So is disaster preparedness information now considered "classified" and only able to be disseminated to the highest bidder. Was Tinkode trying to show a dangerous lack of security on the part of NASA that would just allow anyone to log in and get the information needed to track tsunamis? Shouldn't this be what we want government to be doing?
But you make it sound as though it's (1) a problem and (2) literally everywhere.
1) It was not I that said it was a problem. The post I was responding to in my opinion said the reverse was a problem. I was merely saying that the reverse is not the case. As for 2). No doubt there are places in the USA, where whites outnumber blacks and Spanish folks, but I have not seem one of these places in 10-12 years. But I am sure they are out there. I just am not sure where they are. Speaking for myself, before I moved (out of the country), my apartment building had maybe 400 people in it. Of those maybe 12 where the evil white elite oppressors.
I am firm empiricist. I believe with what I see and hear with my own eyes before I believe what the media says is happening. If the 5 am newscaster says it is sunny, and there is no chance of rain, and I look outside and it is raining, I am going to believe that it is In fact raining.
-While the U.S. economy was tanking all the experts were saying there is nothing wrong, and to keep investing in our stocks. I refuse to listen to the experts. An expert is someone who is selling you something.
I don't have a problem with being the lone white kid. It is a fact that white people may at one time have held the 'high seat', but this is a not a fact anymore. It is only 'elite' media types who will insist that all those Darn racist white rednecks are always making those poor poor inner city black an latino folks feel inferior and keeping them from thriving through their white hegemony I grew up in the Southwest. Where I grew up there was real racism against white people from Spanish. I dealt with it. I am fine. I just find it really laughable when people continue to view white people as the evil oppressors of black and Spanish people everywhere. If white people are in a race to to get to the head of the pack and stay there, they have pretty much lost. I am cool with this.
As far as believing statistics, you have got to be joking. I am reminded of Animal Farm where the pigs that statistically the the collective is growing more and more food each year, while in fact the rank and file animals know they are starving. Statistics are only useful if you can trust the source and impartiality of the provider. This is not true in this case. So continue to believe that all your problems are caused by white people. People like you will always align your thoughts along the politically correct paths laid down the media, and consider people like me to be racist bigots who can't think for themselves. There is nothing I can do to change your mind.
It wasn't the Islamic Fundamentalists, who who have a lot in common with the founders of the United States. It wasn't the United States as explained in the article. However, China has been racking up economically while they finance our war on terror through the purchasing our our debt.
If I wanted to destroy an nation, getting it involved in an endless war on terror, while I Build up my economy would be a great way to go. This is what I would think if I did not have the main stream media to do my thinking for me and tell me it was Islamic terrorism that brought down the trade center.
I always believe the media because they have a crack team of impartial investigative journalists. (who are all investing in China)
In the U.S. it is the lone white kid surrounded by Mexican, and black kids. Do not believe the media hype. Unless you live in Norway, 'white' people are not 'on top' any more.
I was with one of the first groups that 'went out to fight pirates' I was with the coast guard, traveling on a Dutch oiler is support of a bunch of navy and coast guard coast guard patrol craft that were supposed to take on the pirates. At one time we knew the location of 7 ships whose crew were actively being held hostage. What did we do? Absolutely NOTHING. At the time all the hostages were Indian of Filipino, and none of the vessels flew a U.S. flag. Also, were were always worried about invading Somali territorial waters (TTW).
One of the problems was that we had three different services from two different countries operating under 3 different combined task forces. We also had 2 Navy lawyers on-board, where were there to make sure we didn't violate any sovereign territory (I kid you not). Every time someone wanted to like maybe do something, we had to run it by three different chains of command plus the JAG.
If you want to fight pirates, fight pirates don't play games (MMO's). Fighting pirates (unlike fighting an imaginary war on terror) is something that the whole world can get behind. No-one would really care if we invade Somali TTW in order to kill pirates. This was about 5 years ago. At the time perhaps little bit of force could have made a huge difference. My understanding is that the Somalis have gotten a lot more organized in the time. But I really don't know. I no longer am in the service, but somehow I doubt that the U.S. military has (gotten more organized). With that said, I think the U.S. Navy could probably win a war with Somali pirates. It is just that the U.S. Navy is more worried about an incident where say a 20 people die trying to rescue the fillipino crew from a non u.s. flagged vessel. Heaven forbid some of the innocent crew members get killed in the rescue operation.
Providing every crew member of a vessel going through the area with access to a rifle would probably go a long way to combat the problem.
You did not fnord finish the sentence. You forgot fnord to supply the object of what was on the Ipod. Fnord what I am saying is that we will fnord create an all embracing and media control fnord complex, where people will not fnord be able to tell they are being controlled. It will subtly sneak in fnord on them and they will not be able to fnord recognize the all pervading prison that they are fnord surrounded by and controlled in with even fnord if it is directly pointed out to them. They fnord will deny it call you crazy fnord conspiracy theorist.
