"BCITORGB" wrote in message
oups.com...
rick, quite your moaning. If something got snipped, why don't
you
remind us once more what was so g-d precious about it. Now
instead of
addressing the issue you whine about peoples' responses.
======================
ROTFLMAO I was addressing the isue that kman raised. You, on
the other hand didn't like what I said, so had to dishonestly
make it look like i was discussiong something else. Too bad your
idiocy is too easy to see through.




frtzw906

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
oups.com...
rick: once more, instead of whining, remind us about what your
precious
post said... please perhaps clarify... if i missed something,
humblest
apologies... but please, i can't take the whiiiiine anymore.

===========================
Where was the whining, idiot? It was you that was whining about
something that wasn't said. That you didn't like the truth of
the reply I made in relation to the claim that was made isn't my
problem. Thanks for showing your ideology trumps rationality.

As for your whiiiiiiiiine, have some cheese with it, fool.



frtzw906

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 5:17 PM:
snippage...


No one is waiting for treatment. It's about a specific type
of
scan in a
specific geographic area and the waiting is for
non-emergencies.
==================
LOL Again, sure. I understand that when he turns into an
'emergency' case he will be right in the door. That you don't
see a problem with that says alot about your blindly following
what you are being told...

Being told by whom?
==================
Your ideological mouth pieces. Apparently you can't think for
yourself...



Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs
the
US. Being born low weight to a Canadian family is a greater
risk
that being born to a African-American family in the US.
Where
does that fit in with your ill-concieved ideas that the
'poor'
in
the US suffer, while no-one in Canada does?

Where are you getting that information?
=======================
Try getting it yourself. You're the one in canada....

As I suspected. More yakety yak by someone who has no idea.
==========================
LOL Thanks for proving that you are ignorant of computer use.
As far as making ignorant claims, there are more than a few that
you have never backed up.



tell me a 2 1/2 year wait if the boy does have cancer
won't
effect the outcome of his life, and that if the family HAS
the
money, they won't get one privately in Canada or the
states.

snip...

Yes, rich people everywhere can find ways to get things
that
other people
can't. Canada does not have a ban on rich people.
=====================
Yet you try to pretend that your have a single health care
system
for all, and equal for all.

I've said no such thing. But a poor person will receive a
higher standard of
care in Canada than most anywhere else on the planet.
======================
LOL Again, once they are an 'emergency', eh?

No. I can leave my house right now and drive to the nearest
medical clinic
and get excellent care. They will not ask me how much money I
make.
=======================
Sure, but they will make you wait for the tests to determine what
you mental illness is. That you are trying to deny that there
are long wait lists for many treatments needed across Canada is
your ideology speaking, not reality.




As to the 'anywhere else on the planet', Canada barely ranks
better than the US

And yet, ranks better, by whatever standard you are using.
================
LOL Where have I ever claimed the US had no problems? You on
the other hand are trying to defend the indefenseble.



and both are in the 30s, from the top of best
care. Both have serious problems, and jingoistically pounding
your chest about being #30 doesn't really mean anything, does
it?


This means, logically,
at the other end of the scale a very rich person may indeed
opt
to seek care
elsewhere.
================
Again, yes, rather than to wait until they are an 'emergency'
case.

You have no clue.
=====================
Yes, apparently more than you.



You are basing your ridiculous views on an isolated situation
in
Newfoundland. That's like basing my view of US health care on
some spot in
Alaska.
=====================
Isolated? What a hoot!!! Try some research fool. Start at
the Fraser Institute. Surely you've heard of them. They're in
Canada.






All it manages to do is promote a
have vs have-not conflict.

?

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 5:32 PM:


snippage...

I'm sure that's what the Framers had in mind...
======================
Actually, yes. The fact that military and hunting weapons
were
not that much different then(or really now either)means
nothing.
The fact is they were protecting the right to arm for
military
purposes, not hunting.

