HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mike@inti.lbl.gov (Michael Helm)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: School vouchers
Date: 5 Oct 1992 22:50:51 GMT
Organization: N.I.C.E.
Reply-To: mike@inti.lbl.gov (Michael Helm)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.128.82

Russ Vreeland writes:
>Noone has to "show" anything. The inefficiencies of the public sector 
>vis a vis the "perform or die" incentives of the marketplace are 
>irrefutable. Take discussions of this point to "alt.dont.argue.with.fools".

For shoes.  But I don't really buy the "shoes" == "school" equation
(this is a lot better pun in German).  Do we really know this about
schooling?  Is there some modern precedent somewhere in the world
we can look at?  I don't like being the guinea pig.  I am certainly
very suspicious of the education monopoly & think you have a good chance
to be rite, but....

>taxation. In any voucher system I've run across THIS WILL NOT CHANGE -- only
>the monopoly of the public school system will be broken.
>
>Also, the voucher system will be just that - vouchers, not cash. No 
>opportunity to "smoke up" or otherwise misuse an education voucher will
>arise if they are only good for tuition at a school of one's choice.

I think this is an exciting idea, & I'd like to see it tried, (with
caveats above).  However, I've been around.  There are all sorts
of schemers & scammers.  If there's money to be made, they'll
find their way in, & we will have lousy babysitting schools, we'll
have places that will kickback on vouchers & probably lots of
other things I haven't thot of.  How will we determine whether
the voucher money is being spent properly, the school gives good
value &c?   I'm not sure that all parents are fit to judge this
either, some simply won't care.  Also, are we going to track enrollment
& make sure children attend (a, some) school?  How are we going to
keep track of this?  It seems like we will need a complex bureacracy
to regulate this industry; perhaps the present bureaucrats will
be adequate to the task, but what do you think?

>to estimate how much revenue the state could raise by selling the public
>schools? This approach would certainly render moot the arguments about

My guess is $0.  I'm not sure any business would want to buy
a pig-in-a-poke like that.  A business has to have some freedom
to control its means of doing business. I'm not at all convinced
this would be enuf: 

>schools could deal with the problem cases very well with just the help
>of a (very) small number of regulations providing (tax?) incentives to

The bad cases would still be an enormous drain (been to an urban
hi school lately?  It's a shock).

I am really concerned about 2-tiering, & I am somewhat concerned about
creating another corporate welfare class, add the Education complex
to the Military-Industrial group, as well as possibly even increasing
the bureaucracy load if we follow our typical pattern when abuses
are reported.
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.politics
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Subject: Re: No on 9
Followup-To: ba.politics
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 20:58:59 GMT

In article <1992Oct3.011813.19668@oracle.us.oracle.com> rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers) writes:
    >>So, when a potential dating "partner" is too
    >>tall/short/skinny/fat/ quiet/lod/etc. for your tastes, and
    >>you discriminate because of this, and since they have done
    >>you no harm, you're a BIGOT???
    >>
    >When you start systematically discriminating against them and
    >broadcasting your intolerance, yes, I'm afraid so.
    >
    >Making a personal and private choice not to associate with a
    >given individual for private reasons is a far cry from
    >publically broadcasting your hatred and encouraging others to
    >join your little campaign.
    >
    >Using words like "Jews" and "homosexuals" is a far cry from
    >"a potential dating partner is too
    >tall/short/skinny/fat/quiet/lod/etc.", no ?
    >
    >Can you say "inflammatory" ? Sure you can. (-:
    >
    >
    >>Wow, what a train of thought.
    >>
    >Phil, at least my train has a starting point and a
    >destination.
    >
    >Yours, I'm afraid, merely loops. Again, and again, and again.

Yeah, stating over and over that no one, no matter how many friends they
get to agree with 'em, no matter what they call themselves (storm troopers,
the Politically Correct, the Annointed, a democracy) has the right to initiate
coercion WOULD be boring to you, wouldn't it?


    >>Gee, this is fun.
    >>
    >I suspect you confuse this serious discussion with playing
    >games for points. This isn't fun ... it's a serious matter
    >involving life, death, freedom and other issues which,
    >fortunately, nobody relies on you to support. If we did, our
    >rights as human beings would soon be gone.

Hmm, my rights mandate non-coercive interfence with other, your don't.

I think most people wouldn't like your idea of rights.



    >The more I read your babble, the more I wonder who's paying
    >you to practice your obfuscatory nonsense. You seem to do
    >nothing but post. You don't post from your place of work. You
    >don't appear to have a life. One has to start to wonder if
    >this _is_ your work.

Well, Richard, I tell you what I think, and why I think it, and what
my premises are.

All you can do is make one-line statements that are nothing but name calling.