As a member in good standing of the United American Evil Masonic Overlord's of the United States of America, I applaud this innovation. It used to be that we could only persuade the population while they were at home watching the tube. Now thanks to the iPad we can indoctrinate the hearts and minds of the populace wherever they are at given moment. HeheheHe Haahahaha. And even better yet, it includes an attached camera. This TV watches them while they are watching TV.
Seriously what is not to love. It is a brave brave new world.
There is a use of force continuum. If you take the less that lethal options out of the equation, they are more likely to use a gun for a situation where they could use a taser now. I would like to believe that all police officers are martial artists, and could manipulate your joints to put you into submission without causing any injury, but I think they would probably just shoot you if they felt threatened. When all you have is a hammer, every pronblem looks like a nail. If you take the less than lethal tools out of the equation because they have not done 'long term studies' you are likely to get more preventable deaths.
Personally, I am all for giving officers more tasers, OC, and any other non lethal tool you can think of.
-Call me gay, but I am afraid of bullets. You are afraid of flashlights.
Maybe not, but the alternative to less than lethal weapons (tasers, and the flashlights, LRADs (sound) , and Microwaves) is a gun. Guns have a well documented history of causing large amounts of damage to the soft tissue of the body.
Personally I would rather risk a case of blindness than risk a bullet to the head. However you mileage may vary.
Speaking of blindness, did you know that Teddy Roosevelt was blinded in the left eye. Apparently he fought a good natured boxing match while serving as president of the U.S.A.. A lucky blow struck his head, and his retina became detached. They don't make men like that anymore.
I've been around rich people and around poor people. Almost without exception, the poor people have been more honest and a better class of people.
You are extremely naive if you don't think that a large percentage of the drug money isn't being laundered into the hands of the 'legitimate' people who run the government and wear three piece suites. That is why the drug trade is allowed to go on. It is making too many people too much money. If there was a real desire to shut down the trade, it could be shut down overnight. It would be nice if drugs were legalized, but i don't think it will happen as long as so many people are making so much money.
Think about it. The coast guard and the DEA are the drug runners best friends. Who else would artificially inflate the price of these plants. Likewise the DEA, and coast guard have to love the drug runners. Their jobs, and all the neat toys they get to play with are all purchased to fight this endless war on drugs.
When prohibition was finally lifted, it was the rum runners who came to power in the USA (Kennedy et. al) The ironic thing is that even when alcohol was legitimately taxed, it was still the rum runners who were making the money (Kennedy et. al). The only difference is the instead of the crooked individuals being gangsters they became politicians.
Hey said that it was pretty Gay, not that it was pretty homosexual. English is a flexible language, and the meaning of words changes gradually, as more and more people misuse the canonical definitions of words. By Gay, he means that the OP posted an opinion that he strongly disagrees with.
At one time Bad meant of poor quality, and disagreeable. Now it means like totally the opposite thing, and means actually quite good. e.g 'That is a pretty bad looking car'
Ignorance used to be a term denoting a lack of knowledge. Today it is a synonym for stupidity. Gay used to mean happy, then it meant homosexual. Now it just means disagreeable.
Your mistake my friend is believing that sanity/insanity can be determined absolutely. Sure you think he is crazy, but he probably thinks YOU are crazy for 'mindlessly' playing along with an insane society. As for being guilty of mailing bombs to people, without a doubt he is guilty of that. However the victors always make the rules. In another time-line he is considered a freedom fighter, in this one he is just a terrorist. If the Axis had won WWII, undoubtedly everyone on prime time TV would be decrying the crimes of the Jews, and the cowardly bombing of German homeland by the evil allies. If we were living in Greco Roman times people would be on trial for NOT being pedophiles. What is 'sane' can not be taken out of the context of the societal norms. Ted Kaminzky (sp) questioned those norms, therefore it is necessary that he be locked up.
After reading his writing though, I though he had some interesting insight on the disillusionment with contemporary society. It does not mean that I agree with everything he says, it just means that I found some insight from it. I try to evaluate ideas based on their merit w/o regard to the context of the prejudices of the society I am in. Take for example Hitler. Everyone know that Hitler is 'bad'. However That does not mean that animal rights, the green movement, vegetarianism, or oral hygene, all of which Hiller was a big champion of are bad ideas. I try to cherry pick the good ideas from the bad independent of who stated them.
Ted Kaminsky (sp) wrote that when people are living a more and more pointless life and utterly domesticated life, they will sometimes turn to drugs in order to keep themselves placated, and continue to believe that things make sense. If a society does not start consuming drugs whole sale, a lot of strife is sure to ensue. He said that among many other things.
Of coarse his thoughts were considered heretical, so the establishment wrote them off as a rambling lunatic.
