Veterans Only Reply To Rude Drivers

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> It is arguable all right. I have heard the same explanation given for the success of the North
> against the South in the Civil War. I myself have even argued that US aid to the Soviet Union
> during WW II is what saved them. But I do no think any of this is quite correct.
>
> We must give credit where credit is due and all the manufacturing base in the world won't save you
> if you do not have the will and the courage to fight....

Note that I said "most significant" and not only significant.

> The American fighting forces of WW II were second to none although we were a little slow out of
> the gate. We were also the best equipped fighting force and that is always important, but let's
> not slight the human factor in war. The Axis powers of WW II were not only out manufactured, but
> they were out fought also.

I believe that almost all US WW2 veterans that saw combat action ended up with a lot of respect for
the Germans and Japanese. I wonder how many US units would have fought to the very end the way the
vast majority of the Japanese did [1]. Note that there were very few Japanese prisoners of war
taken, and that the Japanese finally surrendered only when Emperor Hirohito personally intervened
and said enough is enough.

As for being the best equipped forces, early in the war it was certainly not the case. Fighter
aircraft, binoculars [2], and torpedoes [3] were areas where US forces were completely outclassed.

[1] A Japanese army unit was discovered in the southwest Pacific region in the mid-1980's. They had
lost communication during the war and never received the news that the war had ended. They did
their duty by manning their post for over four decades. Would soldiers from any other country
have done the same?
[2] A partial reason why most of nighttime naval engagements with the Japanese early in the
Solomon's campaign were lost by the US. The government supported effort in applied optics
research in Japan in the 1920's and 1930's paid off then (not to mention in the postwar camera
industry).
[3] US torpedo's in the early stages of WW2 left visible steam trails that made avoidance
easier, often ran at the wrong depth or otherwise inaccurately, and more often than not
detonated prematurely or not at all - certainly not anywhere near the same class as the
Japanese "Long Lance".

Tom Sherman - Pedant & Curmudgeon

 

[Edward Dolan]

Zippy the Pinhead <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> On 7 Nov 2003 05:45:09 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:
>
> >Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> >>
> >> History lesson time. The first [1] to propose the negative income tax was noted libertarian
> >> economist Milton Friedman in his 1962 book, "Capitalism and Freedom". ... The idea was also
> >> promoted by the Nixon administration in his "Family Assistance Plan of 1969", but was never
> >> implemented.
> >
> >Damnation, but I think you are absolutely right! ... But no matter who first proposed the idea,
> >it was loony because it goes against human nature, or to put it another way, it is too much in
> >accordance with human nature. Who the heck doesn't like to get something for nothing.
>
> One of the supreme ironies of the Democratic feeding frenzy of the summer of 1973 was that they
> rode a fiscal "progressive" out of office.
>
> Only Nixon could go to China, and only Nixon could have effected a "negative income tax". He DID
> implement wage and price controls in those days. (I know; I was a union negotiator trying to win a
> contract wage increase for an underpaid bargaining unit and the "Suit from Management" kept
> telling us to "Blame Nixon". RMN was a better proponent of democrat schemes than any democrat
> elected since, but they hated him, and so he had to go.

Zippy, you are absolutely right about Nixon the progressive. The Dems truly did not know what they
were doing when they went after him tooth and nail. I do think Nixon will go down in history as one
of our better presidents who created sea changes in the cold war with the Soviet Union. I will
always remember Dole's moving tribute to Nixon at his funeral. I have never been able to figure out
why the Dems hated Nixon so much. It was downright irrational.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> Zippy, you are absolutely right about Nixon the progressive. The Dems truly did not know what they
> were doing when they went after him tooth and nail. I do think Nixon will go down in history as
> one of our better presidents who created sea changes in the cold war with the Soviet Union. I will
> always remember Dole's moving tribute to Nixon at his funeral. I have never been able to figure
> out why the Dems hated Nixon so much. It was downright irrational.

Like the Republicans hating Bill Clinton?