Are these weapons being purchased and used for military
purposes? As I said:
====================
That's not the claim. The claim was that they are what is
protected by rights.

And I think that the right of a drug dealer to walk into his
local corner
store and buy an assault weapon to shoot up the local park has
diddly to do
with what the framers wanted.
=======================
I see your idiocy still commands your mind. Too bad Psychiatric
waiting times for you are even longer...
The drug dealer has no protected right to buy any weapons. If
fact, is prohibited from just that action. Again, your
ideological ignorance is getting in the way of rationality, eh?




snip rest of spew...

in article t, rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 10:48 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 5:17 PM:
snippage...


No one is waiting for treatment. It's about a specific type
of
scan in a
specific geographic area and the waiting is for
non-emergencies.
==================
LOL Again, sure. I understand that when he turns into an
'emergency' case he will be right in the door. That you don't
see a problem with that says alot about your blindly following
what you are being told...

Being told by whom?
==================
Your ideological mouth pieces. Apparently you can't think for
yourself...

What ideological mouthpieces?

Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs
the
US. Being born low weight to a Canadian family is a greater
risk
that being born to a African-American family in the US.
Where
does that fit in with your ill-concieved ideas that the
'poor'
in
the US suffer, while no-one in Canada does?

Where are you getting that information?
=======================
Try getting it yourself. You're the one in canada....

As I suspected. More yakety yak by someone who has no idea.
==========================
LOL Thanks for proving that you are ignorant of computer use.

Your statement does not compute.

As far as making ignorant claims, there are more than a few that
you have never backed up.

This is a weasely way of admitting that you can't back up your claim.

tell me a 2 1/2 year wait if the boy does have cancer
won't
effect the outcome of his life, and that if the family HAS
the
money, they won't get one privately in Canada or the
states.

snip...

Yes, rich people everywhere can find ways to get things
that
other people
can't. Canada does not have a ban on rich people.
=====================
Yet you try to pretend that your have a single health care
system
for all, and equal for all.

I've said no such thing. But a poor person will receive a
higher standard of
care in Canada than most anywhere else on the planet.
======================
LOL Again, once they are an 'emergency', eh?

No. I can leave my house right now and drive to the nearest
medical clinic
and get excellent care. They will not ask me how much money I
make.
=======================
Sure, but they will make you wait for the tests to determine what
you mental illness is. That you are trying to deny that there
are long wait lists for many treatments needed across Canada is
your ideology speaking, not reality.

The quality of care varies somewhat particulary (as one might expect) in
sparsely populated regions. But the standard of care across the country is
excellent. I should know, I use it, and so do my friends and relatives. FYI,
I was born in Evanston, Illinois, and I know a fair bit about health care in
both countries, with relatives that live in both. Everyone prefers the
Canadian system. That is not to say that no one has ever complained about
how long they had to wait for an elective procedure, but between the two
systems as a whole, it is no contenst. It has nothing to do with ideology.


As to the 'anywhere else on the planet', Canada barely ranks
better than the US

And yet, ranks better, by whatever standard you are using.
================
LOL Where have I ever claimed the US had no problems? You on
the other hand are trying to defend the indefenseble.

Not at all. So far you have pointed out that certain people looking for a
very specific type of scan in a non-emergency situation in Newfoundland are
having to wait a long time. This is a far cry from the statements about
peopel dying in waiting lines that brought me into this goofy discussion.

and both are in the 30s, from the top of best
care. Both have serious problems, and jingoistically pounding
your chest about being #30 doesn't really mean anything, does
it?


This means, logically,
at the other end of the scale a very rich person may indeed
opt
to seek care
elsewhere.
================
Again, yes, rather than to wait until they are an 'emergency'
case.

You have no clue.
=====================
Yes, apparently more than you.

There is no evidence of that.

You are basing your ridiculous views on an isolated situation
in
Newfoundland. That's like basing my view of US health care on
some spot in
Alaska.
=====================
Isolated? What a hoot!!! Try some research fool. Start at
the Fraser Institute. Surely you've heard of them. They're in
Canada.