Do you, or do you not, belive that NO ONE, alone or in a group of a million,
has the right to initiate coercion against another human being????

Want to answer that question?????




-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Xref: sparky ca.politics:8482 ba.politics:5899
From: mike@frey.lbl.gov (Michael Helm)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Proposition 165
Date: 3 Oct 1992 01:17:54 GMT
Organization: N.I.C.E.
Distribution: ca
Reply-To: mike@frey.lbl.gov (Michael Helm)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.128.81

Robert Daniel West writes:
>According to an article in yesterday's San Jose Mercury News (which
>also appeared in the Sentinel), there is an "error" in Proposition

I saw something similar in a local paper a day or 2 back. 
I don't recall seeing anything further on it.

>assuming the "error" is really there, does anyone believe the governor's
>claim that it is an "error," or does everyone pretty much agree with me

It doesn't really matter to me whether it is an error (sure, I believe
that :-) or not.  I would vote against this Proposition.  However, if the
governor & other supporters of the bill admit or claim it is a mistake,
surely this is sufficient grounds in & of itself to either withdraw
the proposition or vote against it?   This is not a spelling mistake,
it's a serious point of the proposition, & if it is so flawed, it should
not be made a part of the state constitution.  

Xref: sparky ca.politics:8447 ba.politics:5874 talk.politics.misc:49551
From: rchilder@us.oracle.com (Richard Childers)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Statistics from nurses ( was  Re: Mr. Cramer's strange views )
Date: 6 Oct 92 00:08:09 GMT
Organization: Memes-R-Us
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.


twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:


>In article <12528@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

>>The last time I gave blood, a couple months back, one of the nurses
>>told a donor that there was still about a 1:100,000 or so chance
>>of getting AIDS-tainted blood.


>That nurse should have been reprimanded for alarmism.  The chance of
>being infected with HIV for *donating* blood is 0:100,000.


Maybe she was answering a direct question ?

-- richard

-- 
=====
-- richard childers		rchilder@us.oracle.com		1 415 506 2411
         oracle data center  --  unix systems & network administration
                    Klein flask for rent. Inquire within.
From: Arthur_T_Hu@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: For Arthur Hu: Heterosexual AIDS Stats in the East
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 11:16:04 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

... we're all going to die of AIDS ...

Sorry, but you're information is either wrong or irrelavant.

AIDS in Asia has nothing to do with the rate of AIDS in Asian AMericans,
which remains (along with Native Americans), the lowest rate of any race
in this country. In LA, there are NO, ZERO, NADA cases of AIDS among
Asian Indians.

The UN estimates vary from country to country, and AIDS even by UN
estimates is next to nonexistent in East Asian countries like China,
Taiwan and Japan. Where the UN has made outrageously large estmiates,
AIDS skeptics point out that using IV addicts in urban areas to extrapolate
would be like using the Castro district to compute the prevalance of AIDS
in the US. Some people are getting AIDS, but the answer to stoping it is
the same as here - less sex, and safer sex when it is done. No magic.

All evidence is that AIDS in Africa is due to massive amounts of
promiscuity and prevalance of other STDs. There is no other explanation.

All surveys out there show that gays suffer disproportionatly from AIDS
due to large numbers of partners, anal intercourse, protected and otherwise,
and drug use which impairs judgement and use of safe sex practices. Even
if gays were just as safe as heterosexuals, the risk would be higher due to
higher prevalance of HIV in the gay population. The only way that AIDS
will affect heterosexuals equally is either a) heterosexuals adopt gay
sex practices or b) homosexuals adopt safer practices than heterosexuals.
Advocacy of any other approach will only continue the disproportionate deat
of homosexuals due to AIDS.

BTW, the San Jose Mercury News is evidently the first newspaper in US
history to say in so many words that Asian Americans have a low rate of
AIDS - the writer got his hint from my Asian Week article 2 years ago.

Face it folks. People who practice safe sex practices get less AIDS. People
who practice dangerous behaviors get more. And that's all there is to it.
The only way to stop the epidemic is the spread this message around to the
people most at risk. People who say sex is good, and restraint is bad are
helping to spreadh the epidemic, which is an epidemic only among a few
demographic groups at high risk.
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu (June Genis)
Subject: Re: School vouchers
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: ca
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:21:30 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.015942.12061@ntmtv>,
jazanopa@ntmtv.UUCP (Patricia Jazanoski) writes:
>In article <st+p4#n.phil@netcom.com> phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) writes:
>>
>>Since money for the schools is being coerced (taxed) from people, they rightly
>>feel that they should not pay for ideas to be to taught to their kids that
>>they disagree with.
>>
>
>I agree with June's school voucher argument: it creates two classes
>of people: parents and non-parents. Parents would get some tax credit
>for taxes they paid, but non-parents would not.

