Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Brandon Sommerville said:

Children are impossible in a gay marriage. They are not impossible in
a sibling marriage.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Greg said:

Apparently not, see Harvey Milk Public High School, City of New York. It is a
separate public high school for gay students only. Interesting that the gay
lobby only feels like latching on to the civil rights crusade to receive equal
treatment when it is most convenient.

First we hear that gay people need to be married, because they need to be
treated like anyone else, than we hear that they need separate schools, unlike
anyone else.

And just try not hiring any job applicant with that school on his/her resumé and
try to claim that you aren't discriminating on sexuality.
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Bill Funk said:

If, by "have" you mean "beget", you're right.
However, couples that can't beget children can still have children in
their family.
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

z said:

Greg () wrote:
Subject: Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about
safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)

Americans are now spending over $5,000 per capita on healthcare, more
than double what is spent in Canada, or any other country, and that's
with like 40% of the people not belonging to any health plan. What
makes you think we would 'spend *AT LEAST* that much in additional
taxes'?

Because there are no expenses for HMO marketing, competing redundant
HMO bureaucracies (if you think the government bureaucracy is bad
you're not familiar with HMOs), huge executive salaries, dividends and
profits for shareholders, money to cover investment losses (a big
factor in the current sudden rise in insurance costs, or didn't you
know that that's what insurance companies and HMOs do with your
money?); because providers don't have to spend significant chunks of
their highly expensive time filling out various and sundry varieties
of reimbursement forms; because there are no random deliberate or
accidental routine nonpayments of bills that should be paid, requiring
a repeat of the reimbursement process; because a huge health plan has
the market muscle to wrestle low charges from providers, who then
charge correspondingly more for smaller plans and charge the maximum
for individuals paying out of pocket. (Or did you have no idea the
discount your health plan, if you have one, gets from the amount you
see on your hospital bill?)
Of course, that explains why Medicare gets the lowest rates in the US,
and is one of the most successful plans in terms of patient
satisfaction, as well as being the only health plan in the US whose
members get care that's at or near the top rank of the industrialized
nations. Ironic, because of course it is, of course, state-run
healthcare.

Well, yeah, good to see it's dawning on you.
The famous JAMA 7/26/2000 paper points out that the US doesn't have
such bad habits as to put it at the bottom of the barrel for health
care outcomes; we're the 5th best and 3rd best for smoking for females
and males, 5th best for alcohol consumption, fifth best in consumption
of animal fats and third best for cholesterol level, for instance. And
deaths from unnatural causes, like getting shot or car accidents, are
not included. So, if we rank at the bottom of healthcare measures of
quality without ranking at the bottom for lifestyle causes, it's hard
to escape the implication that we are just not getting the best or
most appropriate care, regardless of price.
But enough about me and what I know; what evidence do you have that
you are getting the best care in the industrialized world, or even
average care for the industrialized world, other than your deep-seated
belief that anything else would be just too unthinkable to even
consider?
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

z said:

Greg () wrote:
Subject: Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about
safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)

Americans are now spending over $5,000 per capita on healthcare, more
than double what is spent in Canada, or any other country, and that's
with like 40% of the people not belonging to any health plan. What
makes you think we would 'spend *AT LEAST* that much in additional
taxes'?

Because there are no expenses for HMO marketing, competing redundant
HMO bureaucracies (if you think the government bureaucracy is bad
you're not familiar with HMOs), huge executive salaries, dividends and
profits for shareholders, money to cover investment losses (a big
factor in the current sudden rise in insurance costs, or didn't you
know that that's what insurance companies and HMOs do with your
money?); because providers don't have to spend significant chunks of
their highly expensive time filling out various and sundry varieties
of reimbursement forms; because there are no random deliberate or
accidental routine nonpayments of bills that should be paid, requiring
a repeat of the reimbursement process; because a huge health plan has
the market muscle to wrestle low charges from providers, who then
charge correspondingly more for smaller plans and charge the maximum
for individuals paying out of pocket. (Or did you have no idea the
discount your health plan, if you have one, gets from the amount you
see on your hospital bill?)
Of course, that explains why Medicare gets the lowest rates in the US,
and is one of the most successful plans in terms of patient
satisfaction, as well as being the only health plan in the US whose
members get care that's at or near the top rank of the industrialized
nations. Ironic, because of course it is, of course, state-run
healthcare.

