Thank you, Mr. O.

"David LaCourse" wrote in message
news:2010012321233177923-dplacourse@aolcom...
Yeah, I tell Tom to go take a dump or whatever every once in alwhile. But
we fish well together.

just don't mention wadingg.
Tom

p.s. hell, David and I have had numerous disagreements over politics, and
economics. But, he is somewhat right about this being a longstanding, albeit
contentious kind of a club.

"David LaCourse" wrote in message
news:2010012316380143658-dplacourse@aolcom...
Capital gains tax? Think about it, Tom. Stop drinking the socialists'
Kool Ade. Without investment perks, who the hell is going to invest in
our country, who is going to produce more jobs by such investment.

speaking from personal experience, all I did with the extra money when GWB
gave me a massive tax break was to save most of it, and spend on my family.
Hardly a major stimulus to the economy, and the break came at the expense of
my fellow citizens who weren't receiving dividend checks.


Do
you really think that if they taxed the hell out of investment income that
people would continue to put their dollars in stocks and bonds?

of course. They did before, and the rate of investment didn't change, from
the few studies I've seen, since the change in rates.

you're never going to get it,
Tom

On 2010-01-23 22:27:27 -0500, Tim Lysyk said:

Tim, my cancer was termed lethal and aggressive. I had a very short
time before it metastasized. With a Gleason Score of 9 I had to have
*immediate* care. I couldn't wait around. As I understand it, seeing
a specialist in Canada involves a waiting period. Now, I may be
misinformed, but everything I have read says that it sometimes takes
months to get a specialist's care. My care was immediate. Without
immediate care, I would have died, no question about it. Also, at that
time, there were very few doctors practicing the nerve saving method
pioneered at John Hopkins in Baltimore, and from what I have read, they
were all in the U.S. I had one of the few doctors in Massachusetts
that were using this technique. Without the nerve saving technique, I
would have been incontenent and impotent, not a fun thing for a man in
his 50s.

I am sure as a Canadian that you like what you have and that it is
"free". Just remember that nothing is free - you are paying for it
somehow.

Dave

On 2010-01-23 23:05:29 -0500, "Mark Bowen" said:


"Tim Lysyk" wrote in message
news:z6P6n.60726$Db2.7706@edtnps83...
David LaCourse wrote:


Today as 15 years ago, survival of prostate cancer in Canada is and was a
dismal failure. And don't ask me for a "citation". Look it up, Mr. A.
This has been an argument on roff ever since Obama became president. All
sorts of numbers flying throught the air. Short of shorts: If you want
good care with the best docs, equipment, and drugs, 9 out of 10 says do
it here.

The following article says that five-year survival from prostate cancer in
the US and Canada are pretty similar, 91.1 and 85.1%. I don't think anyone
would say that a 6% difference is a dismal failure.

http://healthcare.procon.org/sourcef...vivalStudy.pdf

The following study says that the peak mortality rate for prostate cancer
in the US occurred in 1991 and was 29.4 deaths per 100,000 men. The same
study says that the peak mortlaity rate for porstate cancer in Canada
occurred in 1991, and was 31.2 deaths per 100,000 men. Again, hardly a
huge difference. It indicates that rates were simialr between Canada and
the US 15 years ago.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...f/15192905.pdf

No wonder you don't want people to ask you for a citation.

Tim Lysyk

Tim, Tim, Tim,

You don't really expect delusional davie to accept anything but his own
devine providence, as proof of Amerika's superior healthcare system, do you?
He has trotted out the same old one trick pony so many time that he has had
to have titanium shoe made for the pony. Each time his lies are refuted he
crawls back under his rock for a time--until he thinks folks memories have
faded and then he brings his proud pony back out again and again and
again...

Facts are beyond delusional Davie's comprehension.

Op

Facts are, Bowen, that I am alive and well and enjoying life in the
Georgia mountains. Facts are, Bowen, that if my cancer was not treated
*immediately*, I would have died, ala Bill Bixby whose Gleason Score
was the same as mine and died just months before I was diagnosed.
Facts are, Bowen, that if you have any testosterone in your body you
will probably have prostate cancer before you die. Pray that you get
treated in NC - Duke should do you well.

Facts are, Bowen, that your tutu makes your ass look fat. Please, for
the sake of all mankind, buy another tutu that fits properly. It's bad
enough seeing you in a tutu, but one that accentuates your ass is just
plain painful.