I know all about the Fraser Institute. LOL. Now perhaps I have at least a
partial explanation of where you are getting these crazy ideas. The
secondary name for the Fraser Institue is "I wish George W. Bush was the
Prime Minister of Canada." Asking what the Fraser Institute thinks about
Canadian Health Care is like asking the NRA for objective advice on
handguns. Only worse! ROFL



All it manages to do is promote a
have vs have-not conflict.

?

in article t, rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 10:55 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 5:32 PM:


snippage...

I'm sure that's what the Framers had in mind...
======================
Actually, yes. The fact that military and hunting weapons
were
not that much different then(or really now either)means
nothing.
The fact is they were protecting the right to arm for
military
purposes, not hunting.

Are these weapons being purchased and used for military
purposes? As I said:
====================
That's not the claim. The claim was that they are what is
protected by rights.

And I think that the right of a drug dealer to walk into his
local corner
store and buy an assault weapon to shoot up the local park has
diddly to do
with what the framers wanted.
=======================
I see your idiocy still commands your mind. Too bad Psychiatric
waiting times for you are even longer...
The drug dealer has no protected right to buy any weapons. If
fact, is prohibited from just that action.

Wow! How progressive! Drug dealers are banned from purchasing assault
weapons? Does Heston know about this? Surely the Framers would be alarmed!

Again, your ideological ignorance

Please explain what my "ideological ignorance" would be here. Do you mean
that I am lacking in ideology, and therefore my view is not valid, or do you
mean that I have an ideology that is ignorant? Assuming the latter, what is
my ideology, and why is it ignorant?

is getting in the way of rationality, eh?

I think the fact that more than 30,000 Americans will be killed by guns at
the hands of their fellow citizens this year is massively irrational.

BCITORGB wrote:

rick says:
=============

Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs the US.

================

Rather, take a look at more meaningful statistics, like infant
mortality.

Rank Country Rate
1 Hong Kong 3.2
2 Sweden 3.5
3 Japan 3.6
4 Norway 4.0
5 Finland 4.1
6 Singapore 4.2
7 France 4.6
7 Germany 4.6
9 Denmark 4.7
10 Switzerland 4.8
11 Austria 4.9
12 Australia 5.0
13 Netherlands 5.2
13 Czech Republic 5.2
15 Canada 5.3
15 Italy 5.3
17 Scotland 5.5
17 New Zealand 5.5
19 Belgium 5.6
19 Northern Ireland 5.6
21 England and Wales 5.7
21 Greece 5.7
21 Israel 5.7
21 Spain 5.7
25 Portugal 5.9
26 Ireland 6.2
27 Cuba 7.1
28 UNITED STATES 7.2
29 Slovakia 8.8
30 Kuwait2 9.4

OK, given the wonders of privatized medicine, I'm curious why we don't
find the USA at the top of this list. I don't know about Hong Kong, but
the next 25 nations all have some form of "nationalized" medicine.

What say you, rick?

I think that he will happily ignore any facts that get in the way of his
rambling... So far I haven't seen anything factual to support his
statements, or anything to support any of the other propaganda-believing
posters.

--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

"Wilko" wrote in message
...


BCITORGB wrote:

rick says:
=============

Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs
the US.

================

Rather, take a look at more meaningful statistics, like infant
mortality.