Well, yeah, good to see it's dawning on you.
The famous JAMA 7/26/2000 paper points out that the US doesn't have
such bad habits as to put it at the bottom of the barrel for health
care outcomes; we're the 5th best and 3rd best for smoking for females
and males, 5th best for alcohol consumption, fifth best in consumption
of animal fats and third best for cholesterol level, for instance. And
deaths from unnatural causes, like getting shot or car accidents, are
not included. So, if we rank at the bottom of healthcare measures of
quality without ranking at the bottom for lifestyle causes, it's hard
to escape the implication that we are just not getting the best or
most appropriate care, regardless of price.
But enough about me and what I know; what evidence do you have that
you are getting the best care in the industrialized world, or even
average care for the industrialized world, other than your deep-seated
belief that anything else would be just too unthinkable to even
consider?
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Bill Funk said:

If, by "have" you mean "beget", you're right.
However, couples that can't beget children can still have children in
their family.
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Greg said:

Apparently not, see Harvey Milk Public High School, City of New York. It is a
separate public high school for gay students only. Interesting that the gay
lobby only feels like latching on to the civil rights crusade to receive equal
treatment when it is most convenient.

First we hear that gay people need to be married, because they need to be
treated like anyone else, than we hear that they need separate schools, unlike
anyone else.

And just try not hiring any job applicant with that school on his/her resumé and
try to claim that you aren't discriminating on sexuality.
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Brandon Sommerville said:

Children are impossible in a gay marriage. They are not impossible in
a sibling marriage.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Bill Funk said:

it seemed that way, from what was written...
"What you *don't* get is the right to skip to the head of the line
because you've got more disposable income if you need or want a
non-critical procedure."

This seems to be saying that you can't get faster service even if you
pay for it.
But if doctors can work outside the system, why can't you get service
faster by paying more?
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Bill Putney said:

No, but if you can arbitrarily assign marriage rights to gays, then why
wouldn't someone be able to assign human legal status to a dog (and - no
- before someone says it, I am not equating gays to dogs). BTW - there
are people who want to do that (i.e., grant certain human legal and
consititutional status to animals). There are also people who would
also want to assign the same legal status to children as adults (i.e.,
erase the distinction), which of course leaves you open to pedopholia
becoming a meaningless word, and NAMBLA will have won its fight that the
UN tried to assist in in the 90's but thank God got publicly exposed by
the "evil" right wingers and stopped single-handedly by the U.S.
Congress (with nary a word from the left or European countries).

I can easily visualize, maybe not the evolution of our legal system to
accepting marriage to dogs (although, frankly nothing would surprise
me), but certainly, one layer of the onion at a time, to where there
will legally be no distinction between children and adults, and
therefore legal pedophilia (the phrase "consenting adults" will become
meaningless, legally).

I assure you - there are those who have those things on their agenda to
be done when the time comes (i.e., when the public is sufficiently
prepared and ready for it - when it's only just one more tiny
"insignificant" incremental step beyond the last one).

And at each step, the left swears and declares "Oh - this is the last
step - we won't go beyond this - just grant us this one concession.
Just allow us to engage in sodomy in our own homes, and we won't ask for
recognition of gay marriage - it's only those religious people that lie
and say that that's what we plan to do - we won't go any furhter -
honest!"

Or now: "Just grant us the right to get married - we promise not to
erase the distinction between adults and children - it's only those
religious people that lie and say that that's what we plan to do - we
won't do that - honest!"

I can hear it now: "There it is - one of them religious right-wingers
bringing up that bogus 'slippery slope' argument". Don't tell me it's
not happening.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Daniel J. Stern said:

Repetition does not bolster this statement's validity.

The gender of people with whom homosexuals fall in love with...?

DS
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Daniel J. Stern said:

etc.

If you don't know the definition of a slippery-slope argument, go look it
up. I am not your debate coach.

DS
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Daniel J. Stern said:

etc.

If you don't know the definition of a slippery-slope argument, go look it
up. I am not your debate coach.