Davie

"MajorOz" wrote in message
...
On Jan 22, 6:57 pm, "Tom Littleton" wrote:
"Larry L" wrote in message

...

well put, Larry. It's sort of enlightening that our founding fathers built
a
system of government, not an economic model. They knew what was truly
important, and also knew they couldn't forsee the economies of the future.

What John doesn't see is that when it comes to healthcare, we are talking
about something that ought to be a birthright of citizenship,

That is as idiotic, divisive, and willfully ignorant as saying (to the
nation at large) that we should all accept Jesus Christ as our Lord
and Savior.

It may be a great idea for some and philosophically hardwired into
them, but it ain't a universally held view, and to assume it is, or
even that it should be, is just plain stupid.

cheers

oz, who prefers primary sources

Major,

First, accepting JC as one's personal Lord an Savior is not and never has
been a "birthright." One's religious preference has always been a matter of
choice--health and well-bing have never been a matter of choice. We have
health and well-being or we don't, eithere from birth or throughout various
points in our lives. You comparison is nonsensical. You are comparing
oranges to orangutans.

By your logic, all roads should be toll and each of us should pay each time
we drive a different road or highway, so that some one can profit from our
travels. While our national transportation system has never been considered
a "birthright," it was designed and constructed to ensure the health and
vitality of our nation--both in terms of economic commerce and national
security. Perhap we should view national health care in similar terms,
because when the time come that only those who can afford access to
healthcare are afforded it ,our nation will be beyond the point of economic
vitality and national security.

Imagine that you lost your job, pension, or other sources of income and
there is no medical safety net to catch you when you most need one. That
time is now for millions of your fellow citizens. And regardless of popular
opinion, I don't believe the vast majority of these people are too sorry to
pay for their own healthcare needs or that they are to lazy or sorry to work
in general. A large portion of our nation's workforce is employed by
companies that cannot afford to provide them with a helthcare benefits
packages i.e., small mom and pop businesses (electrical, plumbing, building
contractors, HVAC etc...) that employ 5 or 6 workers in a small rural
communities or even large cities, the guy that delivers your pizza, the
young or old woman that rings up your purchases at Walmart, the grocery
bagger, small shop owners--the guy or gal that repairs your lawn mower....

Yes there are people who would rather you and I pay their way--but they are
few comparatively, but there are also those who want you or your children to
provide for their security, by fighting the wars that they support so
vociferously--yet they never served in the military, nor do they want their
children to risk their lives fighting in our nations wars--why don't we have
compulsery military service. Why is there no outrage over this disparity?

Many people simply cannot afford to pay for a health insurance, pay rent or
a mortgage, car insurance--mandated in most states (I imagine), their
utilities, fuel for their main mode of transportation, provide food for
their families, save for their childrens educational future, and a myriad of
other factors that don't involve wasteful spending on the individuals part.

Universal healthcare is provided by many nations around the world as part of
their compact with their citzenry. The people pay taxes and the governments
provide vitally essential products such as education systems, national
security, healthcare, police and fire protection.... It's a matter of
priorities and good economic sense. If your nations people are not well
enough or capable of contributing to the national economy, they will become
a burden to that same economy and by extension the security of that nation.

I work for my state government and I am provided free health insurance to a
degree, as our health insurance benefits are on the downslide, so I purchase
supplemental insurance through a so-called flex plan. I am single and I make
$36,500 a year, as an electrician. I don't spend my money on drugs or
alcohol. I pay rent--don't own--I purchase fuel for my transportation,
mostly to and from work, the ocassional *local* fishing trips, back and
forth to mother's to ensure her safety, well-being, and to let her know that
I will always be there for her in her latter years, I rarely eat out at a
restaurant--maybe twice a year, no movies--haven't been in a movie theater
in 20 or more years, I rarely purchase new clothes, can't afford to
date--not that any woman would consider such, and I don't buy very many toys
i.e., fishin' gear or guns, and I don't have any children or a wife to worry
about providing for. And still I have no money to put into savings or throw
about. I cannot imagine providing for the everyday expenses of a family of
four, on my income and pay a premium on top of that for health insurance,
let alone if one or more of my kids were born with a life long
disability--which seems to be quite common these days.