That doesn't mean, however, that I oppose education choice.  I just
think it should be done with tax credits rather than vouchers.  If
someone expects me to help pay for educating their children they
better expect that I want a lot to say about what kind of education
I'm buying.  Tax credits which allow me to donate to what I consider
a good educational program and then deduct that expense from my
taxes gives everyone more control than we have under the current
system.

/June
Xref: sparky ca.politics:8268 talk.politics.misc:48533 ba.politics:5707
From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Medical costs for various groups (was 'tolerance')
Date: 29 Sep 92 21:46:39 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

In article <1aaavtINNb9v@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> stephen@orchid.UCSC.EDU () writes:
>>    >>Incorrect. And I should know. I have my own medical insurance
>>    >>for my daughter, age 3.5, and it is very cheap. $31 a month.
>>    >>I have the complete Blue Cross charts and it gets more
>                           ^^^^^^^^^^
>>Again you VERY ignorant. You should not get your "facts" from newspaper
>>headlines.
>>
>>Blue Shield and Blue Cross are state organizations, not a nationwide
>>company. California Blue Cross is doing very well. And the problems
>>
>
>I think you need to state more clearly what you are talking about, 
>NOTE ABOVE the '^^^^^^^" you made this statement... it is somewhat
>difficult to tell what you are taking about if you are not clear.
>And another point- I DO NOT know of a company called  California Blue Cross,
>But I DO know of a company called Blue Cross of California, so you shoould
>try and get your facts from the company that insures, at least figure
>out what it is called.


Sorry about your cognitive problems. Blue Cross is like AAA. I belong
to Northern California AAA. Technically, it is CSAA. I used California
as an adjective in this case.

However, your nit picking does not excuse from a lack of answer to
your misinformation:

1. Blue Cross is NOT a national company.
2. Blue Cross of California is doing fine.
3. Blue Cross in any state has excellent data collection procedures;
   that is not the source of their problems.



-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Xref: sparky ca.politics:8314 talk.politics.misc:48823 ba.politics:5750
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Medical costs for various groups (was 'tolerance')
Date: 30 Sep 92 17:26:30 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <lchrs0INNeo@spim.mti.sgi.com>, mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen) writes:
> I am only trying to help one individual learn how to use data
> properly.  I think that most of our readers new how ridiculous
> is was to blame $75.25 of a $77.00 pill to treatment of the
> uninsured.  Hell.  Some hospitals don't treat any uninsured,
> and I'll bet their costs for an asprin are the same or higher.

Hospitals, by law, aren't allowed to turn away anyone who is
in need of immediate care, regardless of their insurance.
Therefore, if you can find a hospital that doesn't treat
"any uninsured," they must not have an emergency room.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Bush: War on Drugs, tax cut->bigger deficit.  Clinton: War on Drugs, spending
increase->bigger deficit.  What a great choice.
From: jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu (Michael Lodman)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Give it a rest!
Summary: baiting and flaming without end, amen
Date: 29 Sep 92 20:09:18 GMT
Organization: CSE Department, UC San Diego

I thought alt.politics.homosexuality was created especially for the purpose of
discussing homosexuality and politics.

You people have driven everyone else and every other topic off of ca.politics.

-- 
Michael Lodman	Department of Computer Science Engineering
	University of California, San Diego
jlodman@cs.ucsd.edu		      (619) 455-1500 x2627
Xref: sparky ca.politics:8291 talk.politics.misc:48616
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: No on 9
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:45:38 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <195083@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov>, pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew) writes:
> In article <12517@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# # Now, the "homo-haters" -- those people who have great anger at
# # homosexuals, and are willing to use violence against peaceful
# # homosexuals, aren't what I would consider stable, well-adjusted
# # people.  Those that I have known are pretty messed up, usually
# # by being molested by homosexuals as kids.  They are quite distinct
# # from political activists like me.
# 
# Hoo boy, now I've heard everything.  You honestly believe that what you
# have been doing is political activism?  And not motivated by anger and/or

I've been trying to get AB 2601 vetoed.  Is that political activism?
Maybe not to a liberal.

# fear?  Tell me another one, Clayton.  Judging from your posts, 90% of
# which have absolutely nothing to do with politics, you are most definitely
# a "homo-hater".  You are condemned by your own words.
# 
# Paul Bartholomew          |   "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of

Oh?  My postings have repeatedly emphasized that the argument against
antidiscrimination laws includes the fact that homosexuals are not
"just like the rest of us" but are significantly more likely to be
child molesters, and engage in behavior that demonstrates that they
are not at all healthy.