Rank Country Rate
1 Hong Kong 3.2
2 Sweden 3.5
3 Japan 3.6
4 Norway 4.0
5 Finland 4.1
6 Singapore 4.2
7 France 4.6
7 Germany 4.6
9 Denmark 4.7
10 Switzerland 4.8
11 Austria 4.9
12 Australia 5.0
13 Netherlands 5.2
13 Czech Republic 5.2
15 Canada 5.3
15 Italy 5.3
17 Scotland 5.5
17 New Zealand 5.5
19 Belgium 5.6
19 Northern Ireland 5.6
21 England and Wales 5.7
21 Greece 5.7
21 Israel 5.7
21 Spain 5.7
25 Portugal 5.9
26 Ireland 6.2
27 Cuba 7.1
28 UNITED STATES 7.2
29 Slovakia 8.8
30 Kuwait2 9.4

OK, given the wonders of privatized medicine, I'm curious why
we don't
find the USA at the top of this list. I don't know about Hong
Kong, but
the next 25 nations all have some form of "nationalized"
medicine.

What say you, rick?

I think that he will happily ignore any facts that get in the
way of his rambling... So far I haven't seen anything factual
to support his statements, or anything to support any of the
other propaganda-believing posters.
===========================
LOL Nice projection there ideolog. Again, no where have I said
the US system is best, or even without any faults. All I did was
disabuse the jingoistic chest thumping of kman about the
greatness of the Canadian system. As for statistics, I don't see
any attributions in the above post either. But then, your
propaganda beliefs are just fine without any proof, eh fool?




--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o
t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the
limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 10:48 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 5:17 PM:
snippage...


No one is waiting for treatment. It's about a specific type
of
scan in a
specific geographic area and the waiting is for
non-emergencies.
==================
LOL Again, sure. I understand that when he turns into an
'emergency' case he will be right in the door. That you
don't
see a problem with that says alot about your blindly
following
what you are being told...

Being told by whom?
==================
Your ideological mouth pieces. Apparently you can't think for
yourself...

What ideological mouthpieces?
======================
The ones that tell you that the Canadian system has no waiting
times, and is the best system.




Take a look into low birth weight babies born in Canada vs
the
US. Being born low weight to a Canadian family is a
greater
risk
that being born to a African-American family in the US.
Where
does that fit in with your ill-concieved ideas that the
'poor'
in
the US suffer, while no-one in Canada does?

Where are you getting that information?
=======================
Try getting it yourself. You're the one in canada....

As I suspected. More yakety yak by someone who has no idea.
==========================
LOL Thanks for proving that you are ignorant of computer use.

Your statement does not compute.
=======================
Of course not, not to someone that apparently dosen't know how to
use theirs, eh?



As far as making ignorant claims, there are more than a few
that
you have never backed up.

This is a weasely way of admitting that you can't back up your
claim.
====================
Nopde. Try again fool. I've even given you the hints...



tell me a 2 1/2 year wait if the boy does have cancer
won't
effect the outcome of his life, and that if the family
HAS
the
money, they won't get one privately in Canada or the
states.

snip...

Yes, rich people everywhere can find ways to get things
that
other people
can't. Canada does not have a ban on rich people.
=====================
Yet you try to pretend that your have a single health care
system
for all, and equal for all.

I've said no such thing. But a poor person will receive a
higher standard of
care in Canada than most anywhere else on the planet.
======================
LOL Again, once they are an 'emergency', eh?

No. I can leave my house right now and drive to the nearest
medical clinic
and get excellent care. They will not ask me how much money I
make.
=======================
Sure, but they will make you wait for the tests to determine
what
you mental illness is. That you are trying to deny that there
are long wait lists for many treatments needed across Canada
is
your ideology speaking, not reality.

The quality of care varies somewhat particulary (as one might
expect) in
sparsely populated regions. But the standard of care across the
country is
excellent. I should know, I use it, and so do my friends and
relatives. FYI,
I was born in Evanston, Illinois, and I know a fair bit about
health care in
both countries, with relatives that live in both.
========================
Wow, how nice. Do you figure that you are the only one with
family and friends in both systems?



Everyone prefers the
Canadian system. That is not to say that no one has ever
complained about
how long they had to wait for an elective procedure, but
between the two
systems as a whole, it is no contenst. It has nothing to do
with ideology.
=========================
Then they must be as brainwashed as you, because many of the ones
I know always come back to the US for care. And, in a couple of
cases, to give care.