DS
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Daniel J. Stern said:

Repetition does not bolster this statement's validity.

The gender of people with whom homosexuals fall in love with...?

DS
Click to expand...

George · Dec 7, 2003

Why is this shit in the car groups?

Bill Putney said:

No, but if you can arbitrarily assign marriage rights to gays, then why
wouldn't someone be able to assign human legal status to a dog (and - no
- before someone says it, I am not equating gays to dogs). BTW - there
are people who want to do that (i.e., grant certain human legal and
consititutional status to animals). There are also people who would
also want to assign the same legal status to children as adults (i.e.,
erase the distinction), which of course leaves you open to pedopholia
becoming a meaningless word, and NAMBLA will have won its fight that the
UN tried to assist in in the 90's but thank God got publicly exposed by
the "evil" right wingers and stopped single-handedly by the U.S.
Congress (with nary a word from the left or European countries).

I can easily visualize, maybe not the evolution of our legal system to
accepting marriage to dogs (although, frankly nothing would surprise
me), but certainly, one layer of the onion at a time, to where there
will legally be no distinction between children and adults, and
therefore legal pedophilia (the phrase "consenting adults" will become
meaningless, legally).

I assure you - there are those who have those things on their agenda to
be done when the time comes (i.e., when the public is sufficiently
prepared and ready for it - when it's only just one more tiny
"insignificant" incremental step beyond the last one).

And at each step, the left swears and declares "Oh - this is the last
step - we won't go beyond this - just grant us this one concession.
Just allow us to engage in sodomy in our own homes, and we won't ask for
recognition of gay marriage - it's only those religious people that lie
and say that that's what we plan to do - we won't go any furhter -
honest!"

Or now: "Just grant us the right to get married - we promise not to
erase the distinction between adults and children - it's only those
religious people that lie and say that that's what we plan to do - we
won't do that - honest!"

I can hear it now: "There it is - one of them religious right-wingers
bringing up that bogus 'slippery slope' argument". Don't tell me it's
not happening.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
Click to expand...

Brandon Sommerville · Dec 7, 2003

x-no-archive: yes

Then why ban gay, sibling marriages, or marriages between sterilized siblings where
children are impossible?
Click to expand...

An interesting question. Now that I think about it, incest was fairly
common amongst royalty in a number of different cultures.

Do I support it? No. Why? Because it's far simpler to ban
incestuous marriages in total than to just ban specific types based on
testing. Suppose the tests were wrong?

Now, back to the real question, what do you specifically have against
gay marriage?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

Brandon Sommerville · Dec 7, 2003

it seemed that way, from what was written...
"What you *don't* get is the right to skip to the head of the line
because you've got more disposable income if you need or want a
non-critical procedure."

This seems to be saying that you can't get faster service even if you
pay for it.
But if doctors can work outside the system, why can't you get service
faster by paying more?
Click to expand...

There are big discussions going on now about private clinics: should
they be allowed or not?

If so, we essentially have a two tier health system: One for the
wealthy, one for the rest. That sort of defeats the purpose behind
the concept.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

Bobby Koch · Dec 7, 2003

To give you an opportunity to respond. Thanks for playing.

Bobby Koch · Dec 7, 2003

So you that you can have something to keep you busy.

Bobby Koch · Dec 7, 2003

Nice language from a netcop.

Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

Brandon Sommerville Guest

Brandon Sommerville Guest

Bobby Koch Guest

Bobby Koch Guest

Bobby Koch Guest

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

Are Small Cars a Threat to SUV Drivers?

95 Caravan drivers Seat recliner adjustment

About Safety Certificate.

DRIVERS SIDE SLIDER WON'T OPEN

HUGE LOT 1935-65 GM-FORD-CHRYSLER-AMC-HUDSON-etc. shop manuals

Help ID unknown new car with huge chrome "X" grill

Huge Chrysler OEM part price increases?

Fiat Places Dead Last in J.D. Powers’ UK Satisfaction Study

Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

George Guest

Brandon Sommerville Guest

Brandon Sommerville Guest

Bobby Koch Guest

Bobby Koch Guest

Bobby Koch Guest

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

Useful Searches