I would say it was personal in both cases - it was hard to tell the difference between Clinton, Bush
I and Dole on most policy issues.

Tom Sherman - Curmudgeon

"Don't Have a Cow, Man!" - Bart Simpson

 

[Zippy The Pinhe]

On 7 Nov 2003 16:07:20 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:

> I have never been able to figure out why the Dems hated Nixon so much. It was downright
> irrational.

Well, all that's true, and he did have a huge and underrated impact on the outcome of the Cold War,
but remember this -- in the minds of many of the Democrats who were proud of their place on the
"Enemies List", the *wrong side* eventually won the Cold War. Perhaps they were prescient, and their
hatred of Nixon was born of the fact that they were in fact enemies.

Thus their visceral hatred for him may not have been irrational.

That said, Nixon stepped on his dork big-time with that stupid cloak-and-dagger burglary of Dole's
apartment building, and gave the Democommunists all the ammunition they needed to put his picture on
the lid of the dumpster of history.

Nixon will be remembered mostly for Watergate, because history is written by the winners. And
because those who don't learn from history are tenured to teach it.

Nixon's main contribution will be epitomized by the fact that the media cleverly hypes any new
scandal by appending the syllable "-gate" to a shorthand description of it, e.g. Whitewatergate,
Monicagate.
--
We sleep secure in our beds at night because, somewhere in the world, rough men are awake and
willing to do violence to protect us. George Bernard Shaw

 

[Edward Dolan]

Zippy the Pinhead <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> On 7 Nov 2003 07:52:17 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:
>
> >. One of these days I am going to post my thoughts on how we handle health care in this country
> > and a lot of conservatives here are not going to like what I have to say about it. But that is
> > for another day.
>
> While you're collecting your thoughts on this subject, reflect on the number of Computerized
> Tomography (CT) scanners in the State of Minnesota compared to the number of the same instruments
> in the entire Utopian country of Canada, whose health-care system is viewed as a model by
> "reformers".

No, I am not ready yet to pontificate on the subject, but I think I know what you are implying by
your statement. I have been to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota on several occasions and it
is just about the most impressive health care facility in the entire world. By and large, it is
undeniable that the US has the best health care facilities in the world bar none, but if you can't
access them what good are they? The Canadian system of health care intrigues me no end, not that I
know all that much about it. But conceptually it appeals to
me. I am preparing a longish post (in my mind) which will prove to one and all that I am not really
all that conservative in some of my views. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Zippy The Pinhe]

On 7 Nov 2003 17:32:24 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:

>. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

Wrong.

A FOOLISH consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. (Ralph Waldo Emerson).

There is nothing inherently foolish about consistency.

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > [email protected] (GeoB) wrote in message
> > news:<[email protected]>... ......
> >
> > > Like Gov Jerry Brown said, "We will have to lower our expectations". Of course they jeered at
> > > him and voted him out, but that doesn't mean he was wrong.
> >
> > I have had a passing familiarity with Jerry Brown over the years because I spent some time in
> > California in my long lost youth. He was one of the foremost liberal intellectuals who would
> > regularly run for political office. He was never very successful at any thing he ever
> > did. Why? He totally lacked the common touch. He was always fascinating to listen to, but I
> > could see that he was turning more off than he ever turned on. He just never connected with
> > the average guy. It was too bad because he did have some very interesting ideas and I
> > always understood what he was talking about, but even I did not trust him. I think to be a
> > successful politician in America you had best have the common touch....
>
> Well, the voters in California just chose a new governor with personality but no positions (at
> least publicly) on the issues that he will have to deal with. At least the last actor elected
> Governor of California made a serious effort to address the issues during his campaign (and even
> ended up raising taxes).
>
> Unfortunately, television has turned political campaigns into popularity contests, rather than
> serious discussions of issues. (Lincoln-Douglas would never happen today in the US).