Well I have to go now and watch my daily fix of Jerry Springer / Sports / take my prescription of Zoloft (or other major pharacutical drug) in order to take my mind of the fact that I no longer have to struggle to survive, and that my life is largely pointless. But hey at least I am not taking meth. Delicious sweet smelling meth anphetamine. Just like Grandma used to bake up.
Funny thing you mention that. I was trying to do this EXACT thing. I had a one way ticket to what is considered a '3rd world' country. The nice ticketing agent at United Airlines asked me if I had a return ticket. I said no. She asked me if I was visiting family or friends. I said no. She asked when I would be returning. I said I was just going to play things by ear, and maybe do some sheep farming. She looked at me kind of funny. The really funny thing is that she 'determined' that my passport which has gotten me in and out of 4 different counties (in pretty much the same condition it is in now) no longer meets the TSA standards of legibility. I can read all the numbers just fine, but apparently just the presence of my passport in it's 'mutilated' condition is likely to bring the plane down. She also told me that i did not have a visa for the country in question, so I would not be able to travel. I checked on the counties website. You do not need a visa if traveling from the USA for vacation for periods of up to 3 months. But the United Airlines ticketing agents said that her records said this was not the case. She did not know which continent the country was on, but she was apparently an expert on the nations visa policies. I just hope the country updates their embassy website to make it consistent with the experts at United Airlines ticketing. (hasn't happened yet, but I am sure they will get on that right away)
So in essence the United Airlines ticketing agents denied me the right to travel without having even gotten to the TSA agency.
Thanks for proving my point. You outright hatred to me, someone you have never met, and the entire population of the United States, all 300 million+ of us proves that humanity will never just 'get along.' There will always be one more 'enemy' who needs to be put down before peace can finally be achieved.
It is pretty much obvious that humanity as a whole enjoys killing. It isn't just the U.S. or males between the ages of 18 and 25. It is the whole fricking lot of us w/ exception of those Buddhists.
Over half of the stories / movies/ comics have violence as a central theme. Humanities first love is violence, and it always will be. People who say otherwise are delusional, or trying to sell you something. Hell we can't even get along with our coworkers without engaging in a bunch of cowardly back bitting and office gossip.
People need to just deal with these facts, rather that pretending they are something their not. Perhaps then they could turn their competitive instincts into something nobler, like an international cooperation to build a gigantic quark missile and send it into outer space to kill that fucking asshole know as God.
I jest but in general the only way humans will cooperate and work together as brothers is if they are challenged by an external threat greater than themselves. When that threat disappears human beings turn into the rats they were before.
So who is with me. Let's work towards world peace and harmony by killing some space aliens, or that asshole God, who is always sending down earth quacks and lightning bolts and shit.
You say that it is not restricting the number of doctors in the field. If they are setting the accreditation standards so high that there are not enough doctors coming into the field, isn't that a defacto standard? Regardless of which organization is restricting the supply, it still does not change the fact that there are not enough doctors, and health care is suffering because of it.
Concerning health Insurance:
You say that if we got rid of insurance only those who are healthy financially could afford the best health care. I would agree with you up to a point. In the real world, the richer people will always have access to better health care. That is just the way it is. (I am far far from being rich BTW) The trick is to get rich. There will be people who die just because they can't afford health care. DEAL WITH IT. However, I feel that paradoxically a greater number of people would survive and be better of without health Insurance. Doctors would have to lower their prices. Hospitals would no longer be able to charge $800 for a tissue culture. Cheaper alternative would have to be found. The alternatives may not be the very best alternative, but they would be good enough. People survived hundreds of years without insurance companies, they can in the future. How did the old timey country doctors and patients survive before health insurance? It is possible. You may not have access, to the latest MRI machines or life flight, but I would rather have access to some doctor with a degree from some Carribean school, than no access to the very best doctors. Company health care insurance is a modern invention created during WWII when wage freezes caused companies to start having to offer other incentives to get the best employees. They couldn't offer better wages, so they offered 'free' health care. Health care has been suffering ever since.
As for 'Obamacare'
People decry Obamacare, when they don't realize that we have a defacto socialized system now.
First of all, there is no such thing as Obamacare. The bizarre bill that went through was written by conservatives and has no resemblance to what Obama or any actual democrat would have actually wanted. Blaming this pile of failure on him makes as much sense as blaming the Challenger disaster on GWB.
That said, there is nothing "socialized" about the current system. Socialism implies equality and state control, neither of which exist in the current system.
I did not mean Obamacare in a prejorative manner, or mean to besmirch my president. I would also agree that the bill was not what the President / democrats wanted. IMHO it was written inderectly by the insurance companies.