-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Bush: War on Drugs, tax cut->bigger deficit.  Clinton: War on Drugs, spending
increase->bigger deficit.  What a great choice.
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,ba.politics
From: zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide)
Subject: Re: For Arthur Hu: Heterosexual AIDS Stats in the East
Reply-To: zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide)
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 16:30:33 GMT

In article <12510@optilink.UUCP>, Clayton Cramer writes:
>I know that if heterosexuals were as promiscuous as homosexuals,
>American AIDS demographics would look a lot more like Africa than
>they do.

Do the Africans with AIDS have the kind of sex practices that you
think American homosexuals do? 

JZ

Xref: sparky ca.politics:8292 talk.politics.misc:48617 ba.politics:5728
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,talk.politics.misc,ba.politics
Subject: Re: For Arthur Hu: Heterosexual AIDS Stats in the East
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:48:21 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Sep28.163033.26743@odin.corp.sgi.com>, zursch@whizkid.wpd.sgi.com (Jeffrey B. Zurschmeide) writes:
> In article <12510@optilink.UUCP>, Clayton Cramer writes:
> >I know that if heterosexuals were as promiscuous as homosexuals,
> >American AIDS demographics would look a lot more like Africa than
> >they do.
> 
> Do the Africans with AIDS have the kind of sex practices that you
> think American homosexuals do? 
> 
> JZ

1. Higher promiscuity than American heterosexuals, especially because
of the large numbers of prostitutes in very poor countries.

2. More common use of sodomy among African heterosexuals in order
to remain "virginal."

3. Doubtless because of #1 and the poor medical care, lots of
untreated STDs (which simply the transmission of AIDS in vaginal
sex).

Sounds like a good match to American homosexuals.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Bush: War on Drugs, tax cut->bigger deficit.  Clinton: War on Drugs, spending
increase->bigger deficit.  What a great choice.
Xref: sparky ca.politics:8442 ba.politics:5869
From: kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.politics
Subject: Re: Saturday Night Live && Shinehead
Date: 5 Oct 92 18:50:30 GMT
Followup-To: ca.politics
Organization: Astronomy Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

In article <athos-041092161341@kip2-43.apple.com>
athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:

>I am wondering if anyone would fill me in on exactly why Shinehead found it
>necessary to insult every Catholic on Earth last night on SLV?  What's her
>beef?

Catholicism?
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Subject: Re: Homophobic Majority?
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 21:38:11 GMT

In article <194931@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov> pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew) writes:
>In article <1992Sep18.035027.20969@auto-trol.com>, katbea@auto-trol.com (Kathy Beatty) writes:
>> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>>> 
>>> I mean, can you imagine a Republican convention saying "No Jewish 
>>> marriages!" or "No rights for Jews!"???  Can you imagine a Republican
>>> convention saying it is immoral, unnatural, and perverse to be Jewish?
>>> 
>> Actually, yes. I've no doubt whatsoever that the evil triumvirate of
>> Buchanan, Robertson and Falwell are anti-semitic - they barely disguise
>> it....
>
>I seem to remember a fuss made early in Reagan's term where he attended
>some kind of church convention--the speaker claimed that Jews could not
>go to Heaven because they were not born-again Christians.  This generated
>a fuss in the media, but nobody at that convention protested.  Anyone
>know more about this?

What I remember is that Bill Bright, the leader or founder of Campus Crusade
for Christ announced in his peroration that "God does not listen to the
prayers of Jews".  The convention *did* react -- they burst out laughing.
Someone kindly pointed out to Bill Bright that Jesus Himself was a Jew.  Bill
protested over the mike that Jesus was *not* a Jew!  which set everyone off
again.  Someone loaned him a Bible and that's the last I heard of him (not
that I've been keeping track or anything).


Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com	x6244
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|	"Test everything; retain what is good."  1 Thessalonians 5:21	      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Xref: sparky ca.politics:8462 ba.politics:5886 talk.politics.misc:49593
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Mr. Cramer's strange views
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:39:14 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <BvKA1F.2LB@unix.amherst.edu>, twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
> In article <12528@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
# #The last time I gave blood, a couple months back, one of the nurses
# #told a donor that there was still about a 1:100,000 or so chance
# #of getting AIDS-tainted blood.
# 
# That nurse should have been reprimanded for alarmism.  The chance of
# being infected with HIV for *donating* blood is 0:100,000.
# 
# ____ Tim Pierce                / "You are just naive and repressed because

Work on your reading skills.  Where did I say that the risk was from
donating blood?  See that word "getting"?  What does that mean?

By the way, AIDS Daily Summary indicates 1:60,000 is the risk of
getting AIDS now from a blood transfusion.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Lesson learned from Gov. Wilson's signing of AB 2601: if you don't get 
your way, have a riot.  Next time, Gov. Wilson will cower appropriately.
Xref: sparky ca.politics:8295 talk.politics.misc:48661