,
>> >> and so perscribed some pills (in a plastic bag) to speed my heart up.
>> >When
>> >> I got home I promply threw them away. I think my heart rate was in the
>> >> 50's, which is not too slow. I felt great. No different than I ever
>did.
>> >>
>> >> A friend of mine had a more serious condition and even though he had
>the
>> >> money to see a private doctor, went to the clinic. He went home in a
>box
>> >> because they didn't misdiagnosed his condition.
>> >>
>> >> The problem was, in my view, that the best doctors wouldn't come near
>the
>> >> socialized system, which paid poorly and rationed care. You cannot
>avoid
>> >> the trade-offs of a socialized system and a private competitive system.
>A
>> >> private system will leave some behind. A socialized system will give
>> >> everyone less quality and quantity overall. It's true with any
>"product".
>> >
>> >For a local example just look at the VA hospitals.
>> >
>> >
>> Ask any veteran if he or she would give that up. Please. Then duck.
>
>My Dad was a Veteran Lloyd, he died because the VA cared more about slashing
>costs than providing quality care. Easier, and cheaper, to make an off the
>shoulder diagnosis than to run expensive tests. When he was admitted for
>pnuemonia they finally decided to run some test to see what was causing it
>and found he was riddled with cancer, which any good hospital would have
>detected years earlier. He died 8 days later, at home, even though he begged
>them to let him stay in the hospital. Hospital beds cost money, and they had
>to cut costs, so a dying man was sent home. That is the kind of low quality,
>one kind treats all health system you want Lloyd, and it stinks. Now shut up
>and stop posting your lies and crap on this or any group.
>
not one of private versus public payment. An insurance company would
do the same -- as happened to my own father.
The problem is causing the health care system to focus on costs rather
than care. This is not inherently the case with single payer systems,
whether that is a facility based private HMO, like Kaiser, or a
facility-based government system like VA. But cost-cutting as the
sole value is the ONLY value in our current insurance system.
I am a republican and a free-market conservative. However, for the
same reasons that I don't want the street in front of my house -- a
natural monopoly -- to be privatized, I don't think health care
payment should be either. Doctors should decide care -- not with the
insurance company's gun at their head and hand in their pocket -- but
with good medical practice. That might have saved your father; I am
quite sure it would have mine.
One way to do this, and I am sure there are others, is to have
government payment, but of private doctors who are not government
employees. Political pressure can be put on the system to provide
care, not just cost-cutting.
There is no current way to to do the same to the HMO"s and insurers.
As a side note, because your message was about care, not money, this
also would probably cost society a lot less, maybe even in taxes but
certainly in total societal costs, than is currently the case, and it
would make our businesses more competitive on a global scale. (The
cost reductions come from lower pension, court, worker's compensation,
insurance overhead, hospital and doctor billing and related expenses.)
Once again, I am sorry to hear about your father's passing from poor
health care -- as a fellow sufferer from the same thing, I empathize.
One may disagree with Lloyd on a lot of things, but on the potential
benefits of government payment to health care he is right.
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:22:53 -0500, "Douglas A. Shrader"
<dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bqq8jt$ikt$7@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <vsv15g1jlv50f8@corp.supernews.com>,
>> "The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >news:a1Lzb.3199$WT6.3101@twister.socal.rr.com.. .
>> >>
>> >> "Daniel J. Stern" <dastern@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> >> news:Pine.SOL.4.44.0312031922420.21202-100000@alumni.engin.umich.edu...
>> >> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Canada's healthcare system sucks.