I agree with you that the Lincoln-Douglas debates could never happen in the US today. I once
attended a show on Broadway in New York back in the 60's that was all on the Lincoln-Douglas
debates. I remember Richard Boone was one of the actors. They fooled around with their parts a lot
and the audience had a whale of a good time. No, we are not up to that intellectual standard today.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > Damnation, but I think you are absolutely right! The background information you cite was buried
> > in the back of my head but I am too lazy to look up anything. But allow me to ask you. Did you
> > have this information already in your head ready for instant recall or did you have to hit the
> > "library" for a a bit of looking up. Either way, I am impressed all the way to hell and back....
>
> That Milton Friedman proposed the "Negative Income Tax" is in probably every western economics
> textbook written in the last 30 years.

Maybe so, but who the hell reads this kind of ****?

> Nixon's supporting the idea is commonly reported on by those who wish to point out how far right
> the Republican Party has moved in the last quarter-century.
>
> Having basic knowledge make searching for information much easier and more effective.

So, then you did have to do a search for the information.

> > Even I could be persuaded to vote for someone who promised to give me some money to make up for
> > my deficits.

> Such a beautiful opportunity for a cheap shot!

Yes, I am secure in my ego unlike most liberals and I do not mind giving my inferiors an opportunity
to take cheap shots.

But more importantly, remind me if I ever forget, never to give you a compliment again. I can see
that it is wasted on you. What must it be like to be so insecure that you can not accept a
compliment in good grace. You are truly a phenomenon.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > Absurd and ridiculous! Iraq was harboring and supporting terrorists, was in violation of
> > numerous provisions of the truce and was bent on creating mischief in the Middle East. We took
> > them out just in the nick of time. And the whole world rejoices, except for Democratic
> > liberals....
>
> RONFLMAO! Mr. Dolan obviously has no clue to want anyone outside the US thinks.
>
> Thanks for the laugh!

Are you aware that most Brits support the policy of their Prime Minister with respect to the war?
The percentage is the same as the US. And the Brits equally despise the French and Germans for being
the cowardly bastards that they are.

> > If Israel were truly aggressive she would now be occupying everyone of those Arab countries that
> > you mention (well, probably not Egypt - who in their right mind would want to occupy Egypt). But
> > democracies have no interest in that sort of thing. But Arab dictatorships do, and that is the
> > cause of most of the problems in the Middle East.
>
> If the US has its hands full occupying a country one-tenth its size, do you really think that
> Israel could successfully occupy its neighbors for long? They were never even able to put down a
> bunch of rag-tag Hezbollah guerillas in southern Lebanon.

Israel could do anything it wanted to do if it were ruthless enough. But they are civilized, unlike
the Arabs, and so restrain themselves from the requisite slaughter that would be required.

> You is a funny man, Mr. Dolan. [1]

But not nearly so funny as you, Mr. Sherman.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> ... So, then you did have to do a search for the information.

Only for confirmation purposes.

> > > Even I could be persuaded to vote for someone who promised to give me some money to make up
> > > for my deficits.
>
> > Such a beautiful opportunity for a cheap shot!
>
> Yes, I am secure in my ego unlike most liberals and I do not mind giving my inferiors an
> opportunity to take cheap shots.
>
> But more importantly, remind me if I ever forget, never to give you a compliment again. I can see
> that it is wasted on you. What must it be like to be so insecure that you can not accept a
> compliment in good grace. You are truly a phenomenon.

Note that I did not take the cheap shot, but merely pointed out the opportunity.

Tom Sherman

"Don't Have a Cow, Man!" - Bart Simpson

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > It is arguable all right. I have heard the same explanation given for the success of the North
> > against the South in the Civil War. I myself have even argued that US aid to the Soviet Union
> > during WW II is what saved them. But I do not think any of this is quite correct.
> >
> > We must give credit where credit is due and all the manufacturing base in the world won't save
> > you if you do not have the will and the courage to fight....
>
> Note that I said "most significant" and not only significant.
>
> > The American fighting forces of WW II were second to none although we were a little slow out of
> > the gate. We were also the best equipped fighting force and that is always important, but let's
> > not slight the human factor in war. The Axis powers of WW II were not only out manufactured, but
> > they were out fought also.
>
> I believe that almost all US WW2 veterans that saw combat action ended up with a lot of respect
> for the Germans and Japanese. I wonder how many US units would have fought to the very end the way
> the vast majority of the Japanese did [1]. Note that there were very few Japanese prisoners of war
> taken, and that the Japanese finally surrendered only when Emperor Hirohito personally intervened
> and said enough is enough.