By being a defacto socialized system, I mean that the recipients of the service (the sick) are no longer paying for the services of the producers( the doctors / hospitals). For capitalism to work this MUST happen. You can't throw a profit driven middle man (Insurance) in there and expect market forces to sort it all out. If there is no direct feedback to keep prices low (e.g) less customers coming in, you can not expect hospitals to make financially sane decisions. You can also not expect insurance companies to look after the patients best interest. This is the patients job. This is especially true if large percentages of the health care is being paid not by the insured, but by his or her company who is the real customer.
All three of my proposals: Eliminating the barrier to entry for doctors, Eliminating health Insurance, and Eliminating malpractice suites, work hand in hand. You have to have all three, but if you did that you would have a true free market heath care system. This is something we have not had in a long long time.
Maybe we could try it out on a limited basis in some state like New Hampshire, or Texas.
You give anecdotal evidence that would not be allowed in court by the lawyers you are defending.
Here is my anecdotal evidence:
My mother was run over by an illegal immigrant passed out at the wheel of a car. She ended up surviving, but had her neck broken. She is better now, but she could not find a lawyer to sue because.
1) The illegal immigrant did not have enough money to make the suite worthwhile. 2) Was uninsured, and therefore a lawyer could not hope to profit from the insurance company.
In general for every example of lawyers acting nobly (in their mind), one can find 5 examples of lawyers acting selfishly w/o regard to the greater good of society.
When someone wants to serve humanity they join the peace corps. They don't become legal assassins.
Maybe your national character is better. Just because your HMOs CAN legally gouge their customers doesn't mean they do. Also maybe you guys are just smarter and more unwilling to put up with the stupidity that we have in the USA.
In the example you give, if the geriatric home shares the same parking lot as the hospital, and they can easily move a patient to the hospital on a gurney, I don't understand why they have to call an ambulance, but they may have a reason. Maybe the EMTs can perform emergency cardiac care better than the people at the geriatric center.
Sure there is a reason. If a patient were to die. (likely event), they don't want to be sued by a lawyer. It would look like they are not following 'standard best practices'. How bad does it look when you just throw someone in the station wagon, when you could wait 15 minutes and transport him in approved medical / lawyer free manner. Also 911 HAS to be called. If 911 isn't called it looks like 'standard best practices' aren't being followed.
I live in the USA, but malpractice laws in other countries, such as Canada, are even stricter. In Canada, and in the UK, when doctors make a mistake that harms a patient, they're required to tell that patient. And Canada allows damages for things that wouldn't get damages here, such as the anxiety you have between the time they tell you that you may have been infected by improperly sterilized equipment and the time that you find out you're not infected.
You can't take one particular example of what is being done in another country, and say we should do it the same way here. It's like saying the Central African republic has laws against witchcraft, therefore the United States should get with the program and create similar legal safeguards to protect the children. The point is that health care in the USA is broken. Eliminating malpractice helps. Besides last I checked there were lots Canadians coming to the U.S because the health care is better. The UK has a terrible beuocraticed system. We should be doing exactly the opposite of what they are doing. e.g. getting rid of malpractice suits.
(Juries are a lottery, and often come up with crazy results, but that's the price of the jury system. These are the same jurors who decide death penalty cases. And they're also the voters who choose our elected officials.)
I would trust an admittedly dumbed down U.Sian populace rather than a super intelligent lawyers who their super intelligence to deliberately distort facts to a dumbed down jury so that they can get the greatest monetary award that she / he can.
I am not disputing the fact that malpractice lawyer do not occasionally do good, and that hospitals don't occasionally deserve to be raked over the coals. But at this moment in time, lawyers are doing more good than bad.
There is a grain of truth to that, but for the most part, if a doctor follows the standard best practice, he won't be guilty of malpractice.
Medical malpractice costs aren't really a serious problem,
Hugh
You must live outside the USA. My mom works as a nurse in a geriatric home. Whenever a patient codes they call 911. A ambulance arrives and has to carry them to the hospital proper. They MUST call an ambulance even though the hospital is litterally located in the same parking lot. They must do this due to the fear of lawsuits. An ambulace can cost an excess of $1000. It is interesting to note that whenever they call 911. The fire company ALWAYS arrives first. Mind you the nursing home is literally located in the hospital parking lot.
So you tell me that lawyers are making medicine safer for everyone, and keeping costs down.
300K is a lot of money. It is more money than I am worth. Much of the world's population will never make even 100K over their entire life.
If a doctor screws up. They should admit they are sorry, and pay to fix their mistake. If they cut off the wrong arm. They should pay for a prosthetic arm.
This sound harsh, but we all make mistakes. Doctors are no different. We all do the best with what we have. Nobody is going to live forever. You have no right to live free forever, free of all pain and injury.
If we had more doctors there would be less mistakes like this made. IMHO
Slashdot Mirror
So is disaster preparedness information now considered "classified" and only able to be disseminated to the highest bidder. Was Tinkode trying to show a dangerous lack of security on the part of NASA that would just allow anyone to log in and get the information needed to track tsunamis? Shouldn't this be what we want government to be doing?
