"Giles" wrote in message
...
Try it
sometime.....let's see what happens.

I'll take that under consideration, but it seems that Dave understood me
perfectly, so I'm not exactly fired with great urgency because you failed to
grasp my meaning.

Ah....see.....there's the problem. When you said "just 'reduce
costs'" I took that to mean reduce costs, not reduce benefits. Silly
of me.......one of those basic English things, I guess.

it is. But, when you tell folks you are going to spend less on a
program('reduce costs'), they often make the leap to a reduction of benefits
being the most likely spot to reduce costs. Does that make sense to you?

Do you have any idea at all of which side you are on in this issue?
Do you have any idea at all of what the issue is? Do you have any
idea at all of what the words you use mean?

yup. Do you?
Yeah, you're a legend in the health care field......something I
wouldn't know anything about.

working in research gives you one perspective. Working at the provider end
of things gives another. That, I understand. It's just that I choose not to
belittle your perspective because it is different. What I belittle is the
small-minded way you handle the opinions of others.

We
cannot, as a society provide state of the art care to every person, and
afford it, without a massive taxation increase.

Yep, we'd end up like the Canadians, eh?

really?? Canada provides state of the art care for all citizens under the
public plan? As compared to what is available in the US, or even to those in
Canada willing to
pay extra? That isn't my understanding of reality, but I'd love to hear the
Canadian contingent weigh in.

Uh huh, but I have it from an unimpeachable source that we can't
approach that without fatal tax increases.

what source would that be?

You remember a time when you had something resembling opinions that
you could call your own? You remember something vaguely resembling
self-respect?

I haven't changed a bit. Check your mirror.

With or without me, I see precious little reason to expect intelligent
discourse from some quarters. You want to tell me where I've gone
wrong in this analysis?

well, if you leave it THAT vague, I couldn't argue....simply because it is
as vague a statement as it is vaucous. You see, when you make your mind up
before starting to read and/or listen to others, that is the outlook one
develops.
Sad to see you descend to that level. Like I said, I haven't changed my
outlooks, thought processes, or manner of presentation one bit. Look in the
mirror to find the shortcomings.......

Tom