Yes, I have noticed everything you point out above. The Japanese were fanatical and barbaric. That
is why we had to drop an atom bomb on them. They were not rational and in fact were not civilized in
the Western sense of the term. And the Germans were not much better because of their leadership
(******). But fanaticism is no substitute for good soldering. The allies were quite superior to the
axis in all respects.

> As for being the best equipped forces, early in the war it was certainly not the case. Fighter
> aircraft, binoculars [2], and torpedoes [3] were areas where US forces were completely outclassed.

Of course we were outclassed at first. They were militaristic regimes and gave their full attention
to armaments whereas democracies are notoriously sleeping all the time until attacked. Thank God we
now have leadership in this country which knows how to take the initiative and not sit back and wait
to be struck.

> [1] A Japanese army unit was discovered in the southwest Pacific region in the mid-1980's. They
> had lost communication during the war and never received the news that the war had ended. They
> did their duty by manning their post for over four decades. Would soldiers from any other
> country have done the same?

Nothing but pure fanaticism and barbaric ignorance. No civilized Westerner would nor could be
so stupid.

> [2] A partial reason why most of nighttime naval engagements with the Japanese early in the
> Solomon's campaign were lost by the US. The government supported effort in applied optics
> research in Japan in the 1920's and 1930's paid off then (not to mention in the postwar camera
> industry).
> [3] US torpedo's in the early stages of WW2 left visible steam trails that made avoidance easier,
> often ran at the wrong depth or otherwise inaccurately, and more often than not detonated
> prematurely or not at all - certainly not anywhere near the same class as the Japanese "Long
> Lance".

Well, of course. They had been preparing for war for years. Once we became focused we completely out
classed our enemies in every aspect.

Mr. Sherman illustrates perfectly that having a command of facts is no guarantee of being able to
evaluate where those facts fit in the larger scheme of things. He gets bogged down in details
and loses the larger picture. Ever the problem with technicians and engineers.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"skip" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> <snip>
> >. One of these days I am going to post my thoughts on how we handle health care in this country
> > and a lot of conservatives here are not going to like what I have to say about it. But that is
> > for another day.
>
> I'm a long way from knowing the best way of providing health care, but I have become convinced
> over the past several years that linking it to employment isn't the way. And from what I hear
> about the Canadian system it wouldn't go over well in the U.S. either.
>
> skip

I have been forever and a day against linking health care coverage to employment. I can't think of
anything more unfair. The thing to remember about the Canadian system or any other form of universal
health care single payer system is that those who have it would never ever think of giving it up.
This speaks volumes and cannot be easily dismissed. More on this later.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Zippy The Pinhe]

On 7 Nov 2003 20:23:48 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:

>
> The thing to remember about the Canadian system or any other
> form of universal health care single payer system is that those
> who have it would never ever think of giving it up. This speaks
> volumes and cannot be easily dismissed. More on this later.

Another thing to remember about the Canadian system is that many of the people in line in front of
you at the Mayo Clinic (figuratively speaking, of course) have it but didn't want to wait several
months to take advantage of it.

That, too, speaks volumes.

 

[Edward Dolan]

Zippy the Pinhead <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> On 7 Nov 2003 16:07:20 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:
>
> > I have never been able to figure out why the Dems hated Nixon so much. It was downright
> > irrational.
>
> Well, all that's true, and he did have a huge and underrated impact on the outcome of the Cold
> War, but remember this -- in the minds of many of the Democrats who were proud of their place on
> the "Enemies List", the *wrong side* eventually won the Cold War. Perhaps they were prescient, and
> their hatred of Nixon was born of the fact that they were in fact enemies.