My point is: healthcare should not be a for profit institution! When you or
my infirmities are a means of profit for any entity, we will surely loose in
the end as a society, as we all age and have our maladies. Virtually no one
is free from disease or physical aliment at sometime in their life-times and
if we allow our collective medical problems to be the interests of a profit
driven healthcare system, we will not survive as an economic force in the
world.

If this sounds like socialism, it is! We can't avoid being our brothers
keeper in certain matters. It is not, however, the slippery slope to
Communism and the death of Capitalism--it is what will ensure the survival
of our capitalist way of life.

Op --a primary source--

On 2010-01-23 23:03:48 -0500, sgr said:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 21:23:31 -0500, David LaCourse
wrote:

We have and will continue to fish together.

That comes as no surprise.

I
have put on two roffian claves with about 20 of these nitwits at them.
I have been to a total of 7 and 1/2 claves, meeting just about everyone
who posts here. You just don't know roff, Mr. A., and I doubt you will
stick around. Most Mr. As don't.

Ah, yes, the Peoples Republic of Californicate.

I'll tell ya what, Jawja. Pay attention. Quit pickin' yer ****in' nose
and look at me. Right here, asshole.
Stay the **** in Dumb****istan so ya don't leave a ring around the
clean rivers, ya toothless, unwashed, ignorant, Walmart shoppin',
****wit, inbred, anus lickin', hillbilly, limp dick, son of a bitch.
That about cover your preconceived notions of Californicators?
You certainly have met mine about dumb-**** Jawja asshats, you stupid
hillbilly ****.

Don't get up, I'll find my way out.

And no, you may not blow me until that sore clears up.

LOL. (Ooops, scared the dog.) Wow. I musta hit a noive or sumptin. I
am a recent resident of the fine state of Georgia. My wife and I just
bought a lovely home here in the mountains to spend the winter. I am
from Taxachusetts and a legal resident of that state.

As I speak on this foggy rainy day, 7 deer are wandering through the
back yard. Lots of birds, including the Pileated Woodpecker and a herd
(flock?) of wild turkey. Quite the place. No smog. No Hollywood
types. No traffic. Few people. And it is gated to keep out the
riff-raff. Pool, tennis courts, a lake and pond, small stream, and
surrounded by miles and miles of Chattahoochee Nat'l Forest, it is a
lovely spot on this screwed up earth. Good flyfishing on the property
(bass), and trout but 15 minutes away. No Mass politics. Why, it is
close to paradise.

Hillbilllys from the south? You need to talk to Mark Bowen about that.
He is a genuine hillbilly, albeit from North Carolina. (Careful,
however. He has been known to wear a tutu and, well, you know.....ya
wanna see sumptin that'll scare ya, Bowen in a tutu should do it.) We
have several southern "gents" that haunt this nut house. A couple of
reprobate lawyers from the Great North State, both of them so stupid
that they do not capitalize any words. Lord knows who they represent,
but I'm betting it is some still makin', swill drinkin' hillbilly.
Wally Winters who runs a fly shop in Morganton (deep in the hills with
lots of toothless people) posts on occasion. And then there's Zimbo
and my good friend Tom Brown. Zimbo built a grass rod for me. Nice
piece of work. I fish it in Maine on my home waters. Tom is busy
protecting us from the towel heads, so he doesn't post much any more.
(Need to see that ole boy and drink some good ole moonshine wid him.
Wonder if he still carries?) Boy, talk about hicks. Then there is the
one Georgian that I know of, Charlie Choc. Good guy, pretty good
fisherman, but he too is one of them Georgia boys. Charlie has all his
own teeth, I think, but I could be wrong. Great photographer btw.

Blow you? Don't you California boys ever think about normal sex, you
know, sex with the opposite sex. Boy and girl..... you know.

Now, if you will just identify yourself, Mr. A., you will get along
fine in this nut house. Really.

Dave (aka Davie, Pig, Moron, Idiot, Imbecile, and my very favorite
given to me by the reprobate of all reprobates George Gehrke, "The
Pirate")

On Jan 24, 6:55*am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
MajorOz wrote:
"Tom Littleton" wrote:
What John doesn't see is that when it comes to healthcare, we are talking
about something that ought to be a birthright of citizenship,

It may be a great idea for some and philosophically hardwired into
them, but it ain't a universally held view, and to assume it is, or
even that it should be, is just plain stupid.

There it is, distilled into easy-to-read roffian format. The health
care debate in a nutshell. Decent human beings who care for their
fellow Americans feel strongly that health care is a right and the
rugged individualists feel strongly that it's every man for himself.