>> >> >
>> >> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American
>> >living
>> >> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is
>*vastly*
>> >> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
>> >> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the
>> >Canadian
>> >> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare
>needs
>> >of
>> >> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
>> >> >
>> >> > DS
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> That's great. My experience in a French system was that it did fine
>for
>> >> everyday stuff: bandages, pain killers, antibiotics. Even then it
>could
>> >be
>> >> a littel scary depending on the doctor you see. I was in an accident
>and
>> >> hurt my hand and wrist. No big deal, but I was rushed to the hospital
>in
>> >a
>> >> scary ambulance ride (for sprain wrist!) and then when I got there,
>they
>> >> took my vitals and then took care of my hand. All went well enough
>until
>> >> the doctor saw my pulse rate. She thought is was too slow, dangerously
>> >so,
>> >> and so perscribed some pills (in a plastic bag) to speed my heart up.
>> >When
>> >> I got home I promply threw them away. I think my heart rate was in the
>> >> 50's, which is not too slow. I felt great. No different than I ever
>did.
>> >>
>> >> A friend of mine had a more serious condition and even though he had
>the
>> >> money to see a private doctor, went to the clinic. He went home in a
>box
>> >> because they didn't misdiagnosed his condition.
>> >>
>> >> The problem was, in my view, that the best doctors wouldn't come near
>the
>> >> socialized system, which paid poorly and rationed care. You cannot
>avoid
>> >> the trade-offs of a socialized system and a private competitive system.
>A
>> >> private system will leave some behind. A socialized system will give
>> >> everyone less quality and quantity overall. It's true with any
>"product".
>> >
>> >For a local example just look at the VA hospitals.
>> >
>> >
>> Ask any veteran if he or she would give that up. Please. Then duck.
>
>My Dad was a Veteran Lloyd, he died because the VA cared more about slashing
>costs than providing quality care. Easier, and cheaper, to make an off the
>shoulder diagnosis than to run expensive tests. When he was admitted for
>pnuemonia they finally decided to run some test to see what was causing it
>and found he was riddled with cancer, which any good hospital would have
>detected years earlier. He died 8 days later, at home, even though he begged
>them to let him stay in the hospital. Hospital beds cost money, and they had
>to cut costs, so a dying man was sent home. That is the kind of low quality,
>one kind treats all health system you want Lloyd, and it stinks. Now shut up
>and stop posting your lies and crap on this or any group.
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
I am really sorry to hear about your father, but the problem here is
not one of private versus public payment. An insurance company would
do the same -- as happened to my own father.
The problem is causing the health care system to focus on costs rather
than care. This is not inherently the case with single payer systems,
whether that is a facility based private HMO, like Kaiser, or a
facility-based government system like VA. But cost-cutting as the
sole value is the ONLY value in our current insurance system.
I am a republican and a free-market conservative. However, for the
same reasons that I don't want the street in front of my house -- a
natural monopoly -- to be privatized, I don't think health care
payment should be either. Doctors should decide care -- not with the
insurance company's gun at their head and hand in their pocket -- but
with good medical practice. That might have saved your father; I am
quite sure it would have mine.
One way to do this, and I am sure there are others, is to have
government payment, but of private doctors who are not government
employees. Political pressure can be put on the system to provide
care, not just cost-cutting.
There is no current way to to do the same to the HMO"s and insurers.
As a side note, because your message was about care, not money, this
also would probably cost society a lot less, maybe even in taxes but
certainly in total societal costs, than is currently the case, and it
would make our businesses more competitive on a global scale. (The
cost reductions come from lower pension, court, worker's compensation,
insurance overhead, hospital and doctor billing and related expenses.)
Once again, I am sorry to hear about your father's passing from poor
health care -- as a fellow sufferer from the same thing, I empathize.
One may disagree with Lloyd on a lot of things, but on the potential
benefits of government payment to health care he is right.
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:22:53 -0500, "Douglas A. Shrader"
<dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bqq8jt$ikt$7@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <vsv15g1jlv50f8@corp.supernews.com>,
>> "The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >news:a1Lzb.3199$WT6.3101@twister.socal.rr.com.. .
>> >>
>> >> "Daniel J. Stern" <dastern@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> >> news:Pine.SOL.4.44.0312031922420.21202-100000@alumni.engin.umich.edu...
>> >> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Canada's healthcare system sucks.