But you make it sound as though it's (1) a problem and (2) literally everywhere.
1) It was not I that said it was a problem. The post I was responding to in my opinion said the reverse was a problem. I was merely saying that the reverse is not the case. As for 2). No doubt there are places in the USA, where whites outnumber blacks and Spanish folks, but I have not seem one of these places in 10-12 years. But I am sure they are out there. I just am not sure where they are. Speaking for myself, before I moved (out of the country), my apartment building had maybe 400 people in it. Of those maybe 12 where the evil white elite oppressors.
I am firm empiricist. I believe with what I see and hear with my own eyes before I believe what the media says is happening. If the 5 am newscaster says it is sunny, and there is no chance of rain, and I look outside and it is raining, I am going to believe that it is In fact raining.
-While the U.S. economy was tanking all the experts were saying there is nothing wrong, and to keep investing in our stocks. I refuse to listen to the experts. An expert is someone who is selling you something.
I don't have a problem with being the lone white kid. It is a fact that white people may at one time have held the 'high seat', but this is a not a fact anymore. It is only 'elite' media types who will insist that all those Darn racist white rednecks are always making those poor poor inner city black an latino folks feel inferior and keeping them from thriving through their white hegemony I grew up in the Southwest. Where I grew up there was real racism against white people from Spanish. I dealt with it. I am fine. I just find it really laughable when people continue to view white people as the evil oppressors of black and Spanish people everywhere. If white people are in a race to to get to the head of the pack and stay there, they have pretty much lost. I am cool with this.
As far as believing statistics, you have got to be joking. I am reminded of Animal Farm where the pigs that statistically the the collective is growing more and more food each year, while in fact the rank and file animals know they are starving. Statistics are only useful if you can trust the source and impartiality of the provider. This is not true in this case. So continue to believe that all your problems are caused by white people. People like you will always align your thoughts along the politically correct paths laid down the media, and consider people like me to be racist bigots who can't think for themselves. There is nothing I can do to change your mind.
-Good Luck
It wasn't the Islamic Fundamentalists, who who have a lot in common with the founders of the United States. It wasn't the United States as explained in the article.
However, China has been racking up economically while they finance our war on terror through the purchasing our our debt.
If I wanted to destroy an nation, getting it involved in an endless war on terror, while I Build up my economy would be a great way to go. This is what I would think if I did not have the main stream media to do my thinking for me and tell me it was Islamic terrorism that brought down the trade center.
I always believe the media because they have a crack team of impartial investigative journalists. (who are all investing in China)
In the U.S. it is the lone white kid surrounded by Mexican, and black kids. Do not believe the media hype. Unless you live in Norway, 'white' people are not 'on top' any more.
I was with one of the first groups that 'went out to fight pirates' I was with the coast guard, traveling on a Dutch oiler is support of a bunch of navy and coast guard coast guard patrol craft that were supposed to take on the pirates. At one time we knew the location of 7 ships whose crew were actively being held hostage. What did we do? Absolutely NOTHING. At the time all the hostages were Indian of Filipino, and none of the vessels flew a U.S. flag. Also, were were always worried about invading Somali territorial waters (TTW).
One of the problems was that we had three different services from two different countries operating under 3 different combined task forces. We also had 2 Navy lawyers on-board, where were there to make sure we didn't violate any sovereign territory (I kid you not).
Every time someone wanted to like maybe do something, we had to run it by three different chains of command plus the JAG.
If you want to fight pirates, fight pirates don't play games (MMO's). Fighting pirates (unlike fighting an imaginary war on terror) is something that the whole world can get behind. No-one would really care if we invade Somali TTW in order to kill pirates. This was about 5 years ago. At the time perhaps little bit of force could have made a huge difference. My understanding is that the Somalis have gotten a lot more organized in the time. But I really don't know. I no longer am in the service, but somehow I doubt that the U.S. military has (gotten more organized). With that said, I think the U.S. Navy could probably win a war with Somali pirates. It is just that the U.S. Navy is more worried about an incident where say a 20 people die trying to rescue the fillipino crew from a non u.s. flagged vessel. Heaven forbid some of the innocent crew members get killed in the rescue operation.
Providing every crew member of a vessel going through the area with access to a rifle would probably go a long way to combat the problem.
There are what in the iPad?
You did not fnord finish the sentence. You forgot fnord to supply the object of what was on the Ipod. Fnord what I am saying is that we will fnord create an all embracing and media control fnord complex, where people will not fnord be able to tell they are being controlled. It will subtly sneak in fnord on them and they will not be able to fnord recognize the all pervading prison that they are fnord surrounded by and controlled in with even fnord if it is directly pointed out to them. They fnord will deny it call you crazy fnord conspiracy theorist.