Zippy, you have stated it better than even Ann Coulter. I think the liberal Dems do think the wrong
side won the Cold War. They are hanging on to Cuba and China for dear life. They do not want to see
communism disappear from the face of the earth. However, I think even the most rabid liberal does
draw the line at North Korea. At least I haven't heard Mr. Sherman so far say anything good about
North Korea, but I am expecting! Liberalism - socialism - communism. It is all just a continuum.

> Thus their visceral hatred for him may not have been irrational.
>
> That said, Nixon stepped on his dork big-time with that stupid cloak-and-dagger burglary of Dole's
> apartment building, and gave the Democommunists all the ammunition they needed to put his picture
> on the lid of the dumpster of history.

Nixon was paranoid about his opponents. I knew from day one that McGovern was going down to defeat
big time. What Nixon was doing is a boys will be boys sort of thing, but it was stupid nonetheless -
and so unnecessary. McGovern was his own worst enemy. He could never say anything intelligent about
anything. One of America's all time idiots. And he was from South Dakota too, not too far from where
I live here in SW Minnesota. If I could give the rest of the country any advice, I would tell them
never to vote for anyone from Minnesota or South Dakota. We breed total idiots here in the
Northland.

> Nixon will be remembered mostly for Watergate, because history is written by the winners. And
> because those who don't learn from history are tenured to teach it.
>
> Nixon's main contribution will be epitomized by the fact that the media cleverly hypes any new
> scandal by appending the syllable "-gate" to a shorthand description of it, e.g. Whitewatergate,
> Monicagate.

There are the immediate "histories" which are always being written by liberal types and then there
are the long range histories which are mostly written by conservative types. The latter histories
come along much later and are usually thick tomes which nobody reads except other scholars.
Nevertheless, it is those histories which ultimately have the last word. Of course in the long run
we are all of us dead and so it may only be our grandchildren who will have a proper appreciation of
Nixon. This applies even more forcibly to McCarthy of anti-communism fame.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Zippy the Pinhead <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> On 7 Nov 2003 20:23:48 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:

> > The thing to remember about the Canadian system or any other
> > form of universal health care single payer system is that those
> > who have it would never ever think of giving it up. This speaks
> > volumes and cannot be easily dismissed. More on this later.
>
> Another thing to remember about the Canadian system is that many of the people in line in front of
> you at the Mayo Clinic (figuratively speaking, of course) have it but didn't want to wait several
> months to take advantage of it.
>
> That, too, speaks volumes.

I think that there must always be an option existing along side of the universal system (just like
there needs to be an option to the public schools). Those who are willing to pay out of their own
pocket for special treatment should be able to do so. But the vast, vast majority will be more than
satisfied with what is being provided by the universal system. I think that is pretty much how it
works in both Canada and Britain, but I am not sure about that. Those Canadians who are coming to
the Mayo Clinic are doing so because they appreciate the best care in the world and are willing to
pay for it.

For instance, I might need a heart transplant, but I would elect not to have one based on costs
alone. That is heroic medicine and all I want is garden variety cook book medicine. It would be OK
by me if a universal system would refuse to cover heroic medicine. Those who wanted a heart
transplant could pay for it out of their own pocket and I could live with that. Life is not fair,
but everyone in the society should be able to be treated for common diseases which sooner or later
befall most of us.

Most folks do not mind waiting a bit if there is no true emergency. I am assuming no one in Canada
or Britain who truly needs emergency treatment has to wait of course.