>> >> >
>> >> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American
>> >living
>> >> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is
>*vastly*
>> >> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
>> >> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the
>> >Canadian
>> >> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare
>needs
>> >of
>> >> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
>> >> >
>> >> > DS
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> That's great. My experience in a French system was that it did fine
>for
>> >> everyday stuff: bandages, pain killers, antibiotics. Even then it
>could
>> >be
>> >> a littel scary depending on the doctor you see. I was in an accident
>and
>> >> hurt my hand and wrist. No big deal, but I was rushed to the hospital
>in
>> >a
>> >> scary ambulance ride (for sprain wrist!) and then when I got there,
>they
>> >> took my vitals and then took care of my hand. All went well enough
>until
>> >> the doctor saw my pulse rate. She thought is was too slow, dangerously
>> >so,
>> >> and so perscribed some pills (in a plastic bag) to speed my heart up.
>> >When
>> >> I got home I promply threw them away. I think my heart rate was in the
>> >> 50's, which is not too slow. I felt great. No different than I ever
>did.
>> >>
>> >> A friend of mine had a more serious condition and even though he had
>the
>> >> money to see a private doctor, went to the clinic. He went home in a
>box
>> >> because they didn't misdiagnosed his condition.
>> >>
>> >> The problem was, in my view, that the best doctors wouldn't come near
>the
>> >> socialized system, which paid poorly and rationed care. You cannot
>avoid
>> >> the trade-offs of a socialized system and a private competitive system.
>A
>> >> private system will leave some behind. A socialized system will give
>> >> everyone less quality and quantity overall. It's true with any
>"product".
>> >
>> >For a local example just look at the VA hospitals.
>> >
>> >
>> Ask any veteran if he or she would give that up. Please. Then duck.
>
>My Dad was a Veteran Lloyd, he died because the VA cared more about slashing
>costs than providing quality care. Easier, and cheaper, to make an off the
>shoulder diagnosis than to run expensive tests. When he was admitted for
>pnuemonia they finally decided to run some test to see what was causing it
>and found he was riddled with cancer, which any good hospital would have
>detected years earlier. He died 8 days later, at home, even though he begged
>them to let him stay in the hospital. Hospital beds cost money, and they had
>to cut costs, so a dying man was sent home. That is the kind of low quality,
>one kind treats all health system you want Lloyd, and it stinks. Now shut up
>and stop posting your lies and crap on this or any group.
>
not one of private versus public payment. An insurance company would
do the same -- as happened to my own father.
The problem is causing the health care system to focus on costs rather
than care. This is not inherently the case with single payer systems,
whether that is a facility based private HMO, like Kaiser, or a
facility-based government system like VA. But cost-cutting as the
sole value is the ONLY value in our current insurance system.
I am a republican and a free-market conservative. However, for the
same reasons that I don't want the street in front of my house -- a
natural monopoly -- to be privatized, I don't think health care
payment should be either. Doctors should decide care -- not with the
insurance company's gun at their head and hand in their pocket -- but
with good medical practice. That might have saved your father; I am
quite sure it would have mine.
One way to do this, and I am sure there are others, is to have
government payment, but of private doctors who are not government
employees. Political pressure can be put on the system to provide
care, not just cost-cutting.
There is no current way to to do the same to the HMO"s and insurers.
As a side note, because your message was about care, not money, this
also would probably cost society a lot less, maybe even in taxes but
certainly in total societal costs, than is currently the case, and it
would make our businesses more competitive on a global scale. (The
cost reductions come from lower pension, court, worker's compensation,
insurance overhead, hospital and doctor billing and related expenses.)
Once again, I am sorry to hear about your father's passing from poor
health care -- as a fellow sufferer from the same thing, I empathize.
One may disagree with Lloyd on a lot of things, but on the potential
benefits of government payment to health care he is right.
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:22:53 -0500, "Douglas A. Shrader"
<dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
>news:bqq8jt$ikt$7@puck.cc.emory.edu...