As to the 'anywhere else on the planet', Canada barely ranks
better than the US

And yet, ranks better, by whatever standard you are using.
================
LOL Where have I ever claimed the US had no problems? You
on
the other hand are trying to defend the indefenseble.

Not at all. So far you have pointed out that certain people
looking for a
very specific type of scan in a non-emergency situation in
Newfoundland are
having to wait a long time. This is a far cry from the
statements about
peopel dying in waiting lines that brought me into this goofy
discussion.
==========================
LOL That you have to fisate on one example says alot about your
brainwashing. That you believe that that is the one and only
case available to find is a hoot.


and both are in the 30s, from the top of best
care. Both have serious problems, and jingoistically
pounding
your chest about being #30 doesn't really mean anything,
does
it?


This means, logically,
at the other end of the scale a very rich person may indeed
opt
to seek care
elsewhere.
================
Again, yes, rather than to wait until they are an
'emergency'
case.

You have no clue.
=====================
Yes, apparently more than you.

There is no evidence of that.
====================
I've posted real data, from real sites. You seem to be making it
up as you go. Come on, provide more than just your say-so that
there are no waiting lines for Canadian health-care.



You are basing your ridiculous views on an isolated situation
in
Newfoundland. That's like basing my view of US health care on
some spot in
Alaska.
=====================
Isolated? What a hoot!!! Try some research fool. Start at
the Fraser Institute. Surely you've heard of them. They're in
Canada.

I know all about the Fraser Institute. LOL. Now perhaps I have
at least a
partial explanation of where you are getting these crazy ideas.
The
secondary name for the Fraser Institue is "I wish George W.
Bush was the
Prime Minister of Canada." Asking what the Fraser Institute
thinks about
Canadian Health Care is like asking the NRA for objective
advice on
handguns. Only worse! ROFL
====================
They are but one. But nice to see your ideology won't let truth
get in your way. Keep trying fool, maybe someday you'll learn
something other than your brainwashed opinion.





All it manages to do is promote a
have vs have-not conflict.

?

"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 10:55 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article
t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 5:32 PM:


snippage...

I'm sure that's what the Framers had in mind...
======================
Actually, yes. The fact that military and hunting weapons
were
not that much different then(or really now either)means
nothing.
The fact is they were protecting the right to arm for
military
purposes, not hunting.

Are these weapons being purchased and used for military
purposes? As I said:
====================
That's not the claim. The claim was that they are what is
protected by rights.

And I think that the right of a drug dealer to walk into his
local corner
store and buy an assault weapon to shoot up the local park
has
diddly to do
with what the framers wanted.
=======================
I see your idiocy still commands your mind. Too bad
Psychiatric
waiting times for you are even longer...
The drug dealer has no protected right to buy any weapons. If
fact, is prohibited from just that action.

Wow! How progressive! Drug dealers are banned from purchasing
assault
weapons? Does Heston know about this? Surely the Framers would
be alarmed!
======================
LOL Too bad your sarcasm doesn't substitute for reality fool.
That you are too stupid, willfully?, to know that the local drug
dealer isn't going to be able to walk into a gun store and
purchase weapons tells us that you get all your 'data' from
holloywood. Nave try, idiot, but you ideology is showing again.




Again, your ideological ignorance

Please explain what my "ideological ignorance" would be here.
Do you mean
that I am lacking in ideology, and therefore my view is not
valid, or do you
mean that I have an ideology that is ignorant? Assuming the
latter, what is
my ideology, and why is it ignorant?
==============================
Because it can belive the ignorant spews you come up with. Nay,
not just believe, but relish them.



is getting in the way of rationality, eh?

I think the fact that more than 30,000 Americans will be killed
by guns at
the hands of their fellow citizens this year is massively
irrational.
========================
Tell me, how many were with these so-called assault weapons, by
the corner drug-dealer.