I do think the number one main argument against a universal health care single payer system are the
upfront costs. None of us want to live in a society where we are all being taxed to death. But we
are already (most of us) paying an enormous amount for our health care and yet it is my
understanding that some 45 million of us have no health insurance. Our health care delivery needs to
be rationalized as the present system does not really work all that well for millions of Americans.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > Zippy, you are absolutely right about Nixon the progressive. The Dems truly did not know what
> > they were doing when they went after him tooth and nail. I do think Nixon will go down in
> > history as one of our better presidents who created sea changes in the cold war with the Soviet
> > Union. I will always remember Dole's moving tribute to Nixon at his funeral. I have never been
> > able to figure out why the Dems hated Nixon so much. It was downright irrational.
>
> Like the Republicans hating Bill Clinton?

By the way, I never hated Bill Clinton. In fact, I voted for him both times. I despised his personal
immorality and I think he really left office under a cloud (all those pardons), but I never hated
Bill Clinton. I thought in fact that he did a reasonably good job in the Balkans. He was out to
lunch on the terrorism issue, but so was all of America. It really did take a 9/11 to wake us up
(except you of course
- you are still sound asleep on that issue).

> I would say it was personal in both cases - it was hard to tell the difference between Clinton,
> Bush I and Dole on most policy issues.

Agreed. The Dems could learn a lot by studying Clinton closely, but instead they are taking the
Gore-Dean route, a prescription for disaster at the polls.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Zippy the Pinhead <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> On 7 Nov 2003 17:32:24 -0800, [email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote:
>
> >. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.
>
> Wrong.
>
> A FOOLISH consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. (Ralph Waldo Emerson).
>
> There is nothing inherently foolish about consistency.

Human nature is a very complex phenomenon. Philosophers have spent their lives trying to figure it
out. No one is all one thing. To have completely rationalized yourself is to have dehumanized
yourself. Mr. Sherman often appears as a monster to me because he is so damn rational about
everything. No, I prefer some irrationalities and some contradictions. I prefer my humans to be
thoroughly human. That is why I never take offense at anything that is said to me. I understand all
too well what is going on in the human psyche.

But I know what you mean. I think I have actually improved on old Waldo. After all, who is to say
what is foolish and what is not foolish.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

[email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>... ......

> > >. One of these days I am going to post my thoughts on how we handle health care in this country
> > > and a lot of conservatives here are not going to like what I have to say about it. But that
> > > is for another day.
......

> No, I am not ready yet to pontificate on the subject, but I think I know what you are implying by
> your statement. I have been to the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota on several occasions and it
> is just about the most impressive health care facility in the entire world. By and large, it is
> undeniable that the US has the best health care facilities in the world bar none, but if you can't
> access them what good are they? The Canadian system of health care intrigues me no end, not that I
> know all that much about it. But conceptually it appeals to
> me. I am preparing a longish post (in my mind) which will prove to one and all that I am not
> really all that conservative in some of my views. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota

FLASH ! ED DOLAN'S MANIFESTO ON HEALTH CARE DELIVERY IN THE US !

The way we deliver health care in this country is crazy. It is all based on the ability to pay and
it is darned expensive. When I was growing up you could see a doctor for just a few bucks and you
could stay in a hospital for not much more than it would cost you to stay at home. Unless you are
being covered by your employer, you cannot afford to buy health insurance even if you are middle
class. It is super expensive. Even for the elderly with their Medicare it can still be quite
expensive. It is best to be healthy in America and you for sure do not want to be old and sick in
America and not have good health coverage.

We have the best health care system in the world, but if you can't afford it what good is it? I
believe everyone has a RIGHT to health care by virtue of living in this country just as children
have a RIGHT to schooling by virtue of living in this country. I would like to see heath care made
an entitlement in the US just like schooling for the young is an entitlement. I would like to see a
universal coverage single payer system and not a "socialized" system provided by private
contractors. HMO's are out. It should be modeled after the Canadian system or the British system.

It should be financed mainly by income taxes on the middle classes and the wealthy. I would not rule
out a Value Added Tax although this tends to be regressive in nature, and I like taxes to be highly
progressive and I do not like taxes to be hidden.