>> In article <vsv15g1jlv50f8@corp.supernews.com>,
>> "The Ancient One" <onlytheone@thetopknows.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >"David J. Allen" <dallen03NO_SPAM@sanNO_SPAM.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >news:a1Lzb.3199$WT6.3101@twister.socal.rr.com.. .
>> >>
>> >> "Daniel J. Stern" <dastern@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> >> news:Pine.SOL.4.44.0312031922420.21202-100000@alumni.engin.umich.edu...
>> >> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Canada's healthcare system sucks.
>> >> >
>> >> > I daresay you don't know what you're talking about. I'm an American
>> >living
>> >> > here in Canada, and guess what? Canada's healthcare system is
>*vastly*
>> >> > better than the US system in the vast majority of cases. Are there
>> >> > exceptions? Surely. There's no such thing as perfection. But the
>> >Canadian
>> >> > system does a much better job of handling most of the healthcare
>needs
>> >of
>> >> > most of the people at a reasonable cost.
>> >> >
>> >> > DS
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> That's great. My experience in a French system was that it did fine
>for
>> >> everyday stuff: bandages, pain killers, antibiotics. Even then it
>could
>> >be
>> >> a littel scary depending on the doctor you see. I was in an accident
>and
>> >> hurt my hand and wrist. No big deal, but I was rushed to the hospital
>in
>> >a
>> >> scary ambulance ride (for sprain wrist!) and then when I got there,
>they
>> >> took my vitals and then took care of my hand. All went well enough
>until
>> >> the doctor saw my pulse rate. She thought is was too slow, dangerously
>> >so,
>> >> and so perscribed some pills (in a plastic bag) to speed my heart up.
>> >When
>> >> I got home I promply threw them away. I think my heart rate was in the
>> >> 50's, which is not too slow. I felt great. No different than I ever
>did.
>> >>
>> >> A friend of mine had a more serious condition and even though he had
>the
>> >> money to see a private doctor, went to the clinic. He went home in a
>box
>> >> because they didn't misdiagnosed his condition.
>> >>
>> >> The problem was, in my view, that the best doctors wouldn't come near
>the
>> >> socialized system, which paid poorly and rationed care. You cannot
>avoid
>> >> the trade-offs of a socialized system and a private competitive system.
>A
>> >> private system will leave some behind. A socialized system will give
>> >> everyone less quality and quantity overall. It's true with any
>"product".
>> >
>> >For a local example just look at the VA hospitals.
>> >
>> >
>> Ask any veteran if he or she would give that up. Please. Then duck.
>
>My Dad was a Veteran Lloyd, he died because the VA cared more about slashing
>costs than providing quality care. Easier, and cheaper, to make an off the
>shoulder diagnosis than to run expensive tests. When he was admitted for
>pnuemonia they finally decided to run some test to see what was causing it
>and found he was riddled with cancer, which any good hospital would have
>detected years earlier. He died 8 days later, at home, even though he begged
>them to let him stay in the hospital. Hospital beds cost money, and they had
>to cut costs, so a dying man was sent home. That is the kind of low quality,
>one kind treats all health system you want Lloyd, and it stinks. Now shut up
>and stop posting your lies and crap on this or any group.
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqq8t9$ikt$13@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <tdudnVxyI7goDlKiRTvUqA@texas.net>, Steve <no@spam.thanks>
wrote:
> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >
> >
> >> And the US refusing to buy any military hardware from Airbus isn't a
form
> of
> >> subsidy to Boeing?
> >>
> >
> >Nope. Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, and even Gulfstream and Cessna are
> >free to submit bids also. Its restricting military contracting to US
> >companies, and I have no problem with that.
> >
> It's subsidizing US companies by giving only them government contracts.
That's not "subsidizing". Total BS. Boeing competes in the worldwide
marketplace and gets no help from the feds. The defense business is less
competitive, but for good reason (security).