-Regards
-The Lodge
As a member in good standing of the United American Evil Masonic Overlord's of the United States of America, I applaud this innovation. It used to be that we could only persuade the population while they were at home watching the tube. Now thanks to the iPad we can indoctrinate the hearts and minds of the populace wherever they are at given moment. HeheheHe Haahahaha. And even better yet, it includes an attached camera. This TV watches them while they are watching TV.
Seriously what is not to love. It is a brave brave new world.
There is a use of force continuum. If you take the less that lethal options out of the equation, they are more likely to use a gun for a situation where they could use a taser now. I would like to believe that all police officers are martial artists, and could manipulate your joints to put you into submission without causing any injury, but I think they would probably just shoot you if they felt threatened. When all you have is a hammer, every pronblem looks like a nail. If you take the less than lethal tools out of the equation because they have not done 'long term studies' you are likely to get more preventable deaths.
Personally, I am all for giving officers more tasers, OC, and any other non lethal tool you can think of.
-Call me gay, but I am afraid of bullets. You are afraid of flashlights.
Maybe not, but the alternative to less than lethal weapons (tasers, and the flashlights, LRADs (sound) , and Microwaves) is a gun. Guns have a well documented history of causing large amounts of damage to the soft tissue of the body.
Personally I would rather risk a case of blindness than risk a bullet to the head. However you mileage may vary.
Speaking of blindness, did you know that Teddy Roosevelt was blinded in the left eye. Apparently he fought a good natured boxing match while serving as president of the U.S.A.. A lucky blow struck his head, and his retina became detached. They don't make men like that anymore.
I've been around rich people and around poor people. Almost without exception, the poor people have been more honest and a better class of people.
You are extremely naive if you don't think that a large percentage of the drug money isn't being laundered into the hands of the 'legitimate' people who run the government and wear three piece suites. That is why the drug trade is allowed to go on. It is making too many people too much money. If there was a real desire to shut down the trade, it could be shut down overnight. It would be nice if drugs were legalized, but i don't think it will happen as long as so many people are making so much money.
Think about it. The coast guard and the DEA are the drug runners best friends. Who else would artificially inflate the price of these plants. Likewise the DEA, and coast guard have to love the drug runners. Their jobs, and all the neat toys they get to play with are all purchased to fight this endless war on drugs.
When prohibition was finally lifted, it was the rum runners who came to power in the USA (Kennedy et. al) The ironic thing is that even when alcohol was legitimately taxed, it was still the rum runners who were making the money (Kennedy et. al). The only difference is the instead of the crooked individuals being gangsters they became politicians.
Hey said that it was pretty Gay, not that it was pretty homosexual. English is a flexible language, and the meaning of words changes gradually, as more and more people misuse the canonical definitions of words. By Gay, he means that the OP posted an opinion that he strongly disagrees with.
At one time Bad meant of poor quality, and disagreeable. Now it means like totally the opposite thing, and means actually quite good. e.g 'That is a pretty bad looking car'
Ignorance used to be a term denoting a lack of knowledge. Today it is a synonym for stupidity. Gay used to mean happy, then it meant homosexual. Now it just means disagreeable.
If you disagree with me, you are Gay.
Your mistake my friend is believing that sanity/insanity can be determined absolutely. Sure you think he is crazy, but he probably thinks YOU are crazy for 'mindlessly' playing along with an insane society. As for being guilty of mailing bombs to people, without a doubt he is guilty of that. However the victors always make the rules. In another time-line he is considered a freedom fighter, in this one he is just a terrorist. If the Axis had won WWII, undoubtedly everyone on prime time TV would be decrying the crimes of the Jews, and the cowardly bombing of German homeland by the evil allies. If we were living in Greco Roman times people would be on trial for NOT being pedophiles. What is 'sane' can not be taken out of the context of the societal norms. Ted Kaminzky (sp) questioned those norms, therefore it is necessary that he be locked up.
After reading his writing though, I though he had some interesting insight on the disillusionment with contemporary society. It does not mean that I agree with everything he says, it just means that I found some insight from it. I try to evaluate ideas based on their merit w/o regard to the context of the prejudices of the society I am in. Take for example Hitler. Everyone know that Hitler is 'bad'. However That does not mean that animal rights, the green movement, vegetarianism, or oral hygene, all of which Hiller was a big champion of are bad ideas. I try to cherry pick the good ideas from the bad independent of who stated them.
Ted Kaminsky (sp) wrote that when people are living a more and more pointless life and utterly domesticated life, they will sometimes turn to drugs in order to keep themselves placated, and continue to believe that things make sense. If a society does not start consuming drugs whole sale, a lot of strife is sure to ensue. He said that among many other things.
Of coarse his thoughts were considered heretical, so the establishment wrote them off as a rambling lunatic.