I believe everyone is entitled to garden variety health care. The high tech kind of health care
which is super expensive could be reserved for those who can afford to pay for it out of their own
finances. The federal government, who would be the single payer, would control costs by virtue of
it's near monopoly. Those doctors who did not like it could emigrate to Afghanistan and practice
their art there. There is no reason why doctors should all be rich as Croesus just because they have
gone into medicine.

A single payer system would only work in wealthy societies like the US. Those nations not wealthy
are doomed to have second rate health care. Most of the European nations have a more rational health
care system than we do. It is my understanding that their health care systems are financed largely
out of the VAT (Value Added Tax) and many other taxes including high gasoline taxes. Surely if they
can do it , we can too. But the mind set has to be created first that everyone in America has a
RIGHT to health care. Once that hurdle has been surmounted, everything else will logically follow.

We are already half way there with our Medicare programs. And soon there is to be a prescription
drug program for the elderly. Many states are already offering very low cost coverage for low income
families with children and every state has it's welfare programs which includes health coverage. The
whole business could be rationalized to cover everyone in society. The only thing that is preventing
it are the feared high costs. But if it were done correctly the overall costs could actually be less
than what we are presently paying via private insurance programs and HMOs.

I am not proposing this for myself. I am fortunate to have the VA, but I would like the entire
country to have the equivalent of the VA. Without health you have got nothing. Life becomes a misery
and is not worth living. If the richest country in the world cannot afford universal health coverage
for all it's citizens it is because there is lacking a moral imperative for it. It is actually quite
scandalous if you think about it in a certain light. I keep reading that something like 45 million
Americans have no health coverage. We need to evolve a bit to a higher level.

Would America be happy with a system like they have in Canada? You bet we would! Once we got it we
would never let it go. It may be that the Dems and the Repubs can never get to this point in which
case what is needed is a populist party to effect the change. One thing is crystal clear. The
present system is broken and although it can be patched, it cannot be fixed. It is just a matter of
time until the inevitable universal system becomes the only possible way to go.

A universal public health care system would be regarded as no more socialistic or "government" than
are our public schools. It would quickly become accepted as part of the American way. After a few
years we would think the former private system was quaint and backward and wonder how we ever put up
with it for so long. And we would ALL be getting perfectly adequate health care.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
......

> > > > Even I could be persuaded to vote for someone who promised to give me some money to make up
> > > > for my deficits.
>
> > > Such a beautiful opportunity for a cheap shot!
> >
> > Yes, I am secure in my ego unlike most liberals and I do not mind giving my inferiors an
> > opportunity to take cheap shots.
> >
> > But more importantly, remind me if I ever forget, never to give you a compliment again. I can
> > see that it is wasted on you. What must it be like to be so insecure that you can not accept a
> > compliment in good grace. You are truly a phenomenon.
>
> Note that I did not take the cheap shot, but merely pointed out the opportunity.

What I note above all else is that you and I are unable to read one another. The statement about my
ego was made in jest, the statement about you not being able to take a compliment was made in all
seriousness. You are unable to tell the difference. I think I may be having the same trouble with
you. Apparently you are from one kind of planet and I am from another. You wouldn't be of Germanic
ancestry by any chance would you? In any event, it is well known that in order to get something you
occasionally have to give something.

Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Tom Sherman]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> ... English music has always been a mystery to the rest of the world The English love music more
> than any other people. I believe London has more symphony orchestras than any other large city.
> But English music is abysmal. Other than Elgar and a few others , there is not much there. Let's
> face it. The English are not into music in the same way that the Germans are. But so what? The
> English are preeminent in the literary arts....

There were two potentially great English composers between Purcell and Elgar, Thomas Linley and
George Pinto, but unfortunately both died in their early 20's (and of course Purcell died at the
premature age of
36). So bad luck certainly played a part.

The number of orchestras in London is misleading - there are many musicians who are members of more
than one - and arguably the quality of performance has suffered from it. There are few, if any who
would claim that there is a current English orchestra in the same class as the Philharmonia was
under Herb the Tyrant.

Tom Sherman - Planet Earth

"Don't Have a Cow, Man!" - Bart Simpson