On the other hand, Airbus has received around $30 billion in member state
subsidies since it's inception.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqq8t9$ikt$13@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <tdudnVxyI7goDlKiRTvUqA@texas.net>, Steve <no@spam.thanks>
wrote:
> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >
> >
> >> And the US refusing to buy any military hardware from Airbus isn't a
form
> of
> >> subsidy to Boeing?
> >>
> >
> >Nope. Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, and even Gulfstream and Cessna are
> >free to submit bids also. Its restricting military contracting to US
> >companies, and I have no problem with that.
> >
> It's subsidizing US companies by giving only them government contracts.
That's not "subsidizing". Total BS. Boeing competes in the worldwide
marketplace and gets no help from the feds. The defense business is less
competitive, but for good reason (security).
On the other hand, Airbus has received around $30 billion in member state
subsidies since it's inception.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqq8t9$ikt$13@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <tdudnVxyI7goDlKiRTvUqA@texas.net>, Steve <no@spam.thanks>
wrote:
> >Lloyd Parker wrote:
> >
> >
> >> And the US refusing to buy any military hardware from Airbus isn't a
form
> of
> >> subsidy to Boeing?
> >>
> >
> >Nope. Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, and even Gulfstream and Cessna are
> >free to submit bids also. Its restricting military contracting to US
> >companies, and I have no problem with that.
> >
> It's subsidizing US companies by giving only them government contracts.
That's not "subsidizing". Total BS. Boeing competes in the worldwide
marketplace and gets no help from the feds. The defense business is less
competitive, but for good reason (security).
On the other hand, Airbus has received around $30 billion in member state
subsidies since it's inception.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqq9eg$ikt$18@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <dbhvsvs6ful4cghb4b4hf0bnd6554s5kgv@4ax.com>,
> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is
> outdoing
> >>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
> >
> >Sure.
> >Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
> >their airlines to buy Airbus.
>
> Not nowadays. WTO would slap that down.
>
> >That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
> >Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
>
> They gave startup subsidies, all of which Airbus paid back, as it was
required
> to.
Now the "subsidies" come in the form of "loans". No, this battle is still
being waged.
>
> >Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
> >merit.
> >
> Yeah, sure. That's funny.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqq9eg$ikt$18@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <dbhvsvs6ful4cghb4b4hf0bnd6554s5kgv@4ax.com>,
> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is
> outdoing
> >>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
> >
> >Sure.
> >Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
> >their airlines to buy Airbus.
>
> Not nowadays. WTO would slap that down.
>
> >That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
> >Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
>
> They gave startup subsidies, all of which Airbus paid back, as it was
required
> to.
Now the "subsidies" come in the form of "loans". No, this battle is still
being waged.
>
> >Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
> >merit.
> >
> Yeah, sure. That's funny.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bqq9eg$ikt$18@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <dbhvsvs6ful4cghb4b4hf0bnd6554s5kgv@4ax.com>,
> Bill Funk <bfunk33@pipping.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, 04 Dec 03 10:09:39 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>What does that mean? There are plenty of innovations. Airbus now is
> outdoing
> >>Boeing in orders, for example. Why? Innovative ideas.
> >
> >Sure.
> >Like Britain, France & Germany giving economic incentives (money) to
> >their airlines to buy Airbus.
>
> Not nowadays. WTO would slap that down.
>
> >That's on top of the economic incentives those governments gave to
> >Airbus (subsidies) to help Airbus products.
>
> They gave startup subsidies, all of which Airbus paid back, as it was
required
> to.
Now the "subsidies" come in the form of "loans". No, this battle is still
being waged.
>
> >Boeing doesn't get such help. They have to sell their products on
> >merit.
> >
> Yeah, sure. That's funny.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Dan Gates wrote:
> 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.
Are there any studies that compare the northern teir of US States with Canada? I
think there are pretty wide health differences between the northern and southern
US states.
Ed
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
Dan Gates wrote:
> 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.
Are there any studies that compare the northern teir of US States with Canada? I
think there are pretty wide health differences between the northern and southern
US states.
Ed