Well I have to go now and watch my daily fix of Jerry Springer / Sports / take my prescription of Zoloft (or other major pharacutical drug) in order to take my mind of the fact that I no longer have to struggle to survive, and that my life is largely pointless. But hey at least I am not taking meth. Delicious sweet smelling meth anphetamine. Just like Grandma used to bake up.
Funny thing you mention that. I was trying to do this EXACT thing. I had a one way ticket to what is considered a '3rd world' country. The nice ticketing agent at United Airlines asked me if I had a return ticket. I said no. She asked me if I was visiting family or friends. I said no. She asked when I would be returning. I said I was just going to play things by ear, and maybe do some sheep farming. She looked at me kind of funny. The really funny thing is that she 'determined' that my passport which has gotten me in and out of 4 different counties (in pretty much the same condition it is in now) no longer meets the TSA standards of legibility. I can read all the numbers just fine, but apparently just the presence of my passport in it's 'mutilated' condition is likely to bring the plane down. She also told me that i did not have a visa for the country in question, so I would not be able to travel. I checked on the counties website. You do not need a visa if traveling from the USA for vacation for periods of up to 3 months. But the United Airlines ticketing agents said that her records said this was not the case. She did not know which continent the country was on, but she was apparently an expert on the nations visa policies. I just hope the country updates their embassy website to make it consistent with the experts at United Airlines ticketing. (hasn't happened yet, but I am sure they will get on that right away)
So in essence the United Airlines ticketing agents denied me the right to travel without having even gotten to the TSA agency.
Thanks for proving my point. You outright hatred to me, someone you have never met, and the entire population of the United States, all 300 million+ of us proves that humanity will never just 'get along.' There will always be one more 'enemy' who needs to be put down before peace can finally be achieved.
It is pretty much obvious that humanity as a whole enjoys killing. It isn't just the U.S. or males between the ages of 18 and 25. It is the whole fricking lot of us w/ exception of those Buddhists.
Over half of the stories / movies/ comics have violence as a central theme. Humanities first love is violence, and it always will be. People who say otherwise are delusional, or trying to sell you something. Hell we can't even get along with our coworkers without engaging in a bunch of cowardly back bitting and office gossip.
People need to just deal with these facts, rather that pretending they are something their not. Perhaps then they could turn their competitive instincts into something nobler, like an international cooperation to build a gigantic quark missile and send it into outer space to kill that fucking asshole know as God.
I jest but in general the only way humans will cooperate and work together as brothers is if they are challenged by an external threat greater than themselves. When that threat disappears human beings turn into the rats they were before.
So who is with me. Let's work towards world peace and harmony by killing some space aliens, or that asshole God, who is always sending down earth quacks and lightning bolts and shit.
I am going to have to support Expedia on this one
Concerning the AMA:
You say that it is not restricting the number of doctors in the field. If they are setting the accreditation standards so high that there are not enough doctors coming into the field, isn't that a defacto standard? Regardless of which organization is restricting the supply, it still does not change the fact that there are not enough doctors, and health care is suffering because of it.
Concerning health Insurance:
You say that if we got rid of insurance only those who are healthy financially could afford the best health care. I would agree with you up to a point. In the real world, the richer people will always have access to better health care. That is just the way it is. (I am far far from being rich BTW) The trick is to get rich. There will be people who die just because they can't afford health care. DEAL WITH IT. However, I feel that paradoxically a greater number of people would survive and be better of without health Insurance. Doctors would have to lower their prices. Hospitals would no longer be able to charge $800 for a tissue culture. Cheaper alternative would have to be found. The alternatives may not be the very best alternative, but they would be good enough. People survived hundreds of years without insurance companies, they can in the future.
How did the old timey country doctors and patients survive before health insurance? It is possible. You may not have access, to the latest MRI machines or life flight, but I would rather have access to some doctor with a degree from some Carribean school, than no access to the very best doctors. Company health care insurance is a modern invention created during WWII when wage freezes caused companies to start having to offer other incentives to get the best employees. They couldn't offer better wages, so they offered 'free' health care. Health care has been suffering ever since.
As for 'Obamacare'
People decry Obamacare, when they don't realize that we have a defacto socialized system now.
First of all, there is no such thing as Obamacare. The bizarre bill that went through was written by conservatives and has no resemblance to what Obama or any actual democrat would have actually wanted. Blaming this pile of failure on him makes as much sense as blaming the Challenger disaster on GWB.
That said, there is nothing "socialized" about the current system. Socialism implies equality and state control, neither of which exist in the current system.
I did not mean Obamacare in a prejorative manner, or mean to besmirch my president. I would also agree that the bill was not what the President / democrats wanted. IMHO it was written inderectly by the insurance companies.