Rather than create a strawman, if it must be rephrased, please try to
do it in accordance with original intent, to wit:

"Some decent human beings who care for their fellow Americans feel
strongly that health care is a right. Other decent human beings who
care for their fellow Americans feel strongly the health care is not a
right."

I don't know from philosophical hardwires but it's pretty easy for
me to see where the moral high ground is in this debate.

The above is a textbook illustration of how a misstatement of intent
will create a statement supportive or a pre-extablished position.

cheers

oz, always willing to help

On Jan 24, 8:42*am, "Mark Bowen" wrote:
"MajorOz" wrote in message

...
On Jan 22, 6:57 pm, "Tom Littleton" wrote:

"Larry L" wrote in message

....

well put, Larry. It's sort of enlightening that our founding fathers built
a
system of government, not an economic model. They knew what was truly
important, and also knew they couldn't forsee the economies of the future.

What John doesn't see is that when it comes to healthcare, we are talking
about something that ought to be a birthright of citizenship,

That is as idiotic, divisive, and willfully ignorant as saying (to the
nation at large) that we should all accept Jesus Christ as our Lord
and Savior.

It may be a great idea for some and philosophically hardwired into
them, but it ain't a universally held view, and to assume it is, or
even that it should be, is just plain stupid.

cheers

oz, who prefers primary sources

Major,

First, accepting

Read for content.

I didn't say "accepting"; I said "saying".

Therefore, the rest of your comment is moot.


By your logic, ....

Don't confuse my logic with yours.

Bray, if you must about this and that, but do not presume it stems
from my position.

cheers

oz

MajorOz wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
MajorOz wrote:
"Tom Littleton" wrote:
What John doesn't see is that when it comes to healthcare, we are talking
about something that ought to be a birthright of citizenship,
It may be a great idea for some and philosophically hardwired into
them, but it ain't a universally held view, and to assume it is, or
even that it should be, is just plain stupid.
There it is, distilled into easy-to-read roffian format. The health
care debate in a nutshell. Decent human beings who care for their
fellow Americans feel strongly that health care is a right and the
rugged individualists feel strongly that it's every man for himself.

Rather than create a strawman, if it must be rephrased, please try to
do it in accordance with original intent, to wit:

"Some decent human beings who care for their fellow Americans feel
strongly that health care is a right. Other decent human beings who
care for their fellow Americans feel strongly the health care is not a
right."

If affordable health care isn't a right of citizenship then it
is necessarily a privilege available only to those who can afford
it. I can't understand how a decent human being could be so callous,
unfeeling and so lacking in compassion that they would deny health
care to those unable to pony up the bucks for it.

I don't know from philosophical hardwires but it's pretty easy for
me to see where the moral high ground is in this debate.

The above is a textbook illustration of how a misstatement of intent
will create a statement supportive or a pre-extablished position.

cheers

oz, always willing to help

Willing to help whom ? You're certainly not willing to help those
poor folks who can't afford health care.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"MajorOz" wrote in message
...
On Jan 24, 8:42 am, "Mark Bowen" wrote:
"MajorOz" wrote in message

That is as idiotic, divisive, and willfully ignorant as saying (to the
nation at large) that we should all accept Jesus Christ as our Lord
and Savior.

It may be a great idea for some and philosophically hardwired into
them, but it ain't a universally held view, and to assume it is, or
even that it should be, is just plain stupid.

cheers

oz, who prefers primary sources

Major,

First, accepting

Read for content.

I didn't say "accepting"; I said "saying".

Therefore, the rest of your comment is moot.

No what you wrote was:

"That is as idiotic, divisive, and willfully ignorant as saying (to the
nation at large) that we should all accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and
Savior."

Which make no sense in context to a discussion related to healthcare reform,
is poor analogy for just about any discussion unrelated to religion. Now if
we were discussing a national religion, you above statement might apply to
something--at least it would be somewhat relevant to the discussion.

By your logic, ....

Don't confuse my logic with yours.

No that would be quite impossible, as you apparently haven't the ability to
form locical arguments.

Bray, if you must about this and that, but do not presume it stems
from my position.

Um, what exactly is your position? You have yet to state one. You have
merely objected to the position of others--rather weakly I might add.

Op --an original sourse with a position--


cheers

oz