By being a defacto socialized system, I mean that the recipients of the service (the sick) are no longer paying for the services of the producers( the doctors / hospitals). For capitalism to work this MUST happen. You can't throw a profit driven middle man (Insurance) in there and expect market forces to sort it all out. If there is no direct feedback to keep prices low (e.g) less customers coming in, you can not expect hospitals to make financially sane decisions. You can also not expect insurance companies to look after the patients best interest. This is the patients job. This is especially true if large percentages of the health care is being paid not by the insured, but by his or her company who is the real customer.
All three of my proposals: Eliminating the barrier to entry for doctors, Eliminating health Insurance, and Eliminating malpractice suites, work hand in hand. You have to have all three, but if you did that you would have a true free market heath care system. This is something we have not had in a long long time.
Maybe we could try it out on a limited basis in some state like New Hampshire, or Texas.
You give anecdotal evidence that would not be allowed in court by the lawyers you are defending.
Here is my anecdotal evidence:
My mother was run over by an illegal immigrant passed out at the wheel of a car. She ended up surviving, but had her neck broken. She is better now, but she could not find a lawyer to sue because.
1) The illegal immigrant did not have enough money to make the suite worthwhile.
2) Was uninsured, and therefore a lawyer could not hope to profit from the insurance company.
In general for every example of lawyers acting nobly (in their mind), one can find 5 examples of lawyers acting selfishly w/o regard to the greater good of society.
When someone wants to serve humanity they join the peace corps. They don't become legal assassins.
Maybe your national character is better. Just because your HMOs CAN legally gouge their customers doesn't mean they do. Also maybe you guys are just smarter and more unwilling to put up with the stupidity that we have in the USA.
-Regards
In the example you give, if the geriatric home shares the same parking lot as the hospital, and they can easily move a patient to the hospital on a gurney, I don't understand why they have to call an ambulance, but they may have a reason. Maybe the EMTs can perform emergency cardiac care better than the people at the geriatric center.
Sure there is a reason. If a patient were to die. (likely event), they don't want to be sued by a lawyer. It would look like they are not following 'standard best practices'. How bad does it look when you just throw someone in the station wagon, when you could wait 15 minutes and transport him in approved medical / lawyer free manner. Also 911 HAS to be called. If 911 isn't called it looks like 'standard best practices' aren't being followed.
I live in the USA, but malpractice laws in other countries, such as Canada, are even stricter. In Canada, and in the UK, when doctors make a mistake that harms a patient, they're required to tell that patient. And Canada allows damages for things that wouldn't get damages here, such as the anxiety you have between the time they tell you that you may have been infected by improperly sterilized equipment and the time that you find out you're not infected.
You can't take one particular example of what is being done in another country, and say we should do it the same way here. It's like saying the Central African republic has laws against witchcraft, therefore the United States should get with the program and create similar legal safeguards to protect the children. The point is that health care in the USA is broken. Eliminating malpractice helps. Besides last I checked there were lots Canadians coming to the U.S because the health care is better. The UK has a terrible beuocraticed system. We should be doing exactly the opposite of what they are doing. e.g. getting rid of malpractice suits.
(Juries are a lottery, and often come up with crazy results, but that's the price of the jury system. These are the same jurors who decide death penalty cases. And they're also the voters who choose our elected officials.)
I would trust an admittedly dumbed down U.Sian populace rather than a super intelligent lawyers who their super intelligence to deliberately distort facts to a dumbed down jury so that they can get the greatest monetary award that she / he can.
I am not disputing the fact that malpractice lawyer do not occasionally do good, and that hospitals don't occasionally deserve to be raked over the coals. But at this moment in time, lawyers are doing more good than bad.
There is a grain of truth to that, but for the most part, if a doctor follows the standard best practice, he won't be guilty of malpractice.
Are you trying for +5 Funny?
Thanks for the information. It still does not change the fact that there are too few physicians in the U.S. though
Medical malpractice costs aren't really a serious problem,
Hugh
You must live outside the USA. My mom works as a nurse in a geriatric home.
Whenever a patient codes they call 911. A ambulance arrives and has to carry them to the hospital proper. They MUST call an ambulance even though the hospital is litterally located in the same parking lot. They must do this due to the fear of lawsuits. An ambulace can cost an excess of $1000. It is interesting to note that whenever they call 911. The fire company ALWAYS arrives first. Mind you the nursing home is literally located in the hospital parking lot.
So you tell me that lawyers are making medicine safer for everyone, and keeping costs down.
300K is a lot of money. It is more money than I am worth. Much of the world's population will never make even 100K over their entire life.
If a doctor screws up. They should admit they are sorry, and pay to fix their mistake. If they cut off the wrong arm. They should pay for a prosthetic arm.
This sound harsh, but we all make mistakes. Doctors are no different. We all do the best with what we have. Nobody is going to live forever. You have no right to live free forever, free of all pain and injury.
If we had more doctors there would be less mistakes like this made